What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
The camera starts rolling on Best Buy holiday campaign. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - A behind the scenes look at one employee's singing debut.
84 Comments
- sphira, on 06/17/2008, -6/+26Call it what you will -
But it is real enough -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Forum_ ...
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9903/sovereignty_an ...
Prior to the formation of the SPP the Independent Task Force on North America, a project organized by the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, and the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations, launched in October 2004, published two documents calling for greater integration between the three countries: Trinational Call for a North American Economic and Security Community by 2010 (March 2005) and its final report Building a North American Community[12] (May 2005).
Their final report, which has been described as "an academic exercise with pretensions of reaching policymakers,"[11] proposed increased international cooperation between the nations of Canada, the United States, and Mexico, similar in some respects to that of the European Community that preceded the European Union or the United States' own Articles of Confederation (of sovereign independent states) that preceded the ratification of the United States Constitution which formed a tighter union. The report called for "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community, the boundaries of which would be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter." - Innagadadavida, on 06/18/2008, -4/+121) European Union
2) North American Union
3) Asian Union - African Union - Ext.
4) One World Government - New World Order
Go to wikipedia and look up "Georgia Guidestones" - WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -3/+8The world at his fingertips and yet roger must get the truth from me. The original issue was the North American Union but roger likes to focus folks on me instead. Still no word on how he'd "fight" this.
- WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -2/+7Look at the people on the CFR membership list for a start. They dont work at mcdonalds.
Why do you refuse to do your own homework? Lazy liberals! - stienster, on 06/18/2008, -3/+8For all who insist on living in denial, here's an excerpt: "Back on January 22, 2007, Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Virginia) did the right thing and introduced House Concurrent Resolution 40, "Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada." As of June 16, 2008, this bill has 48 cosponsors. Since passage in the House would take 218 votes, we need many more cosponsors to get this resolution out of committee and into the full House for a vote.
"Since Rep. Goode introduced HCR 40, there has been a NAU rebellion among the states. Twenty-one state legislatures have introduced resolutions in 2007/2008 asking Congress to block the NAU. Seven of these states have passed their anti-NAU resolution in both houses: Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Utah. Another three states have passed an anti-NAU resolution in one house: Alabama, Kansas, and Tennessee.
"So bottom line, 10 states have passed an anti-NAU resolution in one or both houses. This means state legislative bodies in 20% of our states have already gone on record asking Congress to withdraw the United States from the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and to block the development of the NAU." - WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -3/+7What is this idiot talking about? Is he the only one left that cant see reality. Nation States are dead bud. Its called globalization.
- WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -3/+7The CFR is hardly private, do your research idiot.
- sphira, on 06/18/2008, -3/+6WarSaw27
"What is this idiot talking about?"
I hear ya -
This guy is a lost cause -- - RogerStrong, on 06/18/2008, -2/+5btw, All I'm asking for is credible evidence that the US or Canadian government is planning an NAU, or a logical explanation as to why Canada would join it.
- WarSaw27, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3and canada too has fallen prey to the globalists in that they have come to feed at the alter of globalism.
The CFR leadership is a whos who of known globalist elite. Most of the advisory board is foreigners. You just dont know what you are talking about here roger Im sorry. - WarSaw27, on 06/17/2008, -5/+8so roger admits there is a "crowd" and there is evidence from all angles, he just refuses to believe. fair enough.
although if you go back and check the wishful thinking usually comes from those who poo poo the NAU truthers,
no wishful thinking here, I hate this and thats why we are trying to get the word out. - inactive, on 06/18/2008, -2/+5paultards invented trolling and spamming..you have heard the term "blowback", haven't you ??
- WarSaw27, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3that all sounds great but the truth is senior government officials, members of Congress, global leaders, and prominent thinkers coming together with Council members to discuss and debate major international issues affects everyone. You must be thinking of the CDR the Council on Domestic Relations. If you think the Council on Foreign Relations doesnt affect foreigners you are a nut job. You are locked into thinking that the CFR is american and so if you buck us you buck them. Wrong. the CFR is about integrating nations into the global community via WTO, IMF etc. this way you are hamstrung politically by being accountable to the global community. Canada has fallen for this, China has done a much better job of not whoring themselves out to the globalists than you folks. Sorry.
