skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The North American Union is a supranational organization, modeled on the European Union, that will soon fuse Canada, the United States, and Mexico into a single economic and political unit. The details are still being worked out by the countries' leaders, but the NAU's central governing body will have the power to nullify the laws of its member states. Goods and people will flow among the three countries unimpeded, aided by a network of continent-girdling superhighways. The US and Canadian dollars, along with the peso, will be phased out and replaced by a common North American currency called the amero.
135 comments:
it means [God's] Son is about to bend over
Does it mean you're smoking crack?
David axin cause he want's to know if he can come over?
rotflmbao...,
Crack? Nah UBM, I don't even drink coffee.
You strike me as the kind of cat got his nest egg managed by some Madoff knockoff.
You Google Amero yet?
lol.
That's funny CNu
one look at his avatar leaves no doubt that he's angling on a 4:20 play date...,
If that be a gold coin, that wouldn't be bad at all.
Fish, you wouldn't find the mutation of national sovereignty an issue?
You Google Amero yet?
Why Google when I can Wiki?
Seems to me, DV, that by posting this official-looking image without explanation, you're trying to flamboozle your readers into believing that the U.S. government is on the verge of merging with Canada and Mexico into a "North American Union"... and that the "amero" will be its currency.
In fact, this coin is one of a series of “private-issue fantasy pattern coins” designed by Daniel Carr.
And Daniel Carr designed these coins to rouse up the rubes and oppose the coming North American Union.
Quoth Mr. Carr:
"My goal with these coins is not to endorse a Union of North America or a common 'Amero' currency. I fully support the United States Constitution, and I would not welcome (in any form) a diminishment of its provisions. I expect that these coins will help make more people aware of the issue and the possible ramifications."
So then, DV... why you post this image?
No wants a union with Mexico; indeed, that would be akin to being fused with a corpse.
"So then, DV... why you post this image?" UBM
1) It appeals to me aesthetically.
2) I find faith in Federal Reserve notes comical
3) NAFTA is the "North American Union Beta"
^ Cool. Now tell Lyndon LaRouche to quit hogging the pipe.
DV...
"Fish, you wouldn't find the mutation of national sovereignty an issue?"
Whose national sovereignty? What national sovereignty? Given that the creation of our fiat money is in the hands of a private institution, I would say we have private sovereignty, not national sovereignty.
I'd rather have "North American Gold" than United States Federal Reserve paper anytime.
"Whose national sovereignty? What national sovereignty? Given that the creation of our fiat money is in the hands of a private institution, I would say we have private sovereignty, not national sovereignty." MF
Good point.
"Seems to me, DV, that by posting this official-looking image without explanation, you're trying to flamboozle your readers into believing that the U.S. government is on the verge of merging with Canada and Mexico into a "North American Union"... and that the "amero" will be its currency."
CNBC November 27th, 2006.
^ Well, if Steve Previs says it, it must be true!
I love how he urges viewers to "Google it" to get more information. That makes him about as authorative on this subject as Denmark Vesey.
Also, Gray... did you see CNBC's piece the following day?
It means our economy is going to come crashing down and will be rebuilt with the Amero. Obama first meeting was with Canada and Mexico.They're working out the details of how and when it should take place. You heard of the Euro.
Now one has to wonder why Pres. Obama was really elected to carry out this task. The Powers that be are really smart. They knew the the bubble would open up so wide. You need someone to clean it up and place blame if it don't work. In every situation one always has to have a scrapegoat to get tagged. Your it!
Watch the "failed state" rhetoric about Mexico escalate in order to time the larger-scale official intervention.
The drug war is a bilateral problem. According to a recent report by the Brookings Institution, an estimated 2,000 guns make their way from the United States to Mexico every day. Drug consumption in the U.S. has not declined significantly over the last quarter-century, with a total of about 6 million users of heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine. While up slightly since Calderon launched his offensive last year, the street price of cocaine is nonetheless a third of what it was in 1990, indicating a steady supply through the Mexican smuggling routes.
It is in the U.S. interest that Calderon's war succeed, because a failed state in Mexico would mean chaos on the border and more immigration, among other consequences. Under the so-called Merida Initiative, the United States is to provide $1.4 billion worth of interdiction equipment and training to Mexico over three years. Agreements were reached last week on the first delivery, which is expected in January. This should be accompanied by close cooperation between U.S. and Mexican law enforcement. The Obama administration should then step up efforts to interdict southbound shipments of bulk cash, chemicals for methamphetamine production and high-powered weapons. Some weapons come from legal gun stores and shows, but Mexican officials say others are black-market goods from abroad and, apparently, from U.S. Army and National Guard depots. And finally, the U.S. must seriously address drug consumption with funding for prevention and treatment programs. Ultimately, demand drives drug trafficking.
The plan for the other high-profile failed state, Pakistan, is dramatically different and somewhat more catastrophic in nature....,
Failed state next door....,
Mexico is now in the midst of a vicious drug war. Police officers are being bribed and, especially near the United States border, gunned down. Kidnappings and extortion are common place. And, most alarming of all, a new Pentagon study concludes that Mexico is at risk of becoming a failed state. Defense planners liken the situation to that of Pakistan, where wholesale collapse of civil government is possible.
One center of the violence is Tijuana, where last year more than 600 people were killed in drug violence. Many were shot with assault rifles in the streets and left there to die. Some were killed in dance clubs in front of witnesses too scared to talk.
It may only be a matter of time before the drug war spills across the border and into the U.S. To meet that threat, Michael Chertoff, the outgoing secretary for Homeland Security, recently announced that the U.S. has a plan to "surge" civilian and possibly military law-enforcement personnel to the border should that be necessary.
The problem is that in Mexico's latest eruption of violence, it's difficult to tell the good guys from the bad.
Changing the currency would be an easy way to defang the cartels as well as provide a cosmetic fix for the dollar once hyperinflation begins to set in in earnest...,
What up Gray?
Where you been man?
Yeah, interesting clip. Saw that.
UBM is a funny cat.
lol. Nothing is worthy of intellectual consideration until it's been officially sanctioned.
Dollar is barely worth the paper on which it's printed. The Mexican middle-class lives in southern California. Regional banks collapse and are absorbed into national banks. National banks collapse and are absorbed into international banks. NAFTA is already 40% of what a North American Union would look like and Europe homogenized into 1 Super State just a decade ago.
Google: "Diversity of Opinion"
Much of it exists on the prospects of a North American Union.
It's OK. You don't have to wait for a thumbs up from Newsweek.
Undercover Black Man said...
^ Well, if Steve Previs says it, it must be true!
UBM, from whence do you imagine that the word "Amero" first originated?
Do you suppose that the term originated in isolation completely independent of one or more persons sitting around discussing the thing?
It's difficult to determine the main thrust of your skepticism given the fact that it is clearly being talked about.
The second CNBC segment you linked to, which aired the following day, strikes me as a clear example of the network engaging in what can only be termed journalist damage control in order to purposefully debunk the statements which were made by Previs on the previous day.
It is interesting to note that the CNBC anchor in your video (the guy in the green tie) makes it a point to say that Previs is with Jeffries International, which he apparently considers a reputable source of information, but then goes on to say that he wanted to ask Previs, "What are you smoking?"
Ask yourself: if Previs was really the crack-smoking, Amero-idea-touting non-starter that the network talent painted him as, why would CNBC bring this man on as a contributor in the first place?
In other words, are you saying that Previs is a flat-out liar?
Obamamandius is grappling with the challenges of 5th generation warfare on multiple fronts, i.e., the state’s struggle to maintain its monopoly on war and social organization in the face of Fourth Generation challengers.
Trifling muhphukkaz still befuddled by the complexity of 4th generational terms that completely overpowered his predecessor - and aren't intellectually prepared to wrap their little pointy heads around the enormity of what this represents.
The NAU is a done deal, and the Amero a pending reality. That writing has been on the wall ever since the Fed stopped publishing M3.
UBM is a funny cat.
Have clown shoes, will travel.
Nothing is worthy of intellectual consideration until it's been officially sanctioned.
I don't see you "intellectually considering" a gart-damn thing re: the North American Union, DV. I see you doing your bit to pump up the noise-to-signal ratio on the internets.
