US-CANADA-MEXICO one nation? FTW

[TaLoN]

I dont know how many of you follow cnn, cant stand fox news personally, but thats a different issue.  Did anyone catch Lou dobbs the other night when he was talking about investigations into the whitehouse regarding alegations of the govenment talking with Canada and Mexico about a possible union of nations?

Seems very strange and completely outta left feild but FTW? I've been looking around the net after he said it and nothing. Anyone have a clue what the hell he was talking about?

[MONOLITH]

CNN?

Sounds like this is propoganda crap designed to get the average gullable american to get angry at the Bush administration. It's almost election time.

"What'cha all mean they're gonna make us one country? Dang, that ain't right!"

[Da Fish]

Would that make it the "United States of Canamericexico"???

More to the point could many of todays Americans stand "french" as a official native tongue of their country?

Not that it bothers me, I'm British.....

[Zazoo]

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

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

Bill Tucker reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(END VIDEOTAPE)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bill Tucker, thank you very much.

Here's the full transcript of the episode:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/21/ldt.01.html

~Mike

[Para]

No.  Hell no.  I don't have a problem with Canada so much as I do with Mexico.  But still.  No.

[MONOLITH]

I think we need to see the actual bill/legislation to see exactly what's in it; not one side of the partisan fences 'interpretation'.

Particularly things like this...

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



"Securing" can be used/manipulated many ways. Let's find out what the legislature actually says. Anyone from Canada actually think canadian troops are going to southern mexico to be their border patrol? Let's see the Canadian people tolerate anything even remotely like that. I doubt it.

[MONOLITH]

Like I said, probably more anti-republican propoganda than anything else.

Educating mexican border security, and offering technology and training; which directly aids our own security, is far different than Dobbs implying "we are going to take responsibility for Mexicos southern border".


http://www.spp.gov/myths_vs_facts.asp

http://www.spp.gov


Boy, this next line sure sounds evil.....

"Develop and implement a comprehensive North American strategy for combating transnational threats to the United States, Canada, and Mexico, including terrorism, organized crime, illegal drugs, migrant and contraband smuggling and trafficking."

[MONOLITH]

I dont know how many of you follow cnn, cant stand fox news personally, but thats a different issue.

And now you know why I can't stand CNN. Look at what they've got you thinking. That Bush wants to merge Canada and Mexico into the US to form one country; as if we 're all going to have to turn in our dollars for pesos.

This is all pre-election crap, designed to scare people into voting republicans out of office next month.

Fox is far from 'fair and balanced', but CNN is downright devious and dirty. This thread proves the point.

[MONOLITH]

Oh, and just to be real clear.....

My posts are not defending Bush or the Republican administration.

To be honest, I'm so fed up with the bungling of Iraq, and with the anti-American sentiment around the world, I'm looking forward to 2008 just so this nation can begin to patch itself together and get a new start with foriegn relations.

What my posts ARE defending, is the fact that the SPP may very well be something that would be extremely beneficial to the US and Canada (and Mexico), yet the liberals spin it into something evil, just for political gain.

I've about had it with partisanship taking a front seat to what's actually good for the common people. And that goes to both the right and the left.

We need to be common Americans again, not Liberals of Conservatives.

I'm so fed up with partisan game playing, I'm about ready to start my own revolution and overthrow both the right and the left myself.

Who's with me? Power to the People!  :tongue: :wink:

[BOBK]

I became aware of this plan way back at the end of the Carter Administration.

The obviously powerful group that is/was behind it was even able to initiate advertisments under the banner of tourism, utilizing the code word: magic.

If you go back, you'll find/remember Linda Ronstandt being utilized in the campaigns, i.e.,
"the MAGIC of Canada and the MAGIC of Mexico.

I believe part of it is due to the fact that the RFID technology plan is tied up with it.  The world is being re-divided into new blocks, adding to the already-in-use postal zip system.  It is the real reason that illegal immigration was allowed to continue un-abated for so long.

I think promises have been made without anyone's consent...but again...its me talking, so, chalk it up to paranoia again.

[MONOLITH]

I became aware of this plan way back at the end of the Carter Administration.

Carter?

Well, at least then we know it's not Bush's fault.

Of course, that doesn't rule out extra-terrestrials.  :wink:

[DaSmerg]

This has been mulled about in several different ways up here...tighter relations with the U.S., ending and splitting what is now Canada into new U.S. states, dropping the looney and adopting the green back...

So this isn't really "that" new of info from my perspective.

TBH, I don't see how this could even be possible given the economic outlook for my country.  I mean, we sit on the world's largest developing oil reserves outside the Middle East.  AFAIK, I do believe we (Canada) had risen to supplying something like 35% and growing of the U.S. fuel demand, nevermind the growing Asian thirst.  To give you an idea of the growing Asian demand...the largest public works project going on in my province (British Columbia) isn't the build up to the 2010 Winter Games, it's the Gateway Project, masive development in infrastructure (roads, bridges, railways) between our Pacific ports and the province of Alberta including building more port capacity and new ports.



I'm suprised you don't like Lou Dobbs Mono.  He seems more in line with a lot you've had to say over the years.  When I think traditional, little 'c', U.S. conservative, Lou is usually the first guy who pops in my head.  A big recurring theme in his shows has been border security and this would be another slice of the spectrum view of "border security ideas" IMHO.

Oh, and just to be real clear.....

My posts are not defending Bush or the Republican administration.

To be honest, I'm so fed up with the bungling of Iraq, and with the anti-American sentiment around the world, I'm looking forward to 2008 just so this nation can begin to patch itself together and get a new start with foriegn relations

WTH??  Did I just read that?  

