PolyNewbie Posted March 11, 2007 Report Posted March 11, 2007 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Connie Fogal" <[email protected]> To: "em & trent" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 12:58 AM Subject: Re: [Fwd: ATTN. Connie Fogal] > At 09:24 AM 3/9/2007, you wrote: >>Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 08:22:14 -0800 >>From: "em & trent" <[email protected]> >>To: [email protected] >>Subject: ATTN. Connie Fogal >> >> >>Dear Ms. Connie Fogal, >>I am a reporter from the Canadian National Newspaper located in Toronto, >>ON. I am currently writing an article on the North American Union (NAU), >>and how it will affect Canada as a whole if implemented. I'm seeking >>quotes from every political party represented in Canada, and am wondering >>if you would oblige me by answering some, if not all of the following >>questions? The deadline is Friday, March 16; please let me know if you're >>able to oblige us with your response. > > Dear Ms. Emily Wierenga. > > Thank you for phoning me to alert me of your request. I have been able to > go into the e mail to find your letter to respond. My e mail is so > backed up that I often miss important letters. We (CAP) have so few > resources . I really thank you for doing an article on the NAU and am > pleased to have opportunity to participate in this most important > initiative of yours. .My answers follow your questions below. > > First of all , it is not a matter of "If it is implemented". It is being > implemented already. There are cabinet ministers responsible for > implementing it. Under the Liberals in Canada they were Anne McLellan, > Deputy PM and Minister of PublicSafety and Emergency Preparedness, David > Emerson, Minister of Industry, Pierre Pettigrew, Minister ofForein > Affairs. In June 2005 these three along with there companion ministers > from the USA and Mexico reported to Martin Bush and Fox of their > implementation progress since March 2005 "the date of the signing of the > Security and Prosperity Agreement among Bush Fox and Martin) up to June > 2005. > > The document is called Security and Prosperity Partnership of North > America, Report to Leaders. It is dated June 2005 . I have a hard copy > which I pulled off the internet shortly after it was produced. Not sure > if the url will still work. > > Try www.fac-aec.gc.ca/spp/SPP-report.PDF > > I can fax to you a copy of my hard copy if you want . > > When the Conservatives took over, Harper and Emerson connected to be sure > Emerson carried on the implementation. Harper needed someone with > experience to continue the union. Emerson was the only one of the > original three appointed Canadian integrationists who was re-elected. > You may remember Emerson's retort about his move over to the > Conservatives. He said, "I do not know why people are so upset. I am just > continuing the work I was doing before." I certainly understood the > importance of that comment re the unification of North America. > > I live in Emerson's riding and ran as a candidate against him. I only > had one opportunity in that election to challenge him on his role which he > denied until I produced the Report to Ministers with his signature on it. > He ran from the meeting to avoid further questions . No media were > present. The NDP and conservative candidates were silent on the issue. > > I do not know who the other two people are that replaced Pettigrew and > McLellan. The responsible people are being more furtive now even denying > that the SPP was signed or that such a unification is in progress (all the > while knowing full well that it is proceeding at a rapid pace. The > deception is incredible with a complicity at all levels of government- in > the bureaucracy and in the elected representatives. We citizens have had > our sovereignty stolen from us and now live under blatant dictatorial > practice of the national Leaders, and some provincial leaders, and their > minions of three countries. ) > > The nine Federal Cabinet Ministers say this in their June 2005 Report to > the Leaders.: > > "On March 23, 2005, you announced the Security and Prosperity Partnership > of North America. At that time you instructed Ministers to create an > architecture which would further enhance the security of North America > while at the same time promote the economic well-being of our citizens and > position North America to face and meet future challenges......... > > In carrying our your instructions, we established working groups under > both agendas- Security and Prosperity. We had roundtables with > stakeholders, meetings with business groups and briefing sessions with > legislatures,as well as with other relevant political jurisdictions. The > result is a detailed series of actions and recommendations designed to > increase the competitiveness of North America and the security of our > people.......... > > Upon your review and approval, we will once again meet with stakeholders > and work with them to implement the workplans that we have developed. We > will encourage them to continue to provide us with new ideas and proposals > which will help shape our forward agenda and our vision for North > America..... > > To make North America secure for the future, we need integrated, > coordinated and seamless measures in place at, within, and beyond our > borders.... > > Increased economic integration and security cooperation will further a > unique and strong North American relationship- a relationship that meets > your stated goals ..... > > We