Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Mountain. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
North American Union; Security & Prosperity Partnership (SPP)
Topic Started: Feb 16 2007, 06:16 PM (1,633 Views)
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Stop the SPP
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
gobblerblaster
Member Avatar
gobblerblaster
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Texas Farmers getting in the fight to stop the NAU

pave our land' Farm Bureau pleads
Trans-Texas Corridor opposition grows, Legislature considers limits

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 24, 2007
5:30 p.m. Eastern




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com




Texas farmers are stepping up their opposition to the Trans-Texas Corridor, a massive highway project that ultimately could take about 1.5 million acres of the state out of agricultural production – and according to opponents possibly hasten the advent of a North American Union.

"Our members are overwhelmingly opposed to the Trans-Texas Corridor," said Farm Bureau President Kenneth Dierschke, a grain and cotton farmer from San Angelo. "There's never been any doubt that the impact on agriculture would be negative, but now we see a growing number of people who believe the TTC would be bad for all of Texas."

The organization has called the proposal a "disaster" for farm and ranch businesses that lie in its path, whose owners also are discovering that they have allies in their battle.

(Story continues below)

In fact, Republican Rep. Rick Hardcastle has filed legislation to delay construction of the controversial Trans-Texas Corridor because the "critical point for me is when the state disregards the personal property rights of hard-working Texans."

Hardcastle, whose district has little support for the project, filed House Bill 3831 in the Texas House of Representatives, which seeks to halt the project until specific improvements on Highway 35 are made. He also is co-author of House Bill 2772, a statewide two-year moratorium on toll road development.

The TCC is a proposed network of privately funded, limited-access toll roads seen by some critics as part of an incremental merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico. It would be 1,200 yards wide and criss-cross the state like a spider web.

Brenham State Rep. Lois W. Kolkhorst also is working the statehouse, filing two bills which are getting attention. One would kill the TTC plan by removing it from the statutes, and the second would set up a two-year moratorium on the use of private equity comprehensive development agreements.

The second plan, which would prevent outside groups from buying the rights to build and operate toll roads, and keep the resulting revenues, already has 105 co-sponsors, officials said.

Sen. Robert Nichols of Jackson has a matching bill in the Senate, with 27 of 31 state senators already listed as co-sponsors.

"It's a prohibition, for a 24-month period, for any governmental entity in the state of Texas to enter into a tolling agreement with a private entity," Nichols said. "It prohibits them from selling an existing roll road to a private entity in that same period of time."

Nichols also has expressed worry that Cintra-Zachry, the Spanish company scheduled to build the TTC, has inserted "non-compete" clauses in the contracts, so that other roads that would compete with the toll roads would not be allowed – possibly for decades.

Sen. John Carona of Dallas said he sees a growing storm of public opposition to the plans, and he doesn't think the project as originally conceived will be built.

"Pieces of the corridor will be built over the years ago," Carona said. "They are the pieces that would have been built anyway, such as State Highway 130 in Austin."

However, he said the projects won't be four football fields wide.

Just days earlier, McLennan County Farm Bureau President Marc Scott said the TTC would be "devastating to the agriculture industry and to rural communities.

"As a personal note, the 1,700 acres that I produce on are all within the footprint of the proposed TTC,” Scott, a cow/calf and hay producer, said. “So this issue is very near and dear to my heart. My livelihood depends on the outcome of the TTC.”

The $184 billion plan ultimately calls for the construction of a 4,000-mile network of transportation corridors throughout Texas, with separate highway lanes for passenger vehicles and trucks, passenger rail, freight train, commuter rail and dedicated utility zones. As it is proposed, the project would use an estimated 1.5 million acres in Texas.

The concerns about hastening a North American Union lie with the fact that the new Texas superhighways could be expanded nationwide, and allow Chinese goods landed at a Mexican port to be hauled through the United States. To facilitate that, current limits and restrictions in cross-border travel would need to be minimized.

Where is the outcry, where is the common sense, where are the American citizens that will march in the streets over this ? :starwars:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Bill calls for NAFTA pullout

THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Bill calls for NAFTA pullout
3 House members introduce resolution
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 31, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va. (Photo: University of Virginia)
WASHINGTON – Three members of the House of Representatives have co-sponsored a resolution calling on President Bush to provide notice of withdrawal from the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Republican Reps. Virgil Goode of Virginia, Walter Jones of North Carolina and Democrat Gene Taylor of Mississippi introduced the bill, which has been referred to the House Subcommittee of Trade.

The trio objects to NAFTA because of the rising U.S. trade deficits with Canada and Mexico, the loss of American jobs, the safety threat posed by foreign truckers on U.S. highways and the security risks it has meant in increased crime and drugs and the potential for terrorist activity.

According to the Department of Labor, 1.8 million U.S. workers have applied for trade adjustment assistance as a result of jobs lost through NAFTA's implementation.


Oh how I would love to see us pull out of NAFTA!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Check out this video. Lou Dobbs reporting on the NAU.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sibs
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Hill
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
swanj,Mar 7 2007
11:05 AM
And everybody ridiculed and Banned poor ole "Lib Or Die" !! She wasn't so far off base after all Folks! Was She??

SwanJ

I was just thinking that. Heck I live in the KC area and I had no idea they were talking about the smart port deal.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sibs
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Hill
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
legitlinda,Mar 7 2007
11:18 AM
I didn't ridicule her, I know she went to the extreme on a lot of things, but this was something I agreed with her on. Maybe some of you think I'm whacko on this issue too, but I'd rather be safe than sorry on this.

I was trying to remember exactly what she was banned for. Did it have something to do with blaspheming God?

Can anybody remind me of what it was that got her banned? :huh:

smiley-patriotic-flag-wave

I think she used the Lord's name in an inappropriate way, but if I remember correctly there was some name calling going on as well.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jaytalker
Senior Member
[ *  *  * ]
I found little use for LOD on the CDB. She wanted everything to revolve around her charges and would not give any response to other questions that others would have about her points. If you now want to make a hero of her points remember that she also was promoting a war over the Panama Canal.

She also had suposed proof that GWB was behind 9-11, but when questioned she only put up links to known "conspiracy only websites". She made a lot of claims but reniged that the claims weren't hers after challenged.

As far as this topic which deals with our problem with illegal aliens entering our country we need to address the whole problem and state what we need to do to solve it completely. Not just from rumors or conspiracy theories.

Ask yourself a few questions like why do the Mexican populace want to migrate? What would you recomend doing to stop the flood that it brings? At what point will it bankrupt our society? What laws must be put in place to avoid the harm it is toward our country?

Even though many throw up the Counsil of Foreign Relations, may I remind every one here that it is merely a think tank that has come up with thoughts that might lead to answers, not a conspiracy laced org involved in dirty dealings to take away our soventry.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Nobody is making a hero of LoD, or her points. As I said, she was extreme on some things, but I agree with her on the NAU.

Quote:
 
As far as this topic which deals with our problem with illegal aliens entering our country we need to address the whole problem and state what we need to do to solve it completely. Not just from rumors or conspiracy theories.


We're not addressing the problems of the illegals coming into our country with rumors or conspiracy theories.

We have backed up everything we said with links to the information or posted the articles themselves.

Also, they should be taken as two issues that need to be dealt with. Mexicans have been illegaly immigrating here long before the NAU plan began.

If you don't believe this NAU plan is happening, or if you believe it is happening, but it's a good thing, that's up to you, but it's not a conspiracy theory or a rumor.

Why are they coming here? Because their country sucks!

How can we stop them?

1. Put a fence on the border with armed forces that are empowered to stop them, apprehend them, deport them immediately, and even shoot them if they attack, all without needing the permission of the Mexican government first.

2. Don't allow Sanctuary Cities.

3. Strong penalties to employers who hire illegals.

4. No free health care except in life threatening situations, and even then not free.

5. No free education.

6. No Welfare at all.

7. Get rid of the anchor baby law.

8. No double standard in the law.

9. Make schools, health care workers, police mandated reporters.

10. Enforce the laws already on the books.

I think that would be a good start.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Almtnman
Member Avatar
Administrator
Admin
jaytalker,May 3 2007
11:50 AM

Ask yourself a few questions like why do the Mexican populace want to migrate? What would you recomend doing to stop the flood that it brings? At what point will it bankrupt our society? What laws must be put in place to avoid the harm it is toward our country?

