It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

North American Union - New Info (website)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Why Bush and Congress are not securing the borders ...

This is part of an official U.S. government website:

www.spp.gov

Brief Excerpt:

Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America

SECURITY AGENDA

We are launching the next generation of our common security strategy to further secure North America and ensure the streamlined movement of legitimate travelers and cargo across our shared borders. To this end, Canada, the United States, and Mexico will work together to ensure the highest continent-wide security standards and streamlined risk-based border processes are achieved in the following priority areas: ...


Apparently the European Union seems like a good model for doing the same thing with Mexico and Canada – the North American Union. U.S. technological know-how, combined with Canada’s natural resources and Mexico’s cheap labor supply. Think about it. All of the sudden the actions of our leaders makes sense – to them anyway. Trouble obviously is that it will pull the U.S. down to bring in the other two countries. Remember what happened when impoverished East Germany was re-united with the economically stronger West Germany.

So far my opinion of this is


[edit on 6/28/2006 by centurion1211]




posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Remember NAFTA? All the good that did, all the jobs created, all those rules the US likes to break?

Yeah, me too. This union thing is crap.

DE



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
So far my opinion of this is


So far, I haven't found anyone doesn't agree with you on that.

Of particular concern to me is this from your link:



• Creating a sustainable energy economy for North America is in the vital interest of all three countries. Reliable, affordable energy is critical to the prosperity and security of our peoples. We are taking action to create a policy environment that will promote the sustainable supply and use of energy in North America.

• To that end, we affirm our commitment in pursuing joint cooperation in the areas of: regulation , energy efficiency, natural gas including liquefied natural gas (LNG), science and technology, reliability of electricity transmission grids, oil sands production, nuclear energy, hydrocarbons and energy information, statistics and projections.

• Recognizing the importance of natural gas to North America's energy future, we are announcing a trilateral gas initiative to address a range of issues related to the natural gas market in North America, including: production, transportation, transmission, distribution, consumption, trade, interconnections and LNG as well as projections for the future. This initiative also focuses on transparency of regulations, laws and siting processes in the three countries to promote enhanced regional trade and investment.

I don't like it because we have nationalized resources and there is just no way the US will stand for that in this harmonious little family that's being planned.



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 07:09 PM
link   
U.S. technological know-how, combined with Canada’s natural resources and Mexico’s cheap labor supply.

You know that the politicians in all three countries are looking longingly at these items. Canada gets the technology and capital to develop their natural resources, U.S. gets places to use both, and Mexico gets places to send their seemingly endless supply of unemployed people.

That's a key point, too. Reading through this website, it becomes quite obvious that this isn't just a Bush deal. It involves people in the governments of all 3 countries.

Just had another thought on the hispanic deal. While some Mexicans are dreaming of a "reconquista" happening to take back what the lost in the U.S.-Mexican War, it looks more like it will be a "conquista otra vez" (one more time) for the rest of Mexico instead.


[edit on 6/28/2006 by centurion1211]



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Reading through this website, it becomes quite obvious that this isn't just a Bush deal. It involves people in the governments of all 3 countries.


More than Bush? you betcha, would you believe CFR

There was a thread about the CFR and the Amero Union last year, but I couldn't find it.

However,
www.humaneventsonline.com...
This article has this link to a very lengthy CFR PDF document:
www.cfr.org...



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 10:14 PM
link   
I don't like this North American Union idea either. Sounds shady. Could it be a plan to maybe rival the Europian Union? Or worse someday be joined with the Europian Union to form a World Union?



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Reading through this website, it becomes quite obvious that this isn't just a Bush deal. It involves people in the governments of all 3 countries.

Most definitely. We have a political party in Canada called the Canadian Action Party that focuses on this plan. Here's what they have to say: The Morphosis and the sabotage of Canada by our own government, written in three parts


The driving force is corporate. The Chief Executive Officers of the most powerful corporations operating in the three countries want this union and have been working for some time devising their strategies and goals. Their facilitators are first, unelected officials and bureaucrats who move easily between corporations and government; second, former elected officials like John Manley , former Deputy Prime Minister of Canada; third, the heads of the three nations, Martin, Bush, and Fox; and finally, the governments and the rest of the elected members who apparently just rubber stamp what is put in front of them by the unelected officials- few questions, if any asked.



