NAU conspiracy theory pummeled by exasperated conservatives
posted at 8:33 am on September 15, 2007 by see-dubya
Share on Facebook | regular view
What else is there to add to these righteous sense-knockings?
First up: John Hawkins.
Now, you may be thinking that this whole theory is a little foggy and short on specifics — and you’d be right. It’s sort of like handing someone some cake mix, a frying pan, and 4 pine cones — and then saying you expect them to make clam chowder out of it in 30 minutes, but people are buying into the NAU by the thousands, so let’s just take the theory as we find it.
But that’s not all: Richard Reeb of the Claremont Institute piles on, in a post delicately titled “We’ve Got Our Nut Jobs Too“:
Last April at the annual convention of the California Republican Assembly (CRA) in Ontario, literature concerning the NAU was all over the place. People who cheered the President for his judicial appointments or staunch commitment to the war on the terrorists swallowed whole the insane idea that the the same man would betray his country for so banal an object. One particularly obnoxious speaker was one Stanley Monteith, a Santa Cruz-based broadcaster and political entrepreneur, who declared (I paraphrase here): “Your enemies are not some dangerous men abroad (e.g., Arab sheiks, Chi Com apparatchiks or Third World revolutionaries) but men in Washington, D.C., dressed in suits and working in government offices.” This was straight out of the old John Birch Society playbook, according to which the only real enemies of the United States are internal.
The notion that our lax border policy poses critical risks to American sovereignty is one thing, and it’s a concern I take very seriously.
This notion of mysterious shadowy bureaucrats meeting to usher in the NAU with George Bush’s blessing, however, is crazytalk. It hampers serious efforts to argue for border security by making the entire movement look like loons. Please, please, get over it, folks.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Great photo. Gives me chills just contemplating the loony awfulness of it.
Athanasius on September 15, 2007 at 9:01 AM
The story, IMHO, is not the NAU per se., but the growing inability to believe that the gov’t automatically acts in the best interest of the citizens.
The shamnesty thing brought this into focus for the right.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 9:08 AM
You know, the crazies are just going to come in here and use the following bizarro scientific method: “No, you prove to us that it’s not true.”
You cannot convince them, even if you pile on the evidence like Britney Spears piles on the crazy. They already came to their conclusion, and will not be turned away. The NAU is happening, and you who deny it are: sheep, shills or big fat meanies.
albo on September 15, 2007 at 9:09 AM
When the government refuses to secure our borders and seems to want nothing more than hordes of people from various countries streaming across … well, that leads to all kinds of speculation. Failure to secure the boders, especially after 9-11 only bolsters the claims of the impending NAU. I don’t believe GWB is a NAU guy, but I certainly believe he’s a globalization guy, and views the North American continent in economic terms rather than sovereign, individual nations.
darwin on September 15, 2007 at 9:35 AM
That photo is suhweet.
BadgerHawk on September 15, 2007 at 9:40 AM
Completely understand your comment. However, this kneejerk distrust of government stems from the whole “globalization” “open-borders” questions. Seems to me we haven’t really had the national debate on those issues that people want. And when moves in those directions are repeatedly taken by the gov’t, absent a debate and national consensus, these conspiracy theories flourish.
Immigration will figure in the ‘08 election, in spite of the administration’s and candidates’ attempts to shove it down our throats without debate. I suspect that sooner or later, the whole issue of globalization and relaxation of national borders will enter the public square. When that debate happens, the value of NAU conspiracy talk will diminish.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 9:42 AM
Darwin- you beat me to it.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 9:43 AM
NAU, NAFTA, it has really done wonders for our once peaceful neighborhoods. Out here in the suburbs of Shi*cago in the sanctuary F-en state of Ill(like in sick). Soon we will need to fly the mex. flag on our gov. buildings…. Ill(sick) will show you how its done right..What else would you expect from our two senasstors, Turd-bin and the Messiah. It not the mex.’s simulating into our society, it’s us simulating into theirs.
Legions on September 15, 2007 at 9:55 AM
if it ain’t true, why do WE have to have roads run the length of OUR country from Mexico to Canadia?
madmonkphotog on September 15, 2007 at 9:56 AM
Unfortunately, the success in killing the amnesty bill has emboldened the lunatic fringe. And there is absolutely no way to explain to psychotic narcissists that this was accomplished DESPITE their efforts, not because of them.
So, where do we go from here? Absolutely nowhere. This is the new “third rail” of politics. I think even the craziest globalphobes understand that the immigration laws we’ve had in place since 1965 are utterly asinine. But what is the only cry loud enough to be heard among the mob’s din? “Enforce the laws already on the books!”
So what are all the politicians going to do in response? “Talk tough” about enforcing incoherent legislation – and avoid any real reform like it was the plague.
logis on September 15, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Allah, that photo is offensive. I have had to adjust my tin foil hat frequency 10 times now. The truth is out there, sheeple!
Stormy70 on September 15, 2007 at 10:07 AM
The rays are so strong, they are jamming my reading comprehension skills. Damn you, See-Dubya!
Stormy70 on September 15, 2007 at 10:08 AM
I am shocked and enraged that a so-called conservative site like this one could doubt the evil that is the NAU plans of the Bush dynasty. They have been working on it since they were working and making money with Hitler and it is finally coming to fruition because gullible people like YOU are sitting back and letting it happen. All so you can have easy access to Taco Bell! It’s disgusting. The NAU is coming and we will all lose our jobs to uneducated Mexicans who will be given the jobs that we all do now at half the price. What corporation wouldn’t want to hire an uneducated Mexican to be our future engineers, University professors, and scientists instead us white folk who have spent so much money on degrees and stuff? Soon the highest paid person in the general public will be lucky to make $5.50 and hour. And, it isn’t just the illegal aliens that will benefit here. The last time I was abducted by the mothership I was told that there are millions of lizard people from Sigma minor that are just jonesing to come here and take our jobs. And they don’t have green cards either. The Builderbergers are about to kill us all and YOU people are walking around with your heads in the clouds if you don’t see it. They have been planning it with the Masons and the Jesuits and the Pope since before the Revolutionary War. Nicholas Cage was right in that movie that it’s all just been a great cover-up. That wasn’t just entertainment people, some people who are apostates to the one world government are trying to warn us, man. The Unabomber knew and what did they do to him? Rosie O’Donnel was fired by the Joose because she knew it, too. I CAN’T belivethat yo PEOPLE ARESO WILLING TO DKILEL IS ALL LIEKTHSIIS IA MENANE MY GOSD WHYAREYIUO0U SO READYIT 9O THROWOW AAYS OURS COUNTRYLIKE THIWES???????
You guys are all just fools. Maybe even secretly in the pockets of the NAU… and the aliens from Sigma Minor.
