Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I-69: Yet Another NAFTA Super-Highway
Humand Events ^ | September 12, 2006 | Jerome Corsi

Posted on 09/12/2006 10:11:55 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Another NAFTA Super-Highway is moving state-by-state from the planning stage to the funding and construction process. As listed on the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration’s website, the “I-69 Corridor” is planned to connect Mexico and Canada through Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois and Michigan.

Still, skeptics -- even congressmen and senators in the nine states where the I-69 corridor will be built -- continue to charge that any idea that NAFTA Super-Highways are being built are nothing more than “internet conspiracy theories.”

Even NASCO (North America’s SuperCorridor Coalition, Inc.) continues to be in denial, refusing to acknowledge that any NAFTA Super-Highways are being built. A second NASCO homepage makeover reflecting a new public relations attempt by NASCO to defuse criticism now lists a “NASCO FAQs” section, which opens to a .pdf file letter on NASCO stationary. In response to the question, “Will the NAFTA Superhighway be four football fields wide?” NASCO answers: “There is no new, proposed 'NAFTA Superhighway.'” Next, NASCO attempts to redefine the “SuperCorridor” in its name as a reference not to a “super-highway,” but intermodal integration along the “existing ‘NASCO Corridor.’”

We have previously argued that as a trade association NASCO itself will never build any highway of any type, but we continue to argue that NASCO’s members, such as the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), are very actively involved in creating substantial NAFTA corridor infrastructure, including super-highways. Moreover, NASCO not yet responded to our challenge that NASCO repudiate the plans of TxDOT to build the planned Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC-35), the first leg of the NAFTA Super-Highway planned to stretch into Canada parallel to I-35. Otherwise, NASCO is just dealing in semantics, trying to distinguish “Super-Corridors” from “Super-Highways,” or defeating their own straw argument on the basis that we somehow presumed that a trade organization like NASCO would be required to build a NAFTA Super-Highway in order to support a NAFTA Super-Highway one of their members was building.

We need turn no further than the TxDOT’s TTC-35 website to find evidence linking the I-69 NAFTA Super-Highway project to the I-35 NAFTA Super-Highway project. There the TxDOT openly admits the reality:

Interstate 69 is a planned 1,600-mile national highway connecting Mexico, the United States and Canada. Eight states are involved in the project. In Texas, I-69 will be developed under the Trans-Texas Corridor master plan.

The TTC-35 website further acknowledges that:

Congress passed several pieces of legislation defining the I-69 corridor. Legislation included ISTEA (1991), 1993 DOT Appropriations Act, 1995 National Highway System Designation Act and TEA-21 (1998).

Further, the TTC-35 website indicates that TxDOT anticipates completing the I-69/TTC environmental impact statement in fall 2007 and receiving federal approval in winter 2007. The TTC-35 website includes a proposed I-69/TTC map and a schedule of the locations where 37 public hearings were held during July and August 2006 in Texas to review I-69/TTC “recommended corridor alternatives.”

The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LaDOT) acknowledges conducting a I-69 environmental and location study in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to study a proposed route through Bossier, Cado and DeSoto Parishes. As described on the LaDOT website: “The proposed highway is part of the I-69 Corridor, which will link Indianapolis, Indiana to the lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas.” The description of the I-69 Corridor on the LaDOT website echoes the description on the TxDOT website:

Interstate 69 is a 1,600 mile-long national highway that will ultimately connect Canada to Mexico. I-69 traverses nine states from the Gulf of Mexico and Texas’s Golden Triangle, through the Mississippi Delta, the Midewst, to the industrial north and, finally, to Canada.

Again, LaDOT has obtained federal highway funds to begin construction and a series of final public hearings were announced for July 2006.

We find similar I-69 Corridor discussions on the state department of transportation websites in Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana and Michigan. The only state department of transportation website that does not have a specific discussion of the I-69 Corridor is Illinois. The FHWA specifies that the involvement of Illinois in the I-69 corridor is limited and that the current plan is that the I-69 Corridor in Illinois will utilize the existing roads, particularly I-94 from Chicago to Detroit. The I-69 Corridor will cross the U.S. border with Canada in Port Huron, Mich., continuing in Canada as Highway 402 in Ontario.

The FHWA has defined the I-69 corridor as a “Megaproject,” defined as “a major transportation project that costs at least $1 billion and attracts a high level of public attention or political interest because of their impact on the community, environment, and State budgets.” We realize how the FHWA considers Texas and the TTC to be an essential component of the coming system of planed NAFTA Super-Highways, including I-69, when we consult a FHWA map that portrays Texas as the critical NAFTA/CAFTA gateway into the United States.

