North American Union meeting in Banff?

[Looger]

don't mistake 'concern' for being 'upset'.

this is part of a larger agenda, this is part of the breakdown of canada's sovereignty.

i'm interested, i'm concerned, i'm noticing.

if it's such a security concern then if i were you i wouldn't even mention that i was there - it's either harmelss and ok to talk aboot it, or too sensitive to you / your company to even mention you know it took place.

[underGRADFlame]

Originally Posted by Looger

if it's such a security concern then if i were you i wouldn't even mention that i was there - it's either harmelss and ok to talk aboot it, or too sensitive to you / your company to even mention you know it took place.

Wow, you really have no idea about this stuff do you. The meeting was public knowledge, I can say my company was there and worked the event. But if it was donald rumsfield on stage farting on a snare drum or telling the assembly that in 2 years NA will be one country, I cant say, it could cost me my job.

If your so concernd, go to Banff talk to one of the 400 employee's at the springs and maybe on of them will tell you what happened, I won't.

[Looger]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...articleId=3274

Session III: Toward a North American Energy Strategy

Session V: Demographic and Social Dimensions of North American Integration

this is serious stuff.

this isn't just a 'security' meeting.

2 years? something tells me that legally it'll be sooner than that, as the agreement signed by fox, martin, and g.w. bush is already dry.

the bureaucrats are now working out the details.

ask yourself why this agenda is going ahead as fast as it is. these people prefer incrementalism, they don't want the frog to jump out of the water. the wheels are coming off of globalism, the globalists are trying to railroad as much as they can through right now before the lights turn on.

EDIT: if you can't mention anything useful aboot the topic, bringing up knowledge but not the ability to disclose just makes you sound like a toady stooge of these *******s.

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by underGRADFlame

Looger I always read your posts, and tried to keep a open mind to your opinons, but your a freaking moron. Go put on your ****ing tinfoil hat and go back to your conspiracy website with your own kind. I just can't believe someone is as far off the deep end as you are.

Oh by the way, theyre now watching you!

Well put. Could NOT agree more. Why Lanny "invited" this person back is beyond me. Heck, I like Lanny!

Being longer in the tooth than many here, I have seen a ten thousand fold margin of cases where incompetence was the root cause of either systemic change or situations gone wrong versus brilliant planning and flawless execution. The laughable (tragically) situation with 911 conspiracy theories is an example of the former, not the latter.

If I want to read a "looger" I will cough one up in the morning and ponder it. Much more interesting and insightful than the readings here.

When certain people here say "can't you see??" I get an image of Marty Feldman in my mind. Yes, "Marty", I see. Better than you apparently.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Well put. Could NOT agree more. Why Lanny "invited" this person back is beyond me. Heck, I like Lanny!

so - what's your take on the topic at hand?

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Being longer in the tooth than many here, I have seen a ten thousand fold margin of cases where incompetence was the root cause of either systemic change or situations gone wrong versus brilliant planning and flawless execution. The laughable (tragically) situation with 911 conspiracy theories is an example of the former, not the latter.

north american union, what's your take? oh right. 9/11. gotcha. don't worry, i'll start a new 9/11 thread soon to satisfy you and all the other interested individuals on this site.

Originally Posted by Shawnski

If I want to read a "looger" I will cough one up in the morning and ponder it. Much more interesting and insightful than the readings here.

so, what's your opinion on globalization and secret meetings?

Originally Posted by Shawnski

When certain people here say "can't you see??" I get an image of Marty Feldman in my mind. Yes, "Marty", I see. Better than you apparently.

so, what do you think of sovereignty of our country being taken away?

jerome corsi is an interesting investigator for world net daily, a right-wing rag but it's one of the leading news sites on the internet. corsi himself is a nuke-iran maniac but i still pay attention to what he finds on american union, as he is a great journalist even if i disagree with him. here's a story on WND mentioning his findings with judicial watch:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=52164

"There is no specific authorization for this massive administrative-branch integration with Mexico and Canada other than what amounts to a press conference jointly issued by President Bush, Mexico's President Vicente Fox, and Canada's then-Prime Minister Paul Martin on March 23, 2005, at the end of their summit in Waco, Texas," Corsi said.
...
"The Bush administration is trying to create the infrastructure of a new regional North American government in stealth fashion, under the radar and out of public view," Corsi claims. "Where is Congress, asleep at the wheel?"
...

U.S. administrative-branch officers participating in these working groups are drawn from the U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
The released documents affirm that counterparts from official governmental agencies in Mexico and Canada are combined with the U.S. administrative branch to form new trilateral "working groups" that actively rewrite U.S. administrative law to "harmonize" or "integrate" with administrative law in Mexico and Canada. "What we have here amounts to an administrative coup d'etat," Corsi told WND. "Where does the Bush administration get the congressional authorization to invite two foreign nations to the table to rewrite U.S. law?"

judicial watch findings, freedom of informtion act:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/5979.shtml

“Many Americans are interested in where this North American partnership process is going,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Given all that is at stake, the federal government has a responsibility to make sure this process is transparent and open to public scrutiny -- so the release of these documents is an important step forward.”

not as many canadians in my opinion are concerned with their sovereignty. interesting.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive...IADocsSecI.pdf

[Looger]

oops, forgot some WND links:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=52164


N. American students trained for 'merger'
North American confab 'undermines' democracy
Attendance list North American forum
North American Forum agenda
North American merger topic of secret confab
Feds finally release info on 'superstate'
Senator ditches bill tied to 'superstate'
Congressman presses on 'superstate' plan
Feds stonewalling on 'super state' plan?
Cornyn wants U.S. taxpayers to fund Mexican development
No EU in U.S.
Trans-Texas Corridor paved with campaign contributions?
U.S.-Mexico merger opposition intensifies
More evidence of Mexican trucks coming to U.S.
Docs reveal plan for Mexican trucks in U.S.
Kansas City customs port considered Mexican soil?
Tancredo confronts 'superstate' effort
Bush sneaking North American superstate without oversight?
Related columns:
Coming soon to U.S.: Mexican customs officeMerger with Mexico

[worth]

This is indeed a concern for the Soverignty of the country of Canada. I don't want a North American Union, and i'm sure others would like to have a debate about it before deciding on it. Instead this is going on behind closed doors out of the eye of the public. This is an important issue and needs to be examined by Canadians, however, they aren't being alowed to do this.

[RedHot25]

I think it should have been open, or at least they should have publicized somewhat their thoughts/findings/beliefs/conference conclusions/etc.

But then again, I subscribe to ideas concerning democratic parity and participation, parity of participation, etc....

[Azure]

Originally Posted by worth

This is indeed a concern for the Soverignty of the country of Canada. I don't want a North American Union, and i'm sure others would like to have a debate about it before deciding on it. Instead this is going on behind closed doors out of the eye of the public. This is an important issue and needs to be examined by Canadians, however, they aren't being alowed to do this.

But you want the NAFTA, right?

Strange.

[worth]

No, I don't want NAFTA.

Here's a video on the topic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAeEc23_7Ig

[Azure]

Originally Posted by worth

No, I don't want NAFTA.

Here's a video on the topic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAeEc23_7Ig

Oh, okay.

Bush will be gone in two years, and I don't think the next President is going to carry on with the exact same agenda. But I do believe it would be beneficial for Mexico, Canada and the US if they become united in more ways.

We are living in an age of globalization.