BS: North American Union

Subject: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 02:05 AM

The Cancun Summit Mandated The North American Union by 2007
by Jan Allen

http://my.opera.com/prosperingbear/blog/show.dml/305326

I don't want the U.S. to be merged with Canada and Mexico. If the merger occurs, the US Constitution will become what GWBush calls "just a goddam piece of paper." I would be subject to arrest for typing this without my constitution's First Amendment protection of freedom of speech. The constitution would be replaced with another document that sure won't protect my RIGHT to say what I want. Forums like this would die.

Do any of you have similar concerns? Are you doing anything about it?

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Peace
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 05:49 AM

Fuckin' right. We already have ten Provinves and Three territories. We don't need more. Thanks, but no thanks. I am with you, GUEST. (Or rather I am with you but don't want to be with you if you catch my drift. No offence.)

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST,John O'L
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 06:26 AM

Security and Prosperity Partnership, eh?
Sounds dodgey to me. A bit too much like Orwell's Ministry of Peace.

(Excuse me Peace)

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Peace
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 06:31 AM

Sounds like the three want to get together and make their friends richer than they are. The rest of us will get to sit in the middle and suck on it. Ducky.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 09:18 AM

I don't wanna be an Amercanmex or even a Canamex!

Still gotta get past the US Congress and the voters....

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 09:56 AM

No it doesn't have to get past the voters. This is what "trade agreements" are all about. Supra-grovernmental agencies. No voting required. Bureaucrats (in govt and business) get together and set policy. And the "public-private partnership" GWBush speaks of (just another name for fascism) now has the militaries of the 3 countries behind them. So who's to say no to a merger? Certainly not the "political system." Voters are denied a voice, and the representatives and judges are working for the business interests. A closed circle. Hermetic. Antiseptic unless people wake up and puncture the bubble.

This is a done deal in the minds of the Bushes, the Rockefellers, the Queen of England, King Juan Carlos of Spain, et all. The US Supreme court ruled that PRIVATE entities could now take your land IF that entity could use it to generate more tax revenue. That paved the way for the NAFTA superhighways to run from Mexico to Canada. Thousands of square miles of American land will now be seized without compensation to the owners.

And this is set to begin...yesterday.

The resistance to the Big Lie of terrorism has put the global elitists behind in their plan. I suspect we'll now have a "continental" event that will lead to troops swarming the streets of America (foreign troops, too, since we have NATO and U.N. ties). Bird flu, most likely, which they'll tell us "knows no borders." Troops will swarm over the continent as we're quarantined, and while we're locked away the land seizures and road construction will begin in America. And the troops will remain behind to protect the building project once the flu has run its course.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 11:27 AM

As though we don't have enough actual problems to worry about- someone feels the need to manufacture more.

'Global governance', indeed. The North American continent does not constitute even half of the land mass of the world.

In my opinion, this is a fabrication of the first order coming from a mind with a fertile imagination.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 12:25 PM

I agree, Ebbie. NAFTA had to have Congressional approval, as do all treaties.

And I don't really thing that QE2, Juan Carlos, and the rest give a...well, I don't think they care very much.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 01:49 PM

You mean that idiot, go it alone cowboy is actually going to use diplomacy and multi latterisim?

I don't believe it

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 Jul 06 - 05:38 PM

Your problem, then.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Bert
Date: 12 Jul 06 - 01:51 AM

"The more we are together the merrier we shall be" as the song goes.

Seeing as there's Canadians AND Mexicans that I love and are part of my family. All I can say is the sooner the better.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12 Jul 06 - 03:00 AM

Hmmm. sounds like all that old John Birch scare propaganda about the plot to conquer the world by the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations.
A North American Union? Sounds like a good idea to me. Throw in open boarders, and I'll vote for it.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Jul 06 - 06:01 AM

Well I think it sounds quite fun. One big country from Alaska and baffin Island right down to Mexico.

You could all have the same sweatshirt, and support the same football team.

I'll write you a national song if you like.