recognize that this Partnership is designed to be a dynamic , > permanent process and that the attached workplans are just a first step. > ... > > The success of our efforts will be defined less by the contents of the > workplans than by the actual implementation of initiatives and strategies > that will make North America more prosperous and secure." > > The italics present only part of the report. > > Furthermore, the SPP is the blueprint for the North American Union, with > an ultimate goal of a union of the Americas, South and North into one > global power block. This Union has been the agenda of the North American > corporate elite for over 20 years , since the FTA. The NAU ,you must > understand, is being formalized via the SPP which is the written > expression of the agenda of the North American corporate elite that has > been in process for many years- since the first FTA. The SPP is the final > push for the NAU. The movers and shakers deny over and over that the NAU > is in process or on the horizon etc etc. They lie through their teeth. > > >>1. Where does the Canadian Action Party stand on NAFTA, and how does it >>see NAU as a positive or negative result of that agreement? > > The Canadian Action Party calls for the Abrogation of NAFTA. The NAU is a > progression of the corporatization and privatization process that the FTA > and then NAFTA created. See all the above and below for the overall effect > of NAFTA carried forward into the NAU. > >>2. How do you anticipate the NAU benefiting Canadian and Mexican citizens, >>if in any way? > > In no way at all > >>3. How do you anticipate it hurting both parties, in regards to health >>care, agriculture, militarization, 'Americanization' and the overall >>economy? > > The intention of the SPP as with the TILMA is to privatize everything. > There is to be no mixed economy anymore as was Canada's tradition that > worked so well and gave us medicare, hospitalization insurance, Central > mortgage and housing when we had it, the Bank of Canada, crown > corporations for such services as transportation, bus services, hydro, > telephones, highways, the Canadian Wheat Board, other marketing boards, > numerous regulatory bodies all of which as you know are being phased out > slowly. They know they cannot just take everything away too fast or there > will be rebellion. "Kill the people slowly" is the modus operandi "and > maybe they will never know what hit them". The concept of the public good > has been abandoned along with the public interest. The only interest to be > served now are the pockets of the large corporations including and > especially the banking industry which is very much at the heart of the > entire enterprise. > > All the rules and operations that were put into place over the past to > protect the public and to serve the public interest are being dismantled > under the agenda of the corporate elite. In Canada that is the CCCE, the > Canadian Council of Chief Executive . It is they along with their > counterparts in the USA, The Council of Foreign Relations and in Mexico , > the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internationales who are the driving force > behind the Security and Prosperity Partnership. They are the shadow > government, the real and permanent government dictating to the three > federal Leaders and to the Provincial leaders the direction of this > geographical area we call North America. The three leaders are not just > submitting to this takeover, this bureaucratic conquering of three > nations,. They share the ideology!. They are part of the leadership > wanting to do this. The horror is that they pretend to us otherwise . They > lie through their teeth with a smile. > > Prosperity is to be for the corporate elite, not the people. The corporate > and financial moguls of North America compete with Asia and Europe to > extract the most profits out of the resources of the world. The people are > to be tolerated only in so far as they can serve the corporate greed. The > Security is no more than a mechanism to keep the people from rebelling and > throwing off the oppression of the now open new regime. > > Health care is to be privatized. They have almost completed that process > as they have been starving its funding and thereby killing public medicare > to date. > > The integration of Canada's military into USA command is almost complete > under the Binational Planning Committee begun in 2002. Again they lie. > > Agriculture has been on the front line of attack all over the world from > globalization i.e corporatization, but many countries have continued to > provide subsidy to their farmers, including the USA. The death of the > family farm is in process and big agribusiness drives the small farmer to > bankruptcy. An NAU will have more success in finishing off all the small > farmers in Canada, the USA, and in Mexico. It will especially be more > able to eliminate the subsidies of the US farmers. Genetically modertated > foods will thrive contrary to the interest of humans , again all in the > interest of corporate profit, not the health of humans. > > It is no longer really a question of "Americanization " of Canadians. The > large body of citizens in all three countries are being stripped of their > sovereignty. It is the "North" Americanization of all of us. It is the > elimination of three nations and the constitutional protections of the > people in those nations. Our nations and our constitutions were set up > precisely to be geographical boundaries and