I hate you.
Warner Todd Huston on September 15, 2007 at 10:11 AM
Everybody talks about the shamnesty bill as if it was a thing of the past. Unfortunately congress hasn’t forgotten and is trying again: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/bg2069.cfm
JimK on September 15, 2007 at 10:11 AM
some good info here on trans-texas corridor.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 10:12 AM
Heh. It’s called the US interstate highway system. Helps move people and things faster.
We also have roads running from Washington DC to Denver. Does that mean the federal gov’t is going to take over Mile High Stadium?
BacaDog on September 15, 2007 at 10:13 AM
powerful stuff. and convincing. But I know you are lying. Know how? You didn’t mention the Jooooooos.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 10:16 AM
What’s so insane about the idea of an NAU? Hold on, I’m not saying anyone’s actually working on it right now, nor that I agree it should be done. But what’s so crazy about the idea?
Harmonizing trade and defense policy, monetary systems, and migration, would appear to have all kinds of economic benefits, would it not? The Europeans have done it and seem to like it pretty well, don’t they? So what’s so fundamentally different between European and North American countries that makes it perfectly rational for them to consider, but totally unthinkable for us?
So, while I don’t agree with the idea, I don’t necessarily see why the idea must be considered ludicrous by definition.
RD on September 15, 2007 at 10:22 AM
That already happened.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Winnar!
Bad Candy on September 15, 2007 at 10:23 AM
It all started when the 3rd Reich invited the American Interior Dept. to visit Germany to see their Autobahn road system back in the 1930’s. FDR was President back then so it’s not just the ‘Pubs involved here. We adopted the German road system and put millions of outta work Americans back to work building the Interstate system (workfare) so that when the NaZis invade the U.S., they can easily drive their Panzers from the east coast and link up with the Japanese coming in from the west coast. THAT’S why the carriers were not in port on Dec. 7th, 1941. See how it all comes together?
Can have my Truther T-shirt now? Pleeeeease?
Tony737 on September 15, 2007 at 10:27 AM
The reason it would be a bad idea(if it was happening, and its not) is because Mexico isn’t ready for prime time, so to speak. Their economy isn’t nearly advanced enough, their gov’t too shaky and corrupt, people are poorly educated, it would be a huge drag on the US and Canada economies, plus the sovereignty question comes in play.
Bad Candy on September 15, 2007 at 10:27 AM
Oh STFU people, we all know this is an Illuminati plot!
Bad Candy on September 15, 2007 at 10:28 AM
You guys are all just fools. Maybe even secretly in the pockets of the NAU… and the aliens from Sigma Minor.
Warner Todd Huston on September 15, 2007 at 10:11 AM
Oh darn… I’m busted again.
RD on September 15, 2007 at 10:29 AM
Start adding this site to your daily reading, and you’ll begin to get a good idea of how freedom loving people despise the EU. Also, read about Oriana Falaci– one of the bravest and most intelligent women of the 20th century (she just died in “exile” from the EU in NYC).
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 10:30 AM
I think MY overall problem with this whole question is that I can’t figure out WHY our government is doing what its doing.
We want to think that our politicians are at least rational, and yet with the Transborder corridor, Mexican trucker deal, lack of border enforcement, border chaos (drug runners and gang lords), and lack of enforcing our illegal immigration laws… we can’t see a reason for our govenment to act like it is.
So people have to come up with a reason…
Romeo13 on September 15, 2007 at 10:30 AM
That should be Fallaci with double L.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Looks like everyone broke out the beer early today…..
Limerick on September 15, 2007 at 10:32 AM
And good day to you too Seamus.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 10:33 AM
I was just minding my own business and all of a sudden I saw a black suburban and it was followed by another black suburban and that was followed by a third black suburban and I watched these black suburbans drive down the freeway and they all had tinted windows but one had the back window down and inside was full of Hispanic looking people all dressed in battle fatigues and I know that they were going to Washington D.C. to meet with the leaders of Congress and the President because they all had license plates from Texas. TEXAS, can you believe it!! That is a border State!! Then I saw a Prius with North Dakota license plates!!! That’s on the NORTHERN BORDER!!! I couldn’t believe it!! I was witnessing the convergence of the NAU!!!
Troy Rasmussen on September 15, 2007 at 10:35 AM
We’re seriously making progress in yanking this debate away from the conspiracy nuts when you see hate like Warner Todd Huston’s comments above…. He’s not joking by the way…
Good job AP and See-Dubya for doing so!
Mcguyver on September 15, 2007 at 10:36 AM
http://www.spp.gov
OUR Government’s website. Spells it all out quite clearly.
The really crazy thing in all of this is not that some believe in it. Rather, that with so much information out there that NEVER gets discussed when people discredit the idea, that so many are so vociferous in their denial and ridicule.
America1st on September 15, 2007 at 10:37 AM
See-dubya, I hate to tell you this, but John Hawkins has actually verified in print that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. If just one of you would spend some time actually researching what’s going on instead of finding new and entertaining twists on the art of ridicule, you might actually be surprised.
How about this for proof that Hawkins has absolutely no clue on the issue?
Hawkins writes (emphasis added):
Only two problems with Hawkins’ claim. First off, how about allowing the CFR’s own website to tell you if Hawkins’ claim is accurate? (emphasis added):
•Our goal is to use the Council’s convening power and intellectual resources to help inform not only our members, but also Congress, the administration, the media, and the business community. The Washington Program is a place where policymakers turn for guidance, to test new ideas, and to engage with experts as they seek to develop policy initiatives.
The Congress and U.S. Foreign Policy Program engages policymakers on Capitol Hill with a series of initiatives that include:
- briefings for new members of Congress;
- a monthly briefing on foreign policy issues for chiefs of staff;
- an Experts Bank that allows us to custom build briefings on issues ranging from nuclear proliferation to Iraq for members of Congress or congressional delegations
- and, of course, we continue our longstanding Friday roundtable discussions with senior foreign-policy staff.
Our embassy lunches represent part of the Council’s outreach to Washington’s diplomatic community. The series provides a unique opportunity for diplomats to learn more about U.S. foreign policy interests and to exchange views with Council members in intimate discussions on issues affecting bilateral relations.
Let’s look again at Hawkin’s incorrect statement:
Just in case this isn’t enough to prove that Hawkins’ is simply not being honest, there’s a second problem with his comment:
Hawkins claims that “if you read the report in question, you’ll find that it doesn’t call for a North American Union.”
For those of you honest enough to actually READ THE DOCUMENT … you’ll find that Hawkins is playing word games here. While he’s telling you the truth that they don’t actually NAME their plan the “NAU” … it’s quite obvious that the plan IS to build a North American Union. They can name it anything they want, but this doesn’t change that fact. Read it and judge for yourself, and for those who still don’t believe it … please point out specific portions of the plan which are NOT currently being made reality.