You're a bright fellow. How you fall for the Protocols of Zion and the "amero" hoax?
Dollar is barely worth the paper on which it's printed.
Wrong again. The U.S. dollar bill can get you laid from here to Belize, and throughout the Caribbean.
In other words, are you saying that Previs is a flat-out liar?
Who the fuck is Steve Previs to be believed? You never heard of him before or since.
But he gets on CNBC and tells viewers to "Google it" and learn all about the amero... and for that alone you treat him like a cross between Paul Revere and John the Baptist.
Google "amero," and you'll see that the people hyping this concept are the nuttiest sort of conspiracy theorist, like superbigot Hal Turner.
And intelligent dudes who should be embarrassed by "magical thinking" are instead dressed in full voodoo gear for the "New World Order" hoedown.
David, why did the fed stop publishing M3?
Did you know what that was before I asked you this question and you googled it up?
Do you know what it's relevance was/is and which federal agency formerly enforced its "levels"?
^ I don't know what you're talking about, Craig. But then, I never do.
If you can't break it down so us non-MIT types can follow... then why not leave it alone?
I do, however, recognize an Internet hoax when I see one. Just look at the way the information moves. It's like mapping cancer cells.
Who the fuck is Steve Previs to be believed? You never heard of him before or since.
But he gets on CNBC and tells viewers to "Google it" and learn all about the amero...
UBM: If the strength of your debunking exercise hinges solely upon the fact that he used the words "google it", then it's not clear to me that you've proven this to be a hoax.
Additionally, your assertion that the notoriety of the commenter has some significant bearing on the truth of his statements is an equally rickety debunking method. I'd classify your statement about not having heard of him as an instance of the appeal to authority fallacy mixed with a little ad hominem:
An appeal to authority or argument by authority is a type of argument in logic. It bases the truth value of an assertion on the authority, knowledge, expertise, or position of the source asserting it. It is also known as argument from authority, argumentum ad verecundiam (Latin: argument to respect) or ipse dixit (Latin: he himself said it).
It is one method of obtaining propositional knowledge, but a fallacy in regard to syllogistic logic, because the validity of a syllogism is independent of the qualities of the source putting it forward. The converse case is an ad hominem attack: to imply that a claim is false because the asserter lacks authority or is otherwise objectionable in some way.
From a logical perspective, what you've done here is to cast doubt on the credibility of the arguer and not the argument, and the fact that various nutty conspiracy theorists have also commented on the issue has nothing whatsoever to do with the validity of Previs' statements.
Can you prove logically (without ad hominems) that this is a legitimate hoax?
Gray, the burden is not on me to prove it a hoax. The burden on you is to prove it's credible.
You are the one who has engaged in the "appeal to authority" fallacy by saying:
"... Previs is with Jeffries International, which he apparently considers a reputable source of information..."
Pervis provides no evidence... NONE... that the "amero" is a coming reality.
Why, then, did you cite his video clip to support the case that it is a reality?
If you can't break it down so us non-MIT types can follow... then why not leave it alone?
and miss yet another priceless opportunity to whack a digital pinata? puh-leeze...., you know me better than that by now.
Turning your own highly dubious logic against you David, wtf qualifies Y.O.U. to talk about currency if you don't even know the fundamental measure of currency in circulation?
Far be it from me to discourage you from showing all of us as much of your ass as you feel inclined to do. Please carry on....,
Undercover, lol. I like this cat. Mr. Official Story
The New World Order is "nutty".
That's funny. Around the world national sovereignty is dropping like draws at a Girls Gone Wild shoot.
Man, I use the Protocols as a tool to bust conformists in the head who have been conditioned like Pavlovian pitbulls to summarily dismiss memes not sanctioned by their intellectual masters.
Plantation Negros seem most resistant to the suggestion of the possibility of government tyranny.
"Yew Cwazy! Da Mericun GuvAMint Aint Gwoin No Whey!!!!"
The Protocols are no more counterfeit than is the Rosetta Stone, Mills. Tagging it a "counterfeit" was a distracting ploy. Who cares who wrote it?
It was written over 100 years ago and describes events of today quite prophetically.
"Economic crises have been produced by us for the goyim by no other means than the withdrawal of money from circulation."
- Protocols of Zion, 20 1895
I'll bet ya the "Protocols" are more real than the Official 911 Story.
I'll bet ya the "Protocols" are more real than the fractional reserve banking system which enables one to "get laid in Belize and throughout the caribbean)
I'll bet ya the "Protocols" are more real than what you've been taught about the Holocaust.
Here you go DV, let me hook your boy up real quick.
Knowing how much uncritical faith you have in "authoritative" journalistic sources David, here's a breakdown from Ha'aretz - perhaps you can follow and swallow this one - without any indigestion?
The money shot;
So is the Federal Reserve running a Ponzi scheme?
When there is major trouble with debt, especially with government debt, one way to pay it off is to print more money. Alternatively, a central bank could monetize the budget deficit, thereby inflating the economy. How so? By buying the government's debt itself with freshly printed money. That's what the Fed did in the 1970s.
Considering the growing size of the U.S. government debt and the continuing weakening of the dollar, the Fed may be doing just that.
"The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" are a well documented forgery. They were put together by a Russian journalist and also with some help from the Czarist Okhrana and the royal aristocracy. It's probably one of the most well known cases of literary forgery.
Why, then, did you cite his video clip to support the case that it is a reality?
No, I posted that video as a direct reply to your statement that DV was trying to "flamboozle" his readers by posting the image of the Amero: you're trying to flamboozle your readers into believing that the U.S. government is on the verge of merging with Canada and Mexico into a "North American Union"... and that the "amero" will be its currency.
If it's your opinion that DV is trying to flamboozle his readers with this image, then it's reasonable to conclude that you also believe that Steve Previs is also trying to "flamboozle" someone. The difference between the two is that DV is a humble blogger while Previs has been contributing to CNBC since 2003.
Gray, the burden is not on me to prove it a hoax. The burden on you is to prove it's credible.
No, the burdern is on you because you already attempted to debunk it as a hoax by casting doubt on Previs as an authoritative commenter: "Who the fuck is Steve Previs to be believed? You never heard of him before or since."
It was you who attempted to cast doubt on the arguer (Pervis) without ever touching the substance of the actual argument:
The converse case is an ad hominem attack: to imply that a claim is false because the asserter lacks authority or is otherwise objectionable in some way.
^That is the ad hominem fallacy. You seemed to be making the case that Previs' claims were false simply because Previs' credibility as a commentator was objectionable on the basis of his notoriety. I believe I correctly diagnosed this as an informal logical fallacy, the ad hominem. Your first attempt at debunking it was shown to be fallacious, at which point the burden was placed on you to debunk it without resorting to using an ad hominem.
If the burden was not on you to prove it to be a hoax, then why did you make the ad hominem against Previs in the first place?
You are the one who has engaged in the "appeal to authority" fallacy by saying:
"... Previs is with Jeffries International, which he apparently considers a reputable source of information..."
Read my post again. The quote you referenced was made in relation to the network anchors perceivable attitude toward Previs, not my opinion of him.
Again: Can you prove logically (without ad hominems) that this is a legitimate hoax?
"The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" are a well documented forgery.
Pure. Stupidity.
Forged by whom?
They were written weren't they?
They exist, do they not?
They were written / forged over 100 years ago correct?
They detail the intent and process of forming 1 world government do they not?
The global economy and centralization of governmental powers in fewer and fewer hands is exactly what is taking place today, correct?
Where the fuck is the forgery?
It was you who attempted to cast doubt on the arguer (Pervis)...
Again I say: Previs isn't arguing anything! The extent of his "argument" is to tell viewers to "Google it."
Turning your own highly dubious logic against you David, wtf qualifies Y.O.U. to talk about currency if you don't even know the fundamental measure of currency in circulation?
I am not qualified to speak on monetary policy, the science of money, currency theories, etc.
I am a humble student of the cultural flow of information.
And I hate "magical thinking."
"And I hate "magical thinking."
No you don't Mills. You actually subscribe to quite a bit of magical thinking.