You could have a range of national dishes, with a special American dinner.
Budweiser for starters
Steak Sandwich (bread from the canadiam wheatfields, steak from Texas)
followed by ben and jerry's Tequilla ice Cream

go on, give it a go - you know it makes sense.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Mooh
Date: 12 Jul 06 - 09:18 AM

I for one wouldn't accept a union with the Excited States. Such experiments have failed with the USSR, Germany, and some would say with French and English Canada. Foreign and social policy are two huge reasons, health care, gun laws and attitudes, right to work laws, all get my blood pressure up.

Isn't it enough to remain good neighbours?

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Jul 06 - 01:33 PM

Is the EU a merger of European countries or a union of european countries?

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Jul 06 - 03:38 PM

pass

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Peace
Date: 12 Jul 06 - 05:47 PM

Why?

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Jul 06 - 08:59 PM

Lou Dobbs is a mainstream newscaster. CNN anchor. Here's what he reported a week or so ago:

DOBBS: Lisa, thank you very much -- Lisa Sylvester.

The Bush administration's open-borders policy and its decision to ignore the enforcement of this country's immigration laws is part of a broader agenda. President Bush signed a formal agreement that will end the United States as we know it, and he took the step without approval from either the U.S. Congress or the people of the United States.

Bill Tucker reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America sounds benign, hardly like a policy that critics call NAFTA on steroids. It's a deal that few have even heard of.

REP. MARCY KAPTUR (D), OHIO: It's being done, again, by very few people at the very top, on behalf of the investment class. But the working class of people, political officials across our country from communities, from cities and so forth, they don't know anything about this.

TUCKER: Yet, it was agreed to by Mexico's President Fox, Canada's Prime Minister Martin, and President Bush in 2005.

The administration officials counter their critics by saying everything about SPP is on the White House Web site. And they say the partnership is not a treaty, but more of an outline of priorities between the United States, Mexico and Canada. Still, some wonder why there haven't been public discussions about the goals being pursued. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This SPP includes, for instance, a committee that is sitting down to harmonize our meat inspection and food safety. So, how far away from a trade agreement can your dining room table and what you feed your kids be?

TUCKER: Other parts of the agreement mention border security as an issue, which include all of North America. In fact, the name of the agreement is not Security and Prosperity of the United States, but of North America.

PETER MORICI, PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: When we elect officials, we expect them to act on our behalf. When we get involved in cooperative frameworks with other countries for joint regulation of fisheries or rail transportation or the skies, we're basically sharing our sovereignty with that government and outsourcing some of what we give our elected officials.

TUCKER: As disturbing as some find SPP, there is legislation in the House introduced by Florida's Katherine Harris that closely resembles the goals of the partnership.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TUCKER: Included in that bill is a section which calls for the securing of Mexico's southern border by the United States and Canada.

Lou, that's not the border with the United States. That's the border they share with Belize and Guatemala.

DOBBS: The idea that the White House would respond that this is on their Web site, this involves intricate workings amongst the Commerce Department of this country and Canada and Mexico's, of course.

A regional prosperity and security program? This is absolute ignorance. And the fact that we are -- we reported this, we should point out, when it was signed. But, as we watch this thing progress, these working groups are continuing. They're intensifying. What in the world are these people thinking about?

TUCKER: Well, they say, look, these are a declaration and an outline of our priorities.

And when I called them today, Lou, they said I was the first phone call they had received literally since the deal was first signed. So, people are not paying attention. And they're letting them, in fact, get away with this.

DOBBS: You know, I was asked the other day about whether or not I really thought the American people had the stomach to stand up and stop this nonsense, this direction from a group of elites, an absolute contravention of our law, of our Constitution, every national value.

And I hope, I pray that I'm right when I said yes. But this is -- I mean, this is beyond belief.

Bill Tucker, thank you very much.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/21/ldt.01.html

This video clip is available on the internet.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 Jul 06 - 10:08 PM

Ah, Mr. Dobbs, always the soul of tolerance and moderation. If you think he's a mainstream broadcaster, especially on the subject of immigration--which he's decided is his personal hobbyhorse--you need to do a bit of research.

He may have been a reasonable broadcaster in the past--but them days is gone.

I actually disagree on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America sounding benign. I think it's a perfectly wretched choice for the name of the organization--it sure reminds me of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. Not the best idea.

Ironically, the organization itself is totally benign--except for fans of the Trilateral Commission, Illuminati, and other shadowy omnipotent world bodies. And there always are such people--just as there were to swallow the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 Jul 06 - 10:10 PM

But at least this conspiracy theory is a new one--the others had a lot of mileage on them.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Jul 06 - 12:15 AM

It is not benign. It will destroy the middle class in America and Canada. Currencies will have to be floated in the event of a merger. The two dollar systems will plummet when they're floated on the international currency market.

Whatever your stake is in this, you need to work harder to achieve it. Calling it a "conspiracy" will no longer work. You people need to learn some new tricks.

If we hadn't forced the Texas legislature to vote down transponders in vehicle inspection stickers last year, Interstate 35 out of Laredo would be chewing up a quarter mile wide swath northwards right now. But they're stopped at the border, waiting for our next legislature to install the transponder taxation device in our cars. All that's public record. Fortunately the fight was just verbal last time.

I really don't know how you people sleep at nights, knowing what you're doing to your county. But wait, maybe you're like, outsourced from India. Seriously. Half the people I talk to on customer assistance lines nowadays have that not-quite-right command of English, so are they outsourcing internet debunking nowadays, too? "Oh, play the Twilight Zone Rob Sterling song! Here come more of those flying saucy people!" What part of Bombay you live in?

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Peace
Date: 14 Jul 06 - 12:26 AM

The USA is verging on bankruptcy. It has no choice but to try this. If the US goes tits up, so does the Canadian economy. Mexico has no economy, but they do have cheap labour.

However, as a Canadian, I have no wish to get into some half-baked half-assedly considered scheme to make rich bastards richer and poor people poorer. I do not trust the US government one friggin' iota. Hell, I don't have much faith in Canada's right now. And Mexico--their government has been for decades and continues to be a joke.

No. The only people who can benefit from this are the friends of stock markets and government officials in Washington. In two words or less, NO FRIGGIN' WAY!. NO, NO, NO!

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Jul 06 - 09:14 PM

As you may know, I'm not exactly Mr. Bush's biggest fan. However the burden is on those who subscribe to the idea that Bush signed a formal agreement that will "end the United States as we know it". If that statement is not blatant alarmism, let's have the proof.

Let's calm down a bit and look at the proposal.

To pick one example, harmonizing fisheries regulation would be a good thing--so far fish have just not been always obeying national boundaries.   Conservation by one country should not allow overfishing by another.


"End the United States as we know it" sounds suspiciously like fear of the UN's "black helicopters", who of course are here to take your guns.

If everybody is afraid of co-operation, the world's big problems are not likely to be addressed.

By the way, I'd be curious to know the views of Mr. Dobbs' fans on the Trilateral Commission, the Illuminati--and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

And just where is this feared "merger" mentioned in the unfortunately-named "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America."?

Let's have some direct quotes from the Partnership itself to back up these accusations.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 12:54 AM

Cooperation isn't a problem. A benign world govt would be fine, but every US president since Nixon took David Rockefeller to China has called Communist China the "model for the future." A bullet in the head for speaking your mind is the Chinese way. No thanks. Grow up. And quit hiding behind fish. That's the most absurd rationalization I've read today. People know what's going on now. Tree huggers are buying guns, thank goodness.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 09:34 AM

This is my last posting to "Guest". I don't waste my time shadow-boxing Ghosts. Get a handle or a name.

And "tree-huggers are buying guns, thank goodness" and that crack about all US presidents since Nixon seeing Communist China as a role model tells me all I need to know about the brilliance of your thought, anyway. Jimmy Carter--somehow I don't think so.

The point about fishing regulations was just one illustration. There are others.

Enjoy your soliloquy.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 12:26 PM

"...every US president since Nixon took David Rockefeller to China has called Communist China the "model for the future."

I agree, Ron. This person obviusly isn't above using utright falsehoods.

I'm gone too.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 06:01 PM

Oh good, more anti-immigrant hysteria.

I'm for any legislation that will open the borders from Canada to Mexico for people, the same way it has for corporations.

The people of North America should be given the same freedom of movement and choice of where to live and work as is enjoyed by Europeans.