In all seriousness, I'm actually very suprised we haven't seen a 3rd party spring up from this nonesense that's been going on since the 2000 election.  I'm thinking that if this insane partisan rancour continues past 2008, we very well could finally see a real 3rd option that lands somewhere in the middle of the Dems and GOP.  It seems to be more about what party can take and hold onto political power than making use of that for some sort of public good nevermind generating canadidates who have the ability to make these decisions.

But I'm in total agreement with you on your one (assumed) thought here though...after Bush leaves, be it a Dem or Repub that wins the Oval office, some pretty major fence mending is in order.  The U.S. is not the country it was 6 years ago from a perception stand point.

We can point a lot of fingers and some can choose to bash whomever they like but this responsiblity lies with a host of folks at the top, inside the oval office equally as well as captial hill.  They just seem to have been more pre-occupied in following some sort of 'get the party re-elected' strategy than what is good for the whole of the country.

[TaLoN]

Dont get me wrong now, I dislike quite a bit of the guys at fox news, but i also dislike lou doobs  or any other close minded person.  Key point there is "close minded", ala far left far right.  I just brought up the question cause I heard the man say those words specifically and I wanted to know WTH he was talking about.

Go GREEN PARTY.

[BajaBravo]

I used to watch the news constantly. Now I can't watch it for more than 5 mins (maybe 10 mins of CBC). CNN even less. I've never even tried to watch FoxNews. It's all trash.

The debate about balancing sovereignty against integration (whatever form it takes) is as old as The New World. The basic idea that our collective fates in North America are irrevocably intertwined is axiomatic. NAFTA, NORAD, and countless treaties and agreements wouldn't exist otherwise.

It's politically expedient to pluck our nationalistic heart strings by conjuring up phantom threats and paranoia regarding sovereignty (it sells newspapers and gets votes), but at the end of the day business is business on the trade side, and it's hard to argue rationally that our collective security is best achieved by stove-piping each nation's efforts.

I'm not saying sovereignty isn't paramount, because it clearly is. It's just that the sovereignty card is played all the time by the talking heads, but it rarely does it result in dealing with genuine sovereignty issues.

This kind of thing exemplifies the fact that meaningful discussions and debate can't be distilled into sound bites and fake news shows. It's the details and nuances that matter.

[MONOLITH]

*Looking up 'axiomatic' * :tongue:

[BajaBravo]

I just made it up to look cool. :wink:

[MONOLITH]

WTH??  Did I just read that?  

Yep.

My political inner feelings have been evolving lately.

Stay tuned....

[DaSmerg]

While I don't completely understand...and probably never will...I can sympathize with your "evolving...political inner feelings".

I definately don't envy the choice between just two major political parties.

[MONOLITH]

While I don't completely understand...and probably never will....

Why not?


2 years ago, I would have said "I'm simply voting Republican across the board, because I everything I see from liberals I typical don't like".

These days, I'm a little more prone to say "You may be a Republican, but I'm starting to think you're f*cking up here".

More than anything, I'm simply sick of the current state of American politics. Who I blame mostly for it, I'll leave for another thread. But it's not all Bush's fault, nor the Right.

I do have issues with Iraq, with the border, and with our current state of foreign relations. I fault the Republican administration for some questionable decisions, but that wouldn't completely disgust me in terms of politics in general.

Politics in general, I fault the behaviors from the left. Some of the tactics, the antics, the ridiculous cries of stolen elections while they're busy voting with dead people's names and ineligible prison inmates. They don't want voter picture ID cards, because then THEY can't steal elections. You see, the typically liberal black and spanish minorities can spend a few weeks getting their paperwork downtown for their welfare checks and food stamps. That they can do. But get a photo ID to vote....Oh heck no. We can't have that. Then Julio couldn't vote 7 times for a democrat.

So, I have serious isues with both sides of the fence right now. The Right has f*cked up some things; the Left has proven, at least to me, to be something even worse.

So, yeah. That's where I'm at.  I don't think we could win either way. Iraq has become a joke. It's what? 3 years now, and we're still losing 100 American boys a week to rogue militias. Someone with some balls needs to step in there and throw political correctness out the f*cking window, treat it like the combat situation it is and take control of the damn country already.

On the other hand, with the left at the helm, I guarantee you we'd be fighting those militias over here on US soil instead.

So yeah. I'm a bit fed up at the moment.

[DaSmerg]

I was going to make a different thread...but hey...so many threads get derailed/wander off original topic...why not?

You asked why I don't understand.  Just in the province I live in, there are 3 viable parties and a 4th option (the Greens) that are about to become viable because of population re-distribution...

[/start-off-topic-Canuck-stuff]  Quebec is losing seats to Alberta and British Columbia because the 2 western province populations are going up while Quebec's has gone down.  This means the west will now have a larger voice in Ottawa, which is going to signifigantly shift our political focus.  The Green party has always been close to putting together a seat or two.  With this change and greater influence to the west, we should see the Greens emerge as a 4th voting option that would end up with federal representation[/end-off-topic-Canuck-stuff]

That's what I mean by I don't understand.  While yes, the only two parties to dominate Canadian politics have been the Grits and the Tories since the beginning of our country, there have been other options to vote for, and generally a third party (never minding independants) who end up sitting in parliment, to lend voice to this option.

Agreed, where America is today versus where it should be is almost it's own topic...nevermind Iraq...and Afghanistan.

I will say one thing in response to what I think you were alluding too...Iraq has morphed into a war that it is not what it was supposed to be.  With people butchering each other in large numbers with power tools and blunt force trama's for sheer blood and terror all in the name of some illogical and ancient religous divide, it's hard to see how a military only solution is going to prevail this one.  I agree, some plain old fashioned brute military force is needed.  But isn't that what the war was supposed to alleviate?  A brutal military dictatorship?

Ugh huh?