North American Union? NAFTA Superhighways? Amero?

[Brainster]

Has anybody here looked extensively into this? Jerome Corsi outlines (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965) the conspiracy theory:

President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy.

Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA politically, setting the stage for a North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada.

President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.

The NAFTA Superhighways story has been picked up by CTs like Alex Jones and Uncle Fetzer. Corsi claims (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15497):

Quietly but systematically, the Bush Administration is advancing the plan to build a huge NAFTA Super Highway, four football-fields-wide, through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth, Minn.

Once complete, the new road will allow containers from the Far East to enter the United States through the Mexican port of Lazaro Cardenas, bypassing the Longshoreman’s Union in the process. The Mexican trucks, without the involvement of the Teamsters Union, will drive on what will be the nation’s most modern highway straight into the heart of America. The Mexican trucks will cross border in FAST lanes, checked only electronically by the new “SENTRI” system. The first customs stop will be a Mexican customs office in Kansas City, their new Smart Port complex, a facility being built for Mexico at a cost of $3 million to the U.S. taxpayers in Kansas City.

As incredible as this plan may seem to some readers, the first Trans-Texas Corridor segment of the NAFTA Super Highway is ready to begin construction next year. Various U.S. government agencies, dozens of state agencies, and scores of private NGOs (non-governmental organizations) have been working behind the scenes to create the NAFTA Super Highway, despite the lack of comment on the plan by President Bush. The American public is largely asleep to this key piece of the coming “North American Union” that government planners in the new trilateral region of United States, Canada and Mexico are about to drive into reality.

The Amero comes into the story here (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15017):

[Robert] Pastor’s 2001 book “Toward a North American Community” called for the creation of a North American Union that would perfect the defects Pastor believes limit the progress of the European Union. Much of Pastor’s thinking appears aimed at limiting the power and sovereignty of the United States as we enter this new super-regional entity. Pastor has also called for the creation of a new currency which he has coined the “Amero,” a currency that is proposed to replace the U.S. dollar, the Canadian dollar, and the Mexican peso.

From what I can see, Corsi's mostly using paranoid interpretations of diplomatic boilerplate in various statements and documents. For example, he gets the idea that the borders between the US, Canada and Mexico will be eliminated from this:

To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.

Note that it does not say that the movement of people, products and capital will be "free"; just legal, orderly and safe. Only a paranoid mind would go from that non-controversial statement to this:

Why doesn’t President Bush just tell the truth? His secret agenda is to dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union.

Does anybody really believe that? Corsi seems to be taking advantage of anti-immigration fervor to claim that this is really Bush's goal. Is there anybody in America that favors uniting our country with Mexico? Yet Corsi sees it not only likely, but imminent (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15233):

What we have underway here with the SPP could arguably be termed a bureaucratic coup d’etat. If that is not the intent, then President Bush should rein in the bureaucracy until the American people have been fully informed of the true nature of our government’s desire to create a North American Union. Otherwise, the North American Union will become a reality in 2010 as planned.

Of course, Bush won't even be in office in 2010. Would President Hillary Clinton or President John McCain (or Barack Obama, or Rudy Giuliani) be presiding over this unification?

It's tempting to just laugh this stuff off with insults, as talk show host Michael Medved did in a recent Townhall column (http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/b4119746-9434-4f7b-a4fe-7caa91fee062):

But aside from the chilling prospect of a “Monster Highway” (why is a new road in Texas supposed to be so scary?) there’s no reason at all to believe in the ludicrous, childish, ill-informed, manipulative, brain dead fantasies about a North American Union. The entire chimera has been conjured up to scare people over nothing—to solicit contributions to fight a non-existent threat, and then when that threat never materializes the exploiters and charlatans who’ve been lying to you about this nonsense can beat their chests and say, “Look at that! We stopped the globalists in their evil, diabolical plans to terminate American sovereignty—now send us even more money!”

The insults are useful for quickly convincing people who are not into the CT that there's nothing there, but as we all know it doesn't substitute for solid debunking with those intrigued by Corsi's claims.

Note: I'd like to keep this discussion confined to the claims made regarding the NAU, the NAFTA Superhighways, and the Amero. Let's not get too much into the left/right politics on this, please.

[jhunter1163]

I've seen this before, and it makes no sense to me. Why would the US, the world's 800-pound economic gorilla, CHANGE ITS CURRENCY? Why wouldn't we just say to Canada and Mexico, "OK, you guys are gonna start using the US dollar come 1-1-10, OK?"

And I don't think three years would be NEARLY enough lead time for such an enterprise. How long did it take to come up with the EU? Decades. So, I'm not too worried about the whole thing. Thinly disguised xenophobia, is all.

[Horatius]

Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA politically, setting the stage for a North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada.

President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.


I've seen this before, and it makes no sense to me. Why would the US, the world's 800-pound economic gorilla, CHANGE ITS CURRENCY? Why wouldn't we just say to Canada and Mexico, "OK, you guys are gonna start using the US dollar come 1-1-10, OK?"


This is exactly the problem with these guys. Even if their NAU fantasies were true, why would anyone expect the US to be the junior partners in this enterprise?

Does anyone seriously think that the guys in DC would meekly accept orders form some Canuck in Ottawa? Or from someone in Mexico?

If anyone should be worried about the loss of sovereignty in a hypothetical NAU, it should be Canada and Mexico.

Pastor’s 2001 book “Toward a North American Community” called for the creation of a North American Union that would perfect the defects Pastor believes limit the progress of the European Union. Much of Pastor’s thinking appears aimed at limiting the power and sovereignty of the United States as we enter this new super-regional entity

Who is this Pastor guy, and exactly how does his calling for limits on US power translate into any actual chance of that happening?

[Brainster]

Good point about the relative size of the respective economies. I just looked up the GDPs of the three countries at the CIA World Factbook.

Canada's GDP (https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ca.html#Econ) is $1.035 trillion at official exchange rates. Mexico's is (https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/mx.html#Econ) $693 billion. The United States' GDP (https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html#Econ) is $12.49 trillion. The US economy is over seven times as large as Mexico and Canada combined.

[jhunter1163]

So, in the proposed NAU, the US would have about 85% of the economic activity, not to mention about 75% of the population. I think it would be EXTREMELY unlikely that the will of the NAU would be anything but the will of the US.

Not that the NAU is anything more than a figment of Pastor's overheated imagination.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Assuming anything about this idiocy actually leads to a democractic union (and we all LOVE democracy), goodbye the GOP's control of the government. :boggled:

[WildCat]

Quietly but systematically, the Bush Administration is advancing the plan to build a huge NAFTA Super Highway, four football-fields-wide, through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth, Minn.

Now that is funny! A 400 yard wide highway? Lets see, here in Chicago the Dan Ryan Expressway (I-94) is less than 100 yards wide, the paved part only. That's 14 lanes of traffic (more on the way though) and a light commuter train line in the center. So a 400 yard wide highway would be what, at least 56 lanes of traffic? That's just ridiculous!

Why do CT's exaggerate everything to the point of being just silly?

[T.A.M.]

All I have to say is Swing Dangler is gonna owe me $100 (and that better be in USD Swing).

TAM

[LashL]

bump

[David Wong]

So a 400 yard wide highway would be what, at least 56 lanes of traffic?

Picture yourself in the far left lane, then glancing up and realizing that YOUR exit is coming up... on the RIGHT.

You're about to get the finger from 55 different drivers.

[Architect]

And now imagine the chances that at least one of them is a woo-woo, with a gun....

[Horatius]

So a 400 yard wide highway would be what, at least 56 lanes of traffic? That's just ridiculous!

Why do CT's exaggerate everything to the point of being just silly?

But you're forgetting, these are the first-class Mexican lanes, so they'll have double the leg room.

Thus, there will only be 28 lanes to worry about.

[Architect]

Surely you mean width, not legroom?

[Spindrift]

Considering that Bush has 2 years left and a Democratic congress to deal with it really would be amazing if Bush could pull it off.

He's done some constitutionally questionable things, but I doubt even he could pull off refusing to leave office so he can finish this plan.

[Horatius]

Surely you mean width, not legroom?

Well, uhm, the Mexican Trucks will be transporting so many illegal immigrants, their legs will stick out the sides! Yeah, okay, I got nothin'.......

[jhunter1163]

Considering that Bush has 2 years left and a Democratic congress to deal with it really would be amazing if Bush could pull it off.

He's done some constitutionally questionable things, but I doubt even he could pull off refusing to leave office so he can finish this plan.

Nah, he's going on Jan. 20, 2009, whether he likes it or not.

[maccy]

There's already a union of states in North America which is far more integrated politically than the EU, it's called The United States of America.

Funnily enough, some of the more Federalist plans for the EU are criticised by anti-Federalists as leading towards a "United States of Europe".

People are absolutely correct in saying that the EU has taken a long time to develop - it's been almost 50 years since the Treaty of Rome. All the major changes to the EU have required ratification by national parliaments and sometimes referendums. I'm sure that any agreement with Canada and Mexico would have to be ratified by Congress.

Also, a union of three countries is never going to be like the EU. Back in 1957 (when it was the EEC) there were six members, now there are 27. There is a real issue of sovereignty with so many nations, but the main focus is still on the idea of common standards, a single market and freedom of movement.

Even if the supposed American Union were styled after the EU (which is very unlikely) I doubt that most US citizens would see much difference.

A single currency - it wouldn't matter what you called it, the Federal Reserve would now be the central bank for the whole continent. Mexico and Canada would get some input but would have no power (both being too small in population and GDP to have a majority share). The Reserve's monetary policy would be based on the economy of the whole continent, but since most of that is the US it probably wouldn't be very different.

An American Parliament - if modelled on the European Parliament, this would be dominated by representatives from the US.

Mexico a net beneficary of funds - I can't imagine the US ever agreeing to this, but if they did then it may well sort out the immigration issue (such as it is). If the EU is anything to go by, the redistribution of funds from the rich countries to the poor ones has greatly benefitted countries such as Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Greece. As the GDP of countries gets closer the economic pressure to migrate diminishes. To me, it makes more sense than spending billions of dollars on a fence, anyway.

Freedom of movement - again, I can't this happening but even if it did it wouldn't necessarily be a disaster. Yes, you'd have a lot of Mexicans coming to the US, but they'd all be tax payers and subject to the minimum wage (so no longer illegally undercutting wages). They would probably spread out more across the country and some would even go to Canada. Honestly, there is a lot of space in the US for people and increased populations are generally more beneficial than not. As the economies of Mexico and the US equalised, migration would slow, anyway. If this ever did happen, it would surely be phased in over a number of years.

Common standards and practices - would bring Mexico more in line with Canada and the US than vice-versa.

Apart from the fact the the European Social Democratic model seems to be an anathema to US politics, I think biggest stumbling block is that Mexico and Canada would inevitably be dominated by the US in any union. I can't see them agreeing to this.

[Doc Daneeka]

Assuming anything about this idiocy actually leads to a democractic union (and we all LOVE democracy), goodbye the GOP's control of the government.

I've often seen a Republican, upon discovering that I am a Canadian, tell me laughingly about how someday we will be part of the USA. I always find it entertaining to ask if they really relish having 10 new states admitted to the union, containing something like 75 electoral votes, very few of which would go to the GOP in an election. It would be like adding another California, but with 20 senators.

I generally find that the person stops making such comments.

[uruk]

I live in the Rio Grande Valley where the Mexico end of I-69 corridor is supposed to be.

I -69 is supposed to be a straight stretch from Mexico to Canada.
http://www.i69info.com/
If you read the website, I-69 is running into some opposition.

IRC, NAFTA predates Bush. From what I understand NAFTA is supposed to make trade easier between Canada, US, and Mexico With the US holding all the strings, of course.
NAFTA is one of the major reasons that all those factories moved to Mexico and we have $20.00 DVD players.

[TjW]

A Federal highway numbered I-69? Ridiculous. They wouldn't be able to keep the signs up.

[Thunder]

north american union...chemtrails...bohemian grove...its just utter nonsense.

i am willing to bet 100$..there will be no north american union..within 50 years.

[Zygar]

Ok. So we're going to build a massive fence along the border, but we're also going to demolish the border. Makes perfect sense to me.

[Horatius]

north american union...chemtrails...bohemian grove...its just utter nonsense.

i am willing to bet 100$..there will be no north american union..within 50 years.

Is the bet still on if I decide to become Prime Minister of Canada, and annex the US to us? Because I'd be willing to do that for a hundred bucks :)

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I used to tell people there'd be a Republic of Alberta within 10 years...

...back in 1996. :p

As to wether or not or not the US would want to absorb Canada, there's no way in hell the republicans would ever allow the addition of 30 million northern democrats to the voter base.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

. . . .
An American Parliament - if modelled on the European Parliament, this would be dominated by representatives from the US.
. . . .

As Doc Daneeka points out, it might be dominated but . . . . with the really small margins in recent USAian Federal elections the balance of power would shift dramatically to the "left".

[Architect]

I still find at amusing, when hearing about some Americans complaing about "the left", to recall that even the European mainstream right wing (e.g. the Conservatives) tend to be further left than the Democrats.....

[gtc]

I don't think the width of the highway is as crazy as it sounds.

The Trans-Texas (http://www.keeptexasmoving.org/projects/) corridor is supposed to have:


Passenger Vehicle lanes,
Freight Vehicle lanes,
Freight railways,
Commuter railways,
Water, oil, gas, electricity and telecom pipes and lines;


I presume it will also have various access lanes, train stations and gas stations.

[uruk]

Ok. So we're going to build a massive fence along the border, but we're also going to demolish the border. Makes perfect sense to me.
The fence is just lipservice. Everyone who lives on the border knows a fence is only going to slow down the process. It's not going to stop it.
Alot of illegas come over via "coyotes". Those are americans who take money from illegals to smuggle them into the US. Bribery does the rest.

U.S. corporations don't want the flow of illegals to stop. They need the cheap labor. That's why So many companies put thier factories over there. That's what NAFTA was mostly about.

The U.S, did screw over one Mexican industry due to NAFTA. Back in 1999. Nafta was supposed to allow Mexican truckers to ship into all parts of the US. When the time came the US changed thier minds claiming insurance and emission standard reasons. So Mexican truckers can just go into areas called "free trade zones" only to transfer thier loads to american truckers.

So much for America cowtowing to a North American Union.

[Horatius]

So much for America cowtowing to a North American Union.

I'm reminded of a comment from a discussion I had with a friend, back when the frist Free Trade Agreement was being discussed: Treaties only apply to the weaker partner.

[pandamonk]

Anyone heard about this?

It seems that the dollar, both american and canadian, and mexican peso are gradually collapsing giving way to the new Amero, and the erasion of borders with mexico and canada to create the North American Union.

Check out the film documentary, Zeitgeist, the Movie (http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/), and do your own search...

I'd like to find out more, and what you guys think of this conspiracy theory?

Cheers

Lee

[T.A.M.]

there is a thread in this Subforum about that movie...look it up, it may help.

Cheers

TAM:)

[pandamonk]

That was quick.

Ok sorry, should have looked...:o

[T.A.M.]

No sweat...I am sure people will come here and give you opinion on it here as well, but thought it might help get you up to speed.

TAM:)

[pandamonk]

Cool thanks. You know what it's called?

[T.A.M.]

IIRC, it was called "Zeitgeist - the movie"..but I cant remember...It was up here recently, so check the last 2-3 pages of threads, and you might find it.

TAM:)

Edit: here you go...

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=85264

[pandamonk]

Found it here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=85264) thanks.

[Corsair 115]

It seems that the dollar, both american and canadian, and mexican peso are gradually collapsing giving way to the new Amero, and the erasion of borders with mexico and canada to create the North American Union.There's lots of chatter about this but very little evidence. It presumes that the citizens and governments of all three nations want such a union - do they? I'm quite confident in stating the majority of Canadian citizens want Canada to remain an independent nation.

Besides, talk of the NAU from concerned Americans always seems to take the tack that America would be losing something. It's far, far more likely that, since America is by far the biggest of the three nations, it's Canada and Mexico which would lose their identities.

[~enigma~]

Anyone heard about this?

It seems that the dollar, both american and canadian, and mexican peso are gradually collapsing giving way to the new Amero, and the erasion of borders with mexico and canada to create the North American Union.

Check out the film documentary, Zeitgeist, the Movie (http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/), and do your own search...

I'd like to find out more, and what you guys think of this conspiracy theory?

Cheers

LeeWhen i see an Amero I will believe it. At this time I would say that the Amero is just like Alex Jones. IOW full of hot air...

[T.A.M.]

There's lots of chatter about this but very little evidence. It presumes that the citizens and governments of all three nations want such a union - do they? I'm quite confident in stating the majority of Canadian citizens want Canada to remain an independent nation.

Besides, talk of the NAU from concerned Americans always seems to take the tack that America would be losing something. It's far, far more likely that, since America is by far the biggest of the three nations, it's Canada and Mexico which would lose their identities.

I can GUARANTEE that the Canadian govt that tries to do anything close to an NAU will be ousted. As much as we respect our brothers to the south, We relish our independence from them more.

TAM:)

[sesshin]

I, for one, welcome our new North American Union overlords.

[Thunder]

Um, forgive me if I am wrong, but aren't we building MORE fences along the Mexican border...not less?

[Tbone]

I, for one, welcome our new North American Union overlords.

As long as the name is Canamerixco, or something equally hilarious, I'm all for it.

[T.A.M.]

Camerico? Amexicanada? Mexanamerica? CAM?, MAC? AMC?

TAM;)

[JamesB]

Does anyone honestly think that the Mexican ruling elite are going to give the Yankees control of their monetary policy? Get real.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Does anyone honestly think that the Mexican ruling elite are going to give the Yankees control of their monetary policy? Get real.

"Don't forget the Alamo!"

No wait. That's not right. :confused:

"Remember the Alamo."

That's more like it. :(

[Thunder]

Our name...will be North America. Our money will be called the North American Lira. And my name, is boingo boingo.

[Björn Toulouse]

Camerico? Amexicanada? Mexanamerica? CAM?, MAC? AMC?

TAM;)


No, it's Mexamerinada.

So many combinations. This is fun.

[defaultdotxbe]

No, it's Mexamerinada.

So many combinations. This is fun.
no, it will still be the united states, canada will become southern alaska and mexico will become southern california

(we americans dont like change)

[AlanGreenspan]

Let's asume there is really a plan to dissapear the borders between these countries. What's the problem?

[pandamonk]

Let's asume there is really a plan to dissapear the borders between these countries. What's the problem?It's like what's happening here in europe. One currency, one main govrenment, etc. In the video, it says how asia will be come one, as will africa, and so on, and then these will all become one. So there will be a world government. Everyone will be chipped, and controlled by the government. If you step out of line, they'll simply turn off your chip...

Or something along those lines...

[T.A.M.]

This will not happen. If anything, the USA is calling for more definitive borders. Canada will not agree to lose its sovereignty...I can guaranteee that.

It is all fearmongering by paranoid delusional people...

TAM:)

[Brainster]

Here are a couple updates to this crackpot story. First, Jerome Corsi reveals the shocking news (http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57502) that North Carolina's new drivers' licenses include a picture of the globe, which somewhat resembles the logo of the Security and Prosperity Partnership. Our New World Order bosses are brilliant and eeeevil, but they always reveal themselves in ways that only the even more brilliant conspiracy theory guys can see!

And here's a YouTube video of a financial analyst going off the deep end on the Amero in the middle of a CNBC interview:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_3jdQxDC7pA"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_3jdQxDC7pA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

hmmmm, embed doesn't seem to be working for me. Here's the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3jdQxDC7pA

[dudalb]

Ya gotta love how the CT's find "hidden symbolism" in just about everything.
I fully expect Crosi to tell us how a great many states now requiring 2 years of a foreign language to graduate from High School is part of the evil globalisation plot.
What is interesting about the immigrant issue is it just about the only issue where the left/right divide in the US breaks down: Both the left and right have people on both sides of the debate.

[jaydeehess]

If anyone should be worried about the loss of sovereignty in a hypothetical NAU, it should be Canada and Mexico.

BINGO
Any union will be dominated to the extreme by the US. The government would be more akin to the US system, culture would be dominated by US magazines and TV and the dominant language would be English.

The French in Canada and the Mexicans would lose out as far as language goes.

What would essentially occur would be a much larger USA. It may be called something else but that is what it would be. With that in mind what would be the downside for the average American? Present day Mexico would have to conform to present day USA enviromental law, minimum wage for eg. Perhaps even more stringent enviromental law and min wages since in many cases the Canadian equivalents presently are.

If a factory moved to Mexico or Canada it would be no different than if it had moved from Illinois to Georgia.

Now as for that superhighway. I am all for it. If it hits the Canadian border north of Duluth then it will be within an hour's drive of me. i could zip down to the Yucatan by car for my vacation.

[defaultdotxbe]

BINGO
Any union will be dominated to the extreme by the US. The government would be more akin to the US system, culture would be dominated by US magazines and TV and the dominant language would be English.

The French in Canada and the Mexicans would lose out as far as language goes.

What would essentially occur would be a much larger USA. It may be called something else but that is what it would be. With that in mind what would be the downside for the average American? Present day Mexico would have to conform to present day USA enviromental law, minimum wage for eg. Perhaps even more stringent enviromental law and min wages since in many cases the Canadian equivalents presently are.

If a factory moved to Mexico or Canada it would be no different than if it had moved from Illinois to Georgia.

Now as for that superhighway. I am all for it. If it hits the Canadian border north of Duluth then it will be within an hour's drive of me. i could zip down to the Yucatan by car for my vacation.
i would think the worries would be over losing state sovereignty. not national, since state governments are already second to national they worry about it becoming third behind the NAU (possibly 4th behind the UN even)

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

I've seen this before, and it makes no sense to me. Why would the US, the world's 800-pound economic gorilla, CHANGE ITS CURRENCY? Why wouldn't we just say to Canada and Mexico, "OK, you guys are gonna start using the US dollar come 1-1-10, OK?"

Exactly... Look at the Euro... And the British Pound. It is my unprofessional understanding that England feels it's currency is better than the Euro, and that they don't want to give up THAT portion of their identity, even though they are in the EU.

And I don't think three years would be NEARLY enough lead time for such an enterprise. How long did it take to come up with the EU? Decades. So, I'm not too worried about the whole thing. Thinly disguised xenophobia, is all.

Pure Xenophobia, and makes people who have legitimate gripes about Mexican trucks and truck drivers driving across the border with poor safety standards, inadequate insurance coverage, and not to mention the probability of a hundred "undocumented workers" packed in like sardines behind the crates of sparkplugs.

That said, I welcome increased trade in North America. We will all win. By bringing the Mexican economy UP, we will stop the influx of unskilled laborers coming across the border for slave wage labor.

[ZENSMACK89]

While everyone's been talking about the new UBL tape late last night a statement was released by the Transportation Dept granting Mexican trucks authority to operate anywhere in the United States.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domes...7?pageNumber=2

[DavidJames]

While everyone's been talking about the new UBL tape late last night a statement was released by the Transportation Dept granting Mexican trucks authority to operate anywhere in the United States.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domes...7?pageNumber=2 I noticed you also posted a thread about this topic in politics where you also just posted a link without a comment.

What's your point?

[KoihimeNakamura]

See my reply in Politics.

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

I noticed you also posted a thread about this topic in politics where you also just posted a link without a comment.

What's your point?

I think his point is that everyone's post MUST be about every single event that is happening that day, and to NEVER have one thread about one thing.

[maccy]

Exactly... Look at the Euro... And the British Pound. It is my unprofessional understanding that England feels it's currency is better than the Euro, and that they don't want to give up THAT portion of their identity, even though they are in the EU.

Not England, the UK. The main issue isn't so much the superiority of the Pound versus the Euro it's about whether it is better to set monetary policy at a state or a European level.

But yes, the membership of the EU is negotiated over many years, so you can be a member without adopting the Euro. Also, any major changes have to be agreed by the individual governments.

Interestingly enough, the individual states of the US don't control their own monetary policy so the US is already a lot like the Eurozone in that respect. Extending the Federal Reserve to Canada and Mexico probably wouldn't change much for the States in the US, given the relative sizes of the three national economies. It's far more likely that Mexico would suffer as the result of a unified monetary policy that suited the US and Canada but not them.

[cloudshipsrule]

A Federal highway numbered I-69? Ridiculous. They wouldn't be able to keep the signs up.

Now that's funny!:D

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

Not England, the UK. The main issue isn't so much the superiority of the Pound versus the Euro it's about whether it is better to set monetary policy at a state or a European level.
My apollogies for being an ignoramus. Sort of like how non-Americans consider "Yankee" to mean all Americans, while within America, a Yankee is someone from the North... and within the North a Yankee is someone from New England (or a MLB team) and within New England... etc etc etc.
I generally use England and UK interchangeably and yes I do realize it's not right. :)
Interestingly enough, the individual states of the US don't control their own monetary policy so the US is already a lot like Europe in that respect. Extending the Federal Reserve to Canada and Mexico probably would change much for the States in the US, given the relative sizes of the three national economies. It's far more likely that Mexico would suffer as the result of a unified monetary policy that suited the US and Canada but not them.
And how some people in some countries in the EU are worried about losing their National Identity to the whim of the French or Germans or British... Now you can understand people in the U.S. who favor States rights. :)

We're not so different after all.

Ok, it's a stretch!

[ZENSMACK89]

I noticed you also posted a thread about this topic in politics where you also just posted a link without a comment.

What's your point?
Did you read it?

While you're all beating up on Corsi and claiming how full of nonsense he is on this issue why don't you read how wrong he was a year ago...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50803

THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Mexican trucks to enter U.S. freely?
Bush administration refuses to answer WND's questions
Posted: June 27, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

"As a result of the ruling, thirty thousand or more Mexican trucks – which are generally older, more polluting, and less safe than their U.S. counterparts – will be allowed to conduct long haul trucking operations to locations across the United States.

The Teamsters Union has fought NAFTA since the 1990s, concerned that the ultimate plan was to undermine union trucking as well as independent truckers who are owner-operators.

"With all the obstacles that still need to be overcome, our government must heed the OIG's warnings from the January 2005 audit," Galen Munroe, a spokesperson for the Teamsters Union told WND in an email. "The motor carriers in Mexico need to adhere to the same regulations and standards that our companies and drivers are subject to. Unfortunately, this seems to be a near impossible task with Mexico's current infrastructure."


Recent government studies estimate that eighty to ninety percent of the Mexican truck fleet was manufactured before 1994. In a preliminary environmental review, FMCSA concluded that their emissions "can be expected to translate into incremental increases in premature deaths" and "an enhanced incidence of respiratory diseases" in the United States. A 2002 U.S. EPA study reported a "persuasive" link between inhalation of diesel exhaust and cancer."

[DavidJames]

Did you read it?

While you're all beating up on Corsi and claiming how full of nonsense he is on this issue why don't you read how wrong he was a year ago...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50803

THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Mexican trucks to enter U.S. freely?
Bush administration refuses to answer WND's questions
Posted: June 27, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

"As a result of the ruling, thirty thousand or more Mexican trucks – which are generally older, more polluting, and less safe than their U.S. counterparts – will be allowed to conduct long haul trucking operations to locations across the United States.

The Teamsters Union has fought NAFTA since the 1990s, concerned that the ultimate plan was to undermine union trucking as well as independent truckers who are owner-operators.

"With all the obstacles that still need to be overcome, our government must heed the OIG's warnings from the January 2005 audit," Galen Munroe, a spokesperson for the Teamsters Union told WND in an email. "The motor carriers in Mexico need to adhere to the same regulations and standards that our companies and drivers are subject to. Unfortunately, this seems to be a near impossible task with Mexico's current infrastructure."


Recent government studies estimate that eighty to ninety percent of the Mexican truck fleet was manufactured before 1994. In a preliminary environmental review, FMCSA concluded that their emissions "can be expected to translate into incremental increases in premature deaths" and "an enhanced incidence of respiratory diseases" in the United States. A 2002 U.S. EPA study reported a "persuasive" link between inhalation of diesel exhaust and cancer."

I noted you only provided a link and no comments. How do you respond, by providing the link again and quoting from the link.

But you still provide no comments.

I can guess what you're concerned about, but it would just be a guess. I would like to hear why you posted the link (three times now). Also, I would be interested in why you think it belongs in this forum (as well as the politics forum)

[dudalb]

Is there a single Conspiracy theory on Earth that ZenSMack will not buy into?

[Axiom_Blade]

The first time I heard about the NAU and the Amero, I was 100% for it. The US needs to be unified with its neighbors, not isolationist. Now, I don't think there's a chance any of it'll ever happen; certainly not in the next 3 years! The fact that the only people I heard talking about it were Ron Paul supporters and 9/11 conspiracists lent it even less credibility.

It's really too bad. I guess these people just need something to keep their paranoia and hate going.

[twinstead]

It would be nice if somebody who was an advocate of this particular conspiracy theory would join JREF and enlighten us.

It would be a nice change of pace from all the 911 discussions.

[dudalb]

Although I have some basic sympathy for a lot of Libertarian ideas ( I am all in favor of ,limited Government] Paul..and a lot of Libertarian..turn me off with their Isolationism disguised as "Non Interventionlism".
THe bitter fact is even if it was a good idea..which I do not concede....the US Cannot withdraw from the world and live in it's own little corner where ,except for maybe trade agreements,we can ignore all those nasty,foreign countries out there. You can shut yourselves in,but you can't shut the world out. Ron Paul's inablity to grasp that is one reason why I put him in the "kook" category.

[ktesibios]

Perhaps a clue to Canadian attitudes toward being dominated by the USA:

To qualify as "Canadian content" for the purpose of radio broadcasting Canadian content quotas, a musical selection must generally fulfill at least two of the following conditions:
M (music):
the music is composed entirely by a Canadian
A (artist):
the music is, or the lyrics are, performed principally by a Canadian
P (production):
the musical selection is:
• recorded wholly in Canada, or
• performed wholly in Canada and broadcast live in Canada.
L (lyrics):
the lyrics are written entirely by a Canadian.

The MAPL system is used by both the CRTC to check Canadian content compliancy by licensees and as a basis for eligibility to the federal Sound Recording Development Program (SRDP).

In general, 35% of the sound recordings played on a radio station between 6 a.m. and midnight must qualify as "Canadian content" as defined by the MAPL system.

http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/ac-ca/pubs/can-con/can_con.html

See also:

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/cancon.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_content

Yeah, now there's a bunch of folks who'll happily be subsumed into the North American Union.

And, IIRC, Mexico can be rather touchy about even the appearance that they're taking orders from the gringos.

Funny how such ultra-nationalist paranoids as the woos who are screaming about the "NAU" can't recognize that people in other countries have their own nationalist beliefs. It seems to be another demonstration of the correlation between paranoid conspiracism and plain old hatefreakery, but I can't tell what causative relationship exists.

[dudalb]

It would be nice if somebody who was an advocate of this particular conspiracy theory would join JREF and enlighten us.

It would be a nice change of pace from all the 911 discussions.


It's just a slight variation of the usual New World Order crap.

[ZENSMACK89]

I noted you only provided a link and no comments. How do you response, by providing the link again and the quoting from the link.

But you still provide no comments.

I can guess what you're concerned about, but it would just be a guess. I would like to hear why you posted the link (three times now). Also, I would be interested in why you think it belongs in this forum (as well as the politics forum)
I posted a different link. Glad to see you checked them out. This thread started about a so-called CT put forth by Corsi. I then linked how Corsi did a story a year ago about what happened late last night that has a direct connection to the so-called CT. Did you read them before you dismissed them?

It seems that some here don't really think it's a CT their just ok with our borders being erased.

Always full of apologists and excuse makers here at JREF.

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

I hate to say it Zen, but I did mention safety issues with Mexican trucks, and that I have a problem with it... But this is not some sort of NEW NORTHAMERICA ORDER designed to take away our freedoms and give them to Mexicans and Canadians. It's to make the entire continent stronger. It's funny how some of the woo-woos are so pro-laissez faire are suddenly pro-protectionism and isolationism at the drop of a hat.

Being in Upstate NY I have to dodge courteous Canadian drivers on the highways... I'd hate to have to dodge Mexican trucks with faulty brakes and safety equipment. The good news is, they'll fall apart before making it to upstate NY. :)

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

Also: I blame MAPL for bringing to the US:
Celine Dion
Bryan Adams
Anne Murray
and Alanis Moreupsette

[maccy]

I can imagine that Quebec will make absolutely no fuss about joining an NAU. They'd be very happy, oh yes...

:)

[DavidJames]

Did you read them before you dismissed them? Please quote me where I "dismissed them".

[ZENSMACK89]

Please quote me where I "dismissed them".
I think you claimed I posted the same link three times. How did you make that mistake if you read them?

You're not concerned with the truth your concerned with fighting a "truther".

Or is it "toofer"?

[N.Texas]

I don't think the width of the highway is as crazy as it sounds.

The Trans-Texas (http://www.keeptexasmoving.org/projects/) corridor is supposed to have:


Passenger Vehicle lanes,
Freight Vehicle lanes,
Freight railways,
Commuter railways,
Water, oil, gas, electricity and telecom pipes and lines;


I presume it will also have various access lanes, train stations and gas stations.


I couldn't get that link to work but here's one I found. http://www.corridorwatch.org/ttc/cw-plan0206-04planning.htm#Corridor%20layout

[DavidJames]

I think you claimed I posted the same link three times. How did you make that mistake if you read them?

You're not concerned with the truth your concerned with fighting a "truther".

Or is it "toofer"?I was incorrect about you posting the same, link, I apologize. My point was clear however. I never mentioned the content of the links, I asked you why you posted them without providing any comments. I then asked why you posted it in this forum, again without providing your comments.

[ZENSMACK89]

I was incorrect about you posting the same, link, I apologize. My point was clear however. I never mentioned the content of the links, I asked you why you posted them without providing any comments. I then asked why you posted it in this forum, again without providing your comments.
I'm posting the links because the OP was suggesting Corsi was pushing a CT. Is it a CT? Or is it just ok with everyone? One of the links I posted was a Corsi article from a year ago suggesting that the US would open it's borders to Mexican trucks and they wouldn't be under the same regulations, inspections, or pay as American trucks and drivers. I also posted a link to reuters where it reports this very plan was pushed through late yesterday while everyone is talking about the latest and greatest from UBL.

Now again I ask are plans for the NAU really just a CT or is it just ok with everyone as long as they dress it up nice as "good for the consumer"?

[Par]

Now again I ask are plans for the NAU really just a CT or is it just ok with everyone as long as they dress it up nice as "good for the consumer"?


So, to paraphrase, you’re asking: Is the idea of a North American Union really a conspiracy theory, or are you fine with the idea of a North American Union?

That, however, is a false dichotomy.

[twinstead]

So, to paraphrase, you’re asking: Is the idea of a North American Union really a conspiracy theory, or are you fine with the idea of a North American Union?

That, however, is a false dichotomy.

And quite a beautiful example of one, if I may say so. Bravo, Zen!

[Viper Daimao]

last i heard the trans-texas corridor was on hold.

And what is the problem with the mexican trucks? Are you and corsi just concerned about driving safety and the environment? Being a libertarian of sorts, I'm generally all in favor of getting rid of regulations.

[ZENSMACK89]

And quite a beautiful example of one, if I may say so. Bravo, Zen!
I don't believe them to be the only options it's just all I've read here so far.

[Par]

I don't believe them to be the only options it's just all I've read here so far.


Sorry, how do you mean?

[ZENSMACK89]

last i heard the trans-texas corridor was on hold.

And what is the problem with the mexican trucks? Are you and corsi just concerned about driving safety and the environment? Being a libertarian of sorts, I'm generally all in favor of getting rid of regulations.
So we shouldn't inspect any trucks for safty or emissions, or contents?

Do you have a job? How much does it pay an hour? Do you think Mexican truck drivers will start getting paid more or American truck drivers less or not at all?

[ZENSMACK89]

Sorry, how do you mean?
I've seen two kind of takes here. NAU wouldn't be so bad or it's just a CT.

[Horatius]

I'm posting the links because the OP was suggesting Corsi was pushing a CT. Is it a CT? Or is it just ok with everyone? One of the links I posted was a Corsi article from a year ago suggesting that the US would open it's borders to Mexican trucks and they wouldn't be under the same regulations, inspections, or pay as American trucks and drivers. I also posted a link to reuters where it reports this very plan was pushed through late yesterday while everyone is talking about the latest and greatest from UBL.

Now again I ask are plans for the NAU really just a CT or is it just ok with everyone as long as they dress it up nice as "good for the consumer"?



But is it "This very plan"? Your link to the Reuters article doesn't seem to work:



http://www.reuters.com/article/domes...7?pageNumber=2


Is this the same, or similar article?

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN06403579

Let's look at some of what you quoted from the Corsi article that you allege predicted "this very plan", shall we?


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50803


"As a result of the ruling, thirty thousand or more Mexican trucks – which are generally older, more polluting, and less safe than their U.S. counterparts – will be allowed to conduct long haul trucking operations to locations across the United States.



From my linked article:

The administration plans to gradually allow Mexican trucking firms greater access to U.S. highways, topping out at 100 firms and about 500 trucks at the conclusion of the pilot


So, only off by two orders of magnitude on the number of Mexican trucks.




"With all the obstacles that still need to be overcome, our government must heed the OIG's warnings from the January 2005 audit," Galen Munroe, a spokesperson for the Teamsters Union told WND in an email. "The motor carriers in Mexico need to adhere to the same regulations and standards that our companies and drivers are subject to. Unfortunately, this seems to be a near impossible task with Mexico's current infrastructure."




So the big concern is that Mexican trucks might not be held to the same standard as US trucks, right? Well:

John Hill, administrator of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, told reporters in a conference call that Mexican trucking companies, drivers and vehicles must abide by the same standards as U.S. companies, including truck inspections, licensing and drug and alcohol testing. In some cases the criteria will be stricter, Hill said.



So, they won't be held to the same standard, they'll be held to a stricter standard. Not quite a hit, is it?

So out of two major allegations you quoted, both are in fact, wrong. So "how wrong he was a year ago"? Quite wrong, it seems.

[Viper Daimao]

So we shouldn't inspect any trucks for safty or emissions, or contents?

Do you have a job? How much does it pay an hour? Do you think Mexican truck drivers will start getting paid more or American truck drivers less or not at all?

I'm not paid hourly. And as I said, as a libertarian of sorts, I am against protectionism.

[Horatius]

I've seen two kind of takes here. NAU wouldn't be so bad or it's just a CT.



How about the "The changes you are so worried about are really not all that major, and certainly won't lead to the entire reconstruction of the governmental structure of North America, because there's no one who really wants that, they just want cheaper and easier trucking"?

[Par]

I've seen two kind of takes here. NAU wouldn't be so bad or it's just a CT.


Well OK, but the question which opinions you’ve seen so far has no bearing on the fact that you presented DavidJames with an illegitimately reduced set of options.

[ktesibios]

I don't believe them to be the only options it's just all I've read here so far.

Then your reading comprehension is seriously deficient, as usual. Thus far you haven't provided a shred of anything even resembling evidence that the claims made about the putative NAU, e.g. that it will "dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union" are true. Absent such evidence, these claims are properly classified as yet another paranoid conspiracy theory.

Sidetrack discussions of more plausible aspects of increased US-Mexico-Canada cooperation, such as a de facto customs union, don't constitute support for the mythical superstate that has the wingnuts' panties in such a knot.

Stop hiding behind false dichotomies and strawmen like your remarks about Mexican truckers and provide some evidence in support of these larger claims, if you can. If you can't, kindly sod off.

[ZENSMACK89]

But is it "This very plan"? Your link to the Reuters article doesn't seem to work:

It's the same plan as understood a year ago which was I'm sure was considered by some just a CT at the time. You're cherry picking on one side of the article and on debated topics. I read what Hill claims but what has been implemented to facilitate all of this?

From the same article...

House of Representatives Transportation Committee chairman, Rep. James Oberstar of Minnesota, and the panel's subcommittee chairman on highway safety matters, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, contended earlier in the day the administration had not met congressional safety mandates for the program and was moving ahead hastily. House legislation passed in July would cut funding for the pilot. The Senate has not acted similarly.

"This pilot program should be taken extremely seriously, and treated for what it is: a sea change in surface transportation policy. Yet (the Transportation Department) has expressed little regard for the serious calls of Congress to fully test, evaluate, and understand the impacts of granting Mexico-domiciled motor carriers access to our roads," Oberstar said.

[ZENSMACK89]

How about the "The changes you are so worried about are really not all that major, and certainly won't lead to the entire reconstruction of the governmental structure of North America, because there's no one who really wants that, they just want cheaper and easier trucking"?
Yes and we all know the only things that get passed are what the people want and nothing else right?

[ZENSMACK89]

Then your reading comprehension is seriously deficient, as usual. Thus far you haven't provided a shred of anything even resembling evidence that the claims made about the putative NAU, e.g. that it will "dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union" are true. Absent such evidence, these claims are properly classified as yet another paranoid conspiracy theory.

Sidetrack discussions of more plausible aspects of increased US-Mexico-Canada cooperation, such as a de facto customs union, don't constitute support for the mythical superstate that has the wingnuts' panties in such a knot.

Stop hiding behind false dichotomies and strawmen like your remarks about Mexican truckers and provide some evidence in support of these larger claims, if you can. If you can't, kindly sod off.
kindly sod off?

Where are you from the EU?

[ZENSMACK89]

How about the "The changes you are so worried about are really not all that major, and certainly won't lead to the entire reconstruction of the governmental structure of North America, because there's no one who really wants that, they just want cheaper and easier trucking"?
Who's they?

[Horatius]

It's the same plan as understood a year ago which was I'm sure was considered by some just a CT at the time. You're cherry picking on one side of the article and on debated topics. I read what Hill claims but what has been implemented to facilitate all of this?



"It's the same plan as understood a year ago"? How so? Did reading comprehension change in the last year? The two major factual assertions made in the article a year ago have been shown to be entirely different from the current plan. Can you quote anything from that article that would refute this, or are you just going to post your own revisionist interpretations?





From the same article...

House of Representatives Transportation Committee chairman, Rep. James Oberstar of Minnesota, and the panel's subcommittee chairman on highway safety matters, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, contended earlier in the day the administration had not met congressional safety mandates for the program and was moving ahead hastily. House legislation passed in July would cut funding for the pilot. The Senate has not acted similarly.

"This pilot program should be taken extremely seriously, and treated for what it is: a sea change in surface transportation policy. Yet (the Transportation Department) has expressed little regard for the serious calls of Congress to fully test, evaluate, and understand the impacts of granting Mexico-domiciled motor carriers access to our roads," Oberstar said.


And let's not forget this part:


Transportation officials did not act until the agency's inspector general, Calvin Scovel, had completed a safety review of the pilot program, as required by lawmakers. While the administration felt comfortable with Scovel's findings, Oberstar said the report was inconclusive.

But Hill said regulators "fulfilled every congressional requirement" on the books and turned up nothing adverse in its safety analysis of the program. "We are in compliance."


Gee, partisan political mudslinging surrounding a topic with large vested US interests.....That never happens! :rolleyes: Unless you can point to some factual elements that indicate that the current plan is anything more or less that what Hill describes, you've got no case.

[Horatius]

Yes and we all know the only things that get passed are what the people want and nothing else right?

Who's they?



What, you couldn't edit?


Ultimately what gets passed is what someone wants. I make no suggestions as to who "they" are, as I really can't say for sure. Probably An Evil Mexican Trucking Baron Who Desires To Rape Our (Meaning Your, As I'm Canadian) Pristine American Highways With His Shoddy Trucks, Who Happens To Have Video Of An Important Senator. Or "AMTBWDTRO(MY,AIC)PAHWHST,WHTHVOAIS", as his mistress calls him.


ETA: P.S. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2942136#post2942136

[Slayhamlet]

kindly sod off?

Where are you from the EU?

Los Angeles part of the EU? How cool would that be!

:dl:

[ZENSMACK89]

What, you couldn't edit?


Ultimately what gets passed is what someone wants. I make no suggestions as to who "they" are, as I really can't say for sure. Probably An Evil Mexican Trucking Baron Who Desires To Rape Our (Meaning Your, As I'm Canadian) Pristine American Highways With His Shoddy Trucks, Who Happens To Have Video Of An Important Senator. Or "AMTBWDTRO(MY,AIC)PAHWHST,WHTHVOAIS", as his mistress calls him.


ETA: P.S. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2942136#post2942136
And no one wants the NAU?

[Horatius]

Los Angeles part of the EU? How cool would that be!

:dl:



Quiet! That's Stage Three, don't go giving it away now!

[Horatius]

And no one wants the NAU?



I'm sure you could find someone who does. If you leave off the paranoid fears about lost civil rights, it's not really that bad an idea. It's just almost certainly never going to happen.

We can't even get Americans to use Metric, and adopt a $1 coin. Do you really think they'll sit still for a complete overhaul of the political structure of North America?

[ZENSMACK89]

Los Angeles part of the EU? How cool would that be!

:dl:
Yeah right.

http://www.effingpot.com/slang.shtml

[jaydeehess]

It is my understanding that Canadian trucks can enter the USA with goods destined for US locations and pick up goods destined for Canadian locations BUT they cannot pick up goods in the USA and deliver them to another US location. Would I be correct in that?

I would then assume that the same applies to Mexican trucks.

So, just how does this take a job away from an American trucker?
If Mexican and Canadian trucks must meet or exceed safety and enviro standards where's the problem?

It seems that the opponents to this would simply want all goods to travel via American trucks. That would require that all goods be brought to the borders and then transfered to another truck. Yeah, I cannot envision that making goods travel slower or more expensively!:boggled:

What is the situation for goods traveling from the USA to Mexico? Can these truckers cross free to deliver their loads to mexican locations?

[Slayhamlet]

Yeah right.

http://www.effingpot.com/slang.shtml

Or maybe he's watched Monty Python?

[ZENSMACK89]

"It's the same plan as understood a year ago"? How so? Did reading comprehension change in the last year? The two major factual assertions made in the article a year ago have been shown to be entirely different from the current plan. Can you quote anything from that article that would refute this, or are you just going to post your own revisionist interpretations?







And let's not forget this part:





Gee, partisan political mudslinging surrounding a topic with large vested US interests.....That never happens! :rolleyes: Unless you can point to some factual elements that indicate that the current plan is anything more or less that what Hill describes, you've got no case.
Gee, partisan political mudslinging surrounding a topic with large vested Corporate interests.....That never happens! :rolleyes: Unless you can point to some factual elements that indicate that the current plan is anything more or less that what the Teamsters the Public Citizen and Rep. James Oberstar of Minnesota, and the panel's subcommittee chairman on highway safety matters, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon describe, you've got no case.

[ZENSMACK89]

Or maybe he's watched Monty Python?
Or he's delusional.

[ZENSMACK89]

We can't even get Americans to use Metric, and adopt a $1 coin. Do you really think they'll sit still for a complete overhaul of the political structure of North America?

So far yeah.

[Par]

Or he's delusional.


Is that known to cause people to use British slang then, governor?

[Horatius]

It seems that the opponents to this would simply want all goods to travel via American trucks. That would require that all goods be brought to the borders and then transfered to another truck. Yeah, I cannot envision that making goods travel slower or more expensively!:boggled:

What is the situation for goods traveling from the USA to Mexico? Can these truckers cross free to deliver their loads to mexican locations?


That's pretty much what happens now:


Currently, Mexican trucks must transfer their goods at areas just inside U.S. border crossings.



Of course, if you're worried about job losses, there's this brief line:

U.S. trucking firms, until now, have not been allowed to operate in Mexico.


...which seems to imply that this plan will also allow US trucks to now enter Mexico. It's not clear, though, so if anyone has any idea on that, please post it.

So, where's the paranoid fears that US companies will take over the Mexican Trucking Industry? If Mexican trucks are the pieces of crap they're alleged to be, this shouldn't be that hard!

[Furcifer]

I want the NAU. Apparently none of you live by the border, where trucks wait needlessly for hours on end, spewing fumes into the envirnoment, because there could be a terrorist on board? If they want in, they'll find their way. The border between Canada and the US is an imaginary line. Do you honestly believe they will wait at Customs for clearance? I can see Belle Isle as we speak. 2 minutes on a jetski and I can be in an American marina undetected and sipping Stroh's. Making the border between our countries accesible is important. Free flow of good and materials is key. We need to take a page from the EU and move on. Welcome to the New World Disorder.

[Horatius]

Gee, partisan political mudslinging surrounding a topic with large vested Corporate interests.....That never happens! :rolleyes: Unless you can point to some factual elements that indicate that the current plan is anything more or less that what the Teamsters the Public Citizen and Rep. James Oberstar of Minnesota, and the panel's subcommittee chairman on highway safety matters, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon describe, you've got no case.




Oh, burn! I'm so scared!


:rolleyes:


Did you forget that this was a discussion of whether or not it's the same plan as discussed a year ago? I've posted the factual elements that show this simply isn't so. If you choose to ignore that, well, hey, knock yourself out. I'm going to go play with my cat.

[Horatius]

2 minutes on a jetski and I can be in an American marina undetected and sipping Stroh's.



Yeah, you could do that. But why would you want to?

[JimBenArm]

Is that known to cause people to use British slang then, governor?
You know he's bloody well right, mate!

[Furcifer]

Yeah, you could do that. But why would you want to?

:) Money's at par?

[Furcifer]

So far yeah.


Zensmack: Hey long belated welcome! Glad you moved on from YouTube ;) DBJ

[Horatius]

:) Money's at par?



So tell the Yanks to jet ski over here, and drink some Keith's or something! Gah!

[jaydeehess]

That's pretty much what happens now:






Of course, if you're worried about job losses, there's this brief line:




...which seems to imply that this plan will also allow US trucks to now enter Mexico. It's not clear, though, so if anyone has any idea on that, please post it.

So, where's the paranoid fears that US companies will take over the Mexican Trucking Industry? If Mexican trucks are the pieces of crap they're alleged to be, this shouldn't be that hard!

Pretty much what I was getting at. The agreement would have to be reciprocal and allow US trucks into Mexico.

I fail to see a great downside at allowing goods to move freely and less expensively between the countries. Once again this is not going to allow truckers from, for eg. the USA, to make pick-ups in Mexico for delivery within Mexico so national carriers are protected.

[jaydeehess]

:) Money's at par?

Tell that to the toll operators at International Falls bridge. It costs $US 10 to cross over to Canada. However if you want to pay with $CDN it will cost $15. Obviously a money grab since at the International Falls shopping mall the retailers are taking $CDN at par.

[Slayhamlet]

Zensmack: Hey long belated welcome! Glad you moved on from YouTube ;) DBJ

Is that where he's from?

Would explain a lot...

[Furcifer]

So tell the Yanks to jet ski over here, and drink some Keith's or something! Gah!

NO NO NO, that can't even say "Keefs" They can only say "LaBatt's" "What kind?" "LaBatts" "never mind"

Did I ever tell you about the friend of mine that worked at the casino? She got called more than once to the bank machine to help a customer "When they all ask for language, there's only two boxes, one fur English and one fur French. I was just wondering where the box for "American" is, see I only speaks "American""
True story.
(sorry guys, no offence)

[Furcifer]

Is that where he's from?

Would explain a lot...

Oh yes. I may have been the one to encourage him here. And yes, I'm guessing this would explain A LOT.

[ZENSMACK89]

I want the NAU. Apparently none of you live by the border, where trucks wait needlessly for hours on end, spewing fumes into the envirnoment, because there could be a terrorist on board? If they want in, they'll find their way. The border between Canada and the US is an imaginary line. Do you honestly believe they will wait at Customs for clearance? I can see Belle Isle as we speak. 2 minutes on a jetski and I can be in an American marina undetected and sipping Stroh's. Making the border between our countries accesible is important. Free flow of good and materials is key. We need to take a page from the EU and move on. Welcome to the New World Disorder.
What's up DBJ? I'm sure you would be for the NAU but is the plan real or just a CT?

[jaydeehess]

NO NO NO, that can't even say "Keefs" They can only say "LaBatt's" "What kind?" "LaBatts" "never mind"



It says a lot about the influence of American TV. Whereas all Canadians can not only pronounce Budweiser, Coors or Old Milwaukee(though in my case perhaps can't spell them ? :D ) due to the beer ads, the Americans do not see the same as far as ads for Canadian beer.

I used to work at a Brewer's retail store on Ontario and very often an American tourist would ask for Lobatts, Lobetts or Malsom and even for Moslem.

If I had not seen the ads for American beer I might ask for Budweeser, Cores or Old Milwaykee :D

[jaydeehess]

She got called more than once to the bank machine to help a customer

If Zen's nightmare comes to pass maybe we have to have 4 choices
English
French
Spanish
American

[Furcifer]

What's up DBJ? I'm sure you would be for the NAU but is the plan real or just a CT?

I think it's a CT. The border needs to be made smoother and easier for the transportation of goods between our countries. I think a lot of the conspiracy comes from the Mexico/US side of things. I'm going to say fairly certainly that most Canadians do not share the "American Dream". I think it stems from the US/Mexican relation. What I find amusing is the idea that it's that the Americans are always out to get the best of everything, and do. In the mean time, I think Canada will fly under the radar and make the best of the current proposals. We can always play the ignorant simpletons, but the fact of the matter is we aren't. The complain about the brain drain, then say the Americans are taking advantage of us? hehe, people shouldn't be so naive. OK, I think I've said too much.

[Furcifer]

It says a lot about the influence of American TV. Whereas all Canadians can not only pronounce Budweiser, Coors or Old Milwaukee(though in my case perhaps can't spell them ? :D ) due to the beer ads, the Americans do not see the same as far as ads for Canadian beer.

I used to work at a Brewer's retail store on Ontario and very often an American tourist would ask for Lobatts, Lobetts or Malsom and even for Moslem.

If I had not seen the ads for American beer I might ask for Budweeser, Cores or Old Milwaykee :D


Too true. :)

[Corsair 115]

The Teamsters Union has fought NAFTA since the 1990s, concerned that the ultimate plan was to undermine union trucking as well as independent truckers who are owner-operators. I'd like to ask: did the Teamsters Union fight the FTA for the same reasons?

Being in Upstate NY I have to dodge courteous Canadian drivers on the highways... I'd hate to have to dodge Mexican trucks with faulty brakes and safety equipment.For the record, there are unsafe Canadian (and presumably American) trucks as well. After several incidents in months past where tires flew off trucks and injured or killed other motorists, there was a crackdown by the police here in getting unsafe trucks off the road.

I fail to see a great downside at allowing goods to move freely and less expensively between the countries.Let's look at the numbers for 2006 and see how much trade by the U.S. with its two neighbours was worth that year:

U.S. exports to Canada: $230.6 billion (#1; 22.2% of all U.S. exports)
U.S. exports to Mexico: $134.2 billion (#2; 12.9% of all U.S. exports)

U.S. imports from Canada: $303.4 billion (#1; 16.4% of all U.S. imports)
U.S. imports from Mexico: $198.3 billion (#3; 10.7% of all U.S. imports)

Total trade, U.S. and Canada: $534.0 billion (#1; 18.5% of all U.S. trade)
Total trade, U.S. and Mexico: $332.4 billion (#3; 11.5% of all U.S. trade)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/top/top0612.html)

[ktesibios]

I think it's a CT. The border needs to be made smoother and easier for the transportation of goods between our countries. I think a lot of the conspiracy comes from the Mexico/US side of things. I'm going to say fairly certainly that most Canadians do not share the "American Dream". I think it stems from the US/Mexican relation. What I find amusing is the idea that it's that the Americans are always out to get the best of everything, and do. In the mean time, I think Canada will fly under the radar and make the best of the current proposals. We can always play the ignorant simpletons, but the fact of the matter is we aren't. The complain about the brain drain, then say the Americans are taking advantage of us? hehe, people shouldn't be so naive. OK, I think I've said too much.

Besides the way that the promotion of this PCT makes use of the "scary brown people" meme, playing to anti-Mexican prejudice, it seems an old familiar theme.

The paranoid right has been fulminating about "loss of sovereignty" and "one-world government" since the early days of the United Nations. But for a change of names, this could be straight out of American Opinion circa 1960.

I still haven't seen any evidence presented to support the claims of a plan to dissolve the USA into the NAU. I guess I can't anticipate Poquito Mas having to add poutine to the menu, more's the pity.

[Furcifer]

Besides the way that the promotion of this PCT makes use of the "scary brown people" meme, playing to anti-Mexican prejudice, it seems an old familiar theme.

The paranoid right has been fulminating about "loss of sovereignty" and "one-world government" since the early days of the United Nations. But for a change of names, this could be straight out of American Opinion circa 1960.

I still haven't seen any evidence presented to support the claims of a plan to dissolve the USA into the NAU. I guess I can't anticipate Poquito Mas having to add poutine to the menu, more's the pity.

True. I've seen little to support the claim of loss of soveriegnty, and much more to facilitate the transport of good and even services between neighbours (neighbors). I've have never seen anyone from Canada express the wish to be more American (maybe in the realm of taxation :)) We have an antiquated system in place right now, at least in regards to legal trade. Let's fix it.

[fitzgibbon]

:) Money's at par?

Yeah, but let's not forget it's Stroh's yer talking about here. Not like real beer

[twinstead]

Yeah, but let's not forget it's Stroh's yer talking about here. Not like real beer

Ugh. Don't get me started about beer :mad:

[bruto]

When i see an Amero I will believe it. At this time I would say that the Amero is just like Alex Jones. IOW full of hot air...

Get yer red hot Ameros Here! (http://www.halturnershow.com/AmeroCoinArrives.html)

And don't forget to watch the videos. Just don't try lip reading them or your brain will explode.

[~enigma~]

Get yer red hot Ameros Here! (http://www.halturnershow.com/AmeroCoinArrives.html)

And don't forget to watch the videos. Just don't try lip reading them or your brain will explode.
Your too slow. On LCF those we proven false already.

[Jonnyclueless]

I thought the latest craze was that some drivers license has a picture of north america on it and they are now saying it's proof o the union conspiracy.

[bruto]

Your too slow. On LCF those we proven false already.

False? What a shocking discovery.:D

[~enigma~]

False? What a shocking discovery.:D
Yeah...I was ready to vote Celine Dion for president :D

[Dr. Lao]

We will officially be the "Estados Unidos of North America eh?" Our national dish will be back bacon, maple syrup, mayonaise and refried beans in a tortilla. The symbol of the nation will be a beaver, with a rattlesnake in its mouth in the claws of a bald eagle.

[Hokulele]

How long before Quebec and Hawaii announce their independent intentions to secede?

[ConspiRaider]

How long before Quebec and Hawaii announce their independent intentions to secede?
And let's not forget Texas.

On second thought - let's forget Texas. They CAN secede. That way Georgy Bush can be president all over again.

Texas-Nation-State's capital: Crawford
State Game Bird: Lawyer
State Motto: Can't Get Fooled Again
State Book: My Pet Goat
State Flower: Turd Blossom
State Ministry of Truth: SMU
State Vehicle: Bicycle
State Food: Pretzel
State Flag: Crossed Shotgun and Brush Sickle on a Field of Mauve
State Stance: Wide

[IMST]

Snopes has a new article on this (http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/amero.asp) and not too surprisingly, there is a response from the site quoted in brutos post. Follow his link for the definition of ad hominum. It's the predictable Teh Jooz angle.

[peteweaver]

I've been eating aero's for years, don't tell me they've gone and changed the name!!

It was bad enough that they renamed Marathon bars "snickers", and opel fruit got renamed star burst.

[ktesibios]

When I saw that "Amero coin" link I was thinking "that's gotta be from a private mint". There are companies all over the world that strike coins, tokens and medals for the corporate and tchochke-collecting markets; I visited a shop in Virginia City NV where you can watch them striking medallions in precious metals.

Running it down to the source was good research work by Snopes. One mistake they made was in describing Hal Turner as a "conservative radio host". An accurate description would be "spittle-flecked neo-Nazi with a pathetic internet 'radio' program", or perhaps "low-rent Julius Streicher wannabee".

[Wartrac]

Mericanica - Which I like cause it would semi fit with the music from Adam Sandlers' Happy Hanukkah song

Canmexicameric

Or better yet to prove that a union would indeed end up as a police state!!11!11!

USMC - US Mexico Canada

USMC - United States Marine Corp

Coincidence, I think NOT!;)

[TjW]

Mericanica - Which I like cause it would semi fit with the music from Adam Sandlers' Happy Hanukkah song

Canmexicameric

Or better yet to prove that a union would indeed end up as a police state!!11!11!

USMC - US Mexico Canada

USMC - United States Marine Corp

Coincidence, I think NOT!;)

But wouldn't it then become the USMCMC?