How to stop it would be simple if we could get some people in government that would do it, but they seem to be stuck in a rut.

I'll give an example. If you put a bowl of honey down and leave it, ants will be all over it and come from far and wide to eat every drop of that honey. That's what has happened, our government has been giving away free honey and people from far and wide are coming to get. If the honey supply dried up they would quit coming.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jaytalker
Senior Member
[ *  *  * ]
Linda, I am not attacking you or your stand on this issue. But when you say that it isn't rumors or conspiracy theories I must say much of what I have read is set up already biased toward getting the wanted response. It is like the liberal stamping of opposite points of view being called fascist or Hitlerest, we need to not label everything before studying its content.

Much of what we see as between countries affairs can be put in the "Globalist" category even if it is a thought out answer to a problem that is hurting our country. Do we avoid looking at the content because it has been labeled "Globalistic" by others. I do not let others decide my desicions on things that affect my country, my state, my life and my family lives.

As an economic enity we are already in a life and death struggle with the other economic powers of the world. We have to not only acknowledge that but see how we are going to compete with those other leagues of economic powers. China has already more people in their middle class than we do. India will soon be able to compete on an equal ground with us. The EU is in direct competition in most areas with us. Japan is also a mega economic power that we are on the wrong side of the import-export line.

The real question might be "how do we make our neighbors to the south and north able to be viable economic partners not worhless drains on our system?" If you want to build a wall that will cost Billions and maintain it that will also cost more Billions every year and man that wall with troops (or border guards) that will also cost even more Billions every year without looking at other alternatives it is then that I believe that people are not seeing the all the different offshoots of this very complex problem.

For those who scream out for everyone to wake up to this real problem can I just ask that all the ramifications be also discussed as well.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jaytalker,

I still don't agree with you that this is a conspiracy theory. The SPP is happening, it's not in anyones imagination.

It's not like the conspiracy theorists whackos who believe President Bush destroyed the Twin Towers, faked the plane crash into the Pentagon, or lied about WMD's in Iraq. I don't believe any of those things.

These SPP plans are written down on government web-sites, and you can read them for yourself. Maybe you have read them and agree with them. That's your perogative. I myself don't like what I read.

Have you looked at this link?

I don't care about the cost of building the fence or maintaining it when we give soooo much money to other countries. Let's keep our money for our own needs. After we've taken care of our needs then we can give to other countries.

We are responsible to make sure our own country prospers. I don't think we are responsible to make sure Mexico, or Canada prospers. I don't see what Mexico has to offer us.

If Mexico needs help, we can give them advice.

So what we have here is a disagreement on this issue. We don't have a conspiracy theory.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hick
Unregistered

Quote:
 
I don't care about the cost of building the fence or maintaining it when we give soooo much money to other countries. Let's keep our money for our own needs. After we've taken care of our needs then we can give to other countries.

We are responsible to make sure our own country prospers. I don't think we are responsible to make sure Mexico, or Canada prospers. I don't see what Mexico has to offer us.


I've always been of the belief that we should take care of our own first, before trying to take care of others.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Almtnman
Member Avatar
Administrator
Admin
A funny parallel...

I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch and filled it with seed. Within a week we had hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food. But then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue.

Then came the mess. It was everywhere: on the patio tile, the chairs, the table...everywhere. Then some of the birds turned mean: They would dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket. And others birds were boisterous and loud: They sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.

After a while, I couldn't even sit on my own back porch anymore. I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio. Soon, the back yard was like it used to be...quiet, serene and no one demanding their rights to a free meal.

Now let's see . . . our government gives out free food, subsidized housing, free medical care, free education and allows anyone born here to be an automatic citizen.

Then the illegals came by the tens of thousands. Suddenly our taxes went up to pay for free services; small apartments are housing 5 families: you have to wait 6 hours to be seen by an emergency room doctor: your child's 2nd grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn't speak English. Corn Flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to press "one" to hear my bank talk to me in English, and people waving flags other than "Old Glory" are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties.

Maybe it's time for the government to take down the bird feeder.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Herb
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Almtnman,May 3 2007
03:03 PM
A funny parallel...

I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch and filled it with seed. Within a week we had hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food. But then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue.

Then came the mess. It was everywhere: on the patio tile, the chairs, the table...everywhere. Then some of the birds turned mean: They would dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket. And others birds were boisterous and loud: They sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.

After a while, I couldn't even sit on my own back porch anymore. I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio. Soon, the back yard was like it used to be...quiet, serene and no one demanding their rights to a free meal.

Now let's see . . . our government gives out free food, subsidized housing, free medical care, free education and allows anyone born here to be an automatic citizen.

Then the illegals came by the tens of thousands. Suddenly our taxes went up to pay for free services; small apartments are housing 5 families: you have to wait 6 hours to be seen by an emergency room doctor: your child's 2nd grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn't speak English. Corn Flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to press "one" to hear my bank talk to me in English, and people waving flags other than "Old Glory" are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties.

Maybe it's time for the government to take down the bird feeder.

GREAT ANALOGY!!!!!

I used to have a bird feeder in the back yard. My wife made me take it down when she found out I quit buying catfood (bird seed is about 1/10th the cost of catfood).

:jus-passin-thru:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hick
Unregistered

Quote:
 
I used to have a bird feeder in the back yard. My wife made me take it down when she found out I quit buying catfood (bird seed is about 1/10th the cost of catfood).


Thank you very much...... I now have to clean Diet Coke from my monitor and desk after reading that.....


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! :garfield:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I have to say Great Analogy too Almtnman! Herb and Hick, too funny! :lol:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I just got this email from Tom Tancredo and it says what Almtnman just wrote. What a coinkydink! :D



RE: Tancredo driving the debate…

May 3, 2007

Dear Linda,

If you are watching the news today you have probably seen the mass protests by illegal aliens demanding a path to citizenship. Imagine the gall -- they sneak in here, wave their flag and demand benefits! -- Give us healthcare, give us welfare, school our children -- and now -- make us citizens! It says a lot about our elites that we have all these people parading their illegal status in the street and instead of arresting them they are putting them on television.

The good news is that with your help we are going to put an end to all this. We have already started. Click here to help!

This week Senator Brownback withdrew his support from an amnesty bill he has been pushing – too little too late. And last week, the Times carried a front page exposé in its politics section detailing Mayor Giuliani's flip-flop on illegal immigration. Giuliani, the Times explains, has been trying to steer clear of the issue on the campaign trail, but the voters and Tom Tancredo just won't let him. They keep bringing it up:

At the annual Lincoln Day dinner here last Saturday, Representative Tom Tancredo, [Notice they finally stopped calling me "long shot"] Republican of Colorado, received some of the loudest applause from the 1,000 party loyalists in attendance as he railed against illegal immigrants. “We are destroying the concept of citizenship itself,” Mr. Tancredo said. “America, and indeed Western civilization, are in a crisis.”

I knew Giuliani supported amnesty but even I was shocked at the extent of it. The Times reports that as Mayor, Giuliani, "advocate[ed] for $12 million to start a city agency that would assist those seeking citizenship,” and vigorously defended the city’s sanctuary policy.

Giuliani, Romney, and Brownback are flipping left right and center and the media is finally getting the message. It is all because of your help. And we are not going to quit.

When it comes to immigration Giuliani, McCain, Romney and Brownback are all peas of the same pod. They love to talk about their experience in public service -- they may have the competence to run the country but they certainly don't have the courage to defend it.

It's just you and me, friends. It is our country, together we are going to take it back.

We are very excited, because in a few hours Tom is taking this message to the Republican debate at the Reagan Library. You can watch the debate Thursday night, May 3rd at 8PM Eastern time on MSNBC.

So thanks again for your support, and stay tuned, the headlines are rolling in, the march is on.

Thanks for all you do. God bless you.

Bay Buchanan

P.S. The Congressman is driving the debate; the media is getting the message. My job is to keep that momentum going. I must ask for your help.

Can you please make a contribution today? Our staff is lean and our hours are long but we still need your support. We only have three months until the Iowa straw poll so anything you can do today would be much appreciated.

Please contribute today

Paid for by Tancredo for President
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jaytalker
Senior Member
[ *  *  * ]
The bird feeder is an excellent example of poor planning that our gov officials have brought upon us.

Believe me Linda I have kept up on the argument on every side to this issue of illegals storming our borders. The big issue is really the state of gov in Mexico and how our gov officials keep looking away from it as a cause of the problem.

As everybody knows "money sent back to Mexico" by the illegals here in our country is a large part of "Mexico's wealth" at this time. But it shouldn't be so. The report by the CFR encompassing the problem noted the tremendous wealth opportunities that Mexico has squandered and in reality it is the existance of the United States and its policies of the "bird feeder" mentality that in the end will cause both countries to slide down together under the waves as our economy falls to the competition in this ever growing world of mega economies.

The only answer might be called the "tough love approach". Offer the Mexican leaders a complete make over of their poorly consieved and majorly corrupt system. The ideas of the CFR report could serve as the roadmap. Put our best minds on how to make Mexico a successful economic country. Much of the actual work in doing this would feed the new Mexican system and would cause many illegals here now to return to their home country, thereby helping to remove the strain on our system.

The other side of the offer is that if the Mexican leaders do not jump on our offer of "a blueprint for a successful Mexico" is the return to American law where every law is enforced regarding Mexican intergration by the actual letter of the law. Every illegal Mexican will be hunted down and deported and will be documented as the second violation will carry much harsher penalty than just deportation. No rights of citizenship will be given to any illegal, no free medical, no free schools, no free anything.

Much like in the "bird feeder" analogy much of why Mexico countinues on its path of pathetic existence is because the easier route to encourage migration to our country and we have welcomed them. Now their existance here does not add to our country (as our own "bird feeders" are over loaded) but puts a major strain that threatens to bankrupt our over exstended social system.

Now posters here may see that this answer is to just help Mexico rise but if you really see the total scope then you may see it as the way to keep our country at the top and it is the cost of staying there. Remember the hundreds of Mexican flags last year at the Cinco De Mayo cellabrations. These people want the United States to be like Mexico. What a pathectic joke! But as our country slides toward that fate (what nationality is the fastest growing in the United States?).

See the whole problem, not just the syptoms of it.

jaytalker


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
jaytalker,May 3 2007
07:58 PM

The other side of the offer is that if the Mexican leaders do not jump on our offer of "a blueprint for a successful Mexico" is the return to American law where every law is enforced regarding Mexican intergration by the actual letter of the law. Every illegal Mexican will be hunted down and deported and will be documented as the second violation will carry much harsher penalty than just deportation. No rights of citizenship will be given to any illegal, no free medical, no free schools, no free anything.

That's where I think we should be right now.  Haven't we tried to help them already, and didn't we bail them out before?  Yes we did.  They are soooo corrupt and in the pocket of the drug cartels, or they are the drug cartel.  It's hard to know which is which.

Much like in the "bird feeder" analogy much of why Mexico countinues on its path of pathetic existence is because the easier route to encourage migration to our country and we have welcomed them. Now their existance here does not add to our country (as our own "bird feeders" are over loaded) but puts a major strain that threatens to bankrupt our over exstended social system.

Now posters here may see that this answer is to just help Mexico rise but if you really see the total scope then you may see it as the way to keep our country at the top and it is the cost of staying there. Remember the hundreds of Mexican flags last year at the Cinco De Mayo cellabrations. These people want the United States to be like Mexico. What a pathectic joke! But as our country slides toward that fate (what nationality is the fastest growing in the United States?).

That's why we need to stop the influx, and let the ones who are here legally, have time to assimilate and become real Americans.

See the whole problem, not just the syptoms of it.

I do Jay, believe me I do everyday of my life I see the problem, and I do believe the things I listed in my previous post would go a long way in solving the problem.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Herb
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
jaytalker,May 3 2007
08:58 PM
The bird feeder is an excellent example of poor planning that our gov officials have brought upon us.

Now posters here may see that this answer is to just help Mexico rise but if you really see the total scope then you may see it as the way to keep our country at the top and it is the cost of staying there. Remember the hundreds of Mexican flags last year at the Cinco De Mayo cellabrations. These people want the United States to be like Mexico. What a pathectic joke! But as our country slides toward that fate (what nationality is the fastest growing in the United States?).

See the whole problem, not just the syptoms of it.

jaytalker

Here is some information on what we have been spending in direct aid money.

http://mexico.usembassy.gov/mexico/aid.html

Foreign Aid

Foreign Aid from USAID (in millions of dollars)


Category
FY 2001 (Actual)
FY 2002 (Actual)
FY 2003 (Actual)
FY 2004 (Actual)
FY 2005 (Request)

Development Assistance
7.885
8.116
13.224
17.895
14.777

Child Survival and Health Porgrams Fund
5.987
9.500
5.205
3.700
3.230

Economic Support Funds
6.178
10.000
11.685
11.432
13.392

TOTAL
20.050
27.616
30.114
33.027
31.399

I also seem to remember that there was a time we forgave Mexican loans to the World Bank. Part of the conditions were economic reforms that have never happened.

Until the mindset in that 3rd world country changes we can do nothing that will help.

In 5 years we have sent over 100,000,000 to mexico and haven't gained a thing. Not even a country that will support us at the UN.

Your idea of the "tough love approach" has been tried and we would not back up the conditions.

The thing to do is cut them off first and then when they make changes we allow more access/assistance.

The other thing is to place a tax on any money sent to another country from the US, including SS and other retirement moneys. The sending of cash to another country is VERY harmfull to our economy.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bacterialalbatross
Banned
[ *  *  *  * ]
legitlinda,Feb 16 2007
06:16 PM
Well, I was looking around today for some Conservative sites and I came across The Conservative Caucus with Howard Phillips and it happened to be about the NAU so it caught my attention and I watched the video. It's 27 minutes, but I think it's worth the time. Howard Phillips is interviewing Jerome Corsi and he explains what the SPP is all about.

I admit I know nothing about this organization or Howard Phillips so if he's known to be a whacko I apologize.

Here it is

Let me know what you think.

No wacko stuff.... IT'S TRUE....

http://www.spp.gov/

<The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing.

This trilateral initiative is premised on our security and our economic prosperity being mutually reinforcing. The SPP recognizes that our three great nations are bound by a shared belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic institutions.

The SPP provides the framework to ensure that North America is the safest and best place to live and do business. It includes ambitious security and prosperity programs to keep our borders closed to terrorism yet open to trade.

The SPP builds upon, but is separate from, our long-standing trade and economic relationships. It energizes other aspects of our cooperative relations, such as the protection of our environment, our food supply, and our public health.

Looking forward, President Bush, Prime Minister Harper and President Fox have identified emergency management; influenza pandemics, including avian influenza; energy security; and safe and secure gateways (border security and facilitation) as key priorities for the SPP. The Leaders also announced the creation of North American Competitiveness Council to fully incorporate the private sector into the SPP process.>


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Herb
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
bacterialalbatross,May 4 2007
03:06 PM
legitlinda,Feb 16 2007
06:16 PM
Well, I was looking around today for some Conservative sites and I came across The Conservative Caucus with Howard Phillips and it happened to be about the NAU so it caught my attention and I watched the video.  It's 27 minutes, but I think it's worth the time.  Howard Phillips is interviewing Jerome Corsi and he explains  what the SPP is all about.

I admit I know nothing about this organization or Howard Phillips so if he's known to be a whacko I apologize.

Here it is

Let me know what you think.

No wacko stuff.... IT'S TRUE....

http://www.spp.gov/

<The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing.

This trilateral initiative is premised on our security and our economic prosperity being mutually reinforcing. The SPP recognizes that our three great nations are bound by a shared belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic institutions.

The SPP provides the framework to ensure that North America is the safest and best place to live and do business. It includes ambitious security and prosperity programs to keep our borders closed to terrorism yet open to trade.

The SPP builds upon, but is separate from, our long-standing trade and economic relationships. It energizes other aspects of our cooperative relations, such as the protection of our environment, our food supply, and our public health.

