Abolishing the USA

[Tedob1]

Ever wonder why George W. Bush, who sometimes appears fanatical about national security seem to completely ignore border security? Is he really turning a blind eye when the Mexican government encourages it’s citizens to ‘cross the border’? And why does the Mexican president go ballistic when we make attempts to close the border?

could this be why?

On June 9, CNN anchorman Lou Dobbs began his evening broadcast with this provocative announcement: “Good evening, everybody. Tonight, an astonishing proposal to expand our borders to incorporate Mexico and Canada and simultaneously further diminish U.S. sovereignty. Have our political elites gone mad?”

Dobbs then switched to CNN correspondent Christine Romans in Washington, D.C., who reported: “On Capitol Hill, testimony calling for Americans to start thinking like citizens of North America and treat the U.S., Mexico and Canada like one big country.” …


Romans then showed brief excerpts of congressional testimony by Professor Robert Pastor…

“The best way to secure the United States today is not at our two borders with Mexico and Canada but at the borders of North America as a whole,” Pastor told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

As CNN’s Christine Romans noted, the CFR program “envisions a common border around the U.S., Mexico and Canada in just five years, a border pass for residents of the three countries, and a freer flow of goods and people.”

Romans: “The idea here is to make North America more like the European Union....”

On March 23, 2005, President Bush convened a special summit in Waco, Texas, with Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin. The three amigos met at Baylor University to call for a “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America”

… Like NAFTA and CAFTA, this new “partnership” is intended to be an ongoing, constantly evolving process to bring about the economic, political, and social “integration” and “convergence” of the three nation states into a supranational regional system of governance that will then be merged into a larger regional system for the entire hemisphere.


The Full Story

[Egaladeist]

Hi Tedob1,

From a Canadian perspective we have nothing to gain by a free access border...unless it includes free access to jobs...and the US has nothing to gain by a free access border...unless it includes free access to our natural resources.
There is no foreseeable benefit that either of us can achieve, other than those mentioned, that we do not already benefit from.

The border with Mexico is another story entirely...from what I see there is no benefit at all to having a free access border with Mexico...the US already has access to cheap Mexican labor...so what else can Mexico offer? I don't see the trade off...it's all losses and no gains.

Eg

[|3lack|ce]

Tequila! Gallons and Gallons of Tequila! YAR! That's what we'll gain! Oh, and Peyote too!

[RoadClosed]

Nah, we can already come and go as we please and drink all the Tequila we want.

[Tedob1]

i dont think it's a real good thing for anybody except mexico...for the us and maybe canada it would make it easy for employers to move to where the cheap labor is without the red tape and high costs of export/import.

so why is it happening? better still why are we letting this happen. does canada need a deluge of cheap workers? and who up there would want to put up with our hard nosed politics. it just doesnt make any sense. it's hard to understand why the US would be a party to this but unfatamable why canada would.

this isn't something that's coming up for debate. this is something that's going down now!

[foxyloxley]

Oh, and Peyote too!

You HIT that poor defenceless DONKEY ................. you sir, are an absolute cad

[moxnix]

Originally posted here by Tedob1

so why is it happening? better still why are we letting this happen. does canada need a deluge of cheap workers? and who up there would want to put up with our hard nosed politics. it just doesnt make any sense. it's hard to understand why the US would be a party to this but unfatamable why canada would.

Obviously it is about money. Who would benifit the most financially? Who would the power structure be controlled by, and who would control this financial and political dynasty?

Don't think about the good of the people, or the countries involved. Think of the individuals who would benefit most in the financial and power structure.

Cynical am I not.

[Tedob1]

Originally posted here by foxyloxley
You HIT that poor defenceless DONKEY ................. you sir, are an absolute cad

[Tedob1]

Originally posted here by moxnix
Obviously it is about money. Who would benifit the most financially? Who would the power structure be controlled by, and who would control this financial and political dynasty?

Don't think about the good of the people, or the countries involved. Think of the individuals who would benefit most in the financial and power structure.

Cynical am I not.

you have ever right to be cynical. i could be wrong but somehow i think your saying Bush and his cronnies are the ones who will benifit from this. but this goes far beyond a political party because it's something that both (R) and (D) have been working towards for a long time.

[nihil]

"The use of the Herb or Root called Peyote. . . is a superstitious action and reproved as opposed to the purity and sincerity of our Holy Catholic Faith, being so that this said herb, nor any other cannot possess the virtue and natural efficacy attributed to it for said effects, nor to cause the images, phantasms and representations on which are founded said divinations, and that in these one sees notoriously the suggestion and assistance of the devil, author of this abuse."

..............Spanish Inquisition 1620

You have been warned