The FHWA caption under this map reads:

This map of the United States shows the heavy volume of freight shipped through Texas, a major trade gateway from Mexico and South America, as red lines branching out from the heart of the Lone Star State.

This same FHWA report ties together how the FHWA view the strategic purpose of the I-69 Corridor and the TTC as combined:

The second section under study, I-69/TTC, extends from northeast Texas to the Mexican border, incorporating about 1,600 kilometers (1,000 miles) of the planned I-69 corridor. Although part of a national project, I-69/TTC is being developed in Texas under the Trans-Texas Corridor master plan. I-69 is a 2,570-kilometer (1,600 mile) national highway that, once completed, will connect Mexico, the United States, and Canada. Other States involved in the I-60 project include Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisana, Michigan, Mississippi, and Tenessee. The planned location for I-69, designated by the U.S. Congress in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) was chose because of the economic opportunities that could be created along the north-south corridor, especially those related to increased trade resulting from NAFTA.

We are struck by the close similarity between this FHWA language and the language used by states such as Texas and Louisiana in describing the I-69 corridor. Reading this language should leave no doubt that the I-69 Corridor is envisioned by the FHWA to be truly a NAFTA Super-Highway. Any congressman or senator, especially one who represents a state affected by the I-69 Corridor, who argues differently or who appears unaware of the I-69 NAFTA Super-Highway is admitting their own negligence in oversight responsibilities, if not also in just plain public awareness as a citizen of their respective states.

Anyone doubting the importance of NAFTA Super-Highways to the Bush Administration should reflect on President Bush’s nomination last Tuesday of Mary Peters to be the next secretary of Transportation replacing Norm Mineta. Ms. Peters served as the head of the FHWA in the Bush administration as the TTC and I-69 Corridor projects were being developed.



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Canada; Editorial; Government; Mexico; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: 69; afewcardsshy; bushatemyhomework; cafta; canada; cuespookymusic; cunninglinguist; hwytoroswell; i69; icecreammandrake; interstate69; jeromecorsi; kookmagnetthread; mexico; morethorazine; morethorazineplease; nafta; naftacorridor; naftahighway; naftasuperhighway; nasco; nau; northamericanunion; offmymedsagain; pagingartbell; preciousbodilyfluids; sapandimpurify; screwloose; spp; supercorridor; texas; transtexascorridor; transtinfoilcorridor; ttc; ttc35; ttc69; tx; txdot; wearedoomed; whatsthefrequency
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last
To: Alberta's Child

"There are no "NAFTA Super-Highway" projects being built at all."

Come see what's going on right now in Texas. Check out the Texas Super Corridor.


61 posted on 09/12/2006 5:03:49 PM PDT by ViLaLuz (Stop the ACLU - Support the Public Expression of Religion Act 2005 - Call your congressmen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

Eminent domain should be a last resort, especially when other options exist. They could have easily done IN-37 --> US-50 --> IN-57 --> I-164 which only requires a small amount of expropriation (for bypasses and interchanges). Alternatively they could have upgraded US-41 to a freeway for even less expropriation...


62 posted on 09/12/2006 6:08:15 PM PDT by Heartofsong83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Heartofsong83
That's what I'm saying. But that option wasn't even considered. Now that the toll road's been leased, this project is going to kick into high gear. I feel sorry for those in the path of it.

The only gubernatorial candidate that was against the eminent domain was Ken Gividen. And that's a good deal of the reason he got my vote.
63 posted on 09/12/2006 8:05:45 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

I pity the fool that can't see the forest for the trees. The folks you mention would fit the bill completely.


64 posted on 09/13/2006 4:47:27 AM PDT by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: E Rocc
I remember years ago, Bob & Tom show on Q95 in Indianapolis did a Love Boy's parody on "Exit 69 Truck Stop". Hilarious ! This was before they became syndicated nationwide and watered down. The parody was taken after I-69.
65 posted on 09/13/2006 4:59:59 AM PDT by CORedneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BaBaStooey
Yep... Been through the Port Huron, MI and Sarnia, ON border crossing. I remembered there was only one bridge across but it is nice there are two across now. I was through there back in 2003. Nice crossing. Cross over, deal with Canadian customs than get on the Ontario freeway and be over to Toronto within several hours.
66 posted on 09/13/2006 5:02:21 AM PDT by CORedneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Well I guess it is ok this time, as long as I can get from Indy to Evansville in 2 hours instead of 4.