Looking forward, President Bush, Prime Minister Harper and President Fox have identified emergency management; influenza pandemics, including avian influenza; energy security; and safe and secure gateways (border security and facilitation) as key priorities for the SPP. The Leaders also announced the creation of North American Competitiveness Council to fully incorporate the private sector into the SPP process.>

The fact is that we are tied together by the borders. It is true that the safety, security and economies of all three nations are bound together.

The biggest problem is that Mexico seems to see the USA as the goose laying the golden eggs and the goose is almost out of gold. They can't seem to understand that if this country goes down then they are lost also.

We need both Mexico and Canada to be strong, able allies with stable governments and good economies. Just look at the damage that Mexico's lousy economy is doing to our lives.

What scares me the most is that I forsee the politicians implementing agreements that don't force the other countries to hold up their share of the responsibilities and we (the US taxpayer) will take a @$#%&*@.

Of course there will be the problem of one country with 3 languages. Since Canada already has 2 official languages and we add Spanish to the mix it is going to get real interesting.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jaytalker
Senior Member
[ *  *  * ]
I have had to stay off the board for a short time to locate a couple of my relatives who lived in Greensburg, Ks. If you've been watching the news that town in Ks was 95% wiped out as a F5 tornado ripped through it. I finally was able to locate both of them this afternoon. One was dug out from her basement after the storm had destroyed her home. The other was in a another city's hospital with the bumps and bruises of being in the tornado's debris field. Both are okay!

Now back to the discussion. First let me say to those that wrote it....Never ever say I don't care what it costs when looking at a government construction job with more than one gov agency involved in its use or in its construction! Think for just a moment of how many different Cabinet officials who will be trying to get control of this "little wall" to protect our southern border. HS, State, Interior and who knows what others will step up. Imigration, Customs, Secret Service, DEA, FBI, NSA, and probably other gov sub agencies will all add their own pet specs.

Doing a "off the top of my head" estimate (before I retired I did all the cost estimates for the largest residential home builder in the 4 state area, so I can "ballpark an estimate). I have also dealt in the commercial line also and have deth with gov projects, so I know how the power game works between gov agencies. My estimate for a 25 ft high by 5 ft thick wall for the southern border would be about 150 Billion, thats Billion with a B. That alone makes the 30 plus million dollars given to Mexico in the foreign aid seem like peanuts doesn't it. Yes, that initial cost would mean we could offer each illegal in our country right now $10,000 a head to just go home and we would be ahead.

Other costs after the initial costs would be the maintainence costs. The wall itself would be a forever painting project. Also how often would you post border guards? 10 or 15 every mile, 3 eight hour shifts? How much do you pay them? The average gov employee makes around $40,000 a year.

And what would we get back for all this expence? It just is not practical. And by the way how many terrorists have been caught trying to come in the south way? The northern border has a much worst record in terrorists trying to get in. And the southern wall border does not stop the drug cartels from flying across, there has to be additional means to stop that.

The only way is to come up with something that will force the Mexican gov to clean their act up and become a viable partner. It doesn't have to be a situation where we give up our soveintry.

Now much of what I see in the proposed NAU was right out of the CFR report addressing the problem. It seems it is all being set up by our side so far, I say make the Mexican gov do their part first and then we will see if we want to complete our part.

jaytalker




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
First let me say that I am glad your family members are okay, but I am sorry for their loss of their homes. I pray for the people of that community.

Now back to the fence.

I don't know where you got the dimension for that wall, that's not what it looks like here in San Diego, but your estimates is a little on the high side.


link

THE COST OF THAT BORDER FENCE

Posted: Thursday, October 26, 2006 1:29 PM by Mark Murray
Categories: Congress, Republicans
From NBC's Mike Viqueira
With President Bush signing into law today the authorization for the 700-mile fence along the border, there's some disagreement among Republicans in Congress over just how much it's going to cost. The House Appropriations Committee, whose responsibility it is to count and (especially) spend money, estimates that the fence will cost in the neighborhood of $9 million a mile, which would put the total cost of the barrier at $6.3 billion. They base their estimate on what it had cost to build the existing fence near San Diego.

The House Homeland Security Committee, however, disputes that figure. They say the fence will cost only $2 to 4 billion. So if we call it $3 billion, that puts the per mile charge at $4.3 million. The committee bases this figure on an "internal estimate." Whatever the case, keep in mind that the measure that Bush signed today does not "pay" for anything. It merely "authorizes" -- i.e. gives permission -- for the fence to be built. So far Congress has put down only $1.2 billion in real cash to pay for actual construction.

More on the fence




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jaytalker
Senior Member
[ *  *  * ]
A fence is much cheaper but it also becomes a maintainence nightmare. It also has proven to be less of an obstacle for the millions of illegal aliens. When originally stated it was stated as a "wall" not a fence.

A fence only slows down the flood.

A fence requires more border guards to patrol it. With a pair of $10 wire cutters a hole for 50 illegals can be made in less than 5 minutes. So the expense moves from initially to an every year budgetary item.

In the long run the expense is there one way or the other and does either one solve the problem...NO. The problem can't be solved unless you go after the cause of it.

BTW, what was the initial estimate on the Big Dig in Boston? What is it at now? If you trust gov bean counters for real cost projection please remember everybody involved has an interest one way or another in a gov project.

If you want to do the math on how much a "wall" would cost, I would be happy to critique your numbers. I will also be happy to point out where gov specs and gov inspections and sometimes just the battle of who's incharge on any gov project causes treemendous over runs cost wise.

jaytalker

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jaytalker, you're the one that brought up the numbers. I just put up a link with more accurate numbers. Don't forget we already have a fence here in San Diego to use as an example of the cost and effectiveness.

Quote:
 


Morning Edition, April 6, 2006 ·

As Congress looks to revamp immigration policy, some lawmakers are pushing to extend fencing along the U.S. border with Mexico. Proposals range from beefing up existing fences in Arizona to constructing new fences that would span 700 miles. Those advocating expanded fencing already have a model they can look to: a fence the federal government built more than a decade ago along a 14-mile-stretch in San Diego, Calif., that borders Tijuana, Mexico.

Before the fence was built, all that separated that stretch of Mexico from California was a single strand of cable that demarcated the international border.

Back then, Border Patrol agent Jim Henry says he was overwhelmed by the stream of immigrants who crossed into the United States illegally just in that sector.

"It was an area that was out of control," Henry says. "There were over 100,000 aliens crossing through this area a year."

Today, Henry is assistant chief of the Border Patrol's San Diego sector. He says apprehensions here are down 95 percent, from 100,000 a year to 5,000 a year, largely because the single strand of cable marking the border was replaced by double -- and in some places, triple -- fencing.

The first fence, 10 feet high, is made of welded metal panels. The second fence, 15 feet high, consists of steel mesh, and the top is angled inward to make it harder to climb over. Finally, in high-traffic areas, there's also a smaller chain-link fence. In between the two main fences is 150 feet of "no man's land," an area that the Border Patrol sweeps with flood lights and trucks, and soon, surveillance cameras.

"Here in San Diego, we have proven that the border infrastructure system does indeed work," Henry says. "It is highly effective."
Rancher Carol Kimsey, who lives in a valley near the Pacific Ocean on the U.S.-side of the fence, says the border barrier has improved the quality of life in the area.

"It was pretty seriously bad," she recalls of the prefence days. "They were tearing up everything. They'd just go through fences. They didn't care."

Kimsey says life is more peaceful now, despite the Border Patrol helicopters circling nearby. This is still an active smuggling route, especially for drugs. A stretch of border where there's only one fence is referred to as Smugglers' Gulch. The Border Patrol is moving forward with plans to add a second fence there as well as along the last 3.5 miles to the ocean, which had been held up by years of litigation over environmental concerns.

The extra fencing will cost at least $35 million. But Claudio Smith, an attorney and border activist, says the toll has been much higher in human lives. She says the fencing has simply forced immigrants to take more dangerous routes through the mountains and scorching-hot deserts.

"It didn't stop people from crossing," she says. "It just forced them to cross in the deadliest stretches of the border."

An estimated 3,600 people have died crossing the U.S. border since the fences went up.