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 10:29 PM
link   
I don't understand why you guys don't like it. The european countries have security through their union, mainly economically speaking, China, Russia, and a few others benefit from being in the SCO economically. Here North America, mostly the US and Canada, really have nothing. The boost in trade from natural resources in Canada and America, and technology advancements made in America, and the very cheap labor from Mexico, can boost the currencies (money) in all 3 countries. Can someone explain to me why it is a bad idea?



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
I don't understand why you guys don't like it. The european countries have security through their union, mainly economically speaking, China, Russia, and a few others benefit from being in the SCO economically. Here North America, mostly the US and Canada, really have nothing. The boost in trade from natural resources in Canada and America, and technology advancements made in America, and the very cheap labor from Mexico, can boost the currencies (money) in all 3 countries. Can someone explain to me why it is a bad idea?

Take a look at the Bill of Rights, then imagine what they would sound like if melded together with Canada and Mexico. Somehow, i think we might as well just kiss goodbye to the second, and amend the 4th - 8th, as more power would be given to law enforcement in a more centralized state. Same with 9 and 10 - kind of out the door with states' rights.

So yeah, it might be great economically...but we would likely have to sacrifice liberties to make it work. What's the point of living if you can't be free? The government can bite me.



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:41 PM
link   
What I found interesting by reading the pages of spp.gov was how they seem to try and make this sound like it's so great for america, yet it's not talked about much publicly.

If Bush thinks this is so great, why doesn't he talk about it more and try to boost his low ratings?

Instead they keep it out of the big spotlight.

things that make you go ..... hmmm.....



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:54 PM
link   
if they make it a north american union will they not have to make mexico qulity of life similar to the quality of life in usa.

so i assume all the people in usa will have to have a less quality of life to bring them closer to mexicians. is this what you guys think. as in europe they have invested loads to try to get europe as a whole around the same quality of life in each country.

this will happen in nafta will it not?



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   
I also have a question

Why are we adding US troops to "secure" the border when, at the same time, we are in a union with Mexico and creating a super-highway that opens our border?

Isn't that a waste of time and money?



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Have any of ya'll read the "disclaimer" on that site ?
Any tech-savvy people able to find out who is actually hosting/supporting it ?

Couple ideas,
Lex



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Check this out....it's in spp.gov privacy policy page




ITA does collect certain non-personal information to help us better service our site visitors. Information collected includes for example: the IP (Internet Protocol) address from which you accessed our site; the IP address of the website from which you linked to us; the name of your domain; the type of browser and operating system you are using; the date and time our site is accessed; and the pages visited. This information does not identify you personally.



Now I'm not in the habit of reading privacy policies of every site I visit, is this normal?????



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Like I said, look into who is hosting this site. I'm not that tech-oriented....

Lex



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 01:18 AM
link   
For what its worth, there are a lot of threads on similar subjects:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


It all seems to stem from a report published by an independent committee commissioned by the CFR, tasked with comming up with some recommendations for more secure borders, etc.



to further secure North America and ensure the streamlined movement of legitimate travelers and cargo across our shared borders. To this end, Canada, the United States, and Mexico will work together to ensure the highest continent-wide security standards


Whats wrong with this? It seems like a very good idea.

As far as who owns the website:

Disclaimer: The information provided on this Website is intended to be of assistance to U.S. exporters. While we make every effort to ensure its accuracy, neither the United States government nor any of its employees make any representation as to the accuracy or completeness of information posted on this or any other United States government-maintained Website. Readers are advised to independently verify any information prior to reliance thereon. The information provided on this Website does not constitute legal advice.

Its maintained by the government, and is intended as an outlet of information for exporters.


khatores
Take a look at the Bill of Rights, then imagine what they would sound like if melded together with Canada and Mexico.

None of this has to do with overriding the constitution, nor extending the constitution to other countries.


justagirl
Instead they keep it out of the big spotlight.

By creating a set of webpages that condense and distribute the information?
Its not talked about because its boring and complex. The american public doesn't have the mental ability to pay attention to something for very long unless it involves explosions, like a summer blockbuster. And if the plot is really complex and has lots of twists and information, well, it had better end with a big explosion too.

Why are we adding US troops to "secure" the border when, at the same time, we are in a union with Mexico and creating a super-highway that opens our border?

Why do you see the two as being at conflict? The border doesn't need to be closed in order to be secure. The super-highway has two purposes, to enable the freer flow of goods, and to make sure that the transportation is safer, thus, it is in itself a step torwards a more secure border.


andy1033
if they make it a north american union will they not have to make mexico qulity of life similar to the quality of life in usa.

No, they won't.

this will happen in nafta will it not?

No.


[edit on 8-7-2006 by Nygdan]

[edit on 8-7-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Duzey

Originally posted by centurion1211
So far my opinion of this is


So far, I haven't found anyone doesn't agree with you on that.

Of particular concern to me is this from your link:



• Creating a sustainable energy economy for North America is in the vital interest of all three countries. Reliable, affordable energy is critical to the prosperity and security of our peoples. We are taking action to create a policy environment that will promote the sustainable supply and use of energy in North America.

• To that end, we affirm our commitment in pursuing joint cooperation in the areas of: regulation , energy efficiency, natural gas including liquefied natural gas (LNG), science and technology, reliability of electricity transmission grids, oil sands production, nuclear energy, hydrocarbons and energy information, statistics and projections.

• Recognizing the importance of natural gas to North America's energy future, we are announcing a trilateral gas initiative to address a range of issues related to the natural gas market in North America, including: production, transportation, transmission, distribution, consumption, trade, interconnections and LNG as well as projections for the future. This initiative also focuses on transparency of regulations, laws and siting processes in the three countries to promote enhanced regional trade and investment.

I don't like it because we have nationalized resources and there is just no way the US will stand for that in this harmonious little family that's being planned.




• Creating a sustainable energy economy for North America...

that means keep utilities and oil on lockdown, making sure everyone is paying the absolute most they can afford for these things. affordable...sure. if this is the case, the USA needs to lead by example and de-deregulate electricity and stuff. that or let me sell my electricity to 1337 mexicans for mad profit...

• To that end, we affirm our commitment in pursuing joint cooperation...

join the North American Union today, and get employee pricing on all US ICBM's and related WMD hardware. ask about our discounted cold war surplus! enriched uranium not uncluded. get that from iran, use referal code STFUNOOBORWE'LLNUKEYOUROILYARLY

• Recognizing the importance of natural gas..

as an extention of the war against men and fathers, all NAU inmates...er, citizens will use GAS GRILLS! charcoal is now a schedule 1 controlled substance, just like '___' and Crystal Meth. bootleg charcoal briqquetes are availible at insanely high prices (making something illegal makes it way more expensive) from CIA field officers in rural areas. ghettos have crack, BFE gets charcoal. besides, the CIA needs the money to provide quality assurance in overthrowing little bitch governments who won't play right.

lol.



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 03:12 PM
link   
It is well known that Mexican officials are corrupt. You can get out of anything if you pay off the police. They look the other way. And here we are going to join them? That will make us safer? It will be much much worse!!!


Nygdan said:



Its not talked about because its boring and complex. The american public doesn't have the mental ability to pay attention to something for very long unless it involves explosions, like a summer blockbuster. And if the plot is really complex and has lots of twists and information, well, it had better end with a big explosion too.


I disagree. While that may be true for some, everyone I have told of this North American Union and coming Super-Highway has been very surprised and has asked why it's not on the news or in the papers. It's simply not in the media, they are keeping it quiet. Just because there is a website for it means nothing unless they tell someone about the website. I've not seen one news story about it, all they would have to do is give the highlights and then say "for more info go to spp.gov".

I think something this big should be voted on by the people, I'd wager that it would never pass if voted on.



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by justagirl
Check this out....it's in spp.gov privacy policy page


ITA does collect the IP (Internet Protocol) address from which you accessed our site; the IP address of the website from which you linked to us; the name of your domain; the type of browser and operating system you are using; the date and time our site is accessed; and the pages visited. This information does not identify you personally.


Now I'm not in the habit of reading privacy policies of every site I visit, is this normal?


I think so. My internet provider send me such reports of those visiting my homepage. Of the more interesting/exotic visitors to my page are Israel, nz wich I think is New Zealand (not sure) and DoD (that is the US Department of Defense).
Curious...

My last report gave this list:
frsp: domene
-----: ------
23: .com (Commercial)
13: .no (Norway)
11: .arpa (Old style Arpanet (= US Department of Defense))
3: .net (Network)


[edit on 9-7-2006 by Ghaele]



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 07:31 PM
link   
I think something like this is inevitable (that doesn't necessarily mean I like it). Most likely eventually there will be a completely free trade zone with no border checks (neither customs nor immigration) whatsoever from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego, just like the EU is now.

[edit on 7/9/2006 by djohnsto77]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join