Council on Foreign Relations = The NWOrth American Country

[floydian slip]

So to fix our border problem with mexico, we will just get rid of the border and form one big happy country with them and Canada.

Building a North American Community

guess i diddnt need a passport after all

LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everybody. Tonight, an astonishing proposal to expand our borders to incorporate Mexico and Canada and simultaneously further diminish U.S. sovereignty. Have our political elites gone mad?

http://www.rense.com/general66/SDND.HTM

[floydian slip]

GATT NAFTA and CAFTA were not good enough

now we have the SPP and the United States of North America

This past March, President Bush met in Cancun, Mexico, with Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canada's newly elected Prime Minister Stephen Harper (shown above) to discuss the year-old SPP, which was formally inaugurated a year ago in a similar trinational summit in Waco, Texas.

Repeating in places, almost word for word, the security strategy of the SPP, that measure is clearly intended to begin the process of bringing the military and security institutions of the three nations under a central authority, with a single chain of command. The implications of that merger are profoundly troubling, to say the least.

Following his election in 2000, Mexican president Vicente Fox told an audience in California that his government would "use all our persuasion and all our talent to bring together the U.S., Canadian and Mexican governments so that in five or ten years, the border is totally open to the free movement of workers."

its not the mexicans fault that they had to come here to stay alive
the NAFTA free trade agreements practically forced them here

http://www.foodfirst.org/pubs/backgr...sp04v10n2.html

This dramatic migration of farmworkers, the vast majority from Mexico, can be traced to neoliberal, free-market reforms like NAFTA. Free-trade agreements, as well as World Bank requirements and Mexico's own big-business-friendly policies, have brought reductions in public expenditures and government programs for farmers and the poor. Elimination of price support for corn and other basic food items began in 1985 when Mexico signed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and was later accelerated under NAFTA.

[Mazer]

Color me ignorant, but the pros and cons of this kind of future aren't obvious to me. This issue seems to be a subset of the Nationalism versus Globalism debate which is itself fairly complicated. Would anybody care to explain this to me? Is voluntarily merging the three North American nations into one nation a good thing or a bad thing?

[Mazer]

No takers? Damn, this issue looked interesting but I guess I was the only one who thought so.

[miss_silver]

Originally Posted by Mazer

Color me ignorant, but the pros and cons of this kind of future aren't obvious to me. This issue seems to be a subset of the Nationalism versus Globalism debate which is itself fairly complicated. Would anybody care to explain this to me? Is voluntarily merging the three North American nations into one nation a good thing or a bad thing?

To me, it would be an extremly bad thing. Prolly would be the same for all french canadians. We have enough problems with our language that there is no way this province would accept to join such an alliance. As a Canadian point of view, i'm sure that all provinces would declare themselves independent of the canadian central government if they were forced to join such an alliance. The only reason why boy Harper is still standing in cabinet is because the Quebec Block is supporting Harper's new budget for canadians, if it weren't for the Bloc, we would find ourselves, yet again, facing another nationwide election. When the Bloc withdraw it's support, Harper's government will crumble

The last province to join the Canadian government was Newfoundland in 1949 and they did so because Canada decided to give them more land (a chunk of my province no less). Each provinces are a seperate entety and each province takes care of their own health system. The only thing I see useful about the Canadian Central gov is Mail services, unemployment insurances after loosing one's job and the Army. Beyond that, the Central gov laugh at us, see the sponsorship scandals...

[Sinner]

The only reason why boy Harper is still standing in cabinet is because the Quebec Block is supporting Harper's new budget for canadians, if it weren't for the Bloc, we would find ourselves, yet again, facing another nationwide election. When the Bloc withdraw it's support, Harper's government will crumble

LOL!!! Seems you know less about Canadian politics as you do American politics. Wow, very scary. Oh yes the great and powerful PQ government is the reason the budget passed for the good of Canadians. LoL. Nobody outside Quebec gives a shit about the PQ party, Harper’s government is trying to give a little more to Quebec to hopefully stop the consistent whining coming out of that province. So you think the Liberals want another election right now? You do know they don’t even have a leader right now -- right? Why would a party with no leader want an election? Now to the NDP, why on earth would they want another election? They lost seats a few months ago so why would they think they could win more now? But you kno, I am not in Quebec so maybe that is the BS the west is telling the whiners there, That the PQ is the survivor for Canada…..hahahaha!!!!! ohhhhh, that’s a good one, you made my day……

[miss_silver]

Originally Posted by Sinner

LOL!!! Seems you know less about Canadian politics as you do American politics. Wow, very scary. Oh yes the great and powerful PQ government is the reason the budget passed for the good of Canadians. LoL. Nobody outside Quebec gives a shit about the PQ party, Harper’s government is trying to give a little more to Quebec to hopefully stop the consistent whining coming out of that province. So you think the Liberals want another election right now? You do know they don’t even have a leader right now -- right? Why would a party with no leader want an election? Now to the NDP, why on earth would they want another election? They lost seats a few months ago so why would they think they could win more now? But you kno, I am not in Quebec so maybe that is the BS the west is telling the whiners there, That the PQ is the survivor for Canada…..hahahaha!!!!! ohhhhh, that’s a good one, you made my day……

FYI

PQ = Parti Québécois, it's provincial, not federal. It has nothing to do with supporting Harper's federal budget. The Bloc Québécois on the other hand is the one who approved Harper's fed budget, if it wasn't for them, it wouldn't have passed since the libreals and the NPD are against it, in your wisdom, tell me what would have happened if the Bloc didn't approved Harper's new federal spending?

Remember Joe Clark? I do and I don't see why the same thing would happen if the Bloc didn't support Harper on his new budget. Here's something to refresh your memory

Prime Minister

Joe Clark's efforts would prove successful, and on June 4, 1979, at age 39, he became Canada's youngest prime minister, after defeating Trudeau's Liberal government in the May 1979 general election. Clark was the first Conservative to head Canada's federal government since the defeat of John Diefenbaker in the 1963 election. He was also the first Alberta-based prime minister since R.B. Bennett (and the last until the 2006 election of Stephen Harper). Joe Clark also carries the unique distinction of being the only Canadian politician to ever defeat Pierre Trudeau in a federal election.

But with a minority government in the House of Commons, Clark had to rely on the support of the Social Credit Party with its 6 seats or the New Democratic Party (NDP) with its 26 seats. Without this support, he was subject to defeat by the Liberals at any time.

Social Credit was below the 12 seats needed for official party status in the House of Commons. However, the six seats would have been just enough to give Clark's government a majority had the Progressive Conservatives formed a coalition government with Social Credit, or had the two parties otherwise agreed to work together. Clark managed to lure Socred MP Richerd Janelle to the government caucus but this still left the Conservatives short. Clark however declared that he would govern as if he had a majority[1] and refused to grant the small Social Credit caucus official party status or form a coalition or co-operate with the party in any way.

During the 1979 election campaign, Clark had promised to cut taxes to stimulate the economy. However, once in office he adopted a budget designed to curb inflation by slowing economic activity, and also proposed an 18 cent per Imperial gallon tax on gasoline in order to reduce the budgetary deficit. Finance Minister John Crosbie touted the budget as "short term pain for long term gain". Though Clark had hoped this change in policy would work to his advantage, it actually earned him widespread animosity as a politician who could not keep his promises, even in such a short period.

Clark's refusal to work with the Social Credit, combined with the 18 cent gas tax, led to the his government's defeat in the House of Commons in December 1979. The Liberals voted with the NDP on a Motion of No Confidence related to the Clark government's budget, moved by NDP MP Bob Rae. The five members of the Social Credit had demanded the tax revenues be allocated to Quebec and when that was turned down, they abstained which ensured the vote's passage...

From

Now tell me, if the Bloc didn't support Harper, the same thing would have happened, it did once, what would have been different this time around? Keep laughing all you want but if it wasn't for the Bloc, your golden boy would be in hot water. Trust me that the liberals would have had a speedy election as to who would be the next leader if another vote of no confidence would happen, Stephane Dion comes in mind, afterall, the libs have an exemplary track record of choosing french canadians to be their new leader (beside the exception of Paul Martin).