It is now harder to cross the border into the United States, and also more expensive. Border crossers say they pay human smugglers, or coyotes, much more than they did a decade ago.
Smith says the fence has actually created a sort of perverse and unintended consequence: It is keeping people in the United States who used to go back to Mexico.

"The men would come for a number of months out of every year and return (to Mexico)," Smith says. "Now, not only are the men staying, but they're bringing their families."

During the last decade, millions of people have continued to cross the border illegally -- mostly in Arizona. That's the next target for those who want to build double- and triple-fencing.


Quote:
 
If you want to do the math on how much a "wall" would cost, I would be happy to critique your numbers. I will also be happy to point out where gov specs and gov inspections and sometimes just the battle of who's incharge on any gov project causes treemendous over runs cost wise.


No thanks, no offense, but I already have the numbers from people who have actually done the job.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jaytalker
Senior Member
[ *  *  * ]
Well since the job is already complete I see no reason for calling the illegal imigration a problem. Why are we still complaining about an old problem that has been solved?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Well I really wasn't trying to hurt your ego, just sharing information about the fence that has been built here in San Diego and has a 90-95 % success rate. The traffic has moved east to Arizona. It's in the article? The illegals are complaining that we've made it harder and more expensive for them to come across. Now they have to move east to find a way across, that's why we need to build the fence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Hey TD, Virgil Goode from your state is leading an effort to stop the SPP and the North American Community. We need to support him.

Clicker

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
House resolution opposes North American Union
Lawmakers seek to block NAFTA superhighway system, continental integration

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 26, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com


Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va. (Photo: University of Virginia)
Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has introduced a House resolution expressing congressional opposition to construction of a NAFTA Super Highway System or entry into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.

Goode said the goal behind House Concurrent Resolution 40, introduced Monday, is "to block a NAFTA Superhighway System and to indicate the opposition of the Congress to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America that was declared by President Bush, Mexico's then-President Vicente Fox, and Canada's then-Prime Minister Paul Martin, at the conclusion of their summit meeting in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005."

The preamble of HCR 40 refers to the Trans-Texas Corridor being built by the Texas Department of Transportation, noting "a NAFTA Super Highway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union to facilitate trade between the SPP countries."

A subsequent "whereas" clause notes "the State of Texas has already begun planning of the Trans-Texas Corridor, a major multi-modal transportation project beginning at the United States – Mexico border, which would serve as an initial section of a NAFTA Super Highway System."

The resolution expresses concern "it could be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would likely increase the insurance rates for American drivers."

Another concern with the plans for a NAFTA Super Highway is that "future unrestricted trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection, and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities."

The Spanish investment consortium, Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., owned by the Madrid-based Groupo Ferrovial, is funding the construction of TTC-35 and will lease the highway for 50 years. To prevent more such foreign leasing of U.S. highways, HCR 40 notes as a risk that "a NAFTA Super Highway would likely include funds from foreign consortiums and be controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States."

Regarding SPP, HCR 40 states "reports issued by the SPP indicate that it has implemented regulatory changes among the three countries that circumvent United States trade, transportation, homeland security, and border security functions and that the SPP will continue to do so in the future."

Further, HCR 40 charges "the actions taken by the SPP to coordinate border security by eliminating obstacles to migration between Mexico and the United States actually makes the United States-Mexico border less secure, because Mexico is the primary source country of illegal immigrants into the United States."

The resolution calls for Congress to express its sentiment that:

the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement Super Highway System;

the United States should not allow the Security and Prosperity Partnership to implement further regulations that would create a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and

the president of the United States should indicate strong opposition to these acts or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States.
As WND previously reported, in the 109th Congress, Goode had introduced HCR 487, which is substantially the same as the re-introduced HCR 40.

WND has also reported Goode has introduced two additional bills into the new Congress, with the intent of blocking any North American integration by the Bush administration. The two additional resolutions are:

H.C.R. 18. Expressing disapproval by the House of Representatives of the Social Security totalization agreement signed by the Commissioner of Social Security and the Director General of the Mexican Social Security Institute June 29, 2004. Joined by 27 co-sponsors. Introduced Jan. 4, 2007.

H.C.R. 22. Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should provide notice of withdrawal of the United States from NAFTA. Co-Sponsored by Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C.. Introduced Jan. 10, 2007.
HCR 40 currently has five co-sponsors, all Republicans: John J. Duncan Jr. of Tennessee, Virginia Foxx of North Carolina, Jones of North Carolina, Ron Paul of Texas, Cliff Stearns of Florida and Zach Wamp of Tennessee.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Click on the video in the center column to hear some info on NAFTA.

Click




Here's another link with info about the NAU.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Culture Warrior
Member Avatar
an Angry American
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I'm going against the grain, like Jaytalker ;) and post some info that goes against beliefs of the NAU:

There Isn't Going to Be A North American Union (there are links to back this up on the story, so I'd advise going to the site)

Quote:
 
What's the point? Well unfortunately, a lot of conservatives consider this conspiracy theory to be so preposterous that they believe it's beneath them to even bother discussing it, and that leaves Corsi and his ilk to dominate the debate. And since there are a lot of conservatives being taken in by this North American Union nonsense, somebody has got to step up to the plate.

Of course, once you decide to respond to a conspiracy theory, you have a very basic problem: the people who believe in this theory didn't reason their way into it, so it's extremely difficult to use reason to convince them that there's nothing to it. In this case, from what I've seen, most people who buy into the NAU conspiracy theory have done so because they're understandably upset about George Bush's outrageous position on illegal immigration or because they're heard a few big conservative names like Corsi, Phyllis Schlafly, Michael Savage, Lou Dobbs, or Joseph Farah talk about it as if it were reality. Then, they see that we're cooperating with our neighbors on certain issues (which is something that we're always doing) and they leap to the conclusion that we're in the middle of some far ranging plot when nothing could be further from the truth.

However, not one of the advocates of this conspiracy theory mentioned above has ever produced one single solitary piece of evidence that shows anyone in the Bush Administration is working on an Amero or actually merging the US into Canada or Mexico, because there is no such evidence. In fact, that's one of the most striking things about this conspiracy: it's supposedly a grandiose plot that the Bush Administration is engaged in, yet no one from the Bush Administration is ever tied to any of the "evidence," such as it is, that's offered. For example,

A think tank called the Council on Foreign Relations had a task force that put out a report called "Building A North American Community." If you read through the report (.pdf file), contrary to what you've heard said time and time again by NAU conspiracy theorists, you'll find that it does not call for a "North American Union." Moreover, the CFR itself doesn't even take official positions on foreign policy issues because its members have a wide variety of different opinions on the issues. So, there's no cabal of globalists sitting around at the Council on Foreign Relations, rubbing their hands together sinisterly, and plotting to sell us out to Canada or Mexico -- but even if there were, so what? Think tanks champion all sorts of ideas, good and bad; it doesn't necessarily follow that they're implemented by the government.

Then there's Robert Pastor, a liberal university professor and globalist, who has talked about an Amero in one of his books and served as a co-chair of the task force that produced the "Building A North American Community" report. Newsflash: I've talked to Robert Pastor and he denies talking to the Bush Administration about any sort of North American Union. Furthermore, he says that to the best of his knowledge they're not working on any such thing. He also noted that the Amero was one of three ideas he floated in one of his books, that he wasn't married to it, and again, to the best of his knowledge, nobody in the Bush Administration is working on it. Additionally, Robert Pastor has this to say about the idea of a North American Union:

�Each of the proposals I have laid out represent (sic) more than just small steps. But it doesn�t represent a leap to a North American Union or even to some confederation of any kind. I don�t think either is plausible, necessary or even helpful to contemplate at this stage.�

Even if Robert Pastor had said exactly the opposite and called for a North American Union to be formed tomorrow, so what? He doesn't work for George Bush. It's like having a Communist professor screaming that Lenin was right and we should become a Communist nation tomorrow and then having people like Jerome Corsi go, "See? George Bush is converting America to Communism!" It makes no sense.

Next up is NASCO and the Trans-Texas corridor. NASCO is a business organization that promotes businesses up and down a certain stretch of highway in the US, Mexico, and Canada and they do support the building of the Trans-Texas Corridor. However, NASCO isn't affiliated with the Bush Administration, nor were they formed to promote any sort of North American Union. You can like NASCO or not, you can be for or against the Trans-Texas Corridor, but understand that neither project has anything to do with a plot to merge the United States with Mexico or Canada.

Then there's the Security and Prosperity Partnership. The SPP works under the Commerce Department and they are working on increasing cooperation between the US, Mexico, and Canada on a variety of issues (which is something we're always doing). However, again, despite what you may have heard, the SPP is not based on the "Building A North American Community" report. Furthermore, they're not working on an Amero or a North American Union. They say so right on their own website,

"The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers."

Heck, even Tony Snow has specifically said, "Of course, no. We're not interested (building a European Union-style superstate in North America). There is not going to be an EU in the U.S."

So, if the SPP and the Bush Administration are actually working on a North American Union, despite their denials, where�s the hard proof? Not, "Well, look at Bush's position on illegal immigration." Not, "This language on the SPP website sounds kind of similar to this language in the CFR report." Not, "There's a college professor who thinks this is a good idea." Where's the real proof that the Bush Administration is actually working on an Amero or merging the US with Canada or Mexico? There is none and there won't ever be any offered.

That's why conspiracy theorists love to try to bog people down in minutiae. Sure, lots of people saw planes hit the Pentagon and the WTC, but let's ignore that and talk about the temperature that steel melts at and the size of the hole in the building at the Pentagon. That�s how they trick people in missing the big picture. With the North American Union conspiracy theory, nobody ever talks about how this could practically be brought about when it would be almost universally opposed by the American people and would likely require a Constitutional Convention to pull off. Presumably, people like Jerome Corsi believe that there will just be a press conference one day announcing the changeover to an Amero and introducing us to our new Canadian and Mexican overlords -- actually, these conspiracy theorists never really think that far ahead and they hope that you don't either. They don't want you to consider that there have been no leaks from the Bush Administration about this conspiracy even though thousands of people would have to know about it, that the mainstream media, which would love nothing better than to beat George Bush over the head with something like this if it existed, isn't discussing this issue, that the citizens of Canada and Mexico wouldn't go along with a NAU -- you could go on and on. The reality is that even if George Bush were a diabolical mastermind who wanted to dump the dollar and form a North American Union, he doesn't have the authority to do it without the consent of Congress and without it passing muster at the Supreme Court, neither of which would happen.

This is what the conspiracy theorists don't want you to realize because once you get out of the weeds and stop talking about roads, obscure reports, and professors, it becomes obvious that this conspiracy theory doesn't hold water. But, people like Corsi have gone too far out on a limb to ever admit that. So, they'll keep on insisting that the Bush Administration is about to implement a North American Union until Bush is out of office and then they'll try to take credit for preventing the implementation of a non-existent plot rather than admit that they didn't have the slightest idea what they were talking about.

But, for just a moment, let's forget about Corsi and let's talk about you. Do you think America should jealously guard its sovereignty? Good, so do I. Do you oppose the amnesty plan for illegal aliens that George Bush favors? Good, so do I. Would you oppose any sort of North American Union if it were ever offered up? Good, so would I.

However, that doesn't translate into accusing the Bush administration of being behind some sort of monstrous plot to sell us out to Mexico and Canada. When you buy into that sort of conspiracy theory, you marginalize yourself, and that's the biggest concern I have about these wild accusations about a North American Union. When I see important groups like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the Minutemen get entangled in wacky conspiracy theories via their relationship with Corsi, I worry that it will hurt their credibility. When I see people like Joseph Farah, Phyllis Schlafly, and Lou Dobbs promoting a laughable conspiracy theory about as credible as the ones about the Illuminati and the Trilateral commission, it disturbs me to see them damaging their reputations when we may need their influence on issues like illegal immigration over the next couple of years. Last but not least, after making fun of some of our "friends" on the left for the wild conspiracy theories they've indulged in over the last few years, "Bush let 9/11 happen on purpose, rigged the elections, and is going to stick us in camps and rule as dictator, etc.," it troubles me to see a new "black helicopter crowd" being created from scratch on the right that's just as bad as the worst conspiracy theorists on the left. We're supposed to be better and smarter than that.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Culture Warrior
Member Avatar
an Angry American
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Killing the North American Union Conspiracy

Quote:
 

Claim #1: There a Council of Foreign Relations report called, "Building A North American Community," that's being used as the "blueprint" for a merger of the U.S., Mexico, and Canada.

Back in 2005, a task force sponsored by the Council of Foreign Relations put out a report called, "Building A North American Community." I recently spoke to Lee Feinstein, Executive Director of the Task Force Program at the Council of Foreign Relations -- and he told me the report calls for improving security between the borders, steps to grow the American economy, and improving trade.

When I asked him if the report favors merging the United States, Canada, and Mexico, his reply was, "It doesn't favor anything of the kind." Indeed, if you read through the report (.pdf file), you will find that it doesn't call for the creation of a superstate.

Moreover, Mr. Feinstein said he would be flattered if people in the Bush Administration were reading and paying attention to the report, but he denied that it was being used as any sort of "blueprint" and said, "Realistically, anyone outside the government has to be modest about the impact that they have on government policy because the government has its own ideas of what it wants to do."

Claim #2: "Quietly but systematically, the Bush Administration is advancing the plan to build a huge NAFTA Super Highway, four football-fields-wide, through the heart of the U.S..." --Jerome Corsi

To be honest, this one has always been a little hard to figure out. After all, Canada and Mexico are our two biggest trading partners. Therefore, it's difficult to understand why some people are so adamantly opposed to improving the highways running between those nations, and into the US, or why they believe a road is part of some monstrous conspiracy. But nevertheless, since this issue has been widely discussed, I took the time to dig into this claim.

First of all, the group behind the "NAFTA Super Highway" is called NASCO. They're not a government entity and they're not advocating building "four football field-wide" roads or even new roads at all. They just support the expansion of existing roads to better serve business interests in the U.S., Mexico, and Canada.

Yesterday, Tiffany Melvin, the Executive director of NASCO was kind enough to take the time to discuss the North American Union conspiracy theory with me. Here's what she had to say:

"NASCO is a non-profit organization that has been around for 12 years. We have no secret meetings with the Bush administration and we're not part of a conspiracy. We're a business organization trying to promote the NASCO Corridor and the connecting highways in Canada and Mexico as an efficient, secure transportation system that will attract companies to use our corridor for their business."

NASCO has gotten so tired of the conspiracy theories swirling around them that they've actually put up a "NASCO Myths Debunked (.PDF File)" section on their website to try to kill some of these rumors. People who believe they're involved in creating some sort of "North American Union" should take a look at that article. It'll quickly ease their concerns.

Claim #3: A customs facility in Kansas City is going to become Mexican territory!

What this refers to is the KC Smartport, which is, at least in my humble opinion, a brilliant idea. The idea is to set up an area in Kansas City, with Mexican and American customs officials there who can examine outgoing vehicles away from the long lines generated at the borders. You heard that right by the way; this facility will only handle outbound freight headed to Mexico, not Mexican vehicles headed into the United States.

So, is the area the KC Smartport sits on going to be leased or owned by Mexico? No. So, where did the idea come from? I asked Tasha Hammes, the Media Relations & Marketing Manager for the KC Smartport project, about that and she said it was an idea that was kicked around via email in something akin to an online brainstorming session at one point. However, as she confirmed to me in a follow-up email, the idea was not something that the KC SmartPort project chose to pursue:

"Kansas City, Mo., is leasing the facility to KC SmartPort. It will NOT be leased to any Mexican government agency or be sovereign territory of Mexico."

Claim #4: The United States, Mexico, and Canada are going to merge their currencies into something called an Amero.

It's always difficult to reason people out of something that they weren't reasoned into in the first place and therefore, it'll be very difficult to convince people who believe in this claim that it's not going to happen.

That being said, George Bush has never advocated merging our currency with that of another country and neither has anyone in his cabinet. Furthermore, no one has presented any proof whatsoever that anyone in the United States government is working on this idea. At least one of the North American Union conspiracy theorists has speculated that the Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America may be working on such a proposal. However, I spoke with David Bohigian over at the Commerce Department yesterday and he issued a flat denial that the SPP was working on merging America currency with that of our neighbors.