rules in the three regional > areas we called Canada USA and Mexico . They were the recipes for our > social order of how we related to each other in our own nations in our own > interest. The power and might of the shadow government intends to reign > outside of the civil democratic laws that were our base of social order. > Instead we are to be ruled by unelected, unaccountable, unrepresentative > corporate military academic tribunals who rule in their interest only. > The new order intends and is restructuring our countries to enable a few > to be in dictatorial control . > > Witness the dictatorial actions of our BC government who on or about March > 8, 2007 wiped out the authority of elected bodies over transportation in > the Lower Mainland and turned the control of transportation in the Lower > mainland to an unelected, unaccountable, unrepresentative body of > technocrats and corporations. The unexposed reason behind the scenes is > that the elected people were to a fair extent responding to the citizenry > and trying to build a livable transit system to serve the people who live > here. The agenda of the Campbell Liberals and the Klein government (as it > was) is to serve the NAFTA highway linkages which is a major thrust in the > unification of North America. The intention is to serve the > transportation needs of corporations up the NAFTA corridor for the > benefit of corporations, and military. To hell with the people who get in > the way-local people, local lands, protective zoning. > > In fact the real goal is for an "Americanization" of all the Americas, > North and South under this corporate rule stripped of constitutions and > rights and protections for and of and by the people. The goal is to > create a strong block of power in a game of conquer competing with Asia > and Europe for the control of the resources of the world. The corporate > leaders who reside in the geographical area of the Americas have no > allegiance to any country, or to any peoples, only to their selfish > exploitation of the Americas to satisfy their greed and to give them a > power block to compete with the East for their own financial gain.. > > >>4. Do you feel that Canada as a whole would lose its 'identity,' if the >>NAU were implemented? > > Absolutely, we ARE losing our identity. Our foreign and military policy > position and practice is now identical to what the USA dictates. Our > domestic position and practices are deceptively being restructured to > meet the NAU privatization /corporatization agenda under the direction of > the USA leadership. Note the BC/ Alberta TILMA agreement (The trade and > Investment Labour Mobility Agreement) dictatorially entered between > Campbell and Klein in April 2006 coming into effect April 2007. That > agreement removes the right of government on behalf of the people to > participate in the economy under severe financial penalties. TILMA is a > provincial arm of the NAU process. > > TILMA, like the SPP, is an expression of the current practice of > de-structuring and de-democratization of our democratic social order. > Both eliminate accountability, representation, informed consent, and > electoral responsibility. > >>5. What, in your party's perspective, sets Canada apart from the USA ? > > It is not a matter of setting Canada apart from the USA. It is a question > of the people in the three nations having the right and the power to make > rules about their own lives according to their own needs and desires, to > make their own choices; in effect, to exercise democracy. There is a > growing movement in the USA by some U.S. senators who are working to stop > this geographical unification of the Americas. We are not anti each > other. We are not saying we are better than you, or our way is better. > The resisters on both sides of the two borders are saying, we, the people, > want back our capacity to make decisions about our own social order. We > want it to be for human rights , not corporate rights. We are saying > together, "No thank you! We do not want to give up our nation status! We > do not want to be wrested of our constitutional protections." > > >> Would the NAU jeopardize this distinction? > > See all my comments throughout the above. > > >>6. If your party is overall opposed to the NAU, does it have a proposed >>alternative? > > Of course. Let us be Canada, the USA and Mexico with our own respective > rules, and the right to be as different from each other as we choose. Let > us be independent sovereign nations > >>7. If the NAU occurs, what do you envision our nation looking like in 5-10 >>years?rrella o f aphical arsinow called CanadUSAandMExico aS teh provinces >>adnstates do all under ht unb > > > We will not be a nation. Our names may remain as a designation over the > particular geographical area,but there will be no national power of > Canadians over Canadians and for Canadians. The plan here is the end of > nation states . Look around and see all the public talk groups advocating > the end of nation states. The minions are at work!!!!!!!!!!!! > >>8. Overall, is the NAU a threat to Canadian sovereignty, and to the >>nation's social programs? If so, how? > > ABSOLUTELY, YES!!!!!!! See above for my answers on this point. BUT IN > PARTICULAR THERE ARE TO BE NO REAL SOCIAL PROGRAMS. THEY INTERFERE WITH > PROFIT. THERE IS TO BE NO SOVEREIGNTY. THAT INTERFERES WITH PROFIT. > > > >>Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions. By doing so, you >>are helping Canadians understand this complicated and somewhat difficult >>subject. > > > With respect, it is not a difficult subject. The issue is do we want a > country? Do we want to be in control of our own destiny? Do we want the > capacity to make our own decisions about the lives we live. > > Sincerely, Constance Fogal, Leader, Canadian Action Party/Parti action > canadienne > > >>Sincerely, >>Emily T. Wierenga. > > > > Canadian Action Party/ Parti action canadienne > > Leader, Constance (Connie) Fogal > Telephone (604) 872 2128 home; Fax: (604) 872 1504 > E-mail: [email protected] > Quote Support the troops. Bring them home. Let the bankers fight their own wars. www.infowars.com Watch 911 Mysteries at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871 "By the time the people wake up to see the bars around them, the door will have already slammed shut." Texx Mars