Such legislation will take the wind out of the sails of the majority of the racist and xenophobic "wetback" crap, and get the US back on track beating up on it's favorite punching bags, like poor women and African American men.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 08:44 PM

So, if someone breaks into your home and takes a dump on your carpet, that's okay, right? If you say it's NOT okay, then you'll be a racist anti-home invader. And you can't lock your door, or you'll be a racist. Right?

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 09:02 PM

Guest 8:44, get back on your meds.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Troll
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 09:21 PM

HELP!!!HELP!!!

The paranoids are after me!!!

troll

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST,Liberty
Date: 27 Jul 06 - 02:55 PM

The documents regarding the "north AMerican Union" can be found at the department of commerce (america) website. Also, you will find the partnership / peace deal there.
    It has been signed people, it does not need oversite or voting or anything. What gives it credence is that people consent to it, by either ignoring it outright, or blowing it off as paranoid talk.
    Now think of yourself as a tyrannical leader, which is very hard for most good christians. Wouldn't it be a fancy to have so many people just dis-regard everything they didn't like to hear? How easy would it be to rule then? exactly... i dont urge you to believe this... I only urge you to research it. I have to finish this saying, get ready to watch more CIA sponsored "terrorist" attacks.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: artbrooks
Date: 27 Jul 06 - 08:55 PM

GUEST, Liberty, I was unable to find anything called "north AMerican Union," or even "North American Union," at the Commerce website. Perhaps you would be good enough to provide a link?

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 06 - 10:17 PM

Yeah, you freak. Man, you are out there. Play the X-Files music. There is NOT a North American Union. We DENY it. You hear?! Go chase UFOs. The wildly expanding I-35 I drove on in San Antonio today is just...well, it's just CONSTRUCTION, okay? You got that? It has NOTHING TO DO with any "union." And people who write garbage like this...

http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/printer_4088.shtml
...well they're just FREAKS who have nothing better to do than to make things up. LEAVE US ALONE! We are FREE! GOT IT?! Our government LOVES US!!!

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Peace
Date: 28 Jul 06 - 12:52 AM

Coming Through! The NAFTA Super Highway
by Kelly Taylor
August 7, 2006

Man, like I KNEW the 1960s would like catch up with me. I have lost over a week of my life. Like, there it was, man, gone!

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST,Wild Resident
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 01:25 AM

The implementation of open boarders would raise a wide range of security issues on the local and national level, which would ultimately end up in a civil war due to civil unrest from no resolution of these security problems. I am an advocate for a modification of the executive branch within our own government...... More than one president? What? I must be crazy.... Or just think efficently. Once this modification is made mabye then this open boarders policy could be entertained. Multiple presidents (5would be great) could address multiple concerns more efficently..... Just a crazy thought.............

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST,Started the thread
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 09:34 PM

Step # 1 in war, close the borders. The U.S. borders have been thrown more widely open than ever since 9/11. And witness the recent attempt by the gangsters in Washington to legalize 30 million criminal illegals. Then we have this:

WASHINGTON – A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc....

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55830

So, when this "merger" takes place, what happens to my right, as an American, to speak freely, own guns, peacably assemble, etc.? They machine gun demonstrators in Mexico. Will the U.S. Bill of Rights be extended to Mexico and Canada? We all know better than that.

Brzezinski brags that he helped install Pol Pot.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Peace
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 12:14 AM

Hnag on there, shortcake. You meant to say, "Will the Canadian 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms' be extended to Mexico and the US?" That's what you meant, right?

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Peace
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 12:19 AM

Please don't make any automatic assumption that the US is gonna be in charge of the whole thing. That will happen over lots of dead bodies, mine included.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 01:43 AM

Mexico is ok - I like Mexico. Who wants Canada?

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: John O'L
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 01:45 AM

I don't know Brzezinski, but it was always my opinion that Nixon & Kissinger were responsible for Year Zero and all that followed. I am dumbfounded that he (Kissinger) still has credibility and influence. And this new idea is just as lunatic as bombing Cambodia was.
Is there a shortage of idiots or something?

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 01:47 AM

Will this merger include environmental controls?

I might think it was a good idea if they started there.

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: Peace
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 01:51 AM

I agree with Art. No one really wants Canada, so leave us out. PLEASE!

Subject: RE: BS: North American Union
From: kendall
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 06:28 AM

Maybe someone will give him a blow job,then we can impeach him.