The remainder of Hawkins’ argument is nothing more than claims that he spoke to people involved and that they denied it. Pretty weak research for a man who’s supposed to be a professional.
It’s interesting that there’s not one example of actual debate on the topic in either article. They both consist of nothing but the usual ridicule while failing to debate legitimate concerns.
Oh wait. I keep forgetting. Hawkins also spoke to Tony Snow on the phone and Snow denied it. Case closed.
I guess the Teamsters Union is now officially full of nutjobs too.
Gregor on September 15, 2007 at 10:40 AM
Meant to link the CFR webpage to that last comment. HERE IT IS.
Do they really have no connection to Washington, as Hawkins claims?
Gregor on September 15, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Thanks for responding, since yours is a position I also happen to agree with.
But the contrary argument would be, that Portugal and Greece – not to mention some of Eastern Europe – were considered by Europeans to be similar economic “basketcases”, yet the E.U. included them anyway – and the proverbial sky has not fallen. Couldn’t a comparison be drawn here without it being rejected by all as utterly ridiculous on its face?
I don’t think so. Though it may not be advisable for the time being, I still don’t think the idea is ludicrous by definition.
RD on September 15, 2007 at 10:44 AM
Oof… that should read, I don’t think it couldn’t.
RD on September 15, 2007 at 10:46 AM
It’s called laziness.. the government is too damn lazy to involve the represented in debate on what’s good for our country.
It’s called arrogance… the government knows best… to hell with the common folk that voted them in.
It’s called incompetence… the government is incapable of involving the people in their debate and decisions on what’s good for the country.
I mean even if 80% of the people desire something, the elected officials response is: “to hell with you common folk”.
So my question is:
Why the hell bother with having a representative government?
Why not just dictate to us what you want?
And while you are at it, why not just sent us back to school and teach us what you think government should be?
Why the hell not?
Mcguyver on September 15, 2007 at 10:47 AM
Cool with me.
Has the human tide reversed course? No? What could possibly fuel such a conspiracy theory?
‘Thousands’ will discount the possibility of an NAU when the administration proves the primary action that would come from such a thing has been stopped and repatriation occurs.
If our leaders are exasperated all they have to do is their jobs to fix it.
Until then expect exasperated Americans left to their own means to look for reasons as to why their will and laws are still being ignored.
Conspiracy is as conspiracy does, or not. Whose burden of proof in the pudding?
Speakup on September 15, 2007 at 10:53 AM
Again, I’m not arguing that a EU-style union is advisable. I’m just arguing against the suggestion that the mere proposal of the idea must somehow be ridiculous or impossible by definition, when we have valid counterexamples proving the idea is neither ridiculous nor impossible to achieve.
RD on September 15, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Trade/defense agreements are fine. Much more than that lead to HUGE bureaucracies even less beholding to “the people” than we accuse our own bloated Federal gov’t of being.
The question is, do you believe in smaller, limited gov’t? Do you believe in federalism, power to the states, and stuff like that. That’s the reason to oppose further integration of our national sovereignties. The gov’t that could benignly manage that behemoth doesn’t exist, and never will. IMHO, it was tried. It was called the USSR.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Warner Todd Huston on September 15, 2007 at 10:11 AM
The mothership does not like it’s secrets told.
Expect a visit from Xegularizzan.
VolMagic on September 15, 2007 at 10:57 AM
No doubt, and grazie mille for the links – I should start reading Oriana’s work, since she’s awesome… and it’s a shame she’s no longer with us.
RD on September 15, 2007 at 10:59 AM
I don’t know anything about any secret meetings or documents. I’ve never heard of any of these people or things. But I’m old enough to remember when John Lennon’s “Imagine” played on the airwaves and I know its’ lyrics and meaning.
Loss of the nation-state was (is) more natural for Europe than here where in many regions it was a state imposed contrivance to begin with, but not so with England and not so here. Yet so much I see points to just such a thing occurring. In the last analysis, nation-hood is a place in the mind. Once its gone in the minds of its people and of espeacially, its young, it may only likely be possible to restore it in a form that is irrevocably altered. Contrary to popular belief, Rome never fell, it couldn’t have, it simply ceased to be recognizably “Rome”.
At what point do our degreed professionals and their increasingly global enterprises having been raised with contempt for our traditions, come to look upon their host nation as merely the market of the moment, ready to pick up and leave for gated, sunny, retirements elsewhere when its ruin is complete. Why not open the flood gates to mexico and be done with it? Let the invasion begin in earnest! After all, we’re white, we’re evil, we deserve it!
Point being, there be no need for conspiracy, only synergy.
Like as not even if it is tried, an NAU will be unworkable. The likely ends of multi-culturalism will be met with balkanization not unity. Bear in mind, the march toward the American Civil War took some 40 years of escalating discord. Folks of my ilk as well as those of others, will in the end, only stand for so much.
Nyog_of_the_Bog on September 15, 2007 at 11:04 AM
Why yes, it does spell it out quite clearly.
http://www.spp.gov/myths_vs_facts.asp
KSgop on September 15, 2007 at 11:09 AM
Well said. Especially your carefully worded comment about civil war.
As for nationalism, it goes in and out of fashion. Other group loyalties abound (tribal, ethnic, linguistic, religious, philosophical, etc.) One need only look at the Islamic menace to see that the nation-state isn’t the only source of political power, or the only way to bind peoples.
But the USA was clearly founded on the nation-state idea, and firmly rejects the use of other potential group identities. That is what is now being challenged, from within and without. The balkinization is inevitable. There is no other way for the two ideologies to co-exist. And as you say, ultimately history repeats itself, a la 1861.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 11:17 AM
We’d never join up into one country. It would mean we’d have to hang out with Canada, like Canada was cool, and thats just not right, nor is it even remotely possible.
E. M. on September 15, 2007 at 12:12 PM
I, for one, welcome our new mexican overlords.
lorien1973 on September 15, 2007 at 12:14 PM
I dunno. Why do we have roads that run from florida to california…florida to new york. it’s a conspiracy!
lorien1973 on September 15, 2007 at 12:15 PM
I agree with RD: Merging the North America is not loopy or ridiculous. Neither are those who don’t like the idea.
Maybe we’re at the beginning of the 3-power block world that Orwell predicted in 1984. Oceania (us), Eurasia (EU+ Russia), East Asia (China etc). Or did he have a tinfoil bowler too?
dhimwit on September 15, 2007 at 12:21 PM
From the blog entry:
Putting up another post about it, then telling folks to get over it.
How about you get over it?