jbg Posted March 11, 2007 Report Posted March 11, 2007 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Connie Fogal" <[email protected]> To: "em & trent" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 12:58 AM Subject: Re: [Fwd: ATTN. Connie Fogal] Canadian Action Party/ Parti action canadienne > > Leader, Constance (Connie) Fogal > Telephone (604) 872 2128 home; Fax: (604) 872 1504 > E-mail: [email protected] > Piece of advice: Try the program listed at bottom of this reformatted message, then, visit a mental health professional, promptly: ================================================================ At 09:24 AM 3/9/2007, you wrote: Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 08:22:14 -0800 From: "em & trent" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: ATTN. Connie Fogal Dear Ms. Connie Fogal, I am a reporter from the Canadian National Newspaper located in Toronto, ON. I am currently writing an article on the North American Union (NAU), and how it will affect Canada as a whole if implemented. I'm seeking quotes from every political party represented in Canada, and am wondering if you would oblige me by answering some, if not all of the following questions? The deadline is Friday, March 16; please let me know if you're able to oblige us with your response. Dear Ms. Emily Wierenga. Thank you for phoning me to alert me of your request. I have been able to go into the e mail to find your letter to respond. My e mail is so backed up that I often miss important letters. We (CAP) have so few resources . I really thank you for doing an article on the NAU and am pleased to have opportunity to participate in this most important initiative of yours. .My answers follow your questions below. First of all , it is not a matter of "If it is implemented". It is being implemented already. There are cabinet ministers responsible for implementing it. Under the Liberals in Canada they were Anne McLellan, Deputy PM and Minister of PublicSafety and Emergency Preparedness, David Emerson, Minister of Industry, Pierre Pettigrew, Minister ofForein Affairs. In June 2005 these three along with there companion ministers from the USA and Mexico reported to Martin Bush and Fox of their implementation progress since March 2005 "the date of the signing of the Security and Prosperity Agreement among Bush Fox and Martin) up to June 2005. The document is called Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, Report to Leaders. It is dated June 2005 . I have a hard copy which I pulled off the internet shortly after it was produced. Not sure if the url will still work. Try www.fac-aec.gc.ca/spp/SPP-report.PDF I can fax to you a copy of my hard copy if you want . When the Conservatives took over, Harper and Emerson connected to be sure Emerson carried on the implementation. Harper needed someone with experience to continue the union. Emerson was the only one of the original three appointed Canadian integrationists who was re-elected. You may remember Emerson's retort about his move over to the Conservatives. He said, "I do not know why people are so upset. I am just continuing the work I was doing before." I certainly understood the importance of that comment re the unification of North America. I live in Emerson's riding and ran as a candidate against him. I only had one opportunity in that election to challenge him on his role which he denied until I produced the Report to Ministers with his signature on it. He ran from the meeting to avoid further questions . No media were present. The NDP and conservative candidates were silent on the issue. I do not know who the other two people are that replaced Pettigrew and McLellan. The responsible people are being more furtive now even denying that the SPP was signed or that such a unification is in progress (all the while knowing full well that it is proceeding at a rapid pace. The deception is incredible with a complicity at all levels of government- in the bureaucracy and in the elected representatives. We citizens have had our sovereignty stolen from us and now live under blatant dictatorial practice of the national Leaders, and some provincial leaders, and their minions of three countries. ) The nine Federal Cabinet Ministers say this in their June 2005 Report to the Leaders.: "On March 23, 2005, you announced the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. At that time you instructed Ministers to create an architecture which would further enhance the security of North America while at the same time promote the economic well-being of our citizens and position North America to face and meet future challenges......... In carrying our your instructions, we established working groups under both agendas- Security and Prosperity. We had roundtables with stakeholders, meetings with business groups and briefing sessions with legislatures,as well as with other relevant political jurisdictions. The result is a detailed series of actions and recommendations designed to increase the competitiveness of North America and the security of our people.......... Upon your review and approval, we will once again meet with stakeholders and work with them to implement the workplans that we have developed. We will encourage them to continue to provide us with new ideas and proposals which will help shape our forward agenda and our vision for North America..... To make North America secure for the future, we need integrated, coordinated and seamless measures in place at, within, and beyond our borders.... Increased economic integration and security cooperation will further a unique and strong North American relationship- a relationship that meets your stated goals ..... We recognize that this Partnership is designed to be a dynamic , permanent process and that the attached workplans are just a first step. ... The success of our efforts will be defined less by the contents of the workplans than by the actual implementation of initiatives and strategies that will make North America more prosperous and secure." The italics present only part of the report. Furthermore, the SPP is the blueprint for the North American Union, with an ultimate goal of a union of the Americas, South and North into one global power block. This Union has been the agenda of the North American corporate elite for over 20 years , since the FTA. The NAU ,you must understand, is being formalized via the SPP which is the written expression of the agenda of the North American corporate elite that has been in process for many years- since the first FTA. The SPP is the final push for the NAU. The movers and shakers deny over and over that the NAU is in process or on the horizon etc etc. They lie through their teeth. 1. Where does the Canadian Action Party stand on NAFTA, and how does it see NAU as a positive or negative result of that agreement? The Canadian Action Party calls for the Abrogation of NAFTA. The NAU is a progression of the corporatization and privatization process that the FTA and then NAFTA created. See all the above and below for the overall effect of NAFTA carried forward into the NAU. 2. How do you anticipate the NAU benefiting Canadian and Mexican citizens, if in any way? In no way at all 3. How do you anticipate it hurting both parties, in regards to health care, agriculture, militarization, 'Americanization' and the overall economy? The intention of the SPP as with the TILMA is to privatize everything. There is to be no mixed economy anymore as was Canada's tradition that worked so well and gave us medicare, hospitalization insurance, Central mortgage and housing when we had it, the Bank of Canada, crown corporations for such services as transportation, bus services, hydro, telephones, highways, the Canadian Wheat Board, other marketing boards, numerous regulatory bodies all of which as you know are being phased out slowly. They know they cannot just take everything away too fast or there will be rebellion. "Kill the people slowly" is the modus operandi "and maybe they will never know what hit them". The concept of the public good has been abandoned along with the public interest. The only interest to be served now are the pockets of the large corporations including and especially the banking industry which is very much at the heart of the entire enterprise. All the rules and operations that were put into place over the past to protect the public and to serve the public interest are being dismantled under the agenda of the corporate elite. In Canada that is the CCCE, the Canadian Council of Chief Executive . It is they along with their counterparts in the USA, The Council of Foreign Relations and in Mexico , the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internationales who are the driving force behind the Security and Prosperity Partnership. They are the shadow government, the real and permanent government dictating to the three federal Leaders and to the Provincial leaders the direction of this geographical area we call North America. The three leaders are not just submitting to this takeover, this bureaucratic conquering of three nations,. They share the ideology!. They are part of the leadership wanting to do this. The horror is that they pretend to us otherwise . They lie through their teeth with a smile. Prosperity is to be for the corporate elite, not the people. The corporate and financial moguls of North America compete with Asia and Europe to extract the most profits out of the resources of the world. The people are to be tolerated only in so far as they can serve the corporate greed. The Security is no more than a mechanism to keep the people from rebelling and throwing off the oppression of the now open new regime. Health care is to be privatized. They have almost completed that process as they have been starving its funding and thereby killing public medicare to date. The integration of Canada's military into USA command is almost complete under the Binational Planning Committee begun in 2002. Again they lie. Agriculture has been on the front line of attack all over the world from globalization i.e corporatization, but many countries have continued to provide subsidy to their farmers, including the USA. The death of the family farm is in process and big agribusiness drives the small farmer to bankruptcy. An NAU will have more success in finishing off all the small farmers in Canada, the USA, and in Mexico. It will especially be more able to eliminate the subsidies of the US farmers. Genetically modertated foods will thrive contrary to the interest of humans , again all in the interest of corporate profit, not the health of humans. It is no longer really a question of "Americanization " of Canadians. The large body of citizens in all three countries are being stripped of their sovereignty. It is the "North" Americanization of all of us. It is the elimination of three nations and the constitutional protections of the people in those nations. Our nations and our constitutions were set up precisely to be geographical boundaries and rules in the three regional areas we called Canada USA and Mexico . They were the recipes for our social order of how we related to each other in our own nations in our own interest. The power and might of the shadow government intends to reign outside of the civil democratic laws that were our base of social order. Instead we are to be ruled by unelected, unaccountable, unrepresentative corporate military academic tribunals who rule in their interest only. The new order intends and is restructuring our countries to enable a few to be in dictatorial control . Witness the dictatorial actions of our BC government who on or about March 8, 2007 wiped out the authority of elected bodies over transportation in the Lower Mainland and turned the control of transportation in the Lower mainland to an unelected, unaccountable, unrepresentative body of technocrats and corporations. The unexposed reason behind the scenes is that the elected people were to a fair extent responding to the citizenry and trying to build a livable transit system to serve the people who live here. The agenda of the Campbell Liberals and the Klein government (as it was) is to serve the NAFTA highway linkages which is a major thrust in the unification of North America. The intention is to serve the transportation needs of corporations up the NAFTA corridor for the benefit of corporations, and military. To hell with the people who get in the way-local people, local lands, protective zoning. In fact the real goal is for an "Americanization" of all the Americas, North and South under this corporate rule stripped of constitutions and rights and protections for and of and by the people. The goal is to create a strong block of power in a game of conquer competing with Asia and Europe for the control of the resources of the world. The corporate leaders who reside in the geographical area of the Americas have no allegiance to any country, or to any peoples, only to their selfish exploitation of the Americas to satisfy their greed and to give them a power block to compete with the East for their own financial gain.. 4. Do you feel that Canada as a whole would lose its 'identity,' if the NAU were implemented? Absolutely, we ARE losing our identity. Our foreign and military policy position and practice is now identical to what the USA dictates. Our domestic position and practices are deceptively being restructured to meet the NAU privatization /corporatization agenda under the direction of the USA leadership. Note the BC/ Alberta TILMA agreement (The trade and Investment Labour Mobility Agreement) dictatorially entered between Campbell and Klein in April 2006 coming into effect April 2007. That agreement removes the right of government on behalf of the people to participate in the economy under severe financial penalties. TILMA is a provincial arm of the NAU process. TILMA, like the SPP, is an expression of the current practice of de-structuring and de-democratization of our democratic social order. Both eliminate accountability, representation, informed consent, and electoral responsibility. 5. What, in your party's perspective, sets Canada apart from the USA ? It is not a matter of setting Canada apart from the USA. It is a question of the people in the three nations having the right and the power to make rules about their own lives according to their own needs and desires, to make their own choices; in effect, to exercise democracy. There is a growing movement in the USA by some U.S. senators who are working to stop this geographical unification of the Americas. We are not anti each other. We are not saying we are better than you, or our way is better. The resisters on both sides of the two borders are saying, we, the people, want back our capacity to make decisions about our own social order. We want it to be for human rights , not corporate rights. We are saying together, "No thank you! We do not want to give up our nation status! We do not want to be wrested of our constitutional protections." Would the NAU jeopardize this distinction? See all my comments throughout the above. 6. If your party is overall opposed to the NAU, does it have a proposed alternative? Of course. Let us be Canada, the USA and Mexico with our own respective rules, and the right to be as different from each other as we choose. Let us be independent sovereign nations 7. If the NAU occurs, what do you envision our nation looking like in 5-10 years?rrella o f aphical arsinow called CanadUSAandMExico aS teh provinces adnstates do all under ht unb We will not be a nation. Our names may remain as a designation over the particular geographical area,but there will be no national power of Canadians over Canadians and for Canadians. The plan here is the end of nation states . Look around and see all the public talk groups advocating the end of nation states. The minions are at work!!!!!!!!!!!! 8. Overall, is the NAU a threat to Canadian sovereignty, and to the nation's social programs? If so, how? ABSOLUTELY, YES!!!!!!! See above for my answers on this point. BUT IN PARTICULAR THERE ARE TO BE NO REAL SOCIAL PROGRAMS. THEY INTERFERE WITH PROFIT. THERE IS TO BE NO SOVEREIGNTY. THAT INTERFERES WITH PROFIT. Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions. By doing so, you are helping Canadians understand this complicated and somewhat difficult subject. With respect, it is not a difficult subject. The issue is do we want a country? Do we want to be in control of our own destiny? Do we want the capacity to make our own decisions about the lives we live. Sincerely, Constance Fogal, Leader, Canadian Action Party/Parti action canadienne Sincerely, Emily T. Wierenga. Canadian Action Party/ Parti action canadienne Leader, Constance (Connie) Fogal Telephone (604) 872 2128 home; Fax: (604) 872 1504 E-mail: [email protected] This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jbg Posted March 11, 2007 Report Posted March 11, 2007 Besides my concern from certain posters' emotional well being, I do highly recommend emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm . I often use it to cleanse e-mail jokes and posts before circulation. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
PolyNewbie Posted March 11, 2007 Author Report Posted March 11, 2007 Besides my concern from certain posters' emotional well being Just because someone is angry doesn't make them crazy. Maybe things are really as bad as I say they are. Maybe you are right 911 wasn't an inside job. My problem with that is that have have no single shred of evidence from which to work, circumstantial or otherwise. You cannot use the character of the accused perpetrators to win people over to your side. You cannot use history recent or ancient. The scientific aspects of the collapsed prove that explosives were planeted. This is obvious from the giant hunks of building being blown upward during the collapse. It is also obvious from a number of other reasons. The official version is scientifically impossible. The fact that 911 was an inside job means all this other stuff is probably true. You want cling on to a belief and "don't worry be happy". Thats fine with me and I don't worry about what is going to happen with you any more than you do about me. I have never posted an email before and was unaware of this program, email stripper. A lot of the Jews in world war 2 were also labeled as crazy and shunned from friends and family for what they are saying. My views have cost me most of my friends too, but I am far from crazy. I have the couyrage to face this thing head on and a familiarity with evil that makes me see that its all very possible. Quote Support the troops. Bring them home. Let the bankers fight their own wars. www.infowars.com Watch 911 Mysteries at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871 "By the time the people wake up to see the bars around them, the door will have already slammed shut." Texx Mars
jbg Posted March 11, 2007 Report Posted March 11, 2007 I have never posted an email before and was unaware of this program, email stripper. I posted that part as a service. Even when you copy other posts, the post comes out far longer than it should. This program takes out the unwanted hard returns quite well. As far as your well-being goes, I am concerned. You said you once had lots of friends, and they left you, presumably, as a result of your bizarre beliefs. It could be you need some help. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
PolyNewbie Posted March 13, 2007 Author Report Posted March 13, 2007 If this North American Union is a good thing then why is it that politicians are not bragging about it on TV ? Why isn't there specials telling us about how much better off we will be ? Do you think globalization is resposible for the income gap between rich & poor ? Will the NAU lead to even bigger gaps ? Do you know that the Black Plague started because of poor sections in England - it spread and even killed lawyers. Quote Support the troops. Bring them home. Let the bankers fight their own wars. www.infowars.com Watch 911 Mysteries at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871 "By the time the people wake up to see the bars around them, the door will have already slammed shut." Texx Mars
MSH Posted March 13, 2007 Report Posted March 13, 2007 If this North American Union is a good thing then why is it that politicians are not bragging about it on TV ?Why isn't there specials telling us about how much better off we will be ? There are no "politicians bragging about it on TV" most likely because there is no such effort as you describe underway. You are taking public record of various unconnected areas of interdependence between Canada, US and Mexico and stitching them together into some kind of conspiracy theory. NAFTA, the softwood trade dispute resolution and an international security agreement certainly have an impact on globalisation issues but there is no evidence at all that they are linked and part of a comprehensive plan to bring about Manifest Destiny. If Emerson ran off upon encountering you it was probably because you came off as being of questionable sanity, not becasue he had something to hide. Do you think globalization is resposible for the income gap between rich & poor ? Will the NAU lead