- sphira, on 06/18/2008, -0/+3No they are not -
- sphira, on 06/18/2008, -0/+3Why don't you first get to the nitty gritty
what constitutes a NAU?
a mex, tex, ottawan, flowerclub of grandmothers - or do we have to see NAU printed on every billboard from New Haven to Honolulu -- or what?
WarSaw27
until you get that straight he will just go in circles -
- sphira, on 06/18/2008, -2/+5RogerStrong
"Nice try though"
I have no reason to argue or insult.
Really if you think, I'm just pointing to data and information.
Same as others have done for me when I was just as dismissive.
I made what I made out of it.
You will make what you will make.
Noboobie wishes to admit having been taken for a fool and enslaved, but I admit it. Because that is what the money changers are doing to us all.
Seeing the truth and ignoring it because you cant be bothered to read; and learn; and think is the true foolishness.
"The Council on Foreign Relations uses misdirection and sleight of mind techniques to effectively manipulate people into believing they are seeing one thing when in fact they are seeing nothing of the sort."
Check the facts here -- as far as I have checked, they are pretty accurate. Very detailed. A good source.
Follow the money -
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2807/RoadShow ... - WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -4/+6Concerned Americans hardly need to produce evidence to canadians. The truth is in the open now roger YOUR side lost.
- RogerStrong, on 06/18/2008, -4/+6Lots of people digging my post down, but no-one offering any evidence to prove me wrong.
No surprise. - RogerStrong, on 06/18/2008, -5/+7The existence of the European Union doesn't prove the existence of an "NAU" any more than a cow in Europe proves the existence of the sasquatch in North America.
Unlike the EU or the cow, the NAU and the sasquatch are backed only by theories and speculation. When you ask for credible evidence, no-one seems to be able to provide it.
Not that an EU-style union is possible in North America anyway. The EU has several major powers, and plenty of smaller ones that could team up. No one country can dominate the rest. North America on the other hand would be totally dominated by the US population and economy. So for Canada to join, it would require equal say in things like legal and monetary policy. This in turn would be unfair to Americans. It won't happen.
Nor does an EU-style union work even according to NAU conspiracy theorist scripture. The citizens of Europe were given a series of votes on joining, after decades of public planning and debate. As you point out, they STILL get informed votes on important issues.
North America hasn't had the cycle of major war after major war that the EU was created to end. Not just WWII, WWI and the Napoleonic wars, but "little" ones like Thirty Years War - a third of the population of Germany wiped out.
Since the EU is your model, can you honestly see Americans or Canadians - without that history of wars - voting in favor of giving up sovereignty for an NAU? - WarSaw27, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2Homework = looking at the evidence and making up your own minds folks. I understand that there is alot of misinformation out there. Its easy to make fun of things and just forget about it. Its true if you are part of the 97 percentile someone else will be there to fight for you. and you will be there mocking as always, but doesnt that suck to be an irrelevant useful idiot for the establishment. The cowardice runs so deep.
Atlas Shrugged... - WarSaw27, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2tend to happen? thats sounds like bunk.
Societys have been slowly melting together for thousands of years you may not see it but I do. I am beginning to think that you really cannot see anything outside the matrix, that is really pathetic. - RogerStrong, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3The North American way has been trade and security agreements, not EU style political and monetary agreements.
I've yet to see evidence otherwise. - WarSaw27, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2Political systems always change slowly over time.
Eternal vigilence bought by refusing tyranny it is done by fighting it and combating the evil it represents. - sphira, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2Rodger
Try this link to get a sense of how independent nations really are -
http://youtube.com/watch?v=OnwLgrSJZKs
"There are some steps that simply can't be done slowly, like a common currency, or a common political system. There are no signs of either."
True and germane to the argument
I believe the framework is being put in place to facilitate a common currency. It is by design that we are not supposed to see signs -
I see the signs as being that of economic hardship, probably depression, and the excuse will be "global competitiveness" --
Of course war debt and consequences will play a big part -
It could be that an adequate linking of currencies will take place instead of a common currency, anything essentially facilitating the same thing.
As for the political system -
Treaty obligations are already trumping the Constitution and a common "Parliament" is unlikely to be the structure for a long time to come, if ever.