Oh, and keep calling us Whiners, afterall, it was the libs that decided to spend MILLIONS of dollars to promote Canada friendship and unity to the Quebec residents, for what ever good it did, beside depriving hard working citizen like you of their tax dollars

Now i'm laughing

Dude, you really need to brush up on your politics to have forgotten such a big thing. It happened once, would have happened again if it wasn't from... Keep up with the ostridge attitude, it suits you well.

Now i'm really laughing

Oh and remember that the PQ is only provincial and can only ask for more money from the central government while the Bloc can and is affecting federal politics these days.

[miss_silver]

Originally Posted by Sinner

That the PQ is the survivor for Canada…..hahahaha!!!!! ohhhhh, that’s a good one, you made my day……

Are you still laughing? Strange after an entire week you haven't posted back, maybe you found some truth in what I posted last week

Oh forgot to add, stand strong Caledonia, don't give the gov an inch of your land!!!

[multi]

the vist by our PM looked pretty laughable
good to see some of your local unions there to heckle him

[pisser]

Idea - Tell Mexico we will eliminate the border if they also eliminate their southern border with central america.

Result - Never will happen because their immigration policy is draconian.

Talk about the ultimate Hypocrisy......

Albed's boy loves tequila too much!

[floydian slip]

Originally Posted by Mazer

Color me ignorant, but the pros and cons of this kind of future aren't obvious to me. This issue seems to be a subset of the Nationalism versus Globalism debate which is itself fairly complicated. Would anybody care to explain this to me? Is voluntarily merging the three North American nations into one nation a good thing or a bad thing?

if you would like your standard of living to decline its a good thing.
it would also consolidate the power of the corporations



Shipping-Corridor Deal Cuts Heart Out of Heartland

A key purpose of the project is to take jobs away from U.S. longshoremen in Los Angeles and Long Beach, Calif., who earn $140,000 a year, and replace them with Mexican laborers at $10,000 a year. U.S. truck drivers and railroad workers will likewise be replaced by Mexicans.

[Mazer]

I just don't see where our neighbors, especially Quebec, will be interested in such a thing. Europe seems content to let the EU dictate trade policy and commerce to them, but North America is nothing like Europe. We have more natural resources, more than twice the land area, a larger percentage of undeveloped land, two thirds of the population, and a much shorter history. These are the adolescent years of America, and I don't see us giving up our national identites altogether. We won't reach the same critical mass that Europe has for an other century. And though a few cities on our continent are scurrying to globalize themselves, the heartland is maintaining the status quo. The proposed shipping corridor might give the heartland a violent push into the modern world, but I would expect the people to push back just as hard, as is their right as Americans. Let the corporations be damned, they're going to have to wait a while for us to be despairate enough to merge North America into one nation.

[multi]

U.S. longshoremen in Los Angeles and Long Beach, Calif., who earn $140,000 a year

they grow them young in boston

[floydian slip]

Originally Posted by Mazer

I just don't see where our neighbors, especially Quebec, will be interested in such a thing.

Let the corporations be damned, they're going to have to wait a while for us to be despairate enough to merge North America into one nation.

Thats just it tho, they did it, right under our noses. Have you even heard of this before I brought it up? Do you think that 95% of the people of Ameroda have heard of this.

[Mazer]

I'm sorry floyd, but North America is still three separate nations. Perhaps our economic borders are breaking down, but our governments are not. We don't vote in their elections and they don't vote in ours. And if 95% percent of North Americans see it that way, that's not widespread delusion, it's consensus. So both in principle and in practice are we three separate nations.

Don't put too much emphasis on the economics of the situation. Capitalism is a form of commerce, not a form of government, and we are not ruled by it. And to prove it, any time the government wants to it can impose tariffs on the goods transported from our neighbors. In a roundabout way this 'corridor' is being established with the consent of the people. Maybe you don't like it, but you can protest it and raise awareness of it and perhaps motivate a majority of voters to oppose it. By doing so you will be proving that they (and who exactly is they by the way?) still need our consent to make any kind of change to our national identity.

Anyway, besides this NWO conspiracy, why not establish ports in the midwest? Isn't that where a lot of trading posts and forts were built in the 19th century?