If you truly think it’s as ridiculous as faked moon landings, the Flat Earth Society, black helicopters, UFO abductions, mind-control satellites, and the “holograms with laser beams” 9/11 “truth”, then you’d feel no need to keep posting about it. As it is, it sounds like you’re trying desperately to convince yourself.
angryoldfatman on September 15, 2007 at 12:23 PM
This is the very same argument I get from 9/11 truthers all the time. If it’s so unbelievable, why are you discussing it? Must feel great to have that same common sense.
We discuss it because it marginalizes the entire party by believing in it. This government is too incompetent to pull off something like this; just think about that for a second. Have you seen any evidence of this supercompetent, supersecret government at any time during Bush’s administration? If not, why is the NAU scheme so perfect? It’s implausible.
lorien1973 on September 15, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Orwell warned against it. That was his point.
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Just to clarify, I hope you and your fellow scoffers are right, See-Dubya. I want so desperately to believe the leaders of our country have our best interests at heart. But considering everything I’ve seen, heard, and read about confessed and verified governmental misadventures and corruption, and about human nature in general, the less I can believe they do.
angryoldfatman on September 15, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Question… How do you open the borders for trade, and close it for CRIME without there being some type of overall structure to it?
Mexican police suck. If our border with them is open, as this espouses, and the security boundary surrounds all three states, how can you do that without changing the Laws of America? And how does that NOT infringe on sovereignity?
We are about to have a case brought against us in the World Court, and the board who oversees NAFTA because our Congress and people don’t want Mexican truckers wandering around American… Now, how can an overseas Court, or a bunch of Beaurocrats have more power than the Congress of the US about somthing happening on OUR OWN SOIL?
This is the exact thing we are talking about… treaties overriding internal laws… Its happening in Europe with Hate speech laws, and even the stupid Metric system (pubs in England are being pressured to change the Pint)… If we are not vigilant, it will happen here.
Romeo13 on September 15, 2007 at 12:31 PM
I’ll answer that with Nyog_of_the_Bog’s answer above:
There’s no need for supercompetence or supersecrecy or omniscience or whatever other red herring you want to throw in.
angryoldfatman on September 15, 2007 at 12:35 PM
That may be one of the most succinct statements of the case here. I expect to soon hear the Mexican trucking companies argue for the right to build terminals in the US, possibly with some regulatory concessions. No conspiracy, just synergy.
eeyore on September 15, 2007 at 12:35 PM
“there be no need for conspiracy, only synergy.”
I have said almost the smae thing before, whenever this debate gets going here. The “perfect plan” is not necessary. In order for this to come about they only need to push some things and allow others to happen until the weight or momentum will do the job better than any plan could have.
Thank you Nyog_of_the_Bog for saying it so succintly.
America1st on September 15, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Hate to break this to everyone but the NAU is pretty much already here. When you have a Head of State say everywhere there is a Mexican there is Mexico and mean it. That is a problem.
the NAU is not a secret document hashed out in the back room by cloaked people. The NAU is a concept, an idea that has been embraced in one form or another by our “leaders in washington since 1990″
The facts back this up. you want proof?
Failure to secure our borders during a Global War.
Failure of our government to enforce immigration laws
NAFTA
allowing non-english speaking and reading truck drivers on our roads.
Failure to tax wire transfer from this country to mexico. The government taxes anything and everything (esp things it does not want to encourge think cigs and beer)why not this?
All of these things can be explained by a simple concept. Our “leaders” see no difference between the countries of Mexico,Canada, and the USA.
Borders are the key. Our leaders do not think of borders anymore (think illegal immigration/Iraq mess). I personally think it is a by-product of being the only super power left. They are drunk on their own power and will not let little things like borders, founding documents, laws etc get in the way of what they want.
The NAU is a feat accompli. It is simply a small part in the grand view of a new world order. One where nationalism is thrown into the dustbin of human history and “new” concepts of universal human rights, international law, WTO status, GATT, and now possible the law of the sea are the new norm. The USA and the Western Hemisphere since the Monroe doctrine has been a de facto NAU. We provide the protection and capital to both Canada and Mexico. Mexico/Latin America provides the cheap labor and resources, Canada provides cheap abundent resources and we respect each others laws and customs. We no longer require assimiilation to English, or American ideals. We now accept forgien customs, flags, ideas and languages. We have moved on from the NAU thinking to an entire world stage (think Dubai ports) with esp. China and India now starting to be part of the mix.
We may not have one central currency but we also no longer have the entire say on what we can and can not do within our borders.
All comes back to the idea of the new world order. I think Russia and possiblely China and India have something else to say on this idea in the future but as of now our “leaders” have already accepted the fact.
Is it a bad concept? I think so because what has made America great for the last 200 years is not its people but its founding documents. By accepting the customs of other countries and their government bodies without regards to this countrie’s history and guiding laws we are making moral decisons that a government like Cuba’s/China’s/Mexico’s is the same as ours. Which in years could enable us to have a government like Cuba’s and freedom will be a thing of the past.
Iraq would be very different now if we insisted that they form a government like ours was 200 years ago.
unseen on September 15, 2007 at 12:59 PM
“Please, please, get over it, folks.”
See-Dub: Where do you live, Ohio?
Come down here to our communities in the border states and tell us to “get over it”…Apparently you haven’t been paying attention or perhaps your job won’t allow you to see and then speak the truth, but…
Did you notice that over Labor day weekend thousands of pollution spewing, and illegal cargo-carrying trucks came up thru the border without so much as a peek? Did you notice that Dubya tried to sneek this thru when Congress was on break? …This is part of NAFTA, the daddy of http://www.spp.gov and Billy Jeff was the political ho who got the ball rolling, Dubya is just doing what he must to ensure his place at the table of power, if not his very life. So it’s the greedy fat cats i blame, not our President
Have you read Jerome Corsi’s book, The Late Great US? I didn’t think so. The truth is hard to take, I know that from experience.
I for one will not “get over it” until the US becomes a nation of laws once again and we pull this country out of the third world cesspool that is engulfing us…With the attitudes even here, doubt that my children will be able to access the American dream, forget about their children.
Christine on September 15, 2007 at 1:10 PM
Thank you unseen.
Christine on September 15, 2007 at 1:11 PM
As some have already stated well, I’ve always been under the impression the NAU stuff gets traction because of the lax in federal willingness to enforce immigration laws beyond token media raids and the paltry work that is done now. I understand how such a conspiracy theory can gain steam under such conditions. I’m surprised it has taken so long for such a conspiracy to gain such a fan base.
I do not understand the panic over this new highway going from Mexico to Canada. Interstate 5, here in California, does just that already. It goes all the way from the bottom of the country to the top. While it is not a “super” 8, 12, 15, or 20 lane highway as this new one will be through the middle of the country, is the I-5 part of this grand NAU conspiracy too?