67 posted on 09/13/2006 5:03:27 AM PDT by DaiHuy (I have never seen a situation so dismal that a policeman couldn't make it worse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer; conservativecorner
Then what do you say to people who debate by talking about the debaters behind their respective backs?

But to debate the article is even to accept the most basic of the premises.

If somebody were to post an article claiming that the moon was made of green cheese, in order to "debate" it, we would have to begin by accepting its premises.

Corsi is taking some think-tank articles, ambitious state highway projects (God forbid!), and boilerplate diplo-speak and weaving them into a conspiracy. But you can only tie these things together if you believe in the conspiracy in the first place.

So, fine, there is a conspiracy.

And I'm in charge.
68 posted on 09/13/2006 5:10:00 AM PDT by AmishDude (`[N]on-state actors' can project force around the world more easily than Canada". -- Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: CORedneck

I've observed that the smoothest entry into Canada for me is when I am going there to watch a hockey game.

"Welcome to Canada. Where are you going?"

"London"

"For what purpose?"

"A hockey game"

"Well, why wouldn't you? Come on in, eh?"


69 posted on 09/13/2006 5:21:24 AM PDT by BaBaStooey (I heart Emma Caulfield.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude

Get a clue:

BEN BERNANKE & THE NEW INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER







By Steven Yates
September 11, 2006
NewsWithViews.com

When we read some of Ben S. Bernanke’s recent writings, it becomes clear why he was picked to succeed Alan Greenspan as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Corporation.

First, unlike Greenspan, Bernanke is a good writer who expresses himself clearly. An academic by inclination, his essays are sprinkled with citations and endnotes. There are bibliographies at the end. Greenspan’s remarks (except, perhaps, for “irrational exuberance”) often elicited, “Huh?” Bernanke leaves few doubts where he is coming from.

On August 25, Bernanke made a presentation to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s 30th Annual Economic Symposium at Jackson Hole, Wyoming—one of this country’s prime hideaways for the elite, with tracts of real estate priced out of the reach of lesser mortals. The title of Bernanke’s presentation: “Global Economic Integration: What’s New and What’s Not.” (It’s on the Federal Reserve website). In this lecture—which appears tailored as much for outsiders who follow such things as for the Insiders likely to be seen at Jackson Hole—Bernanke adopts a familiar ploy: to depict global economic integration as an exclusively technology-driven process. Thus the section entitled “A Short History of Global Economic Integration” which traces the process to the Romans who “unified their far-flung empire through an extensive transportation network and a common language, legal system, and currency.” (The Roman Empire grew increasingly barbaric and decadent and finally collapsed from within—a little detail of history Bernanke neglects to note—but never mind that for now.)

There are three possible implications of this one remark. One, the current wave of the New International Economic Order is at base an exercise in building an empire owing more to the Romans than its purveyors care to admit. Two, when America’s borders with Mexico and Canada are effectively eroded and the North American Community comes into being, do not be surprised if NAFTA Chapter 11 tribunals so far limited to judging trade disputes evolve into a full-fledged North American legal system that can override our courts and render our Constitution null and void—very possibly with the full cooperation of globalist-leaning Justices such as Stephen Breyer. Three, despite the belligerent denials that anything of the sort is on the drawing board, do not be shocked when, a few years down the road, the Council on Foreign Relation’s (CFR’s) Building a North American Community lead author Robert Pastor’s proposal for a North American currency, the Amero, becomes a live option somewhere down the pike.

A collapse of the dollar would definitely hasten this last. The Federal Reserve, by arranging for the printing of unbacked currency (fiat money) at an unprecedented rate, is hastening the collapse of the dollar. Since the unheralded end of M3 reporting in March of this year, no one knows for sure how much fiat money is in circulation generating real inflation (as opposed to the cooked “core inflation rate” the Fed pawns off on the public through the controlled news media). The contrarian International Forecaster estimates the actual inflation rate at 10.9 percent!

What is clear is that Bernanke’s Federal Reserve is following the agenda of Alan Greenspan’s Federal Reserve without significant change. What the Fed has done is create what author and contrarian economist Gary North describes as an “international time bomb.” The time bomb has two components: (1) the huge accumulation of fiat money; (2) the massive build-up of debt to foreign countries, some of whom (like China) surely do not have our best interests at heart! If the bomb goes off all at once, it will precipitate a global economic collapse that will make the Great Depression look like a bad day at the races by comparison.

Bernanke’s essay also weighed in against protectionism—always safe, since few economists consider protectionism a good idea. The problem here: arguments against protectionism are invariably presented as part of a false dichotomy with the globalist-managed trade being sold as “free trade.” Bernanke’s reasoning is fallacious because of the third alternative: the real thing, allowed to develop on its own rather than orchestrated through economic social engineering. It is difficult to know for sure what real free trade would look like right now, but since genuine free markets operate to enable all to pursue their needs, wants and interests unhampered by government interference and not bankrolled by government, central banks or foundations, it would probably reflect a mixture of the small and local with the large and international. But I digress. Bernanke’s argument is invalid, if its aim is to establish the necessity of global economic integration by making a case against protectionism.

Bernanke sees global economic integration as stemming from technological change. Following World War II, he states, “Technological advances further reduced the costs of transportation and communication… . Telephone communication expanded, and digital electronic computing came into use….” At first glance, this sounds reasonable. But it reflects ignorance of the elites’ long term motives and efforts to integrate the planet having integrated financial and economic systems.

In 1931—well before the explosion of developments Bernanke invokes (except for the telephone)—Arnold Toynbee, Fabian socialist, Rhodes Round Tabler and court historian for the British Royal Institute for International Affairs (counterpart to our CFR) gave a speech to the Conference of Institutions for the Scientific Study of International Affairs in Copenhagen entitled “The Trend of International Affairs Since the War” He told his fellow globalists of the day:

“If we are frank with ourselves, we shall admit that we are engaged on a deliberate and sustained and concentrated effort to impose limitations upon the sovereignty and independence of the fifty or sixty local sovereign independent States which at present partition the habitable surface of the earth and divide the political allegiance of mankind.”

Toynbee went on, “It is just because we are really attacking the principle of local sovereignty that we keep on protesting our loyalty to it so loudly. The harder we press our attack upon the idol, the more pains we take to keep its priests and devotees in a fool’s paradise—lapped in a false sense of security which will inhibit them from taking up arms in their idol’s defense.”

Toynbee then launched into an attack on national sovereignty of the sort reserved for his fellow elitists: “The local national state, invested with the attributes of sovereignty—is an abomination of desolation standing in the place where it ought not. It has stood in that place now … for four or five centuries. Our political task in our generation is to cast the abomination out….”

Finally: “… I will not prophesy. I will merely repeat that we are at present working, discreetly but with all our might, to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local national states of our world. And all the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands, because to impugn the sovereignty of the local national states of the world is still a heresy for which a statesman or a publicist can be—perhaps not quite burnt at the stake, but certainly ostracized and discredited....” (Italics mine.)

This was well before Richard Gardner’s much more often cited remark in a 1974 issue of the CFR’s flagship journal Foreign Affairs that “the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down ... an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

There is thus every reason to believe that dissolving national borders and working in the direction of a global state was on the agenda all along. The effort was intended to sail under the radar until it was too late; obviously, most Americans would reject it if they knew about it, since globalism both has and will mean a serious diminishing of the American standard of living through lost jobs; lowered wages; unchecked immigration; and massive debt (consumer, national and foreign).

Given all this evidence, attributing global economic integration to advancing technology commits a different fallacy, post hoc ergo prompter hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”). Technological change did not “cause” global economic integration, but happened alongside of it, and was perhaps encouraged as a path to eroding borders, undermining sovereignty, and setting us on course to regional political and bureaucratic integration, ending U.S. independence and paving the way first to regional government and then to world government.

David Rockefeller, international banker and archglobalist, stated back in 1993 following the passage of NAFTA: “Everything is in place—after 500 years—to build a true 'new world' in the Western Hemisphere.” Rockefeller and his colleagues in the CFR and the Trilateral Commission had a name for this new world: the New International Economic Order.



Ben Bernanke has sold his soul to this, else he would not have been appointed to one of the most powerful positions in this country, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Corporation.

Bernanke came to his home state of South Carolina two weeks ago, visiting his rural home town of Dillon (population 6,800), one of many rural towns in the Carolinas devastated by plant closings since the passage of NAFTA. The official unemployment rate in Dillon in June was 9.7 percent! Bernanke delivered remarks under the title “Productivity” (also available on the Fed website), again pushing globalization.



His message to the ordinary mortals struggling to survive in post-NAFTA South Carolina: change is going to be forced on you whether you like it or not. Recommendation: tailor your education to technology-driven economic development and become good little worker bees. Now I’ve nothing against learning new technology. What bothers me acutely: from the purveyors of education tailored to economic development we hear not a word about the Constitution or history or the economics of private property rights or critical thinking or other skills appropriate for citizens of a free society. What we heard instead from Ben Bernanke was a thinly veiled warning: you backward South Carolinians are dragging your feet on joining the New International Economic Order. Either get with the program or expect even worse unemployment, underemployment and abject poverty.


70 posted on 09/13/2006 6:29:01 AM PDT by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

I note that you guys have to post interminably long articles to make your point. Here's why: You have to get people to accept your premise. You can't argue it directly, you have to have somebody wade through a long diatribe so that when I try to poke holes in it, you point to other parts. It's whack-a-mole debating. Sorry, I don't play that game.


71 posted on 09/13/2006 6:33:08 AM PDT by AmishDude (`[N]on-state actors' can project force around the world more easily than Canada". -- Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude; conservativecorner
I note that you guys have to post interminably long articles to make your point

While you post insults to people that you don't know and have never met and don't have a grain of truth about them.

You are intellectually lazy, if you consider reading 600 words interminably long.
72 posted on 09/13/2006 7:20:01 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer; conservativecorner; AmishDude
You are intellectually lazy, if you consider reading 600 words interminably long.

Microsoft Word put the "contribution" to this thread in comment #70 at 1691 words. And "intellectually lazy" is expecting someone to wade through it all in order to find the "nugget," and forcing your reader to assume he knows the point you are making, if it even exists at all. There's a reason we learned what a "topic sentence" is in our Elementary Writing classes.

Furthermore, I note (not without some irony) that in the past week or so, our colleague cc once urged us to follow one of his links only to allow us to discover he was linking to the same document at the top of the thread. Why should he be given the benefit of the doubt when it's clear he's not reading the material he himself is citing?

73 posted on 09/13/2006 9:33:52 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
We seem to have reached the stage where the sinister nature of these projects is simply assumed. I mean, the article itself is rather level-headed, in my opinion . . . it's just the undercurrent of impending doom that makes it humorous.

I suspect that Corsi thinks that I-69 is going to become a TTC-style monster highway with 10 to 12 lanes and rail lines. That's what makes this article so ludicrous.

74 posted on 09/13/2006 11:36:01 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Going partly violently to the thing 24-7!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: meyer
Can't they just fix I-75 so it flows freely first?

They're incrementally widening it in Kentucky to...(cue spooky music)...SIX LANES.

75 posted on 09/13/2006 11:38:19 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Going partly violently to the thing 24-7!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
What in the WORLD is that?????

The DNC Talking Points Generator.

76 posted on 09/13/2006 11:39:12 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Going partly violently to the thing 24-7!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

I also think the notion that a private consortium will front the vast majority of the cash to build and operate a road that will not be used (or at least suffer from drastic over-capacity) is rather "peculiar."


77 posted on 09/13/2006 11:43:40 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

I refer to the TTC, of course.


78 posted on 09/13/2006 11:44:34 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude
I note that you guys have to post interminably long articles to make your point.


JMO.... But they can't rationally accept that the world is ever evolving and changing. Things be it humans, society, etc that attempt to remain static are destined to fade into obscurity and die. I suppose they have to throw copious amounts of BS at it from every angle just to try and seek their inner satisfaction.

Who the hell wants to remain in the days of the Studebaker and Conestoga wagons with the buggy whip manufactures being a major employer? Most people don't and won't.

Jerome just woke up to find another major roadway that has been in the works for many years via several states and their departments of transportation. Slowly bits and pieces of it are being rebuilt and expanded to 4-lane to ease traffic flow. These alarmist amaze me but then there are conspiracy buffs abounding in many areas of life... They are a necessary part of humanity I guess.
79 posted on 09/13/2006 11:57:46 AM PDT by deport (The Governor, The Foghorn, The Dingaling, The Joker, some other fellar...... The Governor Wins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: deport; AmishDude
Oh no, Gov Riley just approved a plan to Widen I-65 here in Alabama from Montgomery to Mobile. He says the plan is to help traffic flow during evacuations.

But but now I am not so sure.... I mean it could be a nefarious plan to allow Canadians to ship Hockey Sticks to the port of Mobile for shipment to Latin America.

---look of Wide Eyed panic----

80 posted on 09/13/2006 12:01:53 PM PDT by commish (Freedom tastes sweetest to those who have fought to protect it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson