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.
A Stephen Harper majority is key to forming the Federal Reserve bankers’ North American Union. The Federal Reserve bankers’ plans for a takeover of Canada in 2009 were defeated in 2008 when Stephen Harper won only a minority government. In 2008 the Feds were so sure that Harper would win a majority that they printed $billions in North American Union Notes dated 2009.
Originally posted by DjDoubleD
reply to post by captaintyinknots
Besides who the heck's gonna need paper and coins when all money is modulated by implantable RFID's? No, you won't be 'forced' to get one, just if you want to work, eat, live, love etc.. you'll HAVE TO. This also is coming, and whether or not it is indeed the Biblical 'mark of the beast', it sure is evil as all hell just the same.
....Please read all of article.Also he has a lot more interesting things that are to happen and are happening. Thanks for reading this.............this is a update not old news but new all..
In an article on May 2, 2011 in WorldNetDaily entitled “Wikileaks: North American Initiative,” Bo Unruh wrote: “A document posted online by WikiLeaks reveals that there were strategy discussions regarding the adoption of a ‘North American Union’ – called the North American Initiative in this case – at the ambassadorial level in the United States government. The concept of a North American Union largely has been ridiculed by many in government and media. The Wikipedia entry on North American Union calls it a “theoretical economic union” that has “been the subject of various conspiracy theories.” …The WikiLeaks document was uncovered by investigators with Americans for Legal Immigration, and the organization reports they ‘appear to confirm an incremental and covert plan within the highest levels of the American and Canadian governments to accomplish deeper ‘North American Integration,’ while keeping most average citizens in the dark and bypassing the constitutions of the existing three sovereign nations of America, Canada and Mexico.’ ALIPAC spokesman William Gheen told WND, ‘This is the smoking gun. This is not conjecture. This is a high-ranking member of the U.S. government who created this document.’”
reply to post by DjDoubleD sorry my friend but this is old news and has done the rounds of the internet for the past 18 months or so,I,disagree my friend is just this may and more to come.Thanks for posting article.
PREMEDITATED MERGER Obama signature creates 'continental perimeter' Move described as key step in advance of North American Union Posted: February 08, 2011 8:45 pm Eastern By Jerome R. Corsi © 2011 WND Barack Obama Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper quietly have taken a major step toward erasing the border between the two nations with a new "Beyond the Border" bilateral declaration. In a ceremony designed to remain below the radar of national public opinion, Obama and Harper bypassed Congress to sign on the basis of their executive authority a declaration that put in place a new national security vision defined not by U.S. national borders, but by a continental view of a "North American perimeter." It happened Friday, the day the Obama administration usually pushes through issues that it prefers the media ignore. By signing the declaration, the Obama administration has implemented without congressional approval a key initiative President Bush began under the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, moving the United States and Canada beyond the North American Free Trade Agreement, commonly known as NAFTA, toward a developing North American Union regional government. The declaration signed by the two heads of state and titled "Beyond the Border: A Shared Vision for Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness," was described as "For Immediate Release" on the websites of the White House and the Canadian chief executive. Read more: Obama signature creates 'continental perimeter' www.wnd.com...
In January of 2011, Homeland Security and one of their terror centers released false claims that Tucson shooter Jared Loughner was associated with an online white supremacist group that was anti-government and anti-immigration. The memo was reported by Fox News and Politico, and claimed that Loughner was likely motivated by Congresswoman Giffords’ stances in favor of amnesty for illegal immigrants. The claims turned out to be false and there was no evidence that Loughner was motivated by race or immigration. “We need local authorities to cancel this ill-conceived terror drill that targets Americans based on their main stream political views while ignoring the real enemies of America,” said William Gheen. “We need Congress to step in immediately to determine why the Executive Branch is writing scripts and putting out false information telegraphing armed conflict between government and American gun owners and border security advocates. Whose side are they on anyway?”