The 6 Million number is an example of "magical thinking" to which you subscribe.
Which is my point. It isn't magical thinking vs no magical thinking.
The question is "which" magical thinking does Mills subscribe.
What ever you think seems to need Plantation stamp of approval. That's all.
Side note: Honestly, what's the point of debating the authenticity of the Protocols document when everything you need to know about issues dealing with sovereignty and globalization can be found in plain English on the CFR website?
UBM: Again I say: Previs isn't arguing anything! The extent of his "argument" is to tell viewers to "Google it."
Previs makes a number of claims which I'll transcribe here:
"...apart from that, I think one thing people who are dollar-based need to focus on in the Amero. That's the one thing that nobody's talking about that I think is gonna have a big impact on everybody's life in Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. If you Google it you'll find out all about it. "
..."the Amero is the proposed new currency for the North American Community which is being developed right now between Canada, the U.S., and Mexico to make a borderless community much like the EU and the dollar, Canadian dollar, and the U.S. dollar and the Mexican peso replaced by the Amero.
..."You may wanna visit a couple websites to see how far along it is. The Canadians are pretty upset about it whereas as the Americans apart from the Texans are the only people who know anything about it; the rest of the public is really sort of with their head in the sand on this one."
- He claims that this will have a big impact on the lives of Canadians, Americans, and Mexicans.
- He claims that Canadians are upset about it.
- He claims that Americans outside of Texans are ignorant of it.
- He claims that the Amero is the proposed new currency for the North American Community.
- He claims that people who are dollar-based need to focus on the Amero.
That's a lot more than just "Google it", and trying to debunk his claims by simply zeroing in on those two words like a laser doesn't go a long way in showing his claims to be false.
I am a humble student of the cultural flow of information.
Then what do you suppose possessed Previs to make these claims?
David, I'm beginning to think you're a humble student of the cultural flow of information in the afrosphere - much like Alice Kravitz was a humble student of all things going on in the Stevens' household....,
^ Hey... you mugs wanna believe in the Illuminati, go ahead and delight yourselves. It's unfalsifiable, so I shan't waste keystrokes trying to talk you off it.
I can, however, shine a light on how DV packages his information. He puts up an image of a coin... doesn't tell readers it's a "fantasy" coin designed by someone who's against the "amero"... rather, he uses the image to make the case that the "amero" is a reality.
Like a surgeon, I've done what I do.
If it doesn't lead you to question your own capacity to process information, I can only shed a momentary tear and then move on.
Novus ordo seclorum!
Hey... you mugs wanna believe in the Illuminati, go ahead and delight yourselves. It's unfalsifiable, so I shan't waste keystrokes trying to talk you off it.
I don't see where I gave any indication that I've entertained any notions of the existence of the "Illuminati". Personally, I'd put this post from DV in the context of sovereignty versus globalization. For me it has nothing to do with anything secret and I think of it as a simple ideological battle between the stubborn peoples who still believe in sovereignty versus those who have a clear internationalist bent. I don't need to read a hundred year old document or rely on tales of grand conspiracies. Reading through the CFR's website provides me with all the perspective I need. I'd much rather listen to what Richard Hass has to say than read through the numerous ravings about Freemaons and the like.
Like a surgeon, I've done what I do.
Set up and project straw man, attack straw man, smugly declare victory over straw man - all hermetically accomplished in your very own fertile and pungent imagination..., the stereotypical conservative mindslant I derisively term RFIDD, or (rotten fish in dirty diapers).
Wrong yet again Mills.
Posting of the image was an exercise.
I "believe" in nothing.
I simply accept the best available explanation.
I don't believe in the Protocols any more than you believe in the the existence of "Al Qaeda".
I just don't pretend officially sanctioned memes have any more merit than officially banned memes.
I'm also making fun of your arrogantly ignorant hypocrisy.
Young Brother Gray points to the CFR website as evidence of a globalization agenda.
I point to the 100 year old prediction of globalization in the Protocols of Zion.
The world is globalizing. National sovereignty is dissolving. We are in the era of single super governments.
I point to the systematic "fringing" of non-sanctioned memes like the Protocols and the summary, obedient and slavish dismissal of it's contents by conformist dupes ... as evidence of it's possible merit.
If you showed me a 100 year old "forgery" that detailed a plan to gentrify Harlem ... and today 80% the brownstones north of 125th Street were owned by yuppies and same-sex couples - I'd have to reconsider this supposed "forgery".
CNu: Don't blame me because your ass is made of straw.
And why do you dog conservatives? If you're anti-globalization, the far right should be your strongest ally.
As it's presently constituted, conservatism is simply identity politics in service to elite rule.
What makes you think I'm anti-globalization? A GATTACA type situation would suit me and mine just fine, thank you very much. A Federation or Starship Trooper type situation would suit me equally well. There are all kinds of cultural possibilities that I might find attractive.
OTOH - if it's just consolidation of the existing western monoculture - then no thanks. I needn't concern myself overly much with the prospects for globalization, as I noted earlier, Obamamandius struggling with the challenges of fifth generation warfare in a context of declining net available energy.
Whatever happens next, I suspect it's going to be a vastly more catastrophic adventure than 3/5's of the existing population will prove able to endure.
I think DV needs his own podcast. This is all just beta testing for the realer thing.
Time for the next level.
DV: Here's your boy, Hal Turner, spreading that "amero" bullshit on YouTube.
He holds up one of the actual "amero" coins that you have pictured. "Irrefutable proof," he says, that the U.S. is minting new currency.
Of course, I already the truth upthread. This coin was NOT minted by the U.S. government. It was designed, minted, and is being sold over the internets by Daniel Carr, who is opposed to the so-called North American Union.
That's right, DV. For $19, you can own your own 2009 "20 amero" copper coin... and you can show it off on your own YouTube video!
Novus ordo seclorum.
^ Let me try that first link again:
Here's your boy, Hal Turner.
I think DV needs his own podcast. This is all just beta testing for the realer thing.
Time for the next level.
why byrdeye? Because these Negros are off the SAT charts? half the shit they talk about I need dictionary.com
but it is addictive.
Undercover Black Man is the truth. The Amero coin is not minted by the government. It is fake.
Wait, because David identified the coin image that DV posted to stimulate discussion as inauthentic (I wasn't aware that the provenance of the coin was the topic) now the actual underlying topic is derailed and rendered moot?
Meanwhile, David saunters back to the house of love where he posts some skank getting her toes licked by a golden retriever - mission accomplished?
That's a 50 page book man hustle if I ever saw a 50 page book man hustle. (or in his case, an 8 minute youtube video hustle)
Kissinger said,
Wen Jiabao said,
and Putin said time for a new world order, and all you got is Hal Turner and toe-licking?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!
(I wasn't aware that the provenance of the coin was the topic)
It's the topic only to the degree that you assumed it was legit... or in any ways indicative of actual government monetary praxis, as opposed to an online money-making venture aimed at conspiracy nuts.
The real topic is the way DV presents information. The way he tries to "stimulate discussion" by withholding information. The way over-educated conspiracy nuts like you, CNu, get your drawers all twisted whenever I do a little pro bono truth-squading up in here, in between YouTube trawling sessions.
By the way, there is more human truth in that one video of the foot-licking dog than in all the hooha written so far in this thread regarding the "amero."
David, I wasn't aware that anyone had made the assumption that the coin was authentic - outside your insistence that that's the issue.
In your now characteristic Alice Kravitz fashion, you bum-rushed that theme as a means of changing the subject and diverting away from the important underlying issues raised.
The way over-educated conspiracy nuts like you, CNu, get your drawers all twisted whenever I do a little pro bono truth-squading up in here
Nikkapleeze....,
I wish you would pretend to have the testicular fortitude to pursue a single discussion to its logical and factual end. As it is, you're beginning to distinguish yourself as a disinformation point source totally incapable of or unwilling to have his own cockamammie beliefs and opinions examined in any detail whatsoever.
... now the actual underlying topic is derailed and rendered moot?
Here's where you and I differ, Craig. What kind of discussion is "derailed" by the presentation of authentic information? Between this "amero" and the decapitated Palestinian child, I think I'm imparting a valuable lesson on how one should (and can) verify and clarify the data one encounters on the internets.
How valuable was that "underlying" conversation gonna be with the "overlying" bullshit?
Also, you apparently missed the import of my link to the Hal Turner video. (Which I hope you watched.)
That video demonstrates, irrefutably, that there is much bad information afloat (from bad actors to boot) regarding the "amero." Hence heightening the duty placed on information distributors to come correct.
The fact that Turner's entire presentation was hinged on the "authenticity" of his 20-amero piece... the exact same 20-amero piece that DV posted... I'd say my truth-squading actually does a little bit of good in this world, boosting the signal-to-noise ratio.
Novus ordo seclorum.
The eagle symbol is interesting. What the eagle is holding in it's talon is a symbol of peace and war.
In US currency, the eagle head is looking at the fig leaf, not the bolts. But this photo got the eagle looking at the bolts which is interesting.
Also, it is more likely that Mexico will join Latin American trade union than form a union with gringos. The only thing America is good for to the rest of the world is a big base of consumers.
Besides, what we have to trade? We don't make anything no more!
... you're beginning to distinguish yourself as a disinformation point source totally incapable of or unwilling to have his own cockamammie beliefs and opinions examined in any detail whatsoever.
DV posts a fake-ass picture of a so-called "amero"... and I'm the disinformation point??
Dude, MIT owes you a refund.
My only regret is that I did not ascertain DV's state of knowledge regarding the coin before dropping the truth on his head... like I did with the decapitated little girl.
If my name was booboo-the-fool, not knowing any better than to stay stuck in so-cal with the monumental shitstorm headed your way - I suppose I might bury my head in the sand, clown, or try to change the phugging subject and call grown folks discussing it conspiracy nuts too.....,
Since you're even better known for thought-policing Black folks for fun and profit David than you are for ducking serious discussion - questioning your motives and your modus operandi is practical, reasonable, and sensible.
That you have the nerve and audacity to question anybody else's integrity - given your history - is some truly amazing shit.
Questioning other people's integrity pre-emptively and without corroborating evidence looks a lot less like good faith discussion than you angling on yet another trick to turn.
That you have the nerve and audacity to question anybody else's integrity - given your history - is some truly amazing shit.
Oh, so now it's about me, huh? Not about the "amero" hoax and how DV helped to spread it?
Okay, motherfucker. Here's your boy.
You've pulled the stunt three times with me, twice with your Black crime fantasies in two separate forums, and once with your Race and IQ delusions.
You've pulled it twice now with Fisher that I know of, first on the issue of Zimbabwe, then on Gaza, and now here you go again.
It doesn't take much to show that you carry on a modestly active disinformation campaign with folks endeavoring to engage around serious topics.
I'd very much like for that pattern and praxis to stop, or at the very least, for you to stick around long enough to actually have the ahistorical, erroneous, and or illogical positions that you express dismantled.
You can play stupid all you like, and perhaps some folks will buy that schtick. I just don't happen to be one of them. Your reliance on short attention spans and general ignorance to do what you do - is not a good look, and it's suggestive of still uglier motives.
Oh, so now it's about me, huh?
Better be careful what you wish for bubbie...,
I'd very much like for that pattern and praxis to stop, or at the very least, for you to stick around long enough to actually have the ahistorical, erroneous, and or illogical positions that you express dismantled.
Here I am, Tex.
Plus... you always know where to find me.
Plus... you've got your own blog.
But the last time I hung around for the disco version of your crime theories, you bored the shit out of everybody... and did nothing to explain why black people commit more than half of all homicides in America (and nearly half of all reported rapes and robberies).
Doesn't sound like you're ready to run another marathon, as questioning your opponent's motives is usually a last resort.
Why don't you re-rail the discussion to the "amero," Craig, since you give so much of a shit? Can you explain in a couple of paragraphs why you believe the "amero" is a coming reality? Don't just hyperlink, put it in your own words.
We'll see who comes here bringing straight facts and who brings the horseshit.
Seems to me, DV, that by posting this official-looking image without explanation, you're trying to flamboozle your readers into believing...,
All warfare IS NOT based on deception.
David, what with all the comment stuttering?
If you spent anywhere near as much time organizing your thoughts as you do attempting to attack and police the thoughts of others and posing for the lowest common denominator, perhaps your case for good faith would be somewhat more convincing...,
^ Ladies and gentleman, there's your horseshit. Right on time, too. That train's never late.
If your ideas can't withstand a challenge from me, then what good are they?
But the last time I hung around for the disco version of your crime theories, you bored the shit out of everybody...
You mean here at P6 where you ran away like a little beehatch when Earl questioned your crackpot noise?
Plus... you always know where to find me.
I can't give toe-licking but just so much attention son..., not my thang.
If your ideas can't withstand a challenge from me, then what good are they?
You haven't challenged any of my ideas son. You played dumb, you posed dumb, you ducked all my questions, and you pretend that clicking a hyperlink causes you to catch the vapors
You've challenged DV's integrity.
You've challenged the integrity of GrayConservative's commentator, and ducked Gray' questions.
Now that I've challenged your integrity and called out your modus operandi, you're squealing like a little pig caught under a gate.
Craig, would you like to re-rail the discussion onto the coming reality of the "amero," since you seem to believe I sabotaged it?
Can you explain in a couple of paragraphs why you believe the "amero" is real?
You've challenged DV's integrity.
Not quite. But then, DV is plenty capable of saying so, if he believes I did.
Way to stand up for your man, though, Craig.
The Treasury has been hiding the measure of currency in circulation for 3 years now to mask inflation.
Hyperinflation is the inevitable result of TARP. So if they were motivated to hide inflation three years ago, you can best believe they're shitting their pants now.
Mexico is close to being a failed state due to the drug wholesale meta-economy and the exorbitant profitability of the same (you know, that type of shit you romanticized for teevee) which has enabled narcotrafficantes to control government operations up to the highest federal levels.
1. The U.S. federal government is NOT going to legalize drugs and destabilize narcotrafficantes.
2. The U.S. federal government is NOT going to escalate its joint conflict with the narcotrafficantes to anything beyond low-intensity policing.
3. The U.S. federal government is NOT going to allow the Mexican government to fail and have that security risk on its southern border.
So how exactly can the U.S. federal government destabilize or even wipe out the narco factor in Mexico and simultaneously solve many of its own fiscal challenges? (hyperinflation)
Cause we're not going to pull a zimbabwe and substitute euros or rinmembe for dollars. OTOH - if we subsume continent-wide federal governance operations, consistent with the european union model, and issue new currency as part of a standard operating procedure - the government has a unique opportunity to bloodlessly kill many birds with a single, well-placed stone.
Given what's coming down the financial and economic pike, the question is not whether the Amero is coming, the sensible question is how could it go otherwise?!?!?!?!?!?!
... (you know, that type of shit you romanticized for teevee)...
And only $9.99 from Amazon!
Oh yeah..., small historical aside. When the government of Chicago became a defacto failed state as a result of the metaeconomy spawned by Prohibition, which Treasury agency went in there and cleaned house?
Hint, hint..., it's the same federal agency charged with operational control over M3. So there's a scaled historical precedent for this intervention given a shift of parameters.
The exact same day it happens - the narcotrafficantes' fungible wealth goes to nada - cause a census on currency redemptions is going to be one helluva "legitimacy" filter...,
Let me know if you have any kwestins?
(see David, what you need is Deep State technical consultant who can help you suss out the Byzantine keys to the enigmas of world - and in the process - elevate your narrative scope to that Dan Brown or Neal Stephenson level of the game)
Last thought on the impossibility of a more intense military engagement with Mexican narco-insurgents.
Can you even BEGIN to imagine the hell-up-in-harlem that will ensue should the scope of Mexican failure become enlarged any further north across that border?
Because if a bloodless strategic victory cannot be achieved, that's EXACTLY what's bound to happen.
Put that thought in your cultural imagination pipe next time you reflect on the urgent necessity of the political makeover that just came to pass in Washington DC last week.
There were compelling reasons on multiple fronts for putting a Black man in the White House.
It's hoped that that will put African American folks decisively and unshakeably in the unhyphenated Nationalist camp for the forseeable.
Obama is the most brilliant casting decision imaginable...,
(see David, what you need is Deep State technical consultant who can help you suss out the Byzantine keys to the enigmas of world...)
I'd rather piss away time on YouTube.
But I do have a question. Back during my "Kingpin" research, I encountered someone making the point that if the drug trade ended tomorrow, the world banking system would collapse.
I also recall that (in 2002) the U.S. was a $66 billion-a-year market for illegal drugs.
Markets being markets, and cash being cash, the great stabilizer... why would the U.S. government go through all the trouble of surrendering its sovereignty... just to put Mexican drug cartels out of business?
... what you need is Deep State technical consultant...
The meaning in the message skated by me the first time, Craig. But as with every other shit-talker who comes at me (including Fisher), eventually the hint gets dropped as to catching a few cheese crumbs from my Jewish paymasters.
Tech consultant indeed...
And only $9.99 from Amazon!
In panties, negligee, and 6 inch clear platform heels, aren't you kind of long in the tooth to be out on the point?
eventually the hint gets dropped as to catching a few cheese crumbs from my Jewish paymasters.
Ass still sore eh??
Don't get it twisted, I'm not Capt. Save-a-Ho and whatever happens between you and your pimps is of no concern to me - not to mention, I'm a little too openly Black partisan to pass ideological muster with your macks.
Yo Nulan... the foot-slobbering don't float your boat? All right.
I found your kind of cyberporn... just for you, dude. Wah-laa!
I'm betting you can't go five minutes without squeezing one off.
DV: You still up in this thread? I hate to break topic... especially as I have an unanswered question pending with CNulan. But I'm curious about something you wrote upthread:
I point to the systematic "fringing" of non-sanctioned memes like the Protocols and the summary, obedient and slavish dismissal of it's contents by conformist dupes ... as evidence of it's possible merit.
DV, do you believe "The Bell Curve" has been likewise systematically "fringed" as a non-sanctioned meme?
And do you argue that the summary, obedient and slavish dismissal of "The Bell Curve's" contents by conformist egalitarian dupes is evidence of its possible merit?
>>>why byrdeye? Because these Negros are off the SAT charts? half the shit they talk about I need dictionary.com<<
As an English major, I'm actually relieved to be in the company of black people who force me to run to a dictionary every now and again. Helps me stay sharp and even *gasp* step my own game up.
And David, I had no idea you were one of the guys behind Kingpin. I'm an aspiring writer myself. We should talk shop someday.
David "I'd rather piss away my time on youtube" Mills,
The construction of your "question"
Back during my "Kingpin" research, I encountered someone making the point that if the drug trade ended tomorrow, the world banking system would collapse.
I also recall that (in 2002) the U.S. was a $66 billion-a-year market for illegal drugs.
Markets being markets, and cash being cash, the great stabilizer... why would the U.S. government go through all the trouble of surrendering its sovereignty... just to put Mexican drug cartels out of business?
Which has the beginnings of the answer embedded in it, shows you entirely too stupid and lazy to deserve an answer.
Seriously...,
I find myself deeply conflicted here. On the one hand, professing and practicing Black partisanship requires that I make the utmost effort to give certain folks the benefit of the doubt. At the same time, it compels me to moral consistency, which in this case means the fair and uniform application of standards.
If I disavow one set of folks for their demonstrated tendencies, yet give somebody else a pass, then whatever moral authority I might lay claim to is completely undermined.
In your case Mills, I'm forced to weigh your demonstrated creativity and laudable undercover blackman activities against the bizarre but consistent anti-Black current running through nearly all your cultural and political pronouncements.
Here's a little something for you to open in another tab to stimulate the required friction between your two active brain cells.
Hear it?
Is it talking about Black folks, or is it talking about the world?
OK, now direct your attention toward the questions you should have asked yourself when you were doing your Kingpin "research".
1. What was the total profitability of the U.S. banking system in 2002?
2. What is M3?
3. What percentage of M3 was comprised by drug trade revenues?
4. Through what institutional apparatus must these revenues have flowed?
5. Why did you call cash the "great stabilizer"?
6. What is sovereignty in the context of the "great stabilizer"?
7. Why are banks concerned about and vulnerable to "runs"? (should be quite fresh in your memory considering what happened to WaMu a minute ago - right there in your own backyard)
8. Still listening to the stimulus audio?
These are questions you should have had the gumption to ask on your own?
You didn't then and you haven't now.
Which leads me to ask, don't you have any native curiosity about how the world works?
Let me answer that for you. Like Alice Kravitz, you demonstrate limitless "responsible negro" curiosity. You're curious as hell about whether certain folks are towing the orthodox line.
(had it been me, I wouldna even considered peeping and telling on Samantha, instead, she would've been my ace boon neighbor and I would've been tapping some magical benefits, but that's just me)
With you, such a possibility is outside the realm of imagination. It's a MUCH higher priority to you to clown with me than to challenge orthodoxy.
It's not a good look.
The shame of it all is that a triflingly curious (rather than substantively curious) negro such as yourself is afforded media access. (probably not a coincidence)
This is a categorical waste and disservice, not merely to Black folks, but to all Americans.
So, weighing the pros and cons of your modus operandi David, I've delinked your toe-licking extravaganza from Subrealism and ask that you please reciprocate and delink Subrealism from UCBM.
Thanks...,
about the Bell Curve;
Disingenuous content
Disingenuous argument
Disingenuous program
Only the deeply disingenuous could have ever gotten sucked into its thesis....,
I'll gladly delink you, Craig.
I only hope that my blog can continue to thrive without the surging river of humanity that has come my way via that Subrealism link.
I wish you the best in your future online endeavors... only because I hope that those Google ads on your site will aid in the feeding of your kids. I guess it's that or you'll have to start delivering pizzas on the weekends.
As for this bit o' bullshit --
"Which... shows you entirely too stupid and lazy to deserve an answer."
-- weren't you the trash-talking motherfucker who accused me of running away scurred at the first musky whiff of verbal/ideological combat?
Oh, such a weakness of game. Where's that swingin' dick you enjoy waving so proudly in the faces of neo-Nazis like Byrdeye? Why has it backpedalled up into your own abdomen?
Who was it, Craig, that so aptly summed you up with "Talks like a professor, behaves like a 5-year-old"?
Anyone who has followed your blogospheric shenanigans for any length of time, Craig, can see that dorm-room diddling with Big Ideas takes a back seat in that roomy brainpan of yours... whilst Mr. Id does the driving, flipping the bird and shouting insults to all who don't yield to him in traffic.
A more irrelevant "Black partisan" I have never encountered.
David,
I have a wife, kids, and a life.
You?
I post links to articles because I value intelligent discourse with folks and it beats the smoking and masturbating to youtube videos that preoccupies you in your "spare" time.
As I indicated above, your uniquely faint trace of negritude left me momentarily conflicted about how to respond to you. While the Black partisan in me truly wishes you could do better, the ruthless realist in me knows that you can't.
In my dotage, I've come to accept that folks - at least by middle-age - tend to do the best they can with what little they have.
-- weren't you the trash-talking motherfucker who accused me of running away scurred at the first musky whiff of verbal/ideological combat?
lol!
You have no fight to offer son. Squaring off with you would be the moral equivalent of going guns on a little kid who's pointing a stick and shouting "BANG BANG".
Because I don't stand to learn anything from you, and because your butt-hurt antics won't even be entertaining, it's simply not worth the effort.
Who was it, Craig, that so aptly summed you up with "Talks like a professor, behaves like a 5-year-old"?
That would be Byrdeye, DV's pet racist misogynist court jester who believes that your jewish paymasters are reptilian exobiological entities. Your hasty appeal to his authority may prove a letdown.
Don't fret. I asked him to delink me in the very same way and for many of the very same reasons I'm asking you to. So you're in exactly the type of company you appear to relish.
It's simple housekeeping. Don't take it personally. My ineducable trash will continue to be treasured by folk who value negro fans of The Bell Curve - folks like Byrdeye.
Anyone who has followed your blogospheric shenanigans for any length of time, Craig, can see that dorm-room diddling with Big Ideas takes a back seat in that roomy brainpan of yours... whilst Mr. Id does the driving, flipping the bird and shouting insults to all who don't yield to him in traffic.
This isn't a question of yielding or not yielding David. History teaches that in America, there has always been a place for articulate, useful idiots such as yourself. I just don't happen to share those "egalitarian" American values..,
I have a wife, kids, and a life. You?
Me? Just money, talent, and the respect of my peers in journalism and show business.
... it beats the smoking and masturbating to youtube videos that preoccupies you in your "spare" time.
Motherfucker, nothing beats smoking and masturbation!
That would be Byrdeye.... Your hasty appeal to his authority may prove a letdown.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
"why byrdeye? Because these Negros are off the SAT charts? half the shit they talk about I need dictionary.com
but it is addictive.
Undercover Black Man is the truth. The Amero coin is not minted by the government. It is fake."
Haha, ya I enjoy the SAT words of the day.
But I just think DV is one of the few cats with the courage to go down the rabbit hole, while most others are afraid to...or can't even find it to begin with.
Anyhow, I knew that Amero betatype was not an official US mint release. However, there is often a fine line there, as Daniel Carr has actually also designed some official statehood quarters. But ultimately his motives are irrelevant.
And whether Hal Turner is racist or not is also irrelevant.
The real proof is in the real pudding and whether Daniel's prototype was official or if Hal Turner is racist are both not the real pudding here. Regardless, I think the NAU and Amero are some very real possibilities, and guess we'll see...
"believes that your jewish paymasters are reptilian exobiological entities"
Actually - it makes sense. Reptilians manipulate and tool Jews for ORDO AB CHAO. Many street-level Jews are probably not even aware of this.
Then Jews do the same thing amongst other humans in each country they emigrate to via secret societies and eventually popular politics. Most street-level humans are not aware of this.
As a result...
Blacks and women here think they're fighting for their own identity politics empowerment.
But ultimately, they are just pawns for Jewish empowerment - tooled to dethrone the pre-existing White male power structure.
By the same token, Jews/reptilian hybrids also think they're fighting for their own identity politics empowerment here.
But ultimately, they are also just pawns for full-reptilian empowerment - tooled to dethrone the pre-existing full-human power structure..
This is a textbook political maneuver. An interloping instigator agitates and leads the movement for empowerment of another group. But in the end, it was really just for the instigator's own empowerment. He only tooled that group to dispose the existing regime for him, so that he could swoop in after to fill in the emptied seats of power. Whether that group incidentally benefitted from the process or not, is really irrelevant to his own agenda and motives. He could actually care less either way. Because the real goal was to eventually install his own kind or puppets into the throne, not better any particular group.
thanks for clearing that up and providing further valuable insight burdy...., ;)
Blacks and women here think they're fighting for their own identity politics empowerment.
But ultimately, they are just pawns for Jewish empowerment - tooled to dethrone the pre-existing White male power structure.
oh shit. deep
I thought Nulan was being sarcastic when he was talking about birdie and the lizards. But this guy actually believes this reptilian shit?
Dang, birdie, you're really fucking up my case for the GSWS.
And Mills' case for the intellectual superiority of white folks.
"oh shit. deep"
Yea, it's textbook Jewishism.
The proof is in the pudding. Jews riled proletariats up to overthrow the bourgeois with Communism. But in the end, those proletariats were worse off and even poorer than before. In fact, the whole countries were.
This is why while Jews promoted Communism all over the world, they never promoted it for THEMSELVES in ISRAEL. Their creed is what is good for others, is not for them.
Now, the "Civil Rights" movement in the US was essentially the same formula. Rile up the "underclasses" of Blacks & women to overthrow the reigning WASP kings here. But in the end the whole ship capsizes and everyone starts drowning - as we see now.
Then, enter the Zionist Jew kings to assume power.
(Or so they think. When that fails, then enter the lizard kings to assume aboveground power. :) )
"I thought Nulan was being sarcastic when he was talking about birdie and the lizards. But this guy actually believes this reptilian shit?"
What's hard to believe about the existence of other intelligent life forms? The fact that they might exist, or that they might be reptilian? Or that they might be interfering in human affairs?
You might want to do a little research on cross-cultural "mythology." I'll give you a hint, why is there an etymological connection between "dragon" and the "Dracos" constellation? Why is there a powerfully-revered, yet often feared, reptilian archetype in almost every culture - often figuring in their primal Creation myths?
What creature seduced Eve in Eden, that then got them both damned?
Lol, Mike. You have only merely begun to scratch the surface of Earth's true history...and haven't found the rabbit hole yet, have you?
You know, I just find it ridiculous when the same people who got no problem believing that Eve got tricked by a talking serpent and God's son could walk on water and rise from the dead...mock the existence of aliens as patently laughable.
Can you say brainwashed, hypocritical and close-minded?
Byrdeye said...
"You know, I just find it ridiculous when the same people who got no problem believing that Eve got tricked by a talking serpent and God's son could walk on water and rise from the dead...mock the existence of aliens as patently laughable."
That's actually a good point.
Fact is, "reptilians" is just modern terminology for "serpents" and "dragons."
More questions for Bible study: Why were all of Cain's descendants killed in the Flood?
And why was Noah and his family alone spared?
What did it mean when God said it was because he was "perfect in his generations?"
As opposed to Cain and his descendants?
Who were the Watchers and the "sons of god" who knocked up the daughters of men? Whose hybrid offspring then needed to be destroyed in the Flood?
Do Christians really know wtf the Bible was even talking about? The true meaning??? I really don't think any of you do...or you might see "aliens" today in a more familiar light.
I read the P6 discussion. It was illuminating, as was the discussion involving Michael Fisher and UBM that was also noted.
Also
UBM never really responded to Nulan's comments about why the whole Amero thing is not that far-fetched. While I'm not completely sold on the idea that America and Mexico will merge, Nulan's explanation for why it's possible was a good one.
UBM responded with another question but not a true point by point rebuttal of what Nulan said. Nulan asked a direct question and wanted a direct answer, but it didn't happen. Same thinga happened on P6 thread where UBM discussed the homicide rate among blacks.
This was interesting.
Thank You Big Man!!!
Neither Canada or Mexico will go without complaint into the dark night of continental union, particularly the former which stands to lose a very great deal.
The latter OTOH - will likely have little choice. Because the drug meta-economy and the long-standing la raza rebellion in Chiapas have combined and swollen to the level where elite control of Mexico is seriously in question.
The U.S. absolutely cannot afford to allow Mexico to become a failed state - which means either war or a peaceful and architected subversion of the money power behind the drug cartels.
5th generation warfare is waged on multiple simultaneous levels - but like my man Noam Chomskey taught back in the day, to understand the nexus of power, you need do nothing more than follow the money.
UBM never really responded to Nulan's comments about why the whole Amero thing is not that far-fetched. While I'm not completely sold on the idea that America and Mexico will merge, Nulan's explanation for why it's possible was a good one.
Big Man, you must be bullshittin'. I assumed that everyone could see Nulan's "explanation" was patently nonsensical.
I guess not. Oh well. Looks I'm gonna have to do a little more work for free...
Nulan wrote:
3. The U.S. federal government is NOT going to allow the Mexican government to fail and have that security risk on its southern border.
And THEN Nulan wrote:
So how exactly can the U.S. federal government destabilize or even wipe out the narco factor in Mexico and simultaneously solve many of its own fiscal challenges?
Here is the manifest failure of logic: Nulan argues that Mexican drug cartels are perceived by the U.S. government as a grave threat, because the U.S. government doesn't want a failed state on its "southern border."
Yet Nulan proceeds to argue that the U.S. government's solution to this problem is to erase its southern border! To dissolve the territorial integrity of the United States altogether!
Big Man, can you see the problem here? That the United States would seek to defend its territorial integrity by destroying its territorial integrity... that just makes no sense.
I've determined that Cnulan thinks like a chick...
That essentially, his 5-yo emotional inner child makes all his decisions for his grown-up robotic man-suit. That his professor side then rationalizes with reverse-logic.
Here is the manifest failure of logic: Nulan argues that Mexican drug cartels are perceived by the U.S. government as a grave threat, because the U.S. government doesn't want a failed state on its "southern border."
Yet Nulan proceeds to argue that the U.S. government's solution to this problem is to erase its southern border! To dissolve the territorial integrity of the United States altogether!
rotflmbao...., whew!!!
This is what happens when an ugly, adolescent girl struggles to win a popularity contest she's already lost by trying to revert to an intellectual rather than ad hominem approach.
It's cute how her little sidekick burd-die tried to lend moral support with his $.02 about robotic man-suits...,
So how exactly can the U.S. federal government destabilize or even wipe out the narco factor in Mexico and simultaneously solve many of its own fiscal challenges?
Trying to stay on topic, given that the topic is the hypothetical "Amero".
1. Have european countries dissolved their borders and their sovereign governance infrastructures?
2. Has the EU issued a supernational currency in parallel with the continuing use of francs, pounds stirling, deutsche marks, etc..,?
Operationalizing the euro, a model for operationalizing the amero....,
3. How were the conversions effected?
4. Is the drug business a "cash" business?
5. Is money-laundering still a significant business challenge?
6. How do you suppose drug cartels will convert their dollar-denominated cash holdings into Ameros?
7. What with the new IMF regulatory/accounting/transparency regime - to which the U.S. submitted last summer as reported in Der Spiegel - it seems to me that it will be exponentially more difficult for a dirty bank to launder currency, much less effect a massive currency conversion.
8. Carlos Slim can move mass quantities of major wealth across borders and currencies with total ease and modest transactional fees. Drug cartels, not so much...,
BBCB - let me know when you're ready to stop pretending that that little stick in your hand is a gun. Stomping a mudhole in your chest isn't even mildly amusing anymore...,
1. Have european countries dissolved their borders...?
By the most significant definition of "borders" -- i.e., controlling the inflow of people and making legal distinctions between "citizens" and "aliens" -- of course, Craig, the European countries belonging to the EU have dissolved their borders.
What do you think the "free movement of workers" is all about? And that is a pillar of European Unionism.
It means that citizens of any given EU nation have a right to move into any other EU nation... without so much as a passport. Citizenship in the "Union" trumps citizenship in any given member state, when it comes to where one chooses to live and work.
I can't imagine, Craig, how you could possibly argue that the U.S. government desires this sort of relationship with Mexico... and Mexicans.
"I can't imagine, Craig, how you could possibly argue that the U.S. government desires this sort of relationship with Mexico... and Mexicans." UBM
ugh uh um.
If I may,
Bra Mills, I thinks it's time you discern the difference between 'what happens' and "what da guvament wants ta happen'.
The crew of the Titanic, did not want it to sink. But sink it did.
The 'US government' has about as much control of the US economy (ergo: it's sovereignty) as the crew of the Titanic had control after the ship hit the iceberg.
The NAU will be as much a product of the will of the US, Mexican and Canadian governments as the EU was a product of the will of Danish, French and Italian governments.
The EU, and the NAU is the product of the will of international bankers whose interest transcend geography, nationality and ethnicity.
After the NAU the borders between Canada, Mexico and the US will be the same as before the NAU.
Symbolic.
These are "paces" in BBCB world?
You address yourself to half of one of 8 current questions (not having spoken to any of the previous dozen or so and completely ignoring the bulk of the current 8) comparing the EU border situation after the fact of full implementation with the north american work in progress - and you call that a counter-argument?
Any moderately competent debater might call that a "red herring".
A minimum of 12 million undocumented Mexican workers in the U.S., no movement towards deportation of these "aliens", economic dependence on their cheap labor, and a degree of integration with mexican americans that makes the miami cuban block seem like teensy weensy potatos by comparison.
From a national security perspective, a mexican failed state - with that degree of unassimilated interpenetration within U.S. borders - means something enormous. It means that the basic security situation bracketing all prior discussion and consideration is now in phenomenal flux.
Given DV's clearheaded association of sovereignty and C.R.E.A.M - tell me how the European Economic Community, precursor to the EU, was substantively different than NAFTA and the SPP?
Given that there is every indication that we're charting a common course through NAFTA and the SPP with the EEC (precursor to the EU), and we're host to 12 million aliens in violation of sovereign law that's unenforced, and given that there has NEVER been a greater scope and degree of financial and economic flux impacting the U.S. - (or did you anticipate major U.S. money center bank nationalizations?) your obstinate insistence that this is all a conspiracy nut's fantasy is bizarre to say the least. (I WISH that the drug prohibition in the U.S. was enforced with the same degree of laxity as the inflow of people and the distinction between "aliens" and "citizens" in the U.S. is enforced.)
You address yourself to half of one of 8 current questions... and you call that a counter-argument?
When you build a house of cards, Craig, no matter how many cards you employ -- 8, 80 or 800 -- I needn't snatch them all away to bring the whole thing tumbling down.
I only need to snatch one, thereby demonstrating that your thought processes are unsound... and thus all your other arguments are suspect.
You have plainly (and twice) proposed that the U.S. government wants to protect its southern border by granting de facto citizenship to 110 million Mexicans.
How can anyone take you seriously after you declare such a thing?
From a national security perspective, a mexican failed state - with that degree of unassimilated interpenetration within U.S. borders - means something enormous. It means that the basic security situation bracketing all prior discussion and consideration is now in phenomenal flux.
And so you believe that U.S. decision-makers believe that the solution is to grant de facto citizenship to 110 million Mexicans by creating a North American Union?
Amazing.
... tell me how the European Economic Community, precursor to the EU, was substantively different than NAFTA and the SPP?
Can do, Craig.
It was substantively different in two major respects:
1.) Part of the impetus for creation of the EEC was a desire to prevent another hellish European war by diminishing nationalism and fostering supranationalism... by explicity making war "not only unthinkable but materially impossible."
It wasn't just about creating a trade entity to compete with the United States. It was a manifestation of ideological anti-nationalism... a direct result of WWII.
The United States, obviously, has no similar cultural or ideological impulse to sacrifice its economic or political sovereignty.
2.) Socialism (or "social democracy") has been much, much more of a political way of life in Europe than in the United States. Meaning it was much easier for Europe to make the leap from central economic planning and ideological statism within individual countries... to a system of central economic planning and bureaucratic control between governments.
The United States, lacking that tradition of European-style leftism, is culturally ill-suited (to say the least) to such supranational schemes as the EU. Or even the EEC, which, keep in mind, wasn't just a trading bloc. It was engaged in the central planning of heavy industry and agriculture.
NAFTA is a trading bloc only. Industrial and agricultural planning is not controlled and coordinated by some entity representing a united Mexico, Canada and U.S.
I hope this suffices to help you understand, Craig, why the EEC was substantively different than NAFTA and the SPP.
The 'US government' has about as much control of the US economy (ergo: it's sovereignty) as the crew of the Titanic had...
Yeah, whatever, DV. But Craig Nulan is talking about the U.S. federal government. To wit:
"So how exactly can the U.S. federal government destabilize or even wipe out the narco factor in Mexico and simultaneously solve many of its own fiscal challenges?"
Whip out your Illuminati card on him, not me.
You have plainly (and twice) proposed that the U.S. government wants to protect its southern border by granting de facto citizenship to 110 million Mexicans.
How can anyone take you seriously after you declare such a thing?
No, that's YOUR rephrasing.
What I've stated is that the U.S. cannot abide a failed state on its border and that it doesn't have a feasible military solution to the problem of the civil war(s) being waged in Mexico.
The state is a vehicle through which sovereignty is exercised.
The federal government of the united states cannot interoperate with a failed mexican federal government to subserve any of the many roles that are the exclusive provenance of the state since the treaty of westphalia.
(westphalia was thrown in to prevent you from playing further semantic games i.e., saying that I now mean Arizona or Texas when I use the term "state")
The United States, lacking that tradition of European-style leftism, is culturally ill-suited (to say the least) to such supranational schemes as the EU. Or even the EEC, which, keep in mind, wasn't just a trading bloc. It was engaged in the central planning of heavy industry and agriculture.
Instead of taking fragmentary snapshots, why not simply link summaries of the EEC and of NAFTA and let folks decide for themselves? Oh yeah, and whatever you do, don't forget to discuss the SPP Security and Prosperity Partnership.
Which is closer to your vision of North America?
Vision A: Three interdependent countries with vibrant social movements, respect for labor rights, and environmentally sustainable economies anchored in provision of social needs and respect for cultural autonomy?
Or Vision B: An unequal alliance dominated by the United States, complete with pumped up oil and gas production, increasing militarization, corporate transnational planning groups, and guest worker programs to ensure cheap, vulnerable labor?
If your answer is Vision A, there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that this past August at a summit of the leaders of the United States, Canada, and Mexico in Montebello, Quebec, labor, environmental and globalization activists braved riot police and tear gas to demand democratic input into North American decision-making. The bad news is that the summit was about the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP)—the real-world name of Vision B.
While left activists and researchers in Canada and Mexico have been spreading the word about the SPP for several years, so far in the United States the SPP, which was officially launched in March 2005, has mainly caught the attention of the right wing, which sees it as a stealth plan to impose a European Union-style government on the continent.
The SPP is not a North American version of the European Union. But it is a stealth plan—one aimed at bypassing the kind of international solidarity that halted the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas and the Multilateral Agreement on Investment. The European Union emerged after years of public debate and a treaty ratified by member states. By contrast, the SPP is not a treaty and will never be submitted to the U.S., Mexican, or Canadian legislatures. Instead it attempts to reshape the North American political economy by direct use of executive authority. And while the European Union maintains an explicit role for government in addressing inequality within and between countries, the SPP’s foundation is an unequal alliance where the United States retains the political and economic trump cards.
Designed to shore up the United States’ weakening position as a global hegemon, the SPP’s primary goals are to link economic integration of the three countries to U.S. security needs; deepen U.S. access to oil, gas, electricity, and water resources throughout the continent; and to provide a privileged—and institutionalized—role for transnational corporations in continental deregulation. The stakes for labor, the environment, and civil liberties in all three countries couldn’t be higher. Yet because of the SPP’s reliance on executive authority to push the agenda, many of the SPP’s initiatives remain virtually invisible, even to many activists.
As far as that leftism straw goes, the federal government is in the process of nationalizing U.S. money center banks!!!!!
The U.S. electorate is popularly ill-suited to a whole lot of things that it's soon going to experience a crash course in acclimating itself to.
The classic, time-tested way to implement big social-engineering changes is to first create a crisis, and then in the ensuing panic to offer a solution – the 'solution' being the original goal of the entire exercise. We've seen this formula used to facilitate the installation of the Federal Reserve system, the passage of the bailout schemes, the entry of America into WWII, etc.
What I've stated is that the U.S. cannot abide a failed state on its border and that it doesn't have a feasible military solution to the problem of the civil war(s) being waged in Mexico.
And you've stated, Craig (or else why bring it up in this conversation?), that THIS IS A BIG REASON WHY the U.S. government wants to form an EU-like North American Union.
I merely pointed out the folly of your reasoning, because an EU-like North American Union would grant de facto U.S. citizenship to 110 million Mexicans.
Why would the U.S. government or the banking elites or whoever-da-funk you believe is pushing NUA... why would they want to gran de facto U.S. citizenship to 110 million Mexicans? Why?
Instead of taking fragmentary snapshots, why not simply link summaries of the EEC and of NAFTA and let folks decide for themselves?
Links? Links? That's how you counterpunch... by posting links?
Looky here, Lancelot Link... we're supposed to be having an intelligent discussion here. Why don't we "let folks decide for themselves" who's right by the way we frame our own arguments?
I have presented two compelling reasons why the U.S.A. is culturally and ideologically averse to sacrificing its political and economic sovereignty for the sake of European-style supranationalism.
To remind you:
1.) No need to suppress nationalism in order to avoid war with our neighbors;
2.) No tradition of European-style "social democracy," which had already put European states far down the road of central economic planning.
What say you to these points, Lance?
And you've stated, Craig (or else why bring it up in this conversation?), that THIS IS A BIG REASON WHY the U.S. government wants to form an EU-like North American Union.
Wrong. Putting words in my mouth doesn't strengthen your argument, it only serves to disclose the weakness of your thinking and your obsessive need to define my motivation and simultaneously mask your limited wholistic understanding of the problem space. Had you focused on the latter in good faith, rather than the former in bad faith, we wouldn't be down this adversarial path.
Business interests in the U.S. want unrestricted trade, access to cheap labor and renewable and irreplaceable natural resources. THOSE ARE THE REASONS FOR A NAFTA, SPP, and a NAU!!! Former Mexican president Vicente Fox has openly pushed for the formation of a NAU.
The U.S. government which implemented both NAFTA and the SPP and which has failed to enforce immigration laws pursuant to these business interests has served as the primary vehicle for facilitating a NAU.
The government is merely a means to clearly delineated business ends.
In addition to the above, the government is the undisputed constitutional provider of national security.
Having a failed state on our southern border compromises state-to-state interoperations on multiple fronts, commercial, security, demographic, etc...,
Unless you're proposing that the state open up another active military front in North America, (a profoundly unlikely occurrence) then there are limited means at the disposal of the U.S. government - serving as the vehicle for elite business interests as it did under NAFTA and SPP - to intervene in Mexico so as to shore up the condition of its faltering federal government. For its own part, the Mexican federal government has been compromised as a vehicle in the service of the Mexican establishment or elite business interests. So what to do?
Come now the question of M3, or currency in circulation. The Federal Reserve (a sovereign though not federal or state institution) abruptly stopped publishing the measure of currency in circulation in March 2006 pursuant to what motive or need? (to mask rampant U.S. inflation - or did you imagine that the bubble in housing stock valuations reflected real underlying increases in value?)
Because of the current global financial crisis, nationalization of U.S. money center banks, etc..., 3 Trillion deficit funded stimulus packages, etc..., the dollar is at acute risk of hyperinflating in a fashion simliar to what has happened in Zimbabwe and what happend in Weimar Germany. Don't you suppose that Preznit Obama has something in mind referring to a pending catastrophe?
One of the easiest ways out of that hyperinflationary trouble ahead, is to issue a new supernational currency pegged to a different and expanded underlying tax, business, and resource base. (the other alternative is to declare force majeur, or national bankruptcy and simply repudiate the national debt.) That would trigger WW-III.
By issuing a new currency and recalling the dollar, whose immense cash reserves fuel the narcoinsurgency in Mexico, the U.S. government can non-violently solve a number of acute problems with a single operational stroke. The situation in Mexico is by no means a primary driver for the Amero, rather, the situation with U.S.' collapsed financial system, imploding economy, and potentially hyperinflated currency is the primary driver. The effect that NAU formation and Amero issuance could have on the dollar-fueled narco-insurgency is simply a corollary benefit by which elite Mexican establishment sovereignty could be sustained, U.S. business and national security interests advanced, and illegal immigration problems resolved to a very great extent, because now business would be even freer to operate across the entire continental expanse.
We will see.
Thanks for the rest of the argument.
UBM
I see your point. If the United States accepts all of Mexico as part of a new country, then Mexican citizens will be allowed unfettered access to this country. Given the lack of scrutiny in Mexico, that could mean terrorists gaining easy access to vulnerable U.S. areas. It doesn't seem to make sense.
Here's where I see C Nulan's argument.
If we continue on the current path, the narco wars in Mexico will eventually turn it into Somalia. Except, it will be a Somalia on the U.S. border. Unless the U.S. can discover a way to make those borders secure, which we still haven't figured out and really don't want to figure out given the benefits of the cheap illegal labor, the United States will ultimately have to deal with terrorist operating with impunity all over Mexico.
I could see the U.S. government arguing that it would be better for us to take over Mexico through forming the NAU so that we could have carte blanche to move our military into that country and maintain order. We could justify surrendering some of our sovereignty by pointing to the increased manufacturing potential inherent in Mexico that might allow us to compete with China as far as producing goods.
I don't know, y'all are far more knowledgable about the topic then I am, but it seems like both of your arguments are plausible.
Things could continue in the same vein, or they could drastically change. Given the Obama catchphrase, I can see why CNulan and DV are betting on change. Not sure I agree, but I'm glad for the new viewpoint.
Post a Comment