So, if people want to insist that we're creating some sort of unified currency based on the fact that a few professors think it's a good idea, that's fine -- but as of yet, there has not been one, single, solitary shred of evidence presented that the Bush administration supports, advocates, or is working on this idea.

Claim #5: The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America is the government entity that's working on merging the United States, Canada, and Mexico!

The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America is a group that was launched in 2005 and it works under the aegis of the Commerce Department. The SPP was created to help increase cooperation between the U.S. and its neighbors to the North and South.

As I mentioned earlier, yesterday I spoke to David Bohigian over at the Commerce Department about the SPP. He confirmed that the SPP is not using the, "Building A North American Community," report from the CFR task force as any sort of a "blueprint" and he added the following:

"This is not a treaty and not an agreement. It's like a discussion you'd have with your neighbors. Nobody is looking to merge our currency, or our borders, or do any sort of union like the EU. The United States is working cooperatively with its neighbors to enhance security and prosperity of our countries."

Summary: Folks, as you can see from reading this column, there is no "North American Union" in the works. If you don't believe me when I tell you that, then maybe you'll believe Tony Snow who had this to say when he was, "asked if the president would categorically deny any interest in building a European Union-style superstate in North America,"

"Of course, no. We're not interested. There is not going to be an EU in the U.S."

If you don't believe me and you don't believe Tony Snow, then believe your own knowledge of how the U.S. Government works. To merge the United States into a North American Union would obviously require a whole host of Constitutional Amendments. In fact, so many would be necessary that the only possible way to accomplish it would be through a Constitutional Convention, an event that hasn't occurred in over 200 years and that would require the support of 34 state legislatures to be possible. So, even if George Bush or any other U.S. President were so inclined to create a North American superstate, he would be powerless to do so unless he were able to rally 2/3 of America's state legislatures to his side.

Since that is the case, there's simply no need for people to try to turn run-of-the-mill attempts to improve cooperation with Canada and Mexico into some sort of vast conspiracy to create a North American Union. The reality is that since Mexico and Canada are our neighbors and our biggest trading partners, there are plenty of reasons for the government and private industry to try to streamline and improve our relationship with them on security, trade, and other issues. So, let's worry about real problems instead of non-existent conspiracy theories that melt like snow in the middle of a Texas summer the moment you take a hard look at them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Culture Warrior
Member Avatar
an Angry American
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
We all remember LoD....she was a "conspiracy nut" - believed that 9-11 was ALL Bush's doing, that we were led into the War on Terror (I'm not talking just Iraq here, but Afghanistan TOO) because of profits that big business and government were going to make from it, that the Bin Laden tapes were FAKE, that WWII was started by our own government, that Bushitlerhalliburtoncheneymonkeyrove.Co was responsible for taking all the civil liberties of this country and was going to make it a NaziNation.

Does all this ring some bells? Or have we forgotten how much of a conspiracy kook she was?

Well this NAU fits right in her handbag of conspiracies.

Think about it.......read what was posted above.

Is this country interested in merging with Canada and Mexico - I THINK NOT!

Is this country interested in continuing to have GOOD relations with its neighbors and HOPEFULLY free trade in BOTH directions? I hope so! The good relations bring good allies. Some day we may TRULY need these allies.

The ONLY reason I'm pleased with making her aquaintance is because she gave me the strength and determination to find more truth to debunk her balony so that the next conspiracy fruitcake that walks up and tells me that the Pentagon was hit with a missile will get the response of "How do you tell that to the many, many eyewitnesses that SEEN A PLANE" or in her case, that "none of the DNA of the victims was found" - and kindly point out the autopsy reports of the DNA analysis of the victims from that flight.

Until some bill starts going thru to ACTUALLY make this happen, I'd take it with a grain of salt.....and IF and WHEN it does - stand up just like folks have done for this "Immigration Bill" fiasco and let your elected officials know that it is not in the best interest of those that elected you. If there is anything that talks to a pol, it's knowing that he/she will lose their next election because they did something that is not in the interest of the majority of the voters.

And if there is anything that I really dispise about this current administration is its lack of going out and shutting these darn conspiracy theories down.......course then again the fruitcakes would come back and say "why is he so determined to argue against this - He's gotta be hiding something!!!"

Sometimes folks will just not believe the truth even if it smacks them right between the eyes.....sometimes folks just cannot connect the lines between the dots even if the dots are in a straight line.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
CW, I really hope you're not trying to say I'm a conspiracy nut like LoD. Like I said in a post to Jaytalker, I don't believe Bush had anything to do with 9/11, or that flight 77 didn't really crash into the Pentagon, or that Bush knew there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and went in anyway because he wanted to do it for his father and for oil. I don't believe any of those things. I do believe this NAU thing is different and people can read documents readily available and decide for themselves.

This immigration deal is a perfect example of how many politicians, including the President, were dead set on doing something very detrimental to our country and our way of life; against the will of 80% of Americans. This should prove to us that we have to keep a very close eye on what's going on and should not just "trust" the government to do what's in the best interest of our country. I believe this immigration deal is not in the best interest of our country. It is in the best interest of Mexico. I also believe that there are things in this bill that are so outrageous that many people may have thought the people who are screaming, "No, stop, it's bad for the country and our national security, our social security, our education system, our health care sytem, and our American Culture..."to be "conspiracy nuts" too! It never even entered the minds of most of us that such and anti-American bill could be even be written, no less endorsed by the President and some of our Republican Senators, but here it is for all to read. That should be a lesson well learned.

So not trusting the government does not mean a person is a nut! Of course everybody is free to believe what they want, but they can only make a good decsion after being made fully aware.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Culture Warrior
Member Avatar
an Angry American
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
No Linda, I'm not.... :)

You're not a "conspiracy nut" unless you believe EVERYTHING our gov't does is a conspiracy.

I believe that our pols have been pushed to make a decision on this because this has been spotlighted. Should it have been pushed - YEP....it was time.

We should take time to weed out the rumours, misconseptions, allegations, hype, and make sure we get ALL of the facts straight before jumping to conclusions.

I have been trying to stay out of the immigration debate because I feel something needs to be done, but not entirely sure that SOME of the bill is all wrong. AND that there have been a great deal of misconseptions on BOTH sides making it more difficult to decide just what is the right thing to do.

Here are some things that I believe:

1) we should be enforcing the original laws this country had concerning immigration. The fact that we cannot enforce those laws right now, makes me believe that no matter what we put on the books will not be enforced in the future.

2) Kicking them ALL out of the country is NOT the right thing to do. We do need some "guest" workers in this country. But the baggage they take with them should NOT be the responsibility of the citizens of this country. It should be the baggage of the employers that hire them. If they have to charge us more to pay for their medical, retirement, and educational benefits....then we will get passed the buck. No matter what, that buck is going to end up in our laps, and I'd rather pay an extra .05 for an apple to make sure that this "guest" worker has the proper care, than pay it in taxes. It just makes more cents ;)

3) because our pols are at least TRYING to secure the border, and have SOME control of illegals, I do not beleive that this whole conspiracy of joining all three countries is true. I HIGHLY doubt that the people of Canada would want the influx of Mexicans in their country as well.

4) I beleive that we are attempting to "FIT" into the global economy by making economic relations with Mexico and Canada, as ANY ecomomic relationship will ALSO put $ in our pockets as well as theirs.

As with anything that involves people and differing ideas....this is a complicated situation.

Thought and checking RELIABLE and TRUTHFILLED recources is a good way to start.....just as with the 9/11 conspiracy theories....

Read the info that was posted up above....don't jump to conclusions of either this being a conspiracy or that I'm calling you a "nut"........

One thing that fishing teaches you....if the fish aren't biting....have patience..... smoke a cigar......have a beer.....enjoy the wildlife around you.......have patience grasshopper.......
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Culture Warrior, Jun 8 2007, 04:54 PM

No Linda, I'm not.... :) Thanks! :)

You're not a "conspiracy nut" unless you believe EVERYTHING our gov't does is a conspiracy.

I believe that our pols have been pushed to make a decision on this because this has been spotlighted. Should it have been pushed - YEP....it was time.

We should take time to weed out the rumours, misconseptions, allegations, hype, and make sure we get ALL of the facts straight before jumping to conclusions.