Though not completely related to this topic, but this NAU nonsense should get as far as any elimination of the Electoral College. In real life, it would take a constitutional amendment to eliminate the EC to replace it with a popular vote system. It would also take several constitutional amendments to implement the things necessary to give any such NAU or NWO real powers.
For God’s sake people, the country went through a Civil War over State’s Rights vs Federal (via slavery). People are not going to just lie down and let something like this happen. If you think otherwise, you are ignorant to the lessons of history.
Weebork on September 15, 2007 at 1:16 PM
Dang Gregor you put your foot in that one. Will See-dubya respond directly? Probably not.
Theworldisnotenough on September 15, 2007 at 1:23 PM
Again…
SPP goal:
Increase competitiveness by exploring additional supply chain options, such as by rationalizing minor differences in external tariffs, consistent with multilateral negotiation strategies.
That’s jargon for a single external tariff system covering the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.
What the EU has already done:
The creation of a harmonised common external tariff (CET), as it was known, meant that EU countries had to participate as a single group in international trade negotiations. External trade thus became one of the first instruments of European integration requiring member states to pool their sovereignty.
Anybody?
Theworldisnotenough on September 15, 2007 at 1:26 PM
…”I can’t figure out WHY our government is doing what its doing.”
The big ‘conspiracy’ is merely greed for filthy lucre and power. As others have said, there is no wild-eyed conspiracy here, just an insidious loss of sovereignty and rule of law.
Correction to my first post: Dubya’s dad (another globalist) signed on to NAFTA and began the entitlement of the invaders and the slow destruction of the Republic. This entitlement will grow and it’s just a matter of time before the violence will escalate.
Have you ever heard “Si, se puede!” being chanted in YOUR neighborhood or had a member of MS13 wreck havoc on YOUR street? I didn’t think so.
I think that it’s you (see-Dub and AP, etc) who need to get over your rose-colored pov and spend some time on the front line of the war that you refuse to acknowledge is real.
Please don’t insult us with your cloistered ignorance; we live in the reality of the ‘NAU’ everyday.
Christine on September 15, 2007 at 1:30 PM
Weebork on September 15, 2007 at 1:16 PM
History tells many tales. Like the history of NATO. Now if a NATO country is attacked we are required to go to war. So what you may say? Well our constitution says only congress can declare war. But wait a minute. Did we pass a constitutional amendment giving our enemies the power to push us into war? No but its there all the same. All a Russia or China has to do to start us on a path to war is attack Poland or Austrila and its on.
Our Constitution also says that only Congress can approve treaties but the “leaders” seeing how diffucult this could be to ram unwanted obligations and regulations down the CITIZEN”s throat came up with a the “fast track” idea giving the President the power to write treaties and have them “approved/rubber stamped by Congress” before the people understood what was in them. All this was done without constitutional admendments.
History tells us this. Tells us that FREEDOM is easily taken away for the “greater good” History shows that “governments all governments are a necessary evil” and they must be kept small and limited to preserve individual freedoms.
These are the lessons of history I have learned. I have seen people lie down and give over their freedoms for “security” and “conveinence”. I have seen the “greater good” gobble up Freedoms that my grandfathers and fathers enjoyed. I have read of times in this country where the government did not take 50% of your pay. Where you could own whatever gun you wanted whereever you wanted. I have lived once in a country, this country, where you could say what you wanted without worry of harassment charges being filed. I have also seen people freely give up these rights for the “greater good” This is what history has taught me.
I have seen people attack and spit on those that have defended their rights and yet the “government” did nothing to protect the protectors.
I think freedom is more important that security, more important than cheap lettuce, more important than peace. That is what hisotry has taught me.
unseen on September 15, 2007 at 1:42 PM
THe reason this conspiracy theory has gained so much currency is because of its plausibility in the wake if the government’s inaction over border control.
aengus on September 15, 2007 at 2:05 PM
Gregor at 10:40–
Look. The Council on Foreign Relations is, exactly as Hawkins explained, NOT A GOVERNMENT ENTITY.
It is a THINK TANK.
NOT PART OF THE GOVERNMENT.
They “brief Congress”. They “brief policymakers”. That is what successful think tanks do. They say hey, Congressman Smith, here’s our report on the border, call us if you have any questions.
And the strange thing is that’s exactly what the excerpt you quote from the CFR site–which you think is PROOF THEY’RE CALLING THE SHOTS–actually says.
And the same thing with the CSIS paper about which you say IT’S OBVIOUS IF YOU READ THE DOCUMENT.
Again, it’s not obvious. They’re a THINK TANK. Liberal eggheads are performing a study and submit it to Congress, who will probably ignore it. Ooh, a group of policy wonks studying trade issues. Stock up on ammo now!!!
THINK. TANK.
As for those of you who wonder whether I’m in Ohio: I’m in California. I am quite aware of the issues at stake here, thank you very very much.
see-dubya on September 15, 2007 at 2:14 PM
Unseen,
Well said.
Congress, more specifically the Senate, ratifies treaties, but the president has the power to make treaties. Kyoto is a prime example of this separation of powers. Bill Clinton got us into Kyoto but the Senate rejected it absolutely. I did not see any of this “fast track/rubber stamping” that you speak of.
I don not understand your point about other nations “pushing us into war”. As the Constitution says, treaties, among other things, shall be the supreme law of the land. If we had treaties to defend another nation if they are attacked by another, is it not moral for us to uphold our agreement and defend them?
Our nation was founded by people who rejected authoritarian rule. Even the pilgrims who came before the likes of Jefferson, Washington, et al. did the same thing. We, as a nation, have an inherent resistance to having our traditions eroded. Look at the recent firestorm over the Shamnesty Bill. The mere fact that the whole country is putting a great deal of focus on illegal immigration, more so than decades past, gives us a look into this resistance that I speak of.
In a per captia sense, the Civil War was the bloodiest war the U.S. has ever fought. Moreover, if nukes were around back then, the North and the South would surely have used them on each other. This same ferocity remains within the American psyche, albeit currently dormant. It was reawakened on Dec. 7, 1941 and was partially reawakened on Sept. 11, 2001. It could be completely reawakened at any time, and will most likely do so eventually.
I share your concern over liberty and the nature of government. I have great faith in my country that it will never let such tyrannical forms of government to be inflicted upon us. History over the last 200 years has not wavered that faith in America.
Weebork on September 15, 2007 at 2:15 PM
Thanks Unseen and Weebork.
But Weebork, you said “I have great faith in my country that it will never let such tyrannical forms of government to be inflicted upon us.