It will take another form short term -
International obligations and inter-Continental obligations will continue to undermine the Constitution perhaps over as long as generations before the structure will be consolidated into something you would then Identify as an NAU and a OWG.
The point is the US will not operate under the Constitution (that is increasingly true every day), it will be beholden to a union which will trump it -
The Hate crime legislation is an another example of how union is taking place. By usurping the Constitution with internal law they bring us closer into alignment to the law of Canada and elsewhere. It is clearly unconstitutional -
Alignment will merge into union --
It is multifaceted -- but the end result is not in question
- RogerStrong, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3>> It seems to me you are
>> spending a great deal of
>> time arguing instead of research.
I *did* lots of research. I've yet to see any evidence. Lots and lots of accusations and conspiracy theories, but no evidence.
I'm fully open to the idea that I missed something. Which is why I've asked those who believe in the NAU conspiracy to post some evidence. Is that so unreasonable?
>> People come and go in
>> governments and are
>> considerably poorer than the
>> private citizens you
>> speak of who run the CFR
Sure. The government is too strongly influenced by the rich. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But this is nothing new, and not evidence of any NAU.
btw, When the NAU crowd posted the CFR membership list - you should still be able to find it on the net - it was made up exclusively of Americans, NOT Canadians. Combine that with the fact that Canada rejected the "common security perimeter" and other plans the CFR called for.
When asking for a credible, logical reason why Canada would join any NAU, cries of "CFR! CFR! CFR!" don't cut it. - WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3Your theory that the NAU isnt coming is not backed by anything but your own fears and emotions. You will wait until its fully implemented until you admit its too late.
- RogerStrong, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3>> How many of these did you look at?
I've read most of them at different times.
Environmental cooperation treaties are to be expected - we share the same air and waters.
NAFTA is a trade agreement. The SPP is a series of minor trade and security agreements. Neither is an EU style political or monetary union.
The "Theorized projects" are just that THEORIZED. And not by anyone with the power to turn those theories into reality.
The Independent Task Force on North America *IS* calling for what you claim. BUT.... Canada rejected the "common external tariff and an outer security perimeter". Both Canada and the US have done the exact opposite of the task force called for.
This is the most openly dishonest aspect of the NAU theories. They take the ideas of private citizens and misrepresent them as government policy. YOU TOO can get couple friends together and declare your own "Independent Task Force". You'll have the exact same authority and power to enact whatever policies you produce. - RogerStrong, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3All I'm asking for is credible evidence that the US or Canadian government is interested in the NAU, or a logical explanation as to why Canada would join it.
Why does this make me a lost cause?
YOU insist that this is happening. Why are you unwilling or unable to post any evidence? - RogerStrong, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3In other words, you still don't have evidence or a logical premise for your theories, so you'll stick with accusations and insults.
- sphira, on 06/18/2008, -2/+4Incidentally,
It should take you awhile to get through the beef at the bottom of that 1st private citizen link there -- some of that proof right there for you -
How many of these did you look at?
Enacted Treaties
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation · North American Free Trade Agreement
Projects and working groups
Independent Task Force on North America · Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America
Theorized projects
North American currency union · Trans-Texas Corridor (NAFTA superhighway) · North American Union - vault, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3Yeah, I understand the reasons you claim are why you hate them, that still doesn't make an NAU any more likely.
- WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -4/+5pouting now you are just being childish
- WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1I encourage folks to look at that list and determine for themselves how far that influence reaches. We are not talking about tom and jerry here.
- WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -3/+4Issue: NAU/Amero
Roger: but Warsaw...
Warsaw: Stay on target bud, How are you gonna stop it.
Roger: but if we all just disbelieve itll go awayyy. - sphira, on 06/18/2008, -3/+4The EU is Europe's model
You said yourself
"North America hasn't had the cycle of major war after major war that the EU was created to end. Not just WWII, WWI and the Napoleonic wars...."
Obviously we are something they may have some trouble canning -
and your reason stated for the creation of the EU is incorrect!
This is a control consolidation into a much smaller manageable
structure encompassing Can Mex US that we are talking about.
As I said, Call it what you will!
But
Much more has and is already being done than most can imagine through other mechanisms.
