Why should we trust the buffoons in Washington anymore?
Posted on 07/21/2006 2:39:27 AM PDT by Trupolitik
There is simply too much evidence to convincingly deny what is going on right under our noses.
no joke. I thought the only people who unconditionally trust the federal government to take care of them were liberals?
I have read the documents and, unlike Jerry Corsi, I am fully aware that the Council on Foreign Relations does not run the U.S. government or set its policies.... this kind of stuff belongs in the looney bin.
The keywords are the best part of the post. I love the keywords!!
Looney bin? These threads should be pulled by the Mods, period. Nothing but a distraction.
bump
You read the documents? So then you dont see any similaries in the CFR docs and the SPP.gov goals?
Also, you are mischaracterizing the issue. No one is suggesting the CFR is "running" the government. The issue is that these particular recommendations are being carried out. Of course, if you didnt twist the issue, you wouldnt be able to get away with discrediting it without providing any analysis.
Was that you that added all those?
Did you read the documents or are you waiting until the television tells you about it?
yes ive read tehm and the cfr docs were obviously written to conform to the general tenor of what the government is doing... the spp is trying to harmonize the commerical relationship between the three countries so we can bette rcomete with europe
and the purpose of your affectation for lower case is?
You saw what congress passed today while everyone was busy concentrating on the war (especially the MSM)? You cannot take an eye off these guys and they do their worst on Fridays.
The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America has as its first essential word ‘security’. What comes to mind when one reflects on the word ‘security’ in a geopolitical sense? Protection from invasion? Protection from attack? The ability to feel confident that unfriendly people, or weapons in the wrong hands, are not able to gain access to one’s environment?
Question: Why is our leadership in Washington concerning itself with the security of the continent when the security of our republic is in such toxic disrepair, and when the threats to our lives and liberties have never been greater? And why should the U.S. enter into a security partnership with a country whose political and military leadership continues to demand that the most vulnerable aspect of our national security remains unaddressed, and who benefits from our exposed vulnerability?
Possible answer: Because our elitist leaders in Washington are more interested in uniting Mexico, Canada and the U.S. into one geopolitical/economic entity than they are in retaining the security and sovereignty of the U.S. And continuing to allow the invasion of illegal aliens from Mexico simply furthers that agenda.
And the fact that there are also terrorist elements gaining entrance to the U.S. via our unguarded southern border is perceived by proponents of the North American Union as simply an unfortunate by-product of the planned … even desired … influx of Mexican illegals.
For those who claim that a wall/fence is impractical and/or ineffective, see Israel’s Security Fence. If one can read this entire account, and still disbelieve that the U.S. needs, and would be made significantly more secure by erecting, a fence along our vulnerable southern border, then I suspect that one is irrevocably of one mind with the North American Union proponents.
The administration, and congress, are well aware of the financial practicality (when compared to the financial nightmare engendered by the illegal aliens’ obscene parasitic drain on the American taxpayer/treasury) of building a wall, as well as the extraordinary successes recorded by Israel in doing so.
Tom Tancredo, in his book ‘Mortal Danger’, writes, We have the necessary technology, combined with human resources, to secure our borders tomorrow. It is a canard for politicians to say that it is impossible and that we must figure out a different way to defend America rather than defending our borders. What they are really saying is, ‘I choose not to defend and secure our borders because there are political ramifications that I fear.’ It is those fears that put the life of every American citizen in mortal danger.
There will be no wall (physical or otherwise) built along our southern border. Mexicans by the thousands will daily continue to stream into our country. Islamo-fascists will cross that border as well. And I don’t know which threat is worse … the dissolution of America’s borders as we are swallowed up by the North American Union, or the prospect of another devastating attack on American soil by madmen from the Middle East.
The so-called NAU/SPP ‘conspiracy theorists’ are simply more capable, than those who choose to ridicule them, of connecting some extremely disturbing dots.
~ joanie
Allegiance and Duty Betrayed
Thanks, all, for continuing to bring the SPP/NAU and it's one-branch push out into the light of day. I'd gladly let those who blindly trust the government suffer the inevitable results but for the fact that we're ALL in the same boat with them. Best toss them over the sides while we can - perhaps as fast as this thread was relegated to "Chat".
and why it is a problem to harmonize the economies of the three countries to create a more powerful economic power -- what are you afraid of? do you really think for one minute that the United States does not lead the way in such an arrangement?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.