digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

TX Gov. and Giuliani financially linked to NAFTA Superhighway and SPP

worldnetdaily.com — Gov. Perry has received campaign contributions from Cintra and Zachry Const. Co., the SA-based construction firm selected by TxDOT to build out the TTC. It has also been established that Cintra is represented in the United States by Bracewell and Giuliani, Republican Party presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani's Houston-based law firm.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • vegasbright, on 10/11/2007, -4/+28A note to those who are unaware on how politics works - this is how things are done.
    • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -13/+1Yeah.. I'd rather have this than have a government run for and by the Mafia (which is the case in Providence, RI, where I lived for 4 years). This is one aspect of Giuliani I wouldn't mind. I'm all for the Trans Texas Corridor, and it, along with the low cost of living and high quality of life already there, makes me consider moving there sometime in the next few years.
      • gangstawhiteboy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5dude this super highway will kill the united states. Its a north american union thing man wake up. there are no aspects of Giulianni that are trying to work for the people, so how could you like it!!! our gov't is already run by the mafia, guys like Rudy, and all these scumbags need to go, MAFIA STYLE
        • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -7/+1Are you suggesting that we assasinate our leaders?

          The superhighway is a good thing. Trade is a good thing. This will raise the standard of living in both the USA and Mexico, and I-69 will help to improve the economies of the USA, Mexico, and Canada.

          Since NAFTA was passed Canada has seen its standard of living rise, the US has seen its standard of living rise, and Mexico's standard of living has skyrocketed. Most of Mexico is officially considered "developed" by the UN, and Mexico will eventually rise to "non-*****" status if we continue to trade with them. You are ignorant, and probably shouldn't be allowed near any political rallies.
          • ferrofluid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1by 'standard of living' do you mean rampant price rises and soaring utility bills?
            From all that I have read, living standards and wages for most Americans has fallen dramaticaly over the last x number of years,
            20% might be living in a dream world of 'have', 80% are struggling and falling into debt and poverty.
          • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1ferro:

            Before NAFTA, we had 20 cable channels, 2 crappy cars, 1 "land line" phone, most of us had no computer and those of us who did had a 486 at best, the average house was probably half the size of what we have today, air conditioning was a ***** LUXURY (at least in the northeast) and middle class people still went to supermarkets and movie theaters on hot days just for the air conditioning.

            Think of what we had then and think of what we have now. Life is so much ***** easier with advancing technology, goods are cheaper, our cars are better, we get 200 TV channels and there's still "nothing on", going on an airplane is no longer a very big deal to middle class Americans. When during the Bush 41 years casually "dining out" meant either going to Friendly's, some crappy local establishment, or fast food we now, during the Bush 43 years, have a plethora of national chains to choose from in all but the remotest of areas. Honestly, how has the standard of living dropped since NAFTA? Maybe some of us feel like we're struggling, but that's only because we have so much more ***** to pay for.

            Are you even an American? There is no poverty in America to speak of. Even in New Orleans, we saw among the "poorest of the poor" fat people with computers, TVs, cell phones, cars. If you want to see poverty, take a trip to Haiti sometime. I really don't get how liberals live their lives always thinking the world is getting so much worse when it's so plainly obvious that the world is getting better and better. If things keep improving at the rate they have been in years that I've been old enough to realize what's going on around me then we'll have eliminated poverty worldwide by the turn of the next century.
    • NickSpinner, on 10/11/2007, -7/+13thats the dumbest ***** i ever heard, giulianis dad was a mob boss and he knew the towers were coming down. ron paul 08
      • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Rudy made a name for himself prosecuting mobsters, so I don't know if he has any ties nowadays. His father, per the wikipedia and all the sources that were cited, was nothing more than a low level thug in the mob.

        If you wanna get into crinimals, look into the Kennedy clan's mafia ties. I'm not making any excuses for Giuliani's father, but I don't think he was anything close to a head of a family.
        • ferrofluid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1was it prosecution and elimination of rival families?
      • bort, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Why do people dig comments like this up?
        • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1For the same reason people tend to digg my comments down. Digg is groupthink central
    • Urusai, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3Let us celebrate crookedness by pissing on each other.
    • j0keR, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Graft? In the federal government? Unpossible!
      [/sarcasm]
  • inhisgraceb4, on 10/11/2007, -2/+31The people of Texas have been sold out to the highest bidder. In Christ, Mary
    • StupidLiberal, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Exactly. I can't believe anyone would have voted for Perry--and the spineless representatives in the Texas legislature wouldn't even stand up and overturn his veto. It's enough to make me physically sick.

      From the article:
      "As WND has previously reported, the $180 billion needed to build the 4,000-mile TTC network planned for construction over the next 50 years will be financed by Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., a foreign investment consortium based in Spain. Cintra will own the leasing and operating rights on TTC highways for 50 years after their completion is complete."
      I'm glad we are selling our roads and land to a foreign corporation.
    • LordofShadows, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10Perry won because of all the straight ticket repulican voters here.
    • cobrabyte, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8@LordofShadows

      That's absolutely correct. I talk to so many people who do the same and I just want to slap them. ***** Perry for ruining my state.
    • AMack, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11This is totally disgusting. What is wrong with out politicians? Aren't they supposed to be protecting eminent domain and American jobs?

      Ron Paul is the only politician talking about ending the NAFTA superhighway. Thats just one reason out of many why he's got my vote.
    • rarson, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Ron Paul is the only politician talking about a lot of issues that actually matter. Instead of hot-button press issues like abortion, which people will never come to a consensus on anyway.

      Why don't we just table the less important matters that we can't agree about anyway and start debating issues that have a direct impact on our lives, like this one?
  • gangstawhiteboy, on 10/11/2007, -12/+15When Ron Paul is elected, Rudy is the first to be hung, stoned, shot or just carved out. He is a dispickable piece of *****. I wanna ***** him up so bad.!!!
    • razor150, on 10/11/2007, -11/+1Ron Paul has about as much chance of winning as I do, and I am not even running. If Americans wanted a Libertarian president they would vote for the Libertarian nominee.
      • gangstawhiteboy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2your an idiot sir. ron pauls chances of winning are better than any republican nominee according to a pretty good source...LAS VEGAS!!!! Las Vegas isnt bias, or controlled by the gov't, they give u true to life chances of winning, and Rons are better than anybody in the republican field, so eat ***** you typical ***** idiot, go research ***** b4 you open up ur diarhea flap!!!
    • BrandonMills, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1When?

      s/When/If/

      Don't count your chickens before they hatch.
  • Duncan3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19That's why he was at Bilderberg... in case you can't connect the dots.
    • tovard, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1Remember kids, your tinfoil hat can help you connect the dots between facts that have no relation at all. It can also show you who in the goverment is actually an alien lizardman.
      • FAT_PIGGY, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Remember The North American Union and NAFTA are real. :)
  • jmknsd, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15Literally the day after Perry was elected Governor, he turned around and said that he changed his mind about enforcing immigration, he's just as bad as bush, only on a smaller scale.
    As for his Democratic opponent, Chris Bell, hes a Lobbyist now.

    I voted for kinky.
    I will be voting for Ron Paul.
    • Dewhead, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1You will be throwing your vote away just like you did with kinky. I share your frustration but voting for a candidate that doesn't have a chance in hell of winning is lame.

      There isn't a perfect candidate just like there aren't perfect people. I can't think of a single person that I agree with 100% of the time. Personally, I have a couple of non-negociable issues that I must be in agreement before I can vote for someone. After that, I pretty much know that I won't be happy all of the time. That is the way it goes for all of us.

      Instead of throwing your vote away on a fringe candidate, why not pick your major positions and then support a candidate that is the closest to your ideal? That way at least you will have a say.

      Who are you going to support after the primaries because Ron Paul will not get the Republican nomination. Or will you jump to a democrat?
      • bumb1ebee, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1What if the fringe candidate is closest to my ideals? Voting for the person who is the best representative of your ideals is never throwing away a vote, no matter how small of a chance the candidate has. If you're always voting for who you think is going to win rather who really represents your own views, then this crappy two party system that we have we never change. It will always be a choice between the lesser of two evils. Sometimes, you really don't have a choice at all. Republican vs Democrat? It's really just the same *****, different name.

        If enough people voted how they REALLY feel instead of picking from the limited crop of "top tier" candidates, then our votes would be numerous enough to mean something, to send a message. Unfortunately, too many people think like you. Well, we reap what we sow.
      • jmknsd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0well, since this is Texas, voting for a democrat as weak as Chris Bell was also throwing away my vote.
        so waste my vote voting for someone I would love to be governor, someone I don't want to be governor almost as much as Perry or vote for the bastard who I know is gonna screw me over?

        as for the national level, I will probably be voting Democrat if RP loses the republican nomination.

        and like what bumb1ebee said, if everyone sees always sees it as Rep Dem or waste a vote, were screwed because Republicans and Democrats are both going to act detrimentally to our country.
  • czernel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+29In the end the superhighway will be 2000 miles long and north & south. Why do they say they can do that, but it's impossible to build a fence 2000 miles long east and west?
    • thrallie, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10The road is not the issue, the Nafta superhighway is the first part of a north American union, and eventually there will be I believe 4 unions (american,asian,africa,europe), and the goal then is to of course join those together and make a one world government.
      • MrFlesh, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6No the NAFTA superhighway is to break the backs of the only two big unions in the country.......Longshore man dock workers and teamster truckers. There will not be 4 unions..........North America will devolve into one giant third world.....mexico is already there, the U.S. is on the verge of economic collapse, and if canada is foolish enough to join they'll collapse under the weight. The South American trading block is now forming pulling itself OUT of third world status. Africa is a mess and is at least 100 years away from any type of orginization, that's okay though because it is being exploited by the rest of the world. The european union is on shaky ground...the euro is doing well but there are already countires that want to withdrawl. Asia....ehhh I don't know about that.....china seems to want to internalize as much as possible, most of russia is wilderness.
  • ChuckAndBob, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Criminals run the world. This ***** happens everywhere.
  • Babykitkat, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13NAFTA Superhighway Has Giuliani As Key Player
    http://www.sierratimes.com/07/05/07/70_189_188_189_68367.htm
    http://www.bracewellgiuliani.com/
    Expose all the Rats
    http://www.hillcap.org/default.php?page_id=2
    http://www.vaticanassassins.org/
  • smoothlou, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Who knew the Man-Boy love association could afford such a thing?

    What's that? OH! NAFTA! Yeesh. Well, in fairness, we don't know Giuliani ISN'T part of NAMBLA. AM I RIGHT?!?!?!
  • Ferretman, on 10/11/2007, -8/+0This is so sad....are the Hillary supporters so scared of Giuliani that they're already posting junk like this? Sheesh....

    Ferretman
    • ferrofluid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You cant be scared of nothing. He was too self interested to serve on the ISG, he is worthless.
  • ccL1, on 10/11/2007, -9/+3I 100% support this NAFTA superhighway, because I'm a firm believer in globalization and free trade.

    This project could be a positive development for consumers, as products can be transported faster to American distributors and retailers and could cut costs.

    The fact of the matter is, a lot of the container ships that come in from the East are backlogged by up to 2 weeks or so, because Los Angeles and Long Beach are overcrowded. Mexican superports like Lazaros Cardenas and possibly Punta Colonet can ease that traffic, allowing containers of goods to be offloaded faster and on the road faster to American retailers and distributors.

    Also, compared to Mexican port workers, American unionized port workers are too expensive, from crane handlers and inspectors down to the truck drivers. Ultimately, that cost is borne by the consumers. Using Mexican ports will allow companies to cut prices, because they save a huge amount of money from this switch.

    And for people who are afraid of Americans losing port jobs, it won't happen. Los Angeles and Long Beach will still be the biggest ports on the West Coast. It's just that the backlogs will be eased and the situation at these ports will return to maximum capacity as opposed to over-maximum capacity, which is REALLY inefficient.

    And for people who are afraid of this encouraging outsourcing of jobs, too bad. Globalization and outsourcing will occur whether you like it or not. If consumers are willing to pay for very high priced items made in America, that's fine. I'm not going to argue with you, because I sympathize with you too. But the fact is, consumers are buying foreign made products like hot-cakes, and American corporations are more than willing to continue the process. In fact, the vast majority of you are aiding the process too using computers with components that are made in Asian countries and using gadgetry that is also made in Asian countries.

    As an economics student, I'm loving free trade and this NAFTA superhighway business from cheaper Mexican ports to distribution centres all over America. It's beautiful!
    • Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"As an economics student, I'm loving free trade"
      That about sums it up. If your ass was outsourced to Mexico, you wouldn't nearly be so gleeful. Foreign economists are cheaper, after all. But because it's not your ass that's on the line, you don't give a *****. You better hope that you won't be eat ing your own words.
      • gangstawhiteboy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yeh for real, if all these American Unionized workers are outta jobs, than you just lost your consumer!!! Globalization is horrible for liberty and national sovereignty, but like ^^ said, its not you ass thats gonna be enslaved so why do you care?? And i bet you got Jesus in your heart too huh??
    • fishpicker, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Nafta is not free trade.
  • ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4God damn, I hate G-Man.
  • cheyanne23, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5When Giuliani is president God have mercy on us don't you guys get these people want to decrease the population of the world by 80% these people want to put the poor in consitration camps they have been building since the 70's so go head and vote for the neocons or you could vote for Ron Paul who is a great man!
    • moxley, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5While Cheyanne23's spelling and grammar may not be top notch, her information is accurate.

      There is much more at stake right now than the already horrible economic consequences. These 'people' are ruthless and very difficult to stop, because these groups (like the Bilderbergs) didn't just pop up yesterday and are tied into networks of other groups, like Skull and Bones and the CFR (most of who's members are porch breathren and aren't involved in the inner circle agenda), intelligence agencies throughout the world and paramilitaries as well as terrorist groups. They truly do groom candidates for positions of power, and they truly do pull strings and orchestrate and manipulate events to be able to manipulate populations...And yes, many of them have been forthcoming about some of their key goals (all you have to do is read their position papers) - one of the main ones is the reduction of global population by 80% - via war, disease and any other method to cull the population. Am I saying that these groups are behind everything that happens?? No, not at all. Am I saying that they sometimes manufacture and control events and use crisises and proxies to gain control and manipulate governments and populaces? Most definitely.

      Like intelligence agencies, these groups realize that in order to really have control and be effective you need to control both sides of the political spectrum. If you can play both sides against each other, that is where the real power is.
  • Babykitkat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2@Ferretman I dont know anyone who is a Hillary supporter the only ones are the News who are owned by War Profiteer's Hillary needs to be in Prison
    http://www.hillcap.org/default.php?page_id=2
  • sanman, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1And all of this is relevant because... Giuliani happened to be Mayor of NYC when 9/11 -- the bane of all liberals -- happened?
    Why do these ***** articles get digged up?
    • Derrekito, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1because some people actually READ IT.
    • chicofaraby, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"9/11 -- the bane of all liberals "

      What does the GOP's complete failure on 9-11-01 have to do with liberals? No liberals were in charge of defending the nation that day.
  • AMack, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4@ sanman

    Giuliani's entire campaign is based on 9/11. He's still riding the wave of post-9/11 support. When people actually research the guy, they realize that he is has nothing of substance to offer America. Giuliani means only that the status quo will be maintained in Iraq, and that we will continue to sacrifice our liberties and stomp all over the constitution for eight more years.
  • galore, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The local Republicans have just bitch-slapped Perry by giving the coveted 121 tollway contract to NTTA and not to Cintra. Right after the vote, Perry made clear that the last word has not been spoken yet. Given how Cintra bribes Perry, I am sure there is a good catfight going on within the Texas Republican Party. Meow.
  • kinerry, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Wow, this is what happens when people can still vote straight ticket, they don't realize what they are getting
  • caponumen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Don't forget!, it was CLINTON that made NAFTA law........
  • Swmorgan77, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yep with Gingrich's help!
  • vguard, on 12/03/2007, -0/+1Anybody that doesn't believe the NAFTA Superhighway doesn't exist is a ignorant and gullible fool. This isn't open to debate.It was completed in Mexico over 5 years ago! I've taken the Superhighway from Mexico City to Acapulco, myself. In Mexico, the existence of the Superhighway is common knowledge. As a matter of fact, I just got off of TX SH-59 which is the soon to be I-69, just an hour ago. SH-59 already connects Houston to Laredo. Which is where the Mexican superhighway ends at the US border. There are even signs on the freeway that say "Soon to be I-69"! Construction has been nonstop, just north of Houston. They just got finished with a segment and are preparing for the next.

    The only thing this NAFTA highway "conspiracy" proves is that the media thinks that the average American is so stupid that they can just tell bald face lies to their face.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.