¶4. (SBU) Canadian economists in business, academia and government have given extensive thought to the possible options for further North American integration. Nearly all of this work assumes that each of the three countries is pursuing standard economic policy goals - growth, productivity and competitiveness (rather than more specific concerns raised by Mexican analysts such as migration management, regional development, or environmental protection). Since 9/11, Canadian economists working in this area have generally endorsed a comprehensive initiative with the United States on security, trade, and immigration. Following is our summary of the professional consensus: PROCESS: At this time, an "incremental" approach to integration is probably better than a "big deal" approach. However, governments should focus on choosing their objectives, and not on choosing a process. BORDER VS. PERIMETER: Even with zero tariffs, our land borders have strong commercial effects. Some of these effects are positive (such as law enforcement and data gathering), so our governments may always want to keep some kind of land border in place. Canada and the United States already share a security perimeter to some degree; it is just a question of how strong we want to make it. BORDER RISK: The risk that business will be obstructed at the border by discretionary U.S. actions, such as measures to defend against terrorism or infectious disease, in addition to growing congestion, have become major risks to the economy, inhibiting investment in Canada. For small businesses, the complexities of navigating the border are apparently even more intimidating than the actual costs. Reducing this risk is Canada's top motive for pursuing further integration. LABOR MARKETS: Many Canadian economists point to labor markets - both within and among countries - as the factor market where more liberalization would deliver the greatest economic benefits for all three countries. They advocate freeing up professional licensing laws, and developing a quick, simple, low-cost work permit system, at least for U.S. and Canadian citizens. REGULATION: Canadian economists agree that Canadian regulations (if not their standards, then their complexity) are needlessly restricting foreign investment and impeding food, communications and other industries. (Inter-provincial differences are important here, since Canada's federal government does not have the benefit of a U.S.-style "interstate commerce" clause). While much of the problem is domestic in nature, an international initiative could help to catalyze change. CUSTOMS UNION: A common external tariff, or a customs union which eliminated NAFTA's rules of origin (ROO), is economically desirable. NAFTA's ROO are so restrictive that importers often prefer to pay the tariff rather than try to prove North American origin. However, economists differ on the size of the benefits available and on whether these would justify the effort of negotiation. One study estimated that a full customs union which eliminated ROO would only raise national income by about one percent. CURRENCY UNION: Canadian economists are split on whether a return to a fixed exchange rate, or adopting the U.S. dollar, would benefit Canada in current circumstances. (Canada last tied its dollar to the U.S. dollar from 1962 to 1970). The central bank governor has taken the position that "monetary union is an issue that should be considered once we have made more progress towards establishing a single market." NORTH AMERICAN INTEGRATION: WHAT WE KNOW ----------------------------------------- ¶5. (SBU) Past integration (not just NAFTA but also many bilateral and unilateral steps) has increased trade, economic growth, and productivity. Studies suggest that border efficiency and transportation improvements (such as the lower cost and increased use of air freight) have been a huge part of this picture. Indeed, they may have been more important to our growing prosperity over the past decade than NAFTA's tariff reductions. Freight and passenger aviation are critically important to our continent's competitiveness, and businesses are very sensitive to the timing, security, and reliability of deliveries - hence the "border risk" which so concerns Canadian policymakers. ¶6. (SBU) A stronger continental "security perimeter" can strengthen economic performance, mainly by improving efficiency at land borders and airports. It could also facilitate future steps toward trilateral economic integration, such as a common external tariff or a customs union, if and when our three countries chose to pursue them. Paradoxically, the security and law enforcement aspects of the envisioned initiative could hold as much - or more - potential for broad economic benefits than the economic dimension. WHERE'S THE UPSIDE? ------------------- ¶7. (SBU) Some international economic initiatives (such as FTAs) produce across-the-board measures that generate broad benefits for a country's industries and consumers on a known time-line. This was true of NAFTA but it is less likely to be true of the economic aspects of the NAI. Non-tariff barriers such as standards and regulations generally must be tackled one- by-one. This is a piecemeal process and the ratio of payoff to effort is likely to be lower than with across- the-board measures. Governments naturally focus on resolving the problems which their firms or citizens bring to their attention. While this approach has merits, it tends to deliver the payoffs toward particular interests. If there are hidden costs, there might be little impact on national performance. As we move toward a list of barriers to tackle, it will remain important to balance those interests. For example, some Canadian economists have suggested that NAFTA fell short of expectations with respect to increasing consumer choice in Canada; that may be a WHERE'S THE UPSIDE? ------------------- ¶7. (SBU) Some international economic initiatives (such as FTAs) produce across-the-board measures that generate broad benefits for a country's industries and consumers on a known time-line. This was true of NAFTA but it is less likely to be true of the economic aspects of the NAI. Non-tariff barriers such as standards and regulations generally must be tackled one- by-one. This is a piecemeal process and the ratio of payoff to effort is likely to be lower than with across- the-board measures. Governments naturally focus on resolving the problems which their firms or citizens bring to their attention. While this approach has merits, it tends to deliver the payoffs toward particular interests. If there are hidden costs, there might be little impact on national performance. As we move toward a list of barriers to tackle, it will remain important to balance those interests. For example, some Canadian economists have suggested that NAFTA fell short of expectations with respect to increasing consumer choice in Canada; that may be a theme we should stress as efforts to promote further integration take shape. ¶8. (SBU) In contrast, cooperative measures on the "security" side, a critical focus of current bilateral efforts, can deliver substantial, early, and widespread economic benefits. Security and law enforcement within North America have evolved rapidly since 9/11, leading to many less-than-perfect processes for handling legitimate international traffic. Collaboration to improve these processes could yield efficiency improvements which would automatically be spread widely across the economy, leading to general gains in trade, productivity, and incomes. A NOTE OF CAUTION ----------------- ¶9. (SBU) There is little basis on which to estimate the size of the "upside" gains from an integration initiative concentrating on non-tariff barriers of the kind contained in NAI. For this reason, we cannot make claims about how large the benefits might be on a national or continental scale. When advocating NAI, it would be better to highlight specific gains to individual firms, industries or travelers, and especially consumers. CELLUCCI
HAARP being used to create floods to destroy World’s food supply.
Japanese Company Invents Water Fueled Car
HAARP electromagnetic waves can be used to stimulate geophysical events such as earthquakes, climate change, volcanic eruptions and the like.
Over 100 years ago water was converted into steam and the steam provided the propulsion. The Stanley Motor Carriage was a manufacturer of one of the first water fueled vehicles. It produced water fueled vehicles from 1902 to 1924. The Stanley Motor Carriage used water to power the vehicle. The water was converted into steam using a boiler.
Today's metallurgical technologies weren't available to make weight-efficient boilers. Compounding the boiler problem was the heat source (pilot and burner) and the inability to convert enough water into superheated steam fast enough. It is interesting to note that the boiler problem was resolved after Stanley went out of production with Doble introducing the flash boiler and oil burner (the Doble vaporizing oil burner was the prototype for the modern fuel oil heater we use to heat our homes today!).