Gateway to the Amero. They had a GoToMeeting about it.

>> ^ButterflyKisses:

First off, I'm not part of any specific party. I don't see much difference between dems and repubs in regards to issues like this. NAFTA was started during the Clinton administration and this measure was approved during the Bush administration.
Secondly, I do see a problem paying a use tax to Spain if I wish to drive on a major thoroughfare in the US. I highly doubt the founding fathers would ever approve of such a thing.
Thirdly, what the hell is all this talk about invasion from Canada, Spain or Mexico from you guys? That's just absurd and shouldn't be a point of discussion in regards to this. You're just accusing ridiculous points that were never brought up by those that oppose it.
Fourthly, there is always a terrorist threat these days and putting security in the hands of a completely separate sovereign nation with points of entry sounds ludicrous to me.
If the US owned and operated this series of highways then I wouldn't have a problem with it. The taxes would go back into our economy, not another country's. Yes, Eminent Domain occurs regularly in America. Eminent Domain for another country doesn't.
I'm not happy about this and I'm pissed at the Dems and Repubs for allowing this to happen and even more pissed that they both try to act like it's some crazy conspiracy theory up until the toll booths are in use.


Firstly - I didn't mention a party, I said conservative, which is where your arguments seem to be coming from. No shame in that.

Secondly - Your link doesn't work and wiki doesn't mention Spain, so I'd be curious to learn more about your claims. Not attacking you, defending Spain, appeasing terrorists or anything else, I've just not heard about the Spain thing. Just trying to figure out if this a legitimate concern, false information or out of context political boogeymanism.

Thirdly - The invasion stuff is just for yucks. Figured that was obvious. Didn't mean to offend. Humor can be fun.

Fifthly (I'm limiting my lys to prime numbers) - Again, the Spain thing, linky linky? Hopefully from some semi-respectable source?

(>"<) xoxo

>> ^ButterflyKisses:

I wonder what the people in Texas that have had their land taken from them via eminent domain for this mythical project feel about this. After all, Spain is our ally and we should be thankful that they are going to control a major set of thoroughfares in the US. I know this has been brought up in Congress and the House a few times. It's interesting to see some people call the NAFTA Superhighway project a crazy conspiracy theory when in actual reality it's right there in front of us.


I don't get the opposition to this freeway. Aren't there always eminent domain issues with new or widened highways/roads? Also, is Spain really going to completely own this road? What would be the point of Spain controlling a highway on American soil? What advantage would that give them? What ill could they inflict upon us if this were true? Potholes? A big toll? Staging point for a Spanish invasion? Is this just more conservative xenophobia?

Just curious - I've not really studied the arguments against this project.

I wonder what the people in Texas that have had their land taken from them via eminent domain for this mythical project feel about this. After all, Spain is our ally and we should be thankful that they are going to control a major set of thoroughfares in the US. I know this has been brought up in Congress and the House a few times. It's interesting to see some people call the NAFTA Superhighway project a crazy conspiracy theory when in actual reality it's right there in front of us.

The Amero however, is not on the table for our country but.. if our dollar fails then we'll have some sort of different currency now won't we? Unsure of what that might be, but I doubt it would be something real such as silver/gold-backed currency. It's more profitable and controllable for bankers to institute FIAT based currency, so I'm sure it would be just another form of that.

Well, how else can the Amero get off the ground? Duh.

Yes, leave The Dollar alone. None is this Amero bullshit.

On Friday, December 5, 2008, a summit of Central American leaders “agreed to adopt a common regional currency and passport, among other measures to bolster regional integration in the face of global financial uncertainty.” ...

Many regions have already agreed and implemented plans to create regional currencies, in the process taking power away from local communities. The blueprints for the consolidation of power through single currencies have already been introduced for Asia, South America, the Middle East, and North America ...

It is extremely important to remember that the oligarchy will continually use propaganda through mainstream media to create fear among the populace regarding the necessity to “‘standardize laws’ in the immigration, education and security sectors” of the merging countries, due to the unforeseen collapse of the global economy. This, however, will be a lie.

It's just one step closer to the Amero.

It's all a conspiracy to move our currency closer to the Amero.

^BTW, Dag, you have yet to lay down some of dat mad Amero-Australian science. I double dog dare you.

The Amero of the coming North American Union will be much easier to handle.

For the ultimate convenience, "money chips" will soon be planted in both hands and forehead.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'RickMercer CBC Canada US dollar amero loonie greenback nau spp' to 'banned, redacted' - edited by kronosposeidon

"history proves the elimination of free markets within a state ruins a state's ability to compete in a global free market."

Moronic.

True False or Meaningless, what "free market"???-Globalism is a unilateral clusterfuck for the common man-and an elaborate ruse, designed to eventually subjugate every nation of the world-muddro is correct, because the bankrupting and assimilation of nations is what the game is-you dipshitz who are keeping the faith, had better start developing off-the-grid alternatives to this illusion of a global economy, instead of worrying what your vote will do to "change" anything-....perhaps barter, perhaps take some agri-lessons, and keep seed stores, and find an alternative to the larger cities....haven't heard Obama the implant say a goddamn thing regarding NAFTA, the NAU, the Amero, but it's coming kids, fast and strong-all that we need is a so-called "Natl. emergency".....then this voice crying in this wilderness, will be in the wilderness....deathcow, please keep me a pallet, on your floor....

GB senior's head, along with his putrid wife, over the mantle in the oval office fireside chat room.....a worthy addition, to the wall of past shame.

I try to have an open mind about these things, but aside from the accusation of "shadow government" which you could level at any one of these so-called "think tanks", I'm not sure what's so wrong about participating in an international governmental body.

I'm also curious, is Bush part of CFR?

How about European nations, are they?

Are the U.N., WTO, ICC, all hotbeds of CFR activity?

My problem with this whole line of thinking is that while Bill Clinton and Bush agree on the necessity of NAFTA, they disagree on the way they respond to the UN, WTO, and ICC. Bill Clinton, and Bush 41 liked 'em, Bush 43 despises them. McCain talks pie in the sky about replacing them with new organizations with more limited membership, and a more NATO-like bent. Long story short, if all these guys are all marching to CFR's orders, why have their policies toward international governing bodies differed?

Personally, I see changing NAFTA into NAU as a good thing, since it'd temper some of that capitalistic exploitation with a regulatory body that would make the playing field equal between all three countries, like with the EU. I wouldn't mind changing from the dollar to an "Amero" if it's a strong currency, especially if the dollar is gonna keep racing for parity with the Yen.

I hear Hillary Clinton and Obama making minor noises about "renegotiating" NAFTA to move slightly in this direction (and that's probably an exaggeration at that), but McCain says it's fine as is, and should just be expanded to Central America, too.

I may be a fire-breathing liberal, but free trade should be the policy, so long as there are protections for consumers, workers, and the environment. Protectionism ultimately stifles the economy to everyone's detriment, even if in the short term it can be beneficial.

Rage against the machine music notwithstanding, I don't see anything sinister about a group that sees a global governing body as being a necessity for globalization to work properly. I think we're being hit now by the problems of not doing that while still happily globalizing away (e.g. lead paint in toys, jobs moving overseas, stagnant/shrinking wages, etc.).

AIPAC or PNAC on the other hand, those guys are just out to screw with us.

Though it was bought and sold on the economic principle because no country wants to be ruled by another. Why the UN has such a hard time doing anything. As long as it makes your country money why not sort of thing. Thats why I suppose the Amero seems really good to a lot of people, because at first glance it seems harmless enough. Though i question the true motivations of it all.

watch out for the Amero