You're right we shouldn't jump to conclusions, and I don't think I have. I've been researching this for a year now.

I have been trying to stay out of the immigration debate because I feel something needs to be done, but not entirely sure that SOME of the bill is all wrong. AND that there have been a great deal of misconseptions on BOTH sides making it more difficult to decide just what is the right thing to do.

Here are some things that I believe:

1) we should be enforcing the original laws this country had concerning immigration. The fact that we cannot enforce those laws right now, makes me believe that no matter what we put on the books will not be enforced in the future.

I am in total agreement there.

2) Kicking them ALL out of the country is NOT the right thing to do. We do need some "guest" workers in this country. But the baggage they take with them should NOT be the responsibility of the citizens of this country. It should be the baggage of the employers that hire them. If they have to charge us more to pay for their medical, retirement, and educational benefits....then we will get passed the buck. No matter what, that buck is going to end up in our laps, and I'd rather pay an extra .05 for an apple to make sure that this "guest" worker has the proper care, than pay it in taxes. It just makes more cents ;)

I think we need SOME guestworkers, for SOME jobs, such as picking the fields. NOT in the construction business, hospitality business, retail business or fast food business. Those are all jobs that Americans ARE willing to do. I think it was Duncan Hunter who made this point during the debate. He said when ICE swept through the Tyson chicken plant and arrested all the illegals there, the next day there were lines of Americans waiting to fill those positions.

3) because our pols are at least TRYING to secure the border, and have SOME control of illegals, I do not beleive that this whole conspiracy of joining all three countries is true. I HIGHLY doubt that the people of Canada would want the influx of Mexicans in their country as well.

I don't see them as trying at all. I see them as trying to make us THINK they're trying. If they were sincere, the fence would already be built. But they put it on hold with the hopes of shortening it to 300 miles with this Shamnesty Bill.

I agree with your first point. Enforce the laws already on the books. Secure the border. Those two points alone would make a huge difference. Then we make a sweep of all the criminal gangster element and deport them. Increase fines on employees who hire illegals. I understand your point about making the employers responsible for the healthcare of the "legal" guestworkers, but I'm not sure how that would work out. We don't force empoyers to provide healthcare to Americans, how can we force them to provide it for non-Americans? If they do provide it to the guestworker they would also have to provide it to American employees.


4) I beleive that we are attempting to "FIT" into the global economy by making economic relations with Mexico and Canada, as ANY ecomomic relationship will ALSO put $ in our pockets as well as theirs.

I'm not too hot on this global economy thing. I see it as benefitting big businesses (No, I'm not against big business) that ship their goods around the world, but not so much the average American whose job was outsourced. I see products from all over the world, and especially China in the stores, but I'm hard-pressed to find anything made in America, and that really pi$$es me off. Besides wanting to buy American to help Americans and get better quality, when we buy Chinese we are directly contributing to the Chinese Army by buying their products!

As with anything that involves people and differing ideas....this is a complicated situation. Yes, lots of differing ideas.

Thought and checking RELIABLE and TRUTHFILLED recources is a good way to start.....just as with the 9/11 conspiracy theories....

Read the info that was posted up above....don't jump to conclusions of either this being a conspiracy or that I'm calling you a "nut"........ I did read it before replying to you yesterday, and thanks for not calling me a nut! If you call me a nut, make it a hazlenut, I love anything hazelnut! :D

One thing that fishing teaches you....if the fish aren't biting....have patience..... smoke a cigar......have a beer.....enjoy the wildlife around you.......have patience grasshopper....... Thank you for the advice, but open your hand.....I already have the pebble..... ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Condor
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I announce that I believe in doing any job in America. I am also happy to announce that after forty years of doing those jobs, my retirement plan now allows me the freedom to hire illegal Mexicans who don't have to pay taxes to do the ones that create sweat. I am moving on to hire illegal Mexicans to do the ones that soil my hands as well.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
legitlinda
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I just remembered one more thing that absolutely has to be addressed and that is putting an end to the "anchor baby" law. I think at least one parent has to be a citizen of this country in order for the baby to become a citizen even if it's born here.

So here's a short list that I think would be a giant step in curbing illegal immigration:

1. Secure the border.

2. Enforce the laws already on the books.

3. Deport aliens that are in gangs and all criminal aliens.

4. ICE should continue sweeps of illegals at job-sites, and day labor sites.

5. Increase fines for employers who hire illegals.

6. End 'anchor baby' citizenship.

I don't think it has to be hard as they are making it, and it surely doesn't require 800 pages of mumbo jumbo!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Toothless Dawg
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Linda,

A couple of comments about your list ...

Quote:
 
3. Deport aliens that are in gangs and all criminal aliens.


They are all criminal aliens due to violating federal immigration laws when they enter this country. Additionally, they continue to violate federal, state, and local laws when they report erroneous social security numbers, purchase false documentation and drivers licenses, and skip out on debts/leases when they move overnight.

Quote:
 
4. ICE should continue sweeps of illegals at job-sites, and day labor sites.


Add a sub-heading --- empower state and local law enforcement to actively identify and arrest illegals through job sweeps, construction site sweeps, day labor site sweeps, identity checks during traffic stops, etc.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Culture Warrior
Member Avatar
an Angry American
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
legitlinda,Jun 9 2007
10:15 AM
I don't see them as trying at all.  I see them as trying to make us THINK they're trying.  If they were sincere, the fence would already be built.  But they put it on hold with the hopes of shortening it to 300 miles with this Shamnesty Bill.

I agree with your first point.  Enforce the laws already on the books.  Secure the border.  Those two points alone would make a huge difference. Then we make a sweep of all the criminal gangster element and deport them. Increase fines on employees who hire illegals.  I understand your point about making the employers responsible for the healthcare of the "legal" guestworkers, but I'm not sure how that would work out.  We don't force empoyers to provide healthcare to Americans, how can we force them to provide it for non-Americans?  If they do provide it to the guestworker they would also have to provide it to American employees.


I think if they weren't trying at all, they wouldn't be even discussing it in their house.  I think that there are patriotic pols that are fighting the likes of Kennedy, Reid and Pelosi who just want to do NOTHING at all.  They are at least trying to make sure that SOMETHING is done.  Even if it is just a fine, and a path to amnesty, it still is not just saying "HEY, COM' ON IN" with open arms and our paychecks.  Some of the bill makes sense to me.  If you send the dude back to follow his steps to "amnesty", he may not even come back.

Good point about "health care".  I wasn't thinking of that, but felt that if business are hiring these folks, they should be contributing to their financial support in general.



4) I beleive that we are attempting to "FIT" into the global economy by making economic relations with Mexico and Canada, as ANY ecomomic relationship will ALSO put $ in our pockets as well as theirs.

I'm not too hot on this global economy thing.  I see it as benefitting big businesses (No, I'm not against big business) that ship their goods around the world, but not so much the average American whose job was outsourced.  I see products from all over the world, and especially China in the stores, but I'm hard-pressed to find anything made in America, and that really pi$$es me off. Besides wanting to buy American to help Americans and get better quality, when we buy Chinese we are directly contributing to the Chinese Army by buying their products!

I think it may be wise to look at your 401K's, Mutual Funds, and other investments you may have.  All of these have to do with big business.....so in a way, if they profit, so do we.  The whole part about global economy that leaves ALL of us with a sour taste in our mouth - is that it is not a fair playing field for all involved.  As far as China goes, I'm sure some of their profits go to their military - so do ours - so in that respect, what is fair, is fair.  What is not fair in China is the EXTREMELY low wages that the actual workers make - and that is where the reform needs to be made.  That's where the fair playing field begins.

Read the info that was posted up above....don't jump to conclusions of either this being a conspiracy or that I'm calling you a "nut"........  I did read it before replying to you yesterday, and thanks for not calling me a nut!  If you call me a nut, make it a hazlenut, I love anything hazelnut! :D

One thing that fishing teaches you....if the fish aren't biting....have patience..... smoke a cigar......have a beer.....enjoy the wildlife around you.......have patience grasshopper.......  Thank you for the advice, but open your hand.....I already have the pebble..... ;)


Thanks for the pebble, here's a cup of joe for ya! :coffee:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics & Hot Topics · Next Topic »
Add Reply