That’s the part I worry about. The “country” is the people collectively. And I don’t think we had the liberal socialist infection here before. So how is “the country” supposed to save us, if we need saving from ourselves? Are you talking about civil war? (NOT trying to put words in your mouth)
JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 2:25 PM
Weebork on September 15, 2007 at 2:15 PM
Kyoto, like the Shamensty bill, was a bridge too far too soon. They both will be back. Like Hillarycare. The Senate ratifies the treaties but these treaties are open ended. Their is no longer causes in them to have to be reratifed. Sure we can cancel treaties like Bush did with some Cold War treaties. But with each treaty we are drawn more closely to the world body. This has some good as well as some bad to it.
Good: we become closer to peoples of the world and avoid needless misunderstandings and wars (both trade and military)
Bad: we do this by sacrificing some freedoms and internal self determination. We also allow ourselves to get trapped in forgeign entanlgements ( Washington warned against this). Also treaties should be allowed to change with the times. NATO no longer is facing a massive Soviet threat and does not need our protection but instead of dissolving the treaty we expanded it causing Russia to some degree to again become a threat.
NATO led directly to the formation of the EU. If not for NATO there would be no EU today. Is the EU good or bad? Again there is both in the formation of the EU but the end result for the average CITIZEN of the EU is less FREEDOOM.
Anything that increases the size of government and governmental bodies while also increasing the distance between that government and the people whom they rule is a net bad thing. It brings less freedom, more taxes, more control, more disinformation.
I will use your example as a final point:
The mere fact that the whole country is putting a great deal of focus on illegal immigration, more so than decades past, gives us a look into this resistance that I speak of
I agree 100% but at the same time this massive outporing is occurring our leaders to almost a man still do nothing to capture this anger and political will. When in the history of this country has any leader let alone 90% of them failed to heed the will of the people when that will was in the high 80% of the population. Yet that is what we have. We still have no enforcment, no fence, and no push to improve either. You have to ask yourself why?
unseen on September 15, 2007 at 2:53 PM
JiangxiDad,
I must admit, the thought of a new civil war has crossed my mind, but more of a mind exercise than any real consideration. It would be foolish of me to deny that a possibility of another civil war within the US is possible. I’m not saying that we’re leading up to one, all I’m saying is that there could be one at some point in the future.
It is true that socialism is among the new enemies we face today that the Founders were not faced with. However, tyranny comes in many forms and I believe socialism (and perhaps islamofacism) is merely the new face to the same evil man has faced for millenia.
I believe this “saving” that you speak of may be happening as we speak. The country’s vehement reaction both over the Shamnesty Bill and the Dubai Ports Deal is the establishment of a major mood change in the nation. For example, illegal immigration has always been an important issue, yet it has only been getting the amount of energy we are seeing in just over a few years. Why the sudden change in mood?
There is a growing demand for order. We will still have to wait and see how that demand develops. I know the “wait and see” part is not encouraging, but that is what we have to do.
Weebork on September 15, 2007 at 2:55 PM
But then again I’m old enough to remember when those who worried about the European Union were called crazy and conspiracy nuts and look how that turned out.
Forget about the NAU, if we call it the SPP nobody will be able to claim it doesn’t exist.
Buzzy on September 15, 2007 at 2:56 PM
ROTF!!! Excellent! My sides are hurting.
jaime on September 15, 2007 at 3:12 PM
But he did! He touched all the bases. Hilarious!
jaime on September 15, 2007 at 3:19 PM
Unseen,
A great deal of my thinking about all of this is based on the ideas of a somewhat cyclical pattern of history as laid out by William Strauss and Neil Howe in their book The Fourth Turning. Their thesis explains not only the current ineptitude of our leaders (based on generational archetypes), but also the mood of the country and how it changes over time, and gives an idea into where we could be heading as a nation. It’s all based on history.
In a completely humorous way, I challenge the assumption the EU exists in reality. To me, it exists only on paper and some of that paper includes a 300 page “Constitution” which includes in it such claptrap as “unity in diversity”. In time, as with all abnormalities in nature, the EU will wither and die. (It is for this same reasoning I do not fear the euro.)
To return to seriousness, I disagree that the Kyoto failed because it was too soon. The Senate acted in a manner they were supposed to and rejected the treaty simply because it was bad for the country. It wasn’t because they thought they would totally reject it then just to wait a few more years for the “right time” to then turn around completely and confirm it.
To support my point, recently members of the Senate tried to get their Shamensty Bill passed very quickly without any time for debate. Once this bill was disseminated to the public, the result was what we all witnessed.
Also, Kyoto was partially based on the Global Warming Ponzi scheme. Global Warming had a lot more influence and authority during the days of Kyoto than it does today. Moreover, a great deal of influence that GW had has mostly cooled (pun intended).
Weebork on September 15, 2007 at 3:31 PM
You hit the nail on the head. But I thought we all knew that business owners are driving illegal immigration.
It’s a matter of simple corruption. Some business owners will push a part of their costs to the taxpayer to enrich themselves. Since they are large political contributers to both parties, the politicians are willing to look the other way. I consider any politician who is willing to do nothing, or grant amnesty, to be corrupt.
That’s why I can’t support the likes of Giuliani, McCain, Brownback, etc.
jaime on September 15, 2007 at 3:41 PM
Weebork on September 15, 2007 at 3:31 PM
While I agree with the cycle of history comment, history much like the stock market goes in a up and down cycle yet it TRENDS in one way, up.
It would appear throughout human history government TRENDS towards collectivism not freedom. I think of the American revolution as a market crash. Short, sharp and very powerful on the world stage. Yet in the great scheme of things it much like Athens and Rome will fall to the gentle upward slop of totalitrism which colors most of human history. Because freedom is scary, hard, and diffuclt on a daily basis but in the end it is the most satifying life.
as far as Koyoto and shamensty I say a bridge too far because the “leaders” bit off more they than thought. I also say the powers that be wanted these to happen and happen they would have if not for the vocal opposition of the American people. That opposition far from changing the minds of our leaders have only hardened their views and they will come back with the policies in a different way sooner or later. (cycles again) Thus like in WW2 and the bridge too far even though the Germans won that battle the Allies eventually won the war.
I am upset because it appears that I have been born during the great bull market of collectivism instead of the great crash of freedom in 1776
unseen on September 15, 2007 at 4:02 PM
This notion of mysterious shadowy bureaucrats meeting to usher in the NAU with George Bush’s blessing, however, is crazytalk.
Makes no difference if it is crazy talk or not as that “concern” is a red herring. There are as many as 20 million Mexicans illegally in the United States. Jorge Arbusto has left our borders basically wide open. Go to the ATM and it is “Press one for English; Press two for Spanish”. Packages now have English on one side and Spanish on the other side. Etc., etc., etc. and more etc and still more etc.
Forest for the trees.