The rise and nature of treatise and trade agreements in the last several decades along with the rise of executive orders, and signing statements attached to bills are some main vehicles. - WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -3/+4I did roger rejected it. always the same cute nonsense government coverup spiel. dont stampede the sheep! get a life
- RogerStrong, on 06/20/2008, -2/+3>> Political systems always
>> change slowly over time.
Nope. The big changes - and you're talking about a big change - tend to happen in one big leap.
Usually they're revolutions, coups and invasions. In the EU's case the negotiating took decades, but the actual change was a big pre-planned leap over a few short years. - WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -3/+4Always the same weak argument... wouldnt be fair so uh I dont think it will happen. Course I have no idea how we would fight it if it did but uh...
You are losing it pal, globalism is on the rise not the decline watch the news even the msm admits this. - sphira, on 06/18/2008, -2/+3Good work
data, and reasoning stienster
"US government" !
Do you know the difference between a state and the Federal Government of the United States?
You argue just to argue --
most childish- - RogerStrong, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Sphira -
Agreed.
The definition I'm going by - the one Warsaw27 keeps promoting - is an EU-style union. A full political and monetary union.
A Euro-style common currency called the "Amero" figures prominently in this conspiracy theory. And as usual, it's an idea from a private citizen that the conspiracy theorists have misrepresented as government policy. As usual, they're unable to provide any evidence whatsoever that the US or Canadian government are interested in it. - WarSaw27, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1he doesnt answer because he cant get his facts straight folks. his brand of liberalism relies on a special ignorance to keep afloat
- RogerStrong, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2>> this will be implemented
>> slowly over several years
There are some steps that simply can't be done slowly, like a common currency, or a common political system. There are no signs of either.
>> Freedom is preserved only by eternal vigilance.
Sure. That's why Canadians have refused closer links in the past, and why they'll continue to do so. - WarSaw27, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1this just shows your ignorance towards the current political climate.
Who would block it? what are you talking about? - RogerStrong, on 06/18/2008, -1/+2You've provided theories and accusations, but no proof.
You've provided evidence that some private citizens (the CFR) want it, but there are plenty of citizens with equal standing who want the opposite - protectionism and isolationism. And in any case the US and Canadian governments did the opposite of what "Building an North American Community" called for.
>> The kind of "proof" you are looking
>> for requires that the agenda be
>> uncloaked
That's a cop-out. You could make up ANY claim, and use the same excuse for not providing evidence.
Besides hard evidence, you could at least try to provide a logical argument to back up your claims, Say, a credible arguement why Canada would give up it's sovereignty to join such a union.
>> Even the simple SPP constitutes a
>> union of North America (NAU,
>> including Canada)
The SPP is merely a series of minor trade and security agreements, minor even compared to NAFTA. It's not an EU-style political and monetary union. Simply declaring it otherwise doesn't make it so. - WarSaw27, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2ITs true that this will be implemented slowly over several years, but if you think the globalists are going to abandon the madness of regional government just because it doesnt make sense to you then you are way off your rocker bud. I know you dont believe in tyranny and that is precisely why people are so concerned, because that is when the people are the ripest for being savaged by another dark age of oppression brought on by age old ignorance. Freedom is preserved only by eternal vigilance. you have none. you mock people for even suggesting a fight. (dont make me quote you)
- WarSaw27, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2you are an idiot. so US policy setters only affect the US? What planet are you on jackass?
- WarSaw27, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1But you foolishly think that it is limited to trade and not politics. This is about world government not just trade.
- sphira, on 06/18/2008, -1/+2Plenty of good people here have taken the time to provide you much information. Take advantage of it -
The kind of "proof" you are looking for requires that the agenda be uncloaked -
Even the simple SPP constitutes a union of North America (NAU, including Canada) in "prosperity" -
there's your evidence -
NAU SNAFU NE1410S ID10T
Rodger,
Round and round I wont go - please don't reply - R1ng00, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1It scares me that Obama doesn't even admit it exists... He knows its real - He's obviously in favor of it.
http://polidics.com/presidential-candidates/barack ... - vault, on 06/18/2008, -2/+3homework = watch an alex jones documentary ?
-
Show 51 - 84 of 84 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is