"North American Union"? - a wikileaks release

[kirant]

And this matters because?

People spitball ideas all the time. Doesn't mean they were really serious or even truely workable plans.

Honestly, it sounds like Wikileaks just wants attention and is low on documents.

[Calgaryborn]

I know there ha been a lot of talk about the need to work closer as Nations as means of securing North America from Islamic extremists. Mexico being included helps a lot because it would be easier to control Mexico's southern border that control the border between the them and America.

Mexico also is attractive because of lower wages. Non union Mega ports in Mexico could replace the teamster controlled ports in California. The goods would then be inspected and sealed for transport by mexican trucking outfits. America has already started allowing some Mexican trucking companies to operate in the States on a trial basis.

Part of the plan would also include a mega highway from the Mexico through Western Canada and then Alaska. One currency is just a small part of the plan.

[Bownesian]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

People need to stop saying it would encroach on our sovereignty. The EU still has borders. It's an economic streamlining that makes sense in a lot of ways, given the NAFTA.

It does in the same way that provinces have borders. There are signs on the road and the language might be different but from an outsider's point of view, it's all the same country as far as customs and immigration is concerned.

[afc wimbledon]

Why would we want a union with the Yanks just as their economy goes into the crapper?

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

It does in the same way that provinces have borders. There are signs on the road and the language might be different but from an outsider's point of view, it's all the same country as far as customs and immigration is concerned.

So you're saying I could bring back more alcohol?...

The point is Canada would still be it's own country.

[Rubicant]

Pfft... All a North American Union would do is protect useless lazy workers and harm productivity.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

So you're saying I could bring back more alcohol?...

The point is Canada would still be it's own country.

Countries in the EU do give up some sovereignty though. Many countries have to give in to the "EU" way of doing things and that doesn't always fit with their culture and demographics. For example, the EU has strict rules about agriculture and food production that prevents people in some countries in the union from using their land in ways that suit them the best. I know in Slovenia for example, that the way the cured meat was not in line with EU standards that were imposed by wealthier members and it put a lot of small "mom and pop" types out of work. Basically, if you aren't a big fish in the union, you end up as a migrant worker.

[mikey_the_redneck]

The Security & Prosperity Partnership is a stepping stone to the North American Union.

The NAU is what it is, a loss of sovereignty and a step towards world government. The EU system is unpopular with people in Europe. All participating nations adopt the same standards for everything.

Lou Dobbs was fired from his job for exposing this on national television. I think he was with CNN at the time.

These "unions" are not a political movement that will benefit the people.

These ideas are brought forward by the multi-national banking cartel, NOT we the people or our representatives. This benefits knowone but bankers, and multi-national corporations.

The plan if for a bunch of common economic blocks across the world, including the North American Union, Pan-Pacific Union, African Union, Eurasian Union etc.

I am against this. Our "democracy" is already broken enough, ...the last thing we need is more centralized power.

The key to this plan is that the nations in the union will have a new common fiat currency ran by a newly established central bank that will operate privately, like the Federal Reserve.

The political & business elite attend special interest meetings (usually without media coverage) to plan out our future for us. These special groups where these discussions take place are the CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg, G20 etc....

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost fourty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries." David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991.

"This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long... We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order." - David Rockefeller speaking at the United Nations Ambassadors' dinner. [Sept. 23, 1994]

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Countries in the EU do give up some sovereignty though. Many countries have to give in to the "EU" way of doing things and that doesn't always fit with their culture and demographics. For example, the EU has strict rules about agriculture and food production that prevents people in some countries in the union from using their land in ways that suit them the best. I know in Slovenia for example, that the way the cured meat was not in line with EU standards that were imposed by wealthier members and it put a lot of small "mom and pop" types out of work. Basically, if you aren't a big fish in the union, you end up as a migrant worker.

An example of this is that most of Europe has rejected Monsanto GMO crops, and they are still trying to push the policy through the EU system. It is an easy way for them to do business.

[Blaster86]

And see? Now I don't have to reply to Mikey, because technically I already have.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Let's all recall that this was being bandied about in 2005 according to the link if I read correctly. A lot has changed in a mere 6 years in how the world's top economic minds view monetary policy, and especially since the implosion of Euro denominated countries like Greece, Ireland, and Portugal. Hypothetically if Greece still had the ability to inflate their own currency a lot of their problems would be more managable. My guess is the US, Canada, and Mexico have vastly different views on a potential Amero than they did back then.

If the EU (and their currency) implodes then the likelyhood of them trying to form these unions elsewhere won't be met with much success.

I hope.......

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Mexico also is attractive because of lower wages. Non union Mega ports in Mexico could replace the teamster controlled ports in California. The goods would then be inspected and sealed for transport by mexican trucking outfits. America has already started allowing some Mexican trucking companies to operate in the States on a trial basis.

The last thing the Yanks want right now is transparent borders with Mexico.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

The last thing the Yanks want right now is transparent borders with Mexico.

Both the drug trade with its violence in Mexico and the general economy of the States are big problems for sure. These plans were proposed before these things became problems. The plans might survive until after conditions have change as well..

[Yeah_Baby]

Is the one world government to be ruled by the Antichrist?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

The last thing the Yanks want right now is transparent borders with Mexico.

Why not? It could give them more policing powers in Mexico and Canada for that matter. Joint policing will be much easier to set up.

[getbak]

The "Amero" is a stupid name. If we ever adopted a single North American currency, there's no good reason for it to not be called the Dollar.

[PIMking]

I wouldn't mind being a economic allies with Canada what so ever, but getting us involved with the third world country in Mexico doesn't excite me what so ever.

[PIMking]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Why not? It could give them more policing powers in Mexico and Canada for that matter. Joint policing will be much easier to set up.

It's not like we have a boarder with em now anyways.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

Is the one world government to be ruled by the Antichrist?

Lots of antichrists have come into the world. Could you be more specific?

[AvsJerk]

Originally Posted by PIMking

I wouldn't mind being a economic allies with Canada what so ever, but getting us involved with the third world country in Mexico doesn't excite me what so ever.

I agree and disagree. We are already well involved economically and militarily with Mexico. Perhaps, all though difficult, Canada and the U.S. could drag Mexico into best world status.

Mexico has a lot going for it...particularly natural resources, but also a populace that is both hard working and wanting of a better life...if they can't find it in Mexico, they will search for it in the U.S. and Canada...legally or illegally, and I don't begrudge them one bit.

Canada, likewise, is resource rich, (as is the U.S.). All three countries benefit from the U.S. standing as "The World's Military Super Power" (And really, let's not fool ourselves, still an economic super power).

I guess I don't see it as an "if it will happen" as much as a "when it will happen" kind of deal.