MB4 on September 15, 2007 at 4:35 PM
if it ain’t true, why do WE have to have roads run the length of OUR country from Mexico to Canadia?
madmonkphotog on September 15, 2007 at 9:56 AM
That could have a very benign explanation, like maybe Jorge Arbusto and NASA want to signal space aliens.
MB4 on September 15, 2007 at 4:41 PM
Basically … what’s lacking is evidence that the NAU is not happening. Conspiracy or not, everything sure seems to be pointed in that direction … at least towards an economic NAU.
darwin on September 15, 2007 at 5:18 PM
Yeah. It is a ‘think tank’ all right.
Unfortunately, it is a ‘Think Tank’ of which nearly all of our Presidents, Vice-Presidents, Secretaries of State, Most Presidential Candidates, half of the U.S. Senate, many US Representatives and quite a few Governors over the last 30 or so years ARE MEMBERS; Republican or Democrat.
As are many of the ‘leaders of business and industry’ in America….. From whom the politicians get the really big donations.
It is foolish to dismiss the Council on Foreign Relations as “a bunch of liberal eggheads”. They are the most powerful of us politically, economically and socially, from both major political parties.
So, our so-called leaders are, in general, kind of likely to follow the goals that their little social club / ‘think tank’ / cabal endorses. They might not be willing to actually publicly come out in support of things like the NAU in public, but to have no suspicion that they might want what is best for themselves at the expense of us ‘little people’ is just silly.
LegendHasIt on September 15, 2007 at 5:22 PM
see-dub, don’t expect a reply from Gregor… he likes to come by, drop off his whining Gregor-logues, saying that all we do is “ridicule” him and his ilk, instead of debunking him… yet whenever you do engage him, he never returns. I suppose he’s busy with his video camera, taping Bush and other world leaders performing the “Cremation of Care” at Bohemian Grove, while worshiping the giant owl.
RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 5:32 PM
It’s simple ethnic cleansing. The government is cleansing the country of Americans using the Mexicans.
PRCalDude on September 15, 2007 at 6:18 PM
Don’t forget, this has already been tried. South Africa is the prototype for our future. The corporate elites are quick running out of countries to run to and ruin. Of course, nothing says home like a gated community behind a 10 foot wall laced with razor wire. The liberal, rich whites left South Africa and headed for New Zealand and Australia. They brought the same problems with them there. Once those countries go (and they’re well on their way), they’re out of places to run. Glimpse into the future after the next amnesty.
PRCalDude on September 15, 2007 at 6:34 PM
Really? Is that what Hawkins said? REALLY?
Let’s look again (emphasis mine):
Now we’ll look at what YOU just said (emphasis mine):
I’d say that you just agreed with me that Hawkins is full of crap.
I’m sorry, but where did I suggest that they are “calling the shots?” My only suggestion is that the people calling the shots are actually going along with the suggestions put to them by the CFR “think tank.”
Like I said before … if you disagree with this, please read the CFR’s “Building a North American Community” and point out the portions that are NOT already currently being implemented. To make it easy … the “checklist begins on page eight.
Also, please read THIS DOCUMENT’s suggested timeline starting on page 16. You can clearly look at Bush’s policies and match his actions to the plan as if it’s his own personal checklist.
Are there any steps in that timeline that are NOT occurring EXACTLY as suggested? So, is this some amazing coincidence, or are the governments of the three countries actually following the “suggestions” step-by-step?
It’s really amazing to me how anyone can actually look at something like this and claim they aren’t working together.
Gregor on September 15, 2007 at 7:19 PM
see-dub, don’t expect any actual facts or debate from Rightwinged… he likes to come by, drop off his ridicule, saying that we’re all nutjobs, instead of debunking us… yet whenever you do engage him, he simply offers more ridicule.
More topic dodging from Righwinged in 5 – 4 – 3 – 2 …
Gregor on September 15, 2007 at 7:56 PM
How’s that song go…
“Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right”
But I guess I prefer my fellow conservatives strain of crazy. At least Bush isn’t planning attacks on American citizens; he’s just willing to sign over sovreignity.
VolMagic on September 15, 2007 at 8:55 PM
Quite the contrary… You’re spitting out your same victim “stop ridiculing me” BS you always do… before you run off and never return to engage, when I’ve thrown a couple of links at you. Why waste my time doing anything but “ridiculing” you, given your history?
Now, as always, I’m off to pick up Karl Rover for our next mock human sacrifice at Bohemian Grove. It’s Bilderberger night! This is when we really plot about raising up Satan and taking over the world with him. You and Alex Jones better just keep your cameras away from us Gregor!
RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 9:33 PM
Yeah, think tanks have no power or influence over American government and society whatsoever.
And non-governmental entities couldn’t possibly control even half our government, much less launch a conspiracy to take over the whole thing.
Good shot across the bow of those stupid conspiracy theorists! The next thing you know, they’ll tell us there was a huge conspiracy to steal the 2000 election from George Bush! Can you believe these idiots think that Al Gore did backroom deals with every single Florida voter?! CALL IN THE BLACK HELICOPTERS AND LAY DOWN SOME CHEMTRAILS WOOOO HOOOO!
angryoldfatman on September 15, 2007 at 11:01 PM
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
What offensive thing did I say?
angryoldfatman on September 15, 2007 at 11:02 PM
Here’s some pure specualtion that I don’t think is likely, but it fits the pattern of an NAU consipracy:
1) The Iron Curtain collapses.
2) Previously mild rumors of a European Union (outside of NATO) go mainstream (and eventually are proven true).
3) George H.W. Bush makes some obscure comment in some obscure speech about the New World Order.
4) Recognizing that America is slowing down as a manufacturing nation and cannot possibly compete with the manufacturing might of dozens of European nations, Bill Clinton picks up the ball and runs with it, ushering in NAFTA (he and GHWB seem to be pretty chummy on fundraising adds, so they must be closely linked).
5) American manufacturing will now be out-sourced to Mexico and Canada under NAFTA. Cheaper for companies on labor, better for those companies, right? Better to compete with the dreaded EU who seeks world economic dominance!
6) NAFTA partially implodes. US jobs outsourced to Southeast Asia instead of Mexico and Canada. US still bound under treaty to allow goods produced in Mexico and Canada to be sold tariff-free in the US.
7) Government ignores the irony that goods produced in Asia that are still succeptible to tariffs are still cheaper than goods produced in Canada/Mexico and won’t repeal NAFTA.
8) GWB seems hell-bent on NOT enforcing our borders, thus allowing the flow of Mexican/Canadian-produced goods free access to our economy since we don’t “produce” anymore.
There you go. 8 steps to a fertile conspiracy theory. There are holes in those 8 steps, but what the hell? A conspiracy theory doesn’t have to make sense to become mainstream anymore. 9/11 “truthers,” anyone?
