It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Ron Paul wants you to be scared. There's a conspiracy in the land—what he calls a "conspiracy of ideas"—to give up America's sovereignty. It's a shadowy scheme that begins with the NAFTA "superhighway," a road as wide as several football fields that will link Mexico, the United States and Canada. "They don't talk about it and they might not admit it," Paul said at the CNN-YouTube presidential debate last week. He didn't say exactly who "they" are, but perhaps one can guess. "They're planning on [taking] millions of acres … by eminent domain," warned the prickly libertarian. But elected government officials aren't acting alone. There's "an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments" pushing the idea, Paul wrote in October 2006. "The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union—complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union."
Originally posted by Johnmike
The video is all basically fearmongering and filler. Generic politician stuff.
Can you explain why you oppose the Trans-Texas Corridor?
Originally posted by BlueTriangle
Sorry, but the only thing this proves is that she read the same webpages that I did when I saw the same information months ago. The difference is that she bought everything hook, line, and sinker...whereas I laughed it off as paranoia.
Originally posted by ianr5741
(Big, long post)
Originally posted by Daedalus24
reply to post by CyberSEAL
Even if the NAU were true, is there anything wrong with competing against the European Union? I'm sorry but the biggest threat we have is not terrorism, it's the prospect of other nations opposed to U.S. policy that could be willing to use force against us. I for one, wont be opposing the NAU, it's about time we realize that if we're going to make it past this century we have to admit we're nothing more than an old bloated super power and need other's help to survive.
Originally posted by daddyroo45
I oppose the trans-america corridor for these reasons.
1 Land will be taken from private citizens by eminent domain.
2 Existing state highways paid for by the taxpayers will be turned over to forgien corporations,and operated with a toll charge.
3 With a large corridor on which to travel,customs would not be able to search for contraband with the overflow of traffic.
4 The loss of longshoreman jobs and truck driver jobs here in the US would be devastating.
5 The corridor would allow a larger flow of undocumented aliens into the country.
Or do you consider these few points to be insignificant and political prattle
Republican President George Bush completed NAFTA negotiations with Mexico in September 1992 and enthusiastically promoted the treaty during the campaign. Democratic challenger Bill Clinton took only a lukewarm position toward NAFTA, but two days after he was elected president, Clinton came out in favor of NAFTA and went on to promote its approval and ratification.
However, Perot, the third presidential candidate in 1992, made defeating NAFTA a crusade in 1993. Perot used the populist sentiment he had stirred up during the campaign to fight the treaty's approval in Congress, bringing significant domestic pressure to bear on the president's relationship with U.S. trading partners. In fact, Clinton was forced to reopen negotiations to work out side agreements on environment and labor...