to even bigger gaps ?Do you know that the Black Plague started because of poor sections in England - it spread and even killed lawyers. The Black Plague killed lawyers you say? Well, I guess there IS a silver lining to every dark cloud! Globalisation, I believe, will eventually be responsible for the ELIMINATION of the gap between rich and poor nations (though there will always bee rich and poor people). Globally we have evolved from a society of tribes, to one of nation states, to one of state-enforced colonialism to one of corporate colonialism. As nasty and "exploitative" as some elements of globalisation have been they are actually bringing down that last form of colonialism. For example, outsourcing to India, east Asia and so on has cause us a bit of hardship (and really, it hasn't been that bad for us) but it has brought a lot of prosperity to developing countries, and eventually economic prosperity amongst a large enough segment of the population will bring political enlightenment in a given country. As the world gets smaller through this process and with the advancement of technology like the internet we expose exploitation of the past (sweatshops, environmental destruction, etc) which leads to its curtailment. Developing nations move to more modern manufacturing methods and facilities and their workforces become more skilled and better paid and the gap starts to CLOSE. Furthermore, we in North America and Europe are too complacent, too spoiled and want too much wealth to the point that professional services and even corporate headquarters will be migrating to developing nations. Look at how many high-techs are located in Taiwan. And now we have Halliburton moving its headquarters out of Texas to the middle east! As crackpot as you come across to be, this "NAU" thing you rail against, if it came to be aling the lines of the EU, would probably be a very GOOD thing and would help poorer nations. NAFTA has actually been quite good for Mexico for the most part, and anything that eliminates protectionism and barriers to trade and commerce and cooperation, such as a standard set of security practices at all our borders, has in general been seen as GOOD. I just think it isn't happing any time soon and you're just a bit of a crackpot lol! Quote
jbg Posted March 14, 2007 Report Posted March 14, 2007 Globalisation, I believe, will eventually be responsible for the ELIMINATION of the gap between rich and poor nations (though there will always bee rich and poor people). Globally we have evolved from a society of tribes, to one of nation states, to one of state-enforced colonialism to one of corporate colonialism. As nasty and "exploitative" as some elements of globalisation have been they are actually bringing down that last form of colonialism. For example, outsourcing to India, east Asia and so on has cause us a bit of hardship (and really, it hasn't been that bad for us) but it has brought a lot of prosperity to developing countries, and eventually economic prosperity amongst a large enough segment of the population will bring political enlightenment in a given country. This post, on balance, shows you to be a promising new poster. I take issue, first, with your views of lawyers, for quite obvious reasons. I also take issue with the idea that the gap between rich and poor nations will be eliminated. Good governance seems, for example, to be virtually absent from Spanish-speaking and French-speaking countries. That will take a miracle to change. Without transparent, effective, non-corrupt government, it is hard for any nation to maximize its potential. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
PolyNewbie Posted March 15, 2007 Author Report Posted March 15, 2007 The Black Plague killed lawyers you say? Well, I guess there IS a silver lining to every dark cloud! True, but if we are not around to celebrate whats the point ? As crackpot as you come across to be, this "NAU" thing you rail against, if it came to be aling the lines of the EU, would probably be a very GOOD thing and would help poorer nations. NAFTA has actually been quite good for Mexico for the most part, and anything that eliminates protectionism and barriers to trade and commerce and cooperation, such as a standard set of security practices at all our borders, has in general been seen as GOOD. Globalization just takes power away from elected governments and puts it into the hands of coporations. They will use Indias labour now because its cheaper than ours. Indias labour prices will rise ours will fall. Then when it becomes cheaper to do it here they come back here. Indias labour decreases ours increases. You have the net affect of lowering labour costs and standards of living everywhere. Thats the point. These cororations are not in business for any other reason but exploitation and maximizing profits - thats what business is !!! Globalization makes populations compete against each other instead of working for their own good. Have you ever heard the term child labour ? Who do you think makes your T Shirts and Running Shoes that you pay $30.00 & $120.00 for ? - kids at pennies an hour and for 18 hours per day in indonesia !! Thats globalization !!! Quote Support the troops. Bring them home. Let the bankers fight their own wars. www.infowars.com Watch 911 Mysteries at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871 "By the time the people wake up to see the bars around them, the door will have already slammed shut." Texx Mars
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.