I’ll leave it to fellow Hot Air readers to find the holes and plug them in 4 steps so we can have our very own 12-step program to usher in the NAU.
I seek no enemies here. I know my comments follow AP’s “this is BS” attitude and I really think the NAU is a crock. However, I have a hard time putting anything in the realm of “impossibility” with our current Government. No telling what those fools will do next. They may prove me wrong tomorrow by passing NAU legislation or passing a resolution that the moon is made of concrete (and not cheese). :P
American_Jihadist on September 15, 2007 at 11:27 PM
That’s just too much information you’re throwing at us RightWinged. How long did it take you to do all that research?
I guess you’ve beaten us all again.
Gregor on September 16, 2007 at 1:37 AM
That’s my point, you clown… After “ridiculing” you before, you tossed out your canned victim answer. Then, despite better judgment, I HAVE engaged you and threw a couple links at you. However you never returned to actually argue about them, you always just come back to whine about what a victim you are of ridicule.
As I said to start this, why should I waste my time getting in to a debate about your Truther 2.0 BS, when you never actually stick around when someone does engage you?
RightWinged on September 16, 2007 at 4:47 AM
Funny. I’ve been here for two days now directly answering those who “engage me.” Seems your accusation is a bit off. Still waiting for your first factual addition to this topic, other than the usual name calling and links to articles which repeat the same ridicule. Your idea of “engaging” seems to be to link to someone like John Hawkins, who’s idea of debunking the NAU is to call Robert Pastor and Tony Snow on the phone and ask … “are you guys really doing this? No? Okay, that’s good enough for me.”
Hey, why don’t you call The New Republic and ask them if they are honest, have high standards, and commit to accurate stories? You’ll get an answer something like this:
We all know how reliable that phone call would be, don’t we?
If you want to believe there’s never going to be an NAU because Tony Snow says so, that’s fine with me. But you’ve yet to offer a single example of anything you’ve dug up that supports your view with facts. All the facts happen to lead to you being wrong.
By the way …
Tony Snow says that Comprehensive Immigration Reform was NOT amnesty.
You can trust him if you want to.
This is most likely where you ignore everything I just wrote and respond by saying that I need to stop smoking the pipe and that I refuse to respond to you.
Gregor on September 16, 2007 at 5:32 AM
It was probably because of the number of links in your post.
Gianni on September 16, 2007 at 11:34 AM
see-dubya has proven that he can cut and paste John Hawkins Kool Aid denial.
Dictionary.com defines a conspiracy as; “an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons.”
There is a conspiracy but it is no longer a theory.
If the NAU/SPP does not exist why does the Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007, S.1348, have a provision on page 211, for fast tracking the North American Union inserted in the bill?
“It is the sense of Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity to help generate economic growth and improve the standard of living in Mexico, which will lead to reduced migration,” the draft legislation states on page 211 on the version time-stamped May 18, 2007 11:58 p.m.” http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55787
John Hawkins, Michael Medved, and now see-dubya are in denial when the facts are on the Internet for anyone to read. These guys refuse to believe what is happening right in front of them and then attack anyone that has done their homework.
Dr. Jerome Corsi and Judicial Watch have used the FOIA to obtain the proof that the North American Union is being created in secret, behind closed doors and have posted the documents on the Internet for everyone to read.
There is no “conspiracy theory” here, whether about black helicopters or anything else. The evidence that supports the idea of a strategy aimed at ending U.S. sovereignty by creating a borderless world is in print, often by the authors of its own longstanding advocates, for those who can read plain English.
Screaming “conspiracy theory” is nothing more than committing a straw man (an informal fallacy of basic logic).
Ridicule is the last resort of those who have lost the argument, as the skeptics clearly have.
ScottyDog on September 16, 2007 at 12:11 PM
Here are the FOIA documents proving there is a NAFTA Superhighway: http://nathanmhansen.blogspot.com/2007/05/nasco-lockheed-martin-and-total-domain.html
PowerPoint Presentation on The North American Union
http://www.freedom.org/naugreen2/player.html
Accuracy In Media Report on NAU:
http://www.aim.org/static/5351_0_7_0_C/
Toward a North American Union:
http://www.augustreview.com/issues/regionalization/toward_a_north_american_union_200608181/
Treason Abounds ~ Gov’t Cabal Plots North American Union (NAU)
http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/TreasonAbounds.html
“The SPP.gov website has tried to counter We the People’s opposition to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) by publishing a rebuttal titled: Myths vs. Facts.
Note, item number one on their list which states:
Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.
Fact: The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is NOT an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was EVER signed.
“Their ‘fact’ does not hold up under scrutiny. It is basically a BALD-FACED LIE! It is propaganda in its boldest form.”
“How do I know Because on a Canadian government website there was a statement made and signed by Prime Minister Martin which declares the following:
“on March 23, President Bush, President Fox and I SIGNED the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America that establishes the way forward on our continental agenda for security, prosperity and quality of life.”
The above quote can be found on page 2 of 5. It is the last sentence in the sub-section titled Canada in North America in a document signed by PM Paul Martin: http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/cip-pic/ips/ips-overview2-en.asp.
ScottyDog on September 16, 2007 at 12:14 PM
LOL you two are as good as engaged now. You are completing each other’s thoughts!
Bradky on September 16, 2007 at 3:37 PM
Amazing, he reads the posts:
“As for those of you who wonder whether I’m in Ohio: I’m in California. I am quite aware of the issues at stake here, thank you very very much.”
Hmmmm, let me guess…you live in northern California, the bay area perhaps? That’s pretty darn cloistered for a real awareness, see-dub. I suggest you go on a road trip to our home turf so that you can understand what we mean when we say the NAU is already here, no matter what you want to believe.
If you are aware of the ‘issues’ at stake you certainly don’t project that awareness. Do you have children? Have you spent any time at Home Depot, community health clinics, on the southern cal freeways or in the jails? Nope, I didn’t think so.
We all are terrified of the truth, but being in denial won’t make it go away.
Christine on September 16, 2007 at 6:27 PM
According to the 2000 census 32% of the population of California is Hispanic. So if you are standing in a group of three people, two of you will be of Hispanic origin. When I was stationed in Japan there were rations on how much rice you could purchase at the commissary. More than a few times I’d observe people taking down information on an Asian woman with two bags of rice while completely missing the white or black patron with 4 or 5 bags of rice. Your fears sound remarkably similar to that kind of tunnel vision.
Making a conspiracy out of that simple fact is as silly as believing that the World trade Center buildings went down as a “controlled explosion”.
You live in a free country — if you don’t like living with people of Hispanic origin go to another state with a population comprised of a demographic more suited to your tender sensibilities.
Bradky on September 16, 2007 at 7:29 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »