For the crowd that finds the ex pluribus unum improper anyway (untainted WASP rule being the only thing they consider appropriate) I proposed this new flag some time ago
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/45/neoamiadler1c3nj.jpg
(left wing may be amputated ;-) ).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...therefore it can't be a government cabal.

Do I get the red star?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This email is going to a few people…there is much debate about whether the North American Union (NAU) exists or not. Robert Pastor, the “father” of the NAU, is a real man. You can even read one of his articles in Newsweek -- http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/ 11904430/site/newsweek/ -- if that’s comforting in any way.



This is the hard evidence that exists, regarding the plan for a NAU. Many links are included that lead to detailed documents --



http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context= viewArticle&code=VIV20061220&articleId=4216



and also



http://www.humanevents.com/ article.php?id=16189



Author Jerome Corsi writes:

“Critics who argue that the NAU is a “conspiracy theory” are well advised to take a hard look at Robert Pastor. With U.S. policy toward Latin America, Dr. Pastor first approached the issue in writing (for the radical IPS, as we have noted), next as a university professor, and finally as a government official. Had John Kerry won the 2004 presidential election, Robert Pastor most likely would have emerged with a government position from which he could have pursued his NAU agenda. Given the re-election of George Bush, Dr. Pastor has surfaced within the CFR, an influential “think-tank” NGO whose history of impacting U.S. policy would suggest the CFR impact on SPP.gov could easily be more than academic.”



Testimony of Robert Pastor, to a Canadian government agency for foreign affairs (see http://www.american.edu/ia/cnas/ pdfs/PastorTestimonyCanada.pdf ) --

The tragedy of September 11th reminded us of our shared vulnerability. It also provided us with three distinct sets of choices on how we might respond. Each of the three countries of North America could choose to defend itself by retreating behind a fortress of tighter security and more barriers at the borders. This path would offer only a false sense of security, and it would reverse the remarkable progress made in the last decade in expanding trade and investment. More importantly, it would diminish the standard of living of all three countries. A second option is to act as we always have - handle one problem, one country at a time. This is the most likely course, but it is flawed, for reasons I will describe below. The third path is to lift NAFTA to a new level of cooperation. That is the direction I hope this Committee will take us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In Canada, some people fear that Canada is being absorbed into the USA, and eventually Canada will cease to exist while the USA lives on even bigger and stronger.

Here is an example: The Plan to Disappear Canada

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

in Asia many people think America wants to guide them into the American way of life and then control them.

in Europe we found that the American way of life destroys the community feelings and the family life.

The cars, tv, dishwahsers etc. didnt give more time for happiness.

So all over the world the same pattern.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We're supposed to disbelieve the people pushing this theory because they believe that globalization is eroding the economic prosperity of average Americans and the Democrats cut a similar backroom deal with the devil that the Republicans did when they controlled Congress?

Hello! I think it is reasonably clear to everyone that the Democrats have turned on their base and are pursuing more or less the same policies that are opposed by the majority of Americans--such as the "war on anything that moves" and the occupation of Iraq--so it isn't exactly a seal of good housekeeping that the Democrats are in on whatever the Republicans were accused of. And more and more of those Americans who once championed the brand of globalization much of the world is now rebelling against, are questioning it themselves as they have a second look at the very roots of the theory that led them to embrace such policies in the first place.

This is not to say there is any credence to the rumors of an emerging North American Union, but the flimsy means of attempting to discredit the backers of the theory, rather than dealing with the substance of the claims themselves, certainly is not impressing or convincing me.

If we're not going to waste time and space with the latest nonsense about Paris Hilton, could we at least have something substantially more insightful and rigorously researched and presented instead? Debunking a conspiracy theory with bunk at a time when more and more credible conspiracies are being revealed by Congressional hearings and the piecing together of older published information from official sources does not really get us too far beyond the fluffy, fuzzy thinking (or not thinking, as the case may be) that the author and I find so unworthy of AlterNet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the world is actually run by tweed-jacketed college professors

This is my favourite line from the whole week. Anyone who thinks that academics are elite/powerful/sinister/whatever clearly knows very few college professors.

If those jackets were corduroy, now, that'd be a whole different thing...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Remember the conspiracies of the black unifomred international forces?? This right wing theory is just another variant opposed to internationalism, because it comes up against the class nationalist thugs of Amerikan Nazis. The problem here, is that they do not even admit either the ideological and economic character of Amerikanism, Capitalist, and Corporate, so they stumble over substiute theories, Conspiracy theories, once class nationalists, have transformed themselves into international, corporate thugs, instead of national corporate thugs.

Of course like Hitler, this major class component, is hidden, and instead is replaced with some nebulous left, international, liberal, or socialist label, in the same way Hitler used "socialism", like Bush uses "Democracy" to hide behind for corporate fascism, on a global level. Once again folks, the failure to take class into account, and substitute all kinds of secondary explanations leads to this ideological rot. Yes, the elites can conspire war crimes, economic strategies, but always within the openly ideological class interests, servility to oligarchy, and global corporate fascism. I am not ruling out conspiracies, just placing them within the broader context of class rule, not some non-existent form of scapegoats, the jews, the immigrants, the ragheads, the commies, the gooks, but real global classes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here's Josh back in action in his favorite role as 'debunker' -- it's so much easier than actually digging up the facts.

I saw the story about the North American Union and the Superhighway in September 2006 on the White House website. Quite a lengthy article. It wasn't there the last time I checked, however. Maybe someone -- Josh? -- told Dubya it's only a 'conspiracy theory'.

Then in the month of August 2006 there were hearings all across Texas, ostensibly to inform the ranchers whose land was going to be taken -- no doubt by eminent domain, now that the Supreme Court has made it so easy -- and to get their comments; that's what hearings are supposed to be for. Of course, any comments would be ignored; that's how this government operates these days.

As I understand it, the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), a 90-page document written by Paul Wolfowitz, has things to say about this. The document is available on the Internet; I haven't read it yet, so will just mention that in passing.

However, then there's the film featuring Connie Fogal, head of the Canadian Action Party, available on Google video (I hope it's still available), with what she knows about this.

There really is an abundance of material out there if anyone is interested in knowing the truth -- just as there is about the government cover-up of 9/11. But the only people who REALLY know are those who take off the blinders, pull their heads out of their ... navels, and take an open-minded look at the evidence. That doesn't seem to be a popular option in America these days. And no wonder. The truth is scary as hell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But I'd sure love it if we united with Canada!

Understandably the Canadians aren't so hot on the idea...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is amazing.
Why is the momentum behind NAU any less probable
than the formation of the EU ? The EU is real, isn't it?

This has to do with unified currencies, trade laws and the
"harmonization" of cultures and political systems that dismantle Constitutional protection.
America has had individual rights for the citizens of this
country, sovereignty without the intrusion of its government. NAU, GATT NAFTA, CAFTA and other communist-fascist agendas give
protections to governments and international corporations.
at the expense of individual citizens.Just look at the track record of ine international pharmaceutical industry and other global corps . If the environment,and resources can be ravaged at will with no accountability-because there are no laws to hold these entities accountable - then what? Welcome to globalization.
What do you think it means when an internatiional corporation, like Monsanto patents the genetic codes in seeds. They are basically saying ( I believe) - that they own
the genetic info in something that evolved in nature.
This means that seeds no longer belong to the life- death cycle of nature. They "belong" to a global corp that had think tanks and lawyers incorporate for their benefit something
that belongs to life and everyone.
How about privatizing the water or the air waves?
Isn't a large picture starting to emerge here?
The death and chaos being caused is staggering. Many of the trade laws protect them. Initiating an anti-trust law suit would no longer apply since The Constitution, Bill of Rights and our unalienable rights would no longer apply under international law. This is happening real time.

This has nothing to do with "conspiracy theories". Bush has been pushing for a prosperity initiative that would harmonize the laws of America, Canada and Mexico.

It would dismantle the Constitution, Bill of Rights and our
unalienable rights and Sovereignty by flat lining laws
via inernational trade agreements. Once laws are "harmonized"- Disputes would be (allegedly) decided
in international courts and international tribunals (Think U.N.
IMF, World Bank style "Justice" )
U. S citizens will no longer have a Constitution that protects us. Do you think Bush's war on civil liberties, Habeus Corpus The Consitution and Bill of Rights is random?
Tony Blair has been dismanteling the Constitution is England.( See European Constituion vs. British Sovereignty:Bruce Bartlett: www.capmag.com) There are MANY artcles and much info out there.

This is a well orchestrated plan to harmonize the laws of America with countries that have historically been socialist, communist or had totalitarian dictatorships.


If writers, politicians and bloggers refuse to see this- or want the successful outcome of fascist agendas that strip
individuals of their sovereignty - it does not make dissenters conspiracy theorists. It may , however, create a global police state and slave class.
Just because it is a "conspiracy theory" doesn't mean it isn't true.
If people who have the most to gain from the passage of
these agreements cannot debate these issues openly, without making others "crazy" or wrong- maybe they have something to hide.

Where there's smoke- there's fire. You don't have to believe me, according to this article- I'm just a conspiracy theorist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It had to be an Urban Legend.

Who in their right mind would believe that the most 'powerful nation on Earth' would allow a few elites to replace the the PNAC with a consortium that would include two 'inferior' nations. That would be absurd. The corporations that drive the military-industrial complex have no interest in giving up the extreme power and control they already have and have purchased from politicians inside our own country.

The PNAC has already done an excellent job of taking over our country. They don't need to have it changing hands again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet has become a place I go to not for information, but for entertainment. This article is a perfect example of what has become Josh's subjective writting. If Josh thinks something is xenophobic, racist, or whatever, we should all bow down at the alter of Josh. I think when you claim something comes from the John Birch society you should offer unadulterated proof. Apparently ALTERnet doesn't think so. This site has become increasingly divisive because, certain contributors can't make a point without attempting to smear anyone who might think differently. This approach is what has made our current political system unworkable. And it appears that the real purpose is to drive a wedge between those on the left and right who may have common ground.

I find it deceitful to write about Swiftboaters when the majority of one's pieces are awash in the same tactics. The arrogance it takes to believe that no one is wise enough to see through such deception is disturbing. I believe he continues to get space here because he is a lightening rob. But, so are some of the more venemous and racist posters here and they don't get a byline. Lastly I want to say that Mr. Holland loves to call people racist, which I find hilarious because, he has never engaged the Blacks on this line in a way that says he respects our opinion on matters of race. At least not the Blacks who are unwilling to bow to his superiority.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DIF,

I don't think that you understand Josh's use of the term racist. He means the encouragement of xenophobia by right-wing populists who use nativist rhetoric in order to confuse people about the nature of globalization. The point is not to slam foreigners in the same predicament as we are but to reach an understanding about the class nature of globalization and work out a common agenda to fight the debilitating effects on the working and middle classes everywhere.

So long as you hold right wing populist beliefs out of an unwillingness or inability to understand the real complexity of the world you can't blame people like Josh for unintentionally insulting you and your friends. Josh didn't mean to do so. Right-wing populism is a purile and dangerous belief system based on the inability to understand anything but palpable phenomena like people acting directly as a group of conspiritors. This is not how things work. The world around you and the social systems it consists of are complex. Furthermore, Josh never said all conspiricy theories come from the John Birch Society but that many of these theories resemble those of the JBS because of the latter's attachment to conspiricy.

Let me tell you something DIF and get it through your head. Conspiricy mongering is dangerous, ignorant, and bigoted. It is the refuge of the small minded and the intellectually backward. If this describes you than change!! It's shameful and no way to go through life!!

Also, you don't really know Josh at all!! He is one of the finer and more informed and clear headed writers and hasn't an ounce of racism in his bones. Don't hate him because his writing inadvertantly flies in the face of your attitudes. You are completely unfair and I also notice that you really don't give any specifics about what you mean. He hasn't said anything racist at all. I also don't know what you mean't by calling him a lightening rod (which you misspelled) but I hope it's not some kind of hateful insinuation. Finally, I don't think you should post something out of a knee jerk emotional reaction to someone personally without first thinking clearly about what you're saying.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I wasn't aware this needed "debunking."

Kinda scraping the bottom of the barrel now, eh Joshua?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

With all due respect lately in your AlterNet articles, Joshua you are sounding more and more like the mainstream propaganda news.

Joshua: read this article…..Premeditated Merger North American Union Plan Headed to Congress in fall - Powerful Think tank Prepares report on benefits of integration between U.S., Mexico, Canada. Also read: Stop the North American Union website. Why in the world would our own government officials want to sacrifice our country’s sovereignty? One world government – that’s what all this globalization/globalism/global economy c#*p is about.

“google-schmoogle’ NAU and you will get approximately 80 million hits (some actually have some validity).

Information regarding the N.A.U. is even posted on the U.S.gov website in an audacious - unethical manner.

NAUPremeditated
StopNAU
google-schmoogle: NAU

p.s. Joshua: Also: 9/11 was an inside job!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not a few years ago you were called a 'nut' if you even mentioned the CFR, much less Bilderberger, now they are mentioned in mainstream news articles and apologists, like Mr.Holland, must denigrate them as "egg heads". Look at the membership of the CFR (or Bilderberger) and tell me that they are just "egghead" academics with no influence!

Remember the EU started as a simple coal&steel treaty between, mainly, France&Germany. Now all rules are made by unelected bureacrats in Brussels, Luxembourg, and Strasbourg and one holds an 'EU' passport. Likewise the NAU has started with various, 'simple' trade agreements: NAFTA, CAFTA, SPP, etc. Notice things like SPP are managed/agreed upon without ANY voter input? I thought treaties needed to be approved. Now we have simple 'egg heads' signing treaties and making agreements for us? What kind of 'progressive', or anybody who believes in some kind of democratic, republican form of government, like secret treaties and groups of unelected 'egg heads' making decisions for us?

Note that one thing Holland get correct. The NAU aggrandisement is more 'market based' then the one used in Europe. This is simple tactics, the overall strategy is the same (central control over larger area, less civil rights, free movement of capital, etc) but 'American' people believe more in the 'market' and so this is being used. Whereas in Europe they used more 'progressive' ideals to implement their plan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've just scanned what has been written here, and I'm still thinking about it. I just ran across this article about "Atlantica" and thought some of you might be interested in reading and commenting on it:
http://coanews.org/tiki-print_article.php?articleId=1922
A protest is supposed to be going on in Halifax from June 11-16. Right now, in other words. Maybe it's time to check out the Canadian news.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"What is the NAU?" is this: It is absolutely nothing. The NAU exists only as a proposal..."

Well, your nothing but a proposal is about to displace a million people here in Texas. I know the liberal elite could care less about Texas. We progressives here are simply written off as done for. The Trans -Texas Highway, which would be part of the new highway system from Canada to Mexico, would be getting underway soon if the Texas legislature hadn't put a sort of moratorium on it for 2 years. But Gov "Good Hair" Perry is looking for an end-around as I write. The asphalt plant planned to be built in my county to supply the highway is not nothing. Along with a coal powered energy plant for good measure. I don't give a fuck if it's a conspiracy or not, if I've got a 12 lane highway/railway through my back yard (if not directly over my property). No one in the liberal press seems to give a shit about that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

However it is not logically accurate but an effective means to denigrate someone else's argument or position. You see if you believe in the CFR, SPP, or NAU you are the same as the "John Birchers". Well the "Birchers" are nut cases and racists, so I'd better not believe in NAU, SPP, or the CFR! Similiar to his campaign linking the enforcement of laws against illegal immigration to the KKK. By his tortured logic if the "Birchers", or indeed the KKK, also thought that 1+1=2 then it must not be so, because they are racist or wrong in their other beliefs and therefore wrong on simple maths also! Absurd.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But honestly with all the damage that has been done to this country by the right wing, the Bush administration, religious fanatics ( and the Congress and Lefties that allowed them to do all this damage unchecked). I could actually see this happening. Eventually China's going to want all that money it's lending us to destroy Iraq back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Most of the 2008 presidential candidates are backed by the money of David Rockefeller and other like-minded individuals in one way or another, and that money is being spent for the purpose of pushing forward the agenda for One World Government, which will greatly benefit international corporations.

All of these candidates are members of Rockefeller's Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which advocates One World Government --

Fred Thompson
Rudy Giuliani
John McCain
Mitt Romney
Jim Gilmore
Newt Gingrich
Hillary Clinton
Barack Obama
John Edwards
Joe Biden
Chris Dodd
Bill Richardson

A great source for "insider" information about the plan for One World Government, as organized by David Rockefeller and his private thinktank, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is Daniel Estulin's web site --
http://www.danielestulin.com/?op=noticias&idioma=en

You will also find documentation that demonstrates that David Rockefeller has purchased controlling stakes in NBC, CBS, and ABC in an effort to control the flow of information in the media.

"The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is the American Branch of a society which originated in England... (and) ...believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established."
- Carroll Quigley, member of Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), mentor to Bill Clinton

"Once the ruling members of the CFR shadow government have decided that the U.S. Government should adopt a particular policy, the very substantial research facilities of (the) CFR are put to work to develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy, and to confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition."
- Admiral Chester Ward, former CFR member and Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy

"The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government."
- Admiral Chester Ward, former CFR member and Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy

Also, if you haven't seen it -- the documentary "SPIN," which will blow your mind!!!
http://www.brasscheck.com/videos/spin/spin.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How can an average person make sense of it all? Answer: They can't. Alternet columnists can't, tinfoil hat-wearers can't, the "git yer filthy federal ass off mah land" crowd up in the woods can't either. This article offered some keen perspective on the prospect of a NAU but I don't think it has "debunked" the idea that some very powerful people may be working towards this goal.

All I know is this. There are very powerful people at work in the world toay and they aren't in much of a mood to invite me to their meetings. Many of the most powerful people are not part of any government. I am inclined to believe that they will not be passive while (s)elected officials decide their fate. Most will leverage their power when they are able to. Does that mean that they have inititated a global conspiracy to achieve a one-world government or a N. American government? I don't know that it does but I don't know that it doesn't, either. Like I said they don't invite me to their meetings.

Anyone who claims to know the mind of the world's most powerful people based off of some internet research is full of crap. There is simply too much information, some accurate, some not, to come to any conclusive proof about these sort of things.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The idea that shadowy forces beyond our perception are really in charge of steering the most powerful country in the world is reinforced every time a bipartisan "trade" deal with little or no support gets jammed through Congress.

These are not shadowy forces; it is one force. The force of the corporate establishment that controls both of our parties' leaderships and hence, our government. There is nothing shadowy about campaign fund bribery and legislation written by industry lobbyists. There is nothing shadowy about the revolving door that puts former corporate executives in charge of departments that oversee their industries. It's not a dark secret; it's so blatant that people accept it as normal. The illusion of a republic ruled by the people is perpetuated by elections, that replace TweedleDee with TweedleDum.
Bob Reichenbach,
Director,The Lincoln Initiative

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Joshua,

globalists represent the greatest threat to democracy the world has ever faced.

amerika the great, now complete with a legal acceptance of the private expropriation of public lands.

is this some sort of skit with you playing the role of neville chamberlain?

tks,
rjm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This writer is obviously into debunking (real) elite conspiracies, or he is a paid counterintelligence agent for the elite... that's my bet. This is the samejerk who attempted to be the town crier to let us know that no one in our federal government had anything to do with 9/11. Fat chance that the global elite aren't using their clout to take further control of our poor (Corporately Besieged) planet as they have been doing thoughout history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Manifest Destiny is an ideal that has been embraced by Americans for a long time. Of course, it is offensive to many Canadians, as it assumes that the U.S. somehow has some god-given right to the whole of North America, regardless of the wishes of Canadian citizenry. As a staunch Canadian, I hope to never see that day that we are "harmonized" with the U.S. to the point that we are one country. We like you as neighbours, but prefer you stay on your side of the fence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I do gotta say that is a really snazzy-looking flag!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Propaganda in America is a fundamental feature of public life, and is created by the public relations firms. They work for specific industries, like pharmaceuticals (lawsuits are the reason for high health care costs!), fossil fuels (global warming is a hoax, and renewable energy doesn't work!), the finance industry (now is a great time to get a new mortgage on your house!), and the defense contractors (we need a new billion dollar fighter jet to Keep America Strong!), but there are also 'mass psychology' strategies in use.

In the 90's, the idea was to whip up fear of 'World Government'. Here, the goal is not to protect corporate profits, but to attempt to change the 'mass psychology' of the voting public. Any study of Goebbels and Nazi mythology will reveal how this strategy works. It's based on creating fear, because people who are afraid are more easily manipulated.

Take the astroturf 9/11 truth movement - one effect of this was to create the belief in an all-powerful government agency that was much like a religious deity. The CIA can do anything, go anywhere, can make buildings fall down, and controls everything on the planet, so you had better be afraid! Now, stay in your homes and don't cause trouble!

This is also how religious dictators ruled in the Middle Ages - the priests had a hotline to God, and they could damn you to eternal hellfire if you crossed them. (The word 'propaganda' derives from a Middle Age-era Vatican group called the "Congregatio de Propaganda Fide".)

This is basic psychology - social behavior. When a tribe of chimpanzees, or water buffalo for that matter, is threatened by a predator, the instinctive response is to group together, which makes it harder for the predator to pick off isolated members of the herd.

This explains the statement by the famous Nazi, Josef Goebbels:

"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

This is a remarkable statement, because most people who use such tactics are reluctant to speak so honestly about them.

In this case, what you have is Republican operatives attempting to use fear to motivate their base. In the case of the religious right (a very strange and insular community - they are constantly being directed to the 'approved' news sources, and are very brainwashed), the Repugnant operatives bring up themes like 'the homosexual war against Christianity' and 'the secular war against Christianity' in order to motivate the masses. In the case of this "North American Union" nonsense, it seems to be an attempt to get the western rural white male on board - i.e. the militia types that McVeigh took his inspiration from before the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing.

Public relations, propaganda, pyschological operations - it's the basic mindset of any totalitarian, authoritarian regime - which is what Bush, Cheney and the Repugnant party are trying to create.

Remember: War is a Racket!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alas, I am old enough to remember the inane sribblings of The John Birch Society wingnuts along with other groups that were kicking around in the 1950s. Most of them railed against a "secret plot" to turn the US into a Communist puppet state. Whenever they thought that argument was losing traction, they began shouting about the UN being the forerunner of a "one world government." (That must have been when John Bolton and the other neo-cons were cutting their eye teeth.)

As the Birchers died down, the Club of Rome and Knights of Malta arose as the new conveyors of "truth" about the nefarious plot to rob America of its "vital bodily fluids," to quote George C. Scott's character in Dr. Stranglove.

Now, it's something called the North American Union.

Look at reality, folks. We have had these "anti-One Worlder conspiracy theories being kicked around by various knuckleheads since the end of World War II. As for the latest incarnation, it's a joke for a whole bunch of reasons:

- As an American who has lived in Canada since 1991, I can tell you that the quickest way for a federal politician to be voted out of office is to suggest even a hint of integration with the US. The current PM spent a good deal of the last election campaign trying to assure voters that he was not George Bush's puppet and had no interest in handing Canada over to America.

- The right-wing base of the Republican party would never sit still for a presidential candidate who even thought of the idea.

- The base of the Democratic party, for very different reasons, would want nothing to do with such a policy.

So who exactly are these evil, secretive NAUer's? Mostly, it seems. folks with too much time on their hands and access to a computer and the internet.

If you want to worry about something that's real and happening right now that is destroying the US, focus on Iraq, focus on civil liberties, focus on income disparity, focus on health care. But, for Pete's sake, don't focus on lunatic theories from the lunatic fringer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The NAU is obviously a lightning-rod issue that inflames passions. Joshua's methodology and logic used in debunking have been repeatedly floated for well over 35 years. The bottom-line effect of such protest is to close off legitimate discussion, turn out the lights and go home.

In answer to two of Joshua's call for information, please read the following articles for some factual data...

The Global Elite: Who are they?
Toward a North American Union

This writer has been analyzing the New International Economic Order since 1978. Yes, there are misconceptions and exaggerations about the NAU... but to say it's just a myth is irresponsible, ignorant and dangerous.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

98% of the population will have already gone to the United States.

Then the few remaining Mexican plutocrats will lease Mexico to Club Med.

Canada? Like Iraq - easy to invade, tougher than you'd think to occupy!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada"

First I doubt this seriously since the Bush administration has always been supportive of more border security. But then I have to ask, what would be so bad about the free movement of people? Shouldn't that be a basic goal for anyone who believes in the concept of liberty? There may be practical problems, but we should be trying to fix those problems not building more walls.

Of course that isn't what these deals are attempting to do - and we should be skeptical of any such plan proposed by Washington (or the governments in Canada or Mexico). These trade deals are always about enforcing borders more than tearing them down - at least when it comes to human beings. They want commerce to be able to move about more freely, but not workers.

The anti-globalization movement is opposed to powerful business interests creating free trade deals at the expense of workers and the environment. The right-wing nuts are opposed to these deals because of bigotry and xenophobia. They are more afraid of a few day laborers with little power than of Halliburton.

shoplifters unite

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dismissing rumors about a North American Union is like saying tidal waves never follow underwater earthquakes.

This week, Senior Bush generated tremors by talking about the U.S. being an "assimilating" nation. The problem is, our culture is the one being assimilated, not the Hispanics.

Is it too much to imagine that in 50 years, there will be enough Latino voters in America to force a commercial union of Mexico and the United States, the way European countries did?

Not for me, it isn't. But then, I'm not trying to make a living writing AlterNet articles.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This sounds like a wonderful idea. We could put up a wall around the entire North American continent and cower behind it (sans civil liberties under the benevolent protection of Lord Bush) as we wait for the terrorist hoards.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Look - when you are on the board of directors of a large international corporation bent on making a profit, the first rule is 'don't piss your friends off'.

That explains a lot of things. For example, in media corporations, where your co-board members also sit on big oil corporations, you don't want to be accused of harming their interests by publishing stories that result in lawsuits or loss of profits for your friends - you go to the same parties, you swim in the same circles.

If you expand this notion out to the entire corporate system, what you have is simply self-censorship.

Go to www.theyrule.net to see how corporate boards are structured. Go to 'find a connection', for example.

Enter "TimeWarner Inc." and "Exxon Mobil". The connection chain is from ExxonMobil to board member William R. Howell to Pfizer to Franklin D. Raines to TimeWarner (CNN).

Now, doesn't this explain why CNN promoted the war in Iraq, which resulted in world-record profits for ExxonMobil? Doesn't this explain why CNN won't run negative stories on Big Pharma? Play around with the site a little - it's quite fascinating.

This isn't some 'conspiracy theory' - it's just the way the business world has ALWAYS worked, which is the fundamental reason why business and government need to be kept separate. Unfortunately, what's happened is the 'revolving door' phenomenon, exemplified by Donald Rumsfeld.

Rumsfeld went from Nixon's White House to Big Pharma to Reagan's White House to Big Pharma and back to Bush Jr's White House - as just one example. Along the way, he made billions in profits for Searles, for Merck, and for Gilead, who happens to own the patent for Tamiflu, the so-called 'avian flu drug' - which doesn't work... not that that kept the government from giving Merck and Gilead $7 billion, which resulted in Rumsfeld's Gilead holdings going from $5 million to $25 million in value.

Get it now?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

josh holland isn't even that good as a gatekeeper: a pretend progressive journalist who tries to gently steer the conversation into acceptable parameters.

its transparent josh. you're not very good at your job.

shame on alternet for keeping you on board.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nice article J.

Being a conspiracy reader myself, this is a real scoop. And being Canadian, the Free Trade debate is fresh in our history and memory. A major change that was hotly debated all over the land.

It was terrific to mention Maude Barlow... "of the Council for Canadians have warned for some time that the SPP is part of a push, financed by Canadian and U.S. corporate think tanks, to essentially bring an end to Canada's social welfare state through regional integration."

... so true.

Here's an example; By 1995 the Paul Martin Liberal government had, with Free Trade already in full swing, axed our world famous health care systems funding in half. HALF. Currently it's funding level is the lowest on our history. You know all those stories of long lines at Canadian hospitals? That's why. All that money went into funding corporate ventures like biotech, oil in the tar sands, and so on. That money would be our tax dollars.

Culturally, Canadians don't go in for conspiracy theories. We knew damn well Washington would never deal fairly in business (WTO, my arse!). They never have. The only difference between how Washington deals with Canada over Mexico is that they don't shoot Canadians.

But these conspiracy theories, as J. points out, work uniquely well on Americans. Why? Because they are a culture living in fear of being destroyed. That's insane, of course, but the TV (and certain Presidents) tell Americans every day their families are in deadly danger. So any story about a conspiracy to take over the US, from this latest NAU to the UN being a world government (run by reptilian Jews from Mars no doubt), plays. It really plays. I mean, Americans were sold the idea that there was a world wide terrorist organization planning a "caliphate" from India to Morocco. Dick Cheney still tells this wopper and frack man, no one ever pointed out that was insane.

Somehow, I think the Swift Boat people, and where ever they get their $$$ (hmmm, Karl Rove?), and their ilk will feed this little theory to the poor and ignorant of America with all the gusto the KKK sells the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Which, originally, was a screed against the Tsar of Russia. Someone just crossed out "Tsar" and put in "Jews". Funny? Well, it fooled Henry Ford... for a while. ;p

At least this conspiracy theory doesn't have any aliens in it. I'm sooo sick of aliens. :D

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As the debates and new party nominations continue- the timing could not be more perfect to debunk the North American Union. Since its inception the NAU has been drawing to a close and is not only well-documented, but is relatively well reported, although media conglomerates bury the articles deep within their publications- which is typical corporate media behavior. Many of the links provided by posters on here will take anyone to the scary places to read what is actually going on right under our noses.

Again, typical Bush fashion will dictate several conspiracy theory debunks- He addressed the nation and expressed concern that we not get caught up in conspiracy theories.

First if they were merely conspiracy theories- the president would not acknowledge such lameness. Secondly, he made a huge issue out of it, which clearly indicates there is truth in it which is why he is opposed to people talking about it.


Connie Fogal (Canadian Public Action Leader) openly discusses that the NAU is currently happening: Google her name.

Lou Dobbs addresses not only the NAU, but also points out that the highest levels of all three countries are deeply involved and are busting our own policies and constitutions to achieve the NAU and pushes for the Amero (American version of the Euro).

Google Lou Dobbs and the NAU.

In a nutshell the reporter for this Debunking article is not only an ill-informed boob- he also can't write for shit either. He cannot even sell it other professional debunker's. He really ought to be hawking Slurpies at his local 7-11 and leave the reporting to the grown-ups.

Because we have an election year coming up- all the shitty things the administration is involved in are going to buried in debunker land- or at least they are going to try. I find it fascinating they even debunk at all given they (our administration) doesn't give a rats ass what we think, want and/or have to say about it.

I did post the links but the edit command said I had words that are too long! Funny how that works, eh?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Because it's being rebutted on AlterNet.

People on the "Establishment" Left and Right now that real Americans on the left and right have common concerns about this very real issue. It's looks like the same people seed news outlets trying to debunk this because real people on each side have a commonality, but attempt to keep the lines of division going strong. "Don't look at the facts" you say, "it's a conspiracy theory." Well, shit, it's very well documented and Giuliani is working for a law firm in Texas representing a Mexican interest to get it done. One of many links can be drawn to support the fact. So, AlterNet is doing it's duty to keep it's readership dumbed down on the Left.

Wonder why neither side is tackling the real illegal immigration issue that real Americans on the left and right want solved (As in get the hell out)? Liberals preach the "human rights" crap and the right want cheap labor. Either way the trusted "Establishment" Dems and Repubs screw the common American. It's truly a one party system, each doing their part to destroy the country for a buck.

Sovereignty is being replaced by commerce and freetrade (That ain't free for us) for elites. They lied before, they'll lie again.

"The only people that don't know about it is the Americans"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiPrsc9g98

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/kincaid051407.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's difficult for me to express my feelings about this article or the reaction of its readers. I feel I've got to say SOMETHING, so here goes. I've been familiar with the concept of a world government since age ten. That's when I became a science fiction nut. (No, I'm not a treckie and I haven't got an aluminum beanie). I can't remember WHO it was who set his story in a united world, Heinlein? Asimov? Anyway, I think unification of the world along economic and political lines is a natural and ongoing process, the only question being WHO will actually be in power. Other questions such as what will be the world language-one that will be mandatory for everyone to know, what form the world currency will take, or if there will even be money, etc. etc. will probably stir up a lot of people, so, if you're around when this all begins, be ready for a bumpy ride.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

damn right.

Going for Broke: are Bu$heviks banking on Canadian resources?
you wanna KNOW it... the US is going broke.
China & other foreign investors are buying up both government & PRIVATE debts.

Canada to raise U.S. bank policy with security czar
When *American UNIONS* figure out that they've let Corporatists fuel their paranoia by *bargaining AGAINST* fellow Peoples of *North America*, they'll realize that the corporate poison has been yearning to find a way to pillage the continent with an ample DIVIDED workforce.
"US may collapse as a superpower": analyst - The World Today
pay attention, don't listen to the propaganda.

When the US has closed its borders, controls union assembly, sold off its transportation & control of ports for resources, sources of power & trade, closed down communications... where do you wanna be??

if you find yourself saying, "I'll run for Canada!" then...
GET ACTIVE: join with the PEOPLES of North America & the GLOBE to protect our natural resources.

...& protect OUR collective Future.

meanwhile... why is the shiny new 'terror training' prison... @ BlackJack Village??

so ask yourself: if the Corporate Bushevik solution is the Green Zone in Iraq...
what might their SOLUTION be for the rest of us?

I bet it looks a lot like Dubai's The World...


Spread Love...
... but wear the Glove!

BlueBerry Pick'n
can be found @

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

(Pls note Teresa Healy is with the Canadian Labour Congress not the Council of Canadians)
the FTA, NAFTA and now the SPP are all within the neoliberal policy direction: less power to workers and their communities; limited power of government to regulate and shape the market...

social activists, academics, workers, progressive legislators and independent media outlets from Canada, Mexico and the United States are challenging the big-business driven vision of North American integration contained in the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

In March 2005, Paul Martin, George W. Bush and Vicente Fox met in Waco, Texas to ratify the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). The SPP takes NAFTA's goal of continental economic integration much further by including security and foreign policy issues, and by speeding up the process of regulatory harmonization integral to the first Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. Despite a lack of public awareness or input, lack of debate and votes within each legislature, all three North American right-wing governments are moving quickly and undemocratically toward a continental resource pact, North American security perimeter, and common agricultural and other polices related to our health and environment. Working groups comprised of government executive branches, bureaucrats and corporate leaders are putting this “partnership” into action behind closed doors, that is a fact.

anti-spp folks seek a relationship among Canada, Mexico and the US that can be fostered through fair and ethical trade and multilateralism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Premeditated Merger: North American union plan headed to Congress in fall
Powerful think tank prepares report on benefits of integration between U.S., Mexico, Canada



Global Research, May 24, 2007
WorldNetDaily.com


Email this article to a friend
Print this article


WASHINGTON – A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc.

The final report, published in English, Spanish and French, is scheduled for submission to all three governments by Sept. 30, according to the Center for Strategic & International Studies.

CSIS boasts of playing a large role in the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994 – a treaty that set in motion a political movement many believe resembles the early stages of the European Community on its way to becoming the European Union.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What the dunderheads, dimbulbs, "minutemen," Klansmen, and other various and assorted conspiracy nuts of the reactionary right never understand is that the very people who are bankrolling their little "save America" group are the very people selling them out.

Who might that be?

The usual suspects: the Coors family, Richard Mellon Scaif, Helen Krieble and a galaxy of lesser known reactionary luminaries. And while these self-appointed champions of American sovereignty wave the Uncle Sam's bloody shirt to rouse reactionary dupes to action, their stock portfolios wax fat off profits from corporations that outsource, union-bust, globalize and hire undocumented labor, surreptitiously smuggled across our borders and in our unguarded harbors.

So as the heathens of neoKnow-Nothingism, nativism and good, old fashioned racism howl at the moons of "illegal immigration," NAFTA Super Highways, Mexican truckers and the North America Union, their benefactors are laughing all the way to the bank. Oh, and by the way, The Coors, Scaif, Krieble, et al., are not laughing with their reactionary minions but at them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I read this piece twice. All I can say is, who gives a shirt. I don't. The only continental Union or Federation I can be bothered with to promote, bleed for (cuz everyone in the soldier cult is into the whole blood thing these days) what have you, is a bioregionally organized one. But that's cuz I'm an ecologic-parecon globalist (ooooh pretty words.... a.k.a. Green). Anything else is just rich fuckers messing things up on a daily basis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

blind support of gobalization at the expense of our Constitution.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I mean, seriously. We tried to take Canada in the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, and we did take over half of Mexico's territory. Let's just finish the job. There'll be no more worrying about Mexicans trying to cross the border, since they'll all be north of the border, and they'll get our minimum wage and environmental protections. Canada's health plans are all run through provincial governments, so we won't lack that, and we might even get a bit of inspriration from them, not to mention Tim Horton's competing with Dunkin Donuts, and finally, world domination of hockey. Everyone wins, and you know that Americans always feel awesome when we steal other peoples' land. We'll be happy for a generation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But then again, what passes for journalism these days is like applying for a job at Starbucks.

This is fun too:

"The NAU conspiracy theorists would have you believe
the impossible: that all of that will be done under
cover of the metaphorical dead of night, while
Americans are sleeping, and nobody will notice until
it's too late. That is, nobody but those who are "wide
awake" enough to embrace their conspiratorial
worldview."

Yeah, you mean like the Patriot Act? How about that
Federal Reserve and Income tax? - those were pretty
damn huge - done in the dead of night, and nobody
noticed until it was too late.

What this writer aso fails to see is that it's not a
Bush admin or Republican idea.

..."it would quickly be rejected not only by most
Americans, but also by every member of Congress who
likes the idea of serving another term."

You mean like the Patriot Act? Iraq war? Funding for
the war recently? That one is hilarious.

Nor does this writer himself mention the blatent open
borders policy. The influx of illegal immigrants of
larger than history has ever seen. All while we are
supposedly fighting a "War On Terror" to keep
Terrorists out.. we have on average pof 3000 illegal
aliens entering the vountry on a daily basis, worse
than ever - and we have the latest legislation to
essentially pardon everyone, i don't mind the
immigrants, what i do mind is pretending that somethng
is being done about it.

Just like the wannabe 9/11 debunkers, he doesn't look
at the whole picture. He doesn't mention the meeting
that was made btwn the 3 heads of the 3 countries in
2005 that started this mess. How members of the press
that were there have come out and discussed what they
witnessed. He doesn't mention the AMERO - the AMERO
which is teh proposed currency that even Wikipedia has
an entry on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Coming from Berlin, Germany I remember how when this was first reported in the news people all said it was a conspiracy theory, especially those in the media.

Then a few years later, all of a sudden we have the Euro and with every passing day the EU centralizes more power and keeps trying to enforce it's federal constitution and laws upon sovereign European states.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Boy, I know this is not going to be popular but would it really be that bad to have a North American government?

We already have states. Does it bother you that Idaho or Nevada or New York belong to the same country as you do (I'm a Californian)?

Ever been to Mississippi? Rural parts of Louisiana? Downtown Los Angeles? We have some mighty poor areas in our 'land of plenty.'

Ever been to Guanajuato? Oaxaca? Toronto? Cool places! I recommend a trip!

As an American, I read these comments (as well as posts on the immigration article JH wrote) and it saddens me. How lucky I am that I don't experience this kind of vitriol when I travel to other countries. I'm always embraced, people are very kind to me and my young son.

If only we could be that kind to the visitors of our country, and the people who like it so much they'd like to stay.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

you can be sure it's a done deal. Like the slander against the 9/11 truth movement, which regularly appears in this venue, despite the fact that the official story of 9/11 has holes big enough to drive a truckload of thermite through. And the attitude over the public outcry against illegal immigration, which is regulary described as pure xenophobia, despite the documented effects on the wages of working class Americans.

Alternet often presents interesting articles, which is why I and other readers who disagree with the moderators keep coming back. But I still recognize them as left-wing gatekeepers, who see it as their personal mission to derail any deep thinking about what is really going on behind the scenes in this country.

America is being fiscally mismanged, perhaps deliberately so. The US dollar isn't particularly healthy right now, with monetary inflation running about 12.5 percent, according to economists who have reconstructed the no longer officially released M3 report on currency printing. One more major financial hit, and the dollar will drop like a stone, affecting Canada's and Mexico's economies as well. This would be a good excuse to change to a new "stable" currency to bail out the entire north american economy.

So don't be too surprised if in a few years from now you're paying for your Walmart chinese imports in Ameros. It's all over but the shouting, folks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...'cause the hammer of Josh Holland is gonna fall and you're all gonna be erased & replaced with comments exalting his gloriousness!

Really, I find it absolutely absurd that JH should use the 'editor's pick' button as a means to enhance those who kiss his ass & buy into his schlock. He's turned this forum into a faux-left mockup of the worst of Jerry Springer & Fox News.

Really Josh, I can't tell the difference between you and Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh. You're equally as able to twist the truth, put forth lies and push your transparent agenda as any of them.

Congratulations, you've entered the grown-up world of mainstream media.

It's 9:40 CST, let's see how long my post stays up tonight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Josh, thanks for the reminder why i'll never donate money to this fake "left" site. Unbelievable- you think you can shill for the NAU without pulling your own covers? Like turning over more power to the mass-murdering parasitic globalists is a good idea?

Debunk Alternet funding, left side:
http://leftgatekeepers.com/chart.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Actually, I'm quite amused by this and the same talking points from other liberal media outlets today. They are doing a full court press on the issue of the immigration reform legislation covering all the liberal talking points on the issue: 1. xenophobia
2. conspiracy theory on the NAU.

Both of which are dishonest arguments.

Calling xenophobia is merely shunning technique to prevent people from discussing things that they don't want discussed. Here's a clue for you... it's not working anymore - and it's never going to work again.

The other one - 'conspiracy theory' is wrong also. It's not a theory. The conspiracy is a fact and all the documents are in the public domain for anybody who is intellectually curious and/or honest enough to go looking.

You can start here -

History Lesson for Joshua - NAU Timeline

And you can see how the whole rotten, treasonous conspiracy is working at a process level - here
Treason on the Installment Plan

The issue of the North American Union is not a left vs right issue. It is an American issue. If you care about the Constitution. If you care about this country - then you'd better get this thing figured out because we don't have a lot of time left.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Re: NAFTA Critic on NAU Conspiracy Theory

Here are the two most important errors in this piece:

1) First and foremost the author does NOT mention that treaties are the "law of the land" according to the US Constitution. Thus, international agreements between Canada, Mexico, and become law. Thus, a North American Union can come about piece-meal, one treaty at a time, harmonizing regulations, continental defense, etc etc. The pulic need never be consulted. It is not important whether or not somebody finally slaps the NAU label on the treaty mess or not. We need to revive the BRICKER AMENDMENT proposed in the 1950s to correct this defect of the US Constitution.

2) The author is also a leftist who substitutes faceless "corporations" for what he desparages as the "shadowy cabals" of the Right. In fact, the Right pierces the "Corporate Veil" to the CONTROLLERS of the Major Corporations who, as epitomized by David Rockefeller, control finance, and participate in the "policy wonk" intellectual committees at the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderbergers, Trilateral Commission and other CORPORATE FINANCED "think tanks" that the author thinks are so irrelevant. The idea that Committees set-up by the Corporate financed Council on Foreign Relations are irrelevant "idealists" is silly beyond words!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If the US is enthusiastic about the NAU and SPP, Canada should be running away, far, far away.

With a balance (2006, the CIA Fact Book) of $20,560,000,000 why would we want to become part of a union that with the US being top debtor with $-862,300,000,000 and will eventually be owned by China?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sorry to read this site has been taken over...This article is propaganda. There is established proof of the North American Union, and plenty of websites to prove it.

I am very sorry to see AlterNet be taken over by the Neocon propaganda machine.

This will be my last visit ever to this site because of this fake news story. WAKE UP AMERICA (AND ALTERNET)!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There’s a lot of vitriol on this thread and a lot of personal attacks against me, the messenger, but nobody has touched on these central points:

1) The actual proposal issued by the CFR -- the heart of the whole fairytale -- doesn’t in fact call for the formation of an EU-style political union.
2) The SPP, supposedly part of the plot, is a coordinating body with zero authority. Contrary to the fairytale, the SPP’s recommendations are not binding on any of the three governments in any way, shape or form.
3) While there are clearly constituents for greater regional economic and regulatory integration -- and closer security coordination -- nobody wants an EU-style federation. There is no constituency for a political union in the U.S., in Mexico or in Canada.

But forget about all of that for a moment. Let’s pretend for a moment that there were really a call for an EU-style federation and there were really constituents for that kind of political union.

In order to enact a North American (political) Union, the Constitution would obviously need to be amended (it delegates powers, you know). That process goes like this: either two-thirds of state legislatures call a Constitutional Convention -- that’s only happened twice and not since 1863 -- or an amendment is passed by a two-thirds majority in both chambers of Congress before being sent to state legislatures for ratification. It only becomes an amendment, though, if three-fourths of all state legislatures approve it.

Everyone voting for that amendment -- in Congress and in those state legislatures -- would be voting to decrease his or her power, or eliminate their jobs altogether. Of course, there would be the proverbial villagers with pitchforks rioting outside while they cast their votes.

So, if you think all that happening is a likely sequence of events in a political culture that can’t pass a decent immigration bill, I suggest you spend a lot of time on the internet writing in all caps. Tell people to WAKE UP!, call them SHEEPLE and SUCKERS and suggest that anyone who doesn’t worry about the NAU as much as you do is stupid or naïve or a shill for … whomever.

Many of you are obviously already following this stratagem.

But if you think all of that coming to pass is about as likely as Jenna Bush signing up for frontline combat duty in Falluja, then you, like me, must conclude that the NAU is one of the sillier conspiracy theories out there.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think I made it extremely clear in this article that I am an opponent of the kind of corporate-led process of "globalization" we've seen so far, and I think the NAU is a distraction from the very important fight against the very thing so many readers seem to believe I'm supporting above.

Again: I don't deny there is a very real push for economic/regulatory integration in North America (as elsewhere), but the NAU as it is described in the conspiracy is not an economic union but a political one.

Yes, there is a NAFTA, and there are certainly business groups -- real entities that you and I can name -- pushing for greater regulatory harmonization. Yes, they want to do all sorts of things that would facilitate trade. Yes, people should be concerned with them.

But the conspiracy theory is about a political union with no internal borders and some form of supernational government to which the existing governments of North America would have to cede significant political power.

I went out of my way to make that distinction in the piece and it's kind of frustrating that so many commenters can't see the difference. People must be so accustomed to being told that corporate globalization is great that they have a hard time with the message that it isn't great but, hey, this other thing is also just a myth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

TO ASK FOR MONEY AGAIN. WHAT A FARCE IS THE AD THAT YOU SUPPORT INDEPENDENCE DAY WHEN YOU ARE A SHILL FOR DOING AWAY WITH OUR CONSTITUTIONAL SOVERIGNTY.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The conspiricy mongering is getting nice 'n thick out there. I guess the cognitive abilities are in about as much a deficit as our nation's federal government!!

The NAU is a total myth. The NAU has nothing to do with the NAFTA hwy as I've explained in an above post. The NAFTA Hwy is just more globalization and offshoring of good jobs, specifically the ILWU union jobs on the west coast. This is the way the capitalist system at this phase of global development usually works. It isn't connected to any so called NAU. And it's no conspiricy. Also, it is not a way of sneaking illegal workers into the country because the proposed Highway from Texas to Canada will have military checkpoints at all disembarking points being an international highway. This will render the smuggling of illegal immigrants quite impossible. It's really much more about globalization. Sorry conspiricy mongerers. Nice try.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

EARTH INC.

CHAPTER 11 PLANET.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Like Nazi Germany after 14 years of Wiemar democracy, the US will also employ right-wing populist rhetoric before democracy is crushed by fascism. The reason is the need to pay homage to years of democratic expectations fostered by the system in better times. Now that capitalism facing a global crisis of sustainability and social movements that oppose it authoritarian rule is in the offing. The populist rhetoric we see from Alternet readers is the result of an effective campaign in the red states convincing some of America's poorest workers that their real enemies are the international bankers, illegal immigrants, the "illumenatti", Gays, democrats, the UN, racial minorities, and, of course, Da Jooooooooooooz. Have a ball, crackers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is for those who have personally attacked others: Can't you have a civil discussion without impugning the motives of those with opposing views. We all have different experiences and information sources that we have used to form an understanding of issues to the best of our abilities. To attack a writer on this site as being a shill, serving corporate interests, or the interests of some group is juvenile. If Joshua is a shill, then all of us are shills for a variety of interests. Focus on the issues, not the person.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stalinism
Dictionary

Home > Library > Words > Dictionary
Sta·lin·ism (stä'lə-nĭz'əm)
n.
The bureaucratic, authoritarian exercise of state power and mechanistic application of Marxist-Leninist principles associated with Stalin.

Stalinist Sta'lin·ist adj. & n.
Stalinize Sta'lin·ize' v.
Britannica Concise Encyclopedia

Home > Library > Reference > Britannica Concise Encyclopedia
Stalinism
Method of rule, or policies, of Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union and his imitators elsewhere in the Soviet bloc. On taking power, Stalin brooked no dissent from party policies, of which he assumed the role of sole infallible interpreter. He postponed the struggle for world proletarian revolution, focusing instead on "socialism in one country." He decreed the wholesale collectivization of Russian agriculture and a program of rapid industrialization, which, though broadly effective, resulted in the deaths of many millions. Purges in the 1930s (see Purge Trials) resulted in the deaths of millions more, as opponents were branded traitors and executed or sent to the Gulag. After Stalin's death Nikita Khrushchev repudiated Stalinism (1956) as an aberration. See also Leninism, Trotskyism.

For more information on Stalinism, visit Britannica.com.


History Dictionary


The form of Marxism associated with Soviet leader Joseph Stalin. Stalinism emphasizes the repression of all dissent, often by brutal means; a rigid adherence to government management of economic life; and the domination of all communist movements worldwide by the Soviet Union. In holding to these beliefs, Stalin opposed Leon Trotsky. (See Trotskyism.)

WordNet

Home > Library > Reference > WordNet
Note: click on a word meaning below to see its connections and related words.
The noun Stalinism has one meaning:

Meaning #1: a form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator (not restricted by a constitution or laws or opposition etc.)
Synonyms: dictatorship, absolutism, authoritarianism, Caesarism, despotism, monocracy, one-man rule, shogunate, totalitarianism, tyranny

Wikipedia

Home > Library > Reference > Wikipedia
Stalinism
Part of a series on
Communism


Ideologies
Marxism
Leninism
Left communism
Council communism
Religious communism
Anarchist communism
Stalinism
Trotskyism
Titoism
Maoism
Eurocommunism
Basic concepts
Class struggle
Communist party
Historical materialism
Marxist philosophy
Proletarian internationalism
Socialist economics
Communist internationals
Communist League
First International
Comintern
Fourth International
Prominent communists
Karl Marx
Friedrich Engels
Rosa Luxemburg
Vladimir Lenin
Joseph Stalin
Leon Trotsky
Mao Zedong
Related subjects
Anarchism
Anti-capitalism
Anti-communism
Criticisms of communism
Democratic centralism
Dictatorship of the proletariat
History of communism
Left-wing politics
New Class
New Left
Post-Communism
Primitive communism
Socialism
Communism Portal


Joseph Stalin
Stalinism is the political and economic system named after Joseph Stalin, who implemented it in the Soviet Union. It includes an extensive use of propaganda to establish a personality cult around an absolute dictator, as well as extensive use of the secret police to maintain social submission and silence political dissent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

that the political/corporate sponsors of Mr.Holland's "debunking" of the "theory" of the integration between Canada, USA, and Mexico were not satisfied with the resulting evidence and commentary provided by Alternet readers. Or it could be also that they simply were using the time-honoured tactic used by their brethen in the EU. If the people don't accept, or vote, the way you wish you simply erase the data and vote again. Until they vote properly. Maybe re-word it. Or start another million Euro advert campaign. Or make some new political pay-outs. Or make some new regulations or votes on 'smaller' issues and incrementally created the super-state. (Or simply enact changes without popular elections. After all the serfs and simple people cannot be expected to understand what is really good for them or "complex" economic and political theories. It is, after all, for their own good.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

beacon of truth and defender of rationalism, again you rap our knuckles, like an angry nun, for daring to think out of turn!

Here's a new assignment I think you'll really enjoy. Give us a book review of Mike Ruppert's "Crossing The Rubicon."

And stop deleting my posts, unless I break your rules.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm the host and producer of Action Point with Cynthia Black on Air America affiliate Nove M Radio network station AM 1480 KPHX, Phoenix AZ.

On June 10, in response to rising listener interest and to contextualize a discussion on AZ's fiery "anti-immigration" tensions--I covered the topic with Dr. David Morris, VP of Institute for Local Self Reliance and ex-energy department advisor for presidents Ford, Clinton and G.W. Bush.

The NAU is real (yes, through the SPP--which operates under the auspices of the US Dep't of Commerce) as well as the NAFTA superhighway and the Trans Texas Corridor (TCC). In addition, with a 2006 signing order, G.W. Bush granted the presidential office immunity from Congressional oversight on SPP.

The rights to build the first leg of the Highway, the Trans Texas Corridor (TCC)--with TX partner Zachry Construction Corp., set toll prices and collect profits for the next 50 YEARS-- are owned by Spanish contractor CINTRA (Cintra Concessiones de Infrastructures de Transporte S.A.).

Cintra is already partners with Australian firm Macquerie, on a toll road in Indiana. CINTRA is also represented by the firm of Bracewell and Giuliani (yes, Rudy).

For more info. listen to the archived show here.

For continuing info stay tuned...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I know a couple of things about politics, but I had never even HEARD of the "North American Union" conspiracy theory before. This is what people think is out there? This is what people are concerned about? Such a wacky country...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Even the most cursory reading of history shows that Conspiracies by governments are the normal state of events; and that honesty in government is so unusual that breif periods such as the Golden Age of Pericles in Ancient Greece are talked about for thousands of years.

When a dog bites a man, that is NOT news; but when a man bites a dog, that IS news -- GET IT???!

So, who are these idiots who feel they can ignore thousands of years of government conspiracies and believe that somehow today only honest saints occupy political office?

If you are one or know how to contact any of these idiots please have them get in touch with me ASAP -- I still have a few shares of Brooklyn Bridge stock available at a Great Price!

Sheesh!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

http://www.sandersresearch.com
http://www.globalresearch.ca
http://www.onlinejournal.com
http://www.larouchepub.com
http://www.danielestulin.com/?op=noticias&idioma=en
http://www.carolynbaker.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... of responses in favour of the article as there are against.




Right?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]