I'm stunned! I just ran across a document entitled "NORTH AMERICAN FUTURE 2025 PROJECT". Some of you have probably seen it, if not here's a link: http://www.canadians.org/water/documents/NA_Future_2025.pdf
The document is rather lenghtly, but here's an excerpt:
"...
SUMMARY
The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) proposes to conduct a research project that will examine the future strategic issues facing North America projecting out to the year 2025. The results of the study will enable policymakers to make sound, strategic, long-range policy decisions about North America, with an emphasis on regional integration.
Specifically, the project will focus on a detailed examination of future scenarios, which are based on current trends, and involve six areas of critical importance to the trilateral relationship: labor mobility, energy, the environment, security, competitiveness, and border infrastructure and logistics...
"PROJECT DESCRIPTION
In order to strengthen the capacity of Canadian, U.S., and Mexican administration officials and that of their respective legislatures to analyze, comprehend, and anticipate North American integration, the CSIS North America Project proposes to carry out a series of seven closed-door roundtable sessions...
The final deliverable will be a report on options and policy recommendations on the future of North American integration that will be presented in September 2007 to the executive and legislative branches of the three governments of North America. The report will be produced in the three official languages—English, Spanish, and French—as part of an effective dissemination strategy aimed at maximizing the policy impact of the report..."
This document was purportedly published by Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). I went to their website and found the following (I think you'll recognize some of the names):
"Board of Trustees and Counselors
CSIS trustees are drawn equally from the worlds of public policy and the private sector. They contribute a wealth of expertise to the Center’s mission and management. One asterisk (*) denotes a member of the Executive Committee and two asterisks (**) denote a CSIS Counselor.
ChairmanSam Nunn* ** -- Cochairman & CEO, Nuclear Threat Initiative
Vice Chairman & Co-FounderDavid M. Abshire -- President, Center for the Study of the Presidency
Chairman of the Executive CommitteeWilliam A. Schreyer* -- Chairman Emeritus, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.
Vice Chairman of the Executive CommitteeAnne Armstrong* -- Former U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain
President & CEOJohn J. Hamre* -- President & CEO, CSIS
Trustees
- George L. Argyros -- Chairman & CEO, Arnel & Affiliates
- Richard Armitage -- President, Armitage International
- Betty Beene -- Former President & CEO, United Way of America
- Reginald K. Brack -- Former Chairman & CEO, Time, Incorporated
- William E. Brock** -- Counselor and Trustee, CSIS
- Harold Brown** -- Counselor and Trustee, CSIS
- Zbigniew Brzezinski** -- Counselor and Trustee, CSIS
- William S. Cohen -- Chairman & CEO, The Cohen Group
- Ralph Cossa -- President, Pacific Forum/CSIS
- Richard Fairbanks** -- Counselor and Trustee, CSIS
- William H. Frist -- Trustee, CSIS
- Michael P. Galvin* -- President, Harrison Street Capital, LLC
- Linda W. Hart -- Vice Chairman & CEO, The Hart Group, Inc.
- Ben W. Heineman, Jr. -- CSIS Trustee and Senior Adviser
- Thomas O. Hicks -- Chairman, Hicks Holdings LLC
- Carla A. Hills** -- Chairman & CEO, Hills & Company
- Ray L. Hunt -- Chairman & CEO, Hunt Consolidated, Inc.
- E. Neville Isdell -- Chairman & CEO, The Coca-Cola Company
- James L. Jones -- Trustee, CSIS
- Henry A. Kissinger** -- Chairman & CEO, Kissinger Associates, Inc.
- Kenneth G. Langone -- President & CEO, Invemed Associates, LLC
- Donald B. Marron -- Chairman & CEO, Lightyear Capital
- Joseph Nye -- Distinguished Service Professor, Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government
- E. Stanley O’Neal -- Chairman and CEO, Merrill Lynch & Company, Inc.
- Joseph E. Robert -- Chairman and CEO, The J.E. Robert Companies (JER)
- Felix G. Rohatyn -- President, Rohatyn Associates, LLC
- David M. Rubenstein -- Cofounder and Managing Director, The Carlyle Group
- Charles A. Sanders -- Former Chairman & CEO, Glaxo Inc.
- James R. Schlesinger** -- Senior Adviser, Lehman Brothers, Inc.
- Brent Scowcroft** -- President, Forum for International Policy
- Rex Tillerson -- Chairman & CEO, Exxon Mobil Corporation
- Murray Weidenbaum -- Hon. Chair, Weidenbaum Center, Washington University
- Frederick B. Whittemore -- Advisory Director, Morgan Stanley
TRUSTEES EMERITUS
COUNSELORS
- William E. Brock -- Counselor and Trustee, CSIS
- Harold Brown -- Counselor and Trustee, CSIS
- Zbigniew Brzezinski -- Counselor and Trustee, CSIS
- Frank C. Carlucci -- Counselor, CSIS
- Richard Fairbanks -- Counselor and Trustee, CSIS
- Carla A. Hills -- Chairman & CEO, Hills & Company
- Henry A. Kissinger -- Chairman & CEO, Kissinger Associates, Inc.
- Theodore McCarrick -- Counselor, CSIS
- Sam Nunn -- Cochairman & CEO, Nuclear Threat Initiative
- James R. Schlesinger -- Senior Advisor, Lehman Brothers, Inc.
- Brent Scowcroft -- President, Forum for International Policy "














Editor at Large

Comments Policy
Ten, what are you
August 1, 2007 - 00:23 ET by ThoughtPoliceTen, what are you saying?
Are you telling me this is some type of "evidence" or "proof" that they are trying to converge the U.S., Mexico, and Canada into one entity? Surely you are kidding? ? Do you think that the well read, knowledgeable people of America will let that stand?? Do you think the pride of being Mexican won't get in the way? I mean, surely the Canadians will do something about this, right?
Come on, why don't you look at history? My magic 8 ball says this will NEVER happen!?!??
(Sarcasm off)
This one just hits you
August 1, 2007 - 01:27 ET by Ten7sThis one just hits you right between the eyes, doesn't it?
(yawn)
August 1, 2007 - 07:31 ET by Unsane(yawn) Someone might want to explain to me then why the Canadian government recently purchased icebreakers to defend its sovereignty (yes, Canada's sovereignty) over the "Northwest Passage", an idea that the United States is at odds with?
Doesn't quite fit the conspiracy, does it?
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
A.) Thanks for another
August 1, 2007 - 13:53 ET by Ten7sA.) Thanks for another irrelevant and off-topic piece of info.
B.) Why are you so fixated on conspiracies?
Never more on-topic
August 8, 2007 - 03:52 ET by UnsaneUm, this is EXTREMELY on-topic in spite of your childish attempts to wish otherwise. What, are you running around your office/room/study/whatever with your hands over your eyes screaming "I'M NOT READING!!!" because that information pokes some holes in your little fantasy?
Deal with it. I pointed out that the Canadians are out to defend their sovereignty, which would not be necessary if half of what you type on these forums was true.
You are the one fixated on conspiracies, not I. To listen to you whine and cry, we are DOOMED as a nation because we have LAND BORDERS.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
For the thousandth time, NO CONSPIRACY
August 8, 2007 - 14:55 ET by Ten7sA conspiracy is a secret agreement to perform an illegal act. I’ve never alleged a conspiracy. Quite the contrary, the facts show that the ‘Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America’ is a clear and unfortunate reality, one antithetical to a healthy republic:
And you counter with the trite and irrelevant bit of information that 'Canada bought some IceBreakers'. Quite frankly you are the one that refuses to read and contemplate what you don't want to hear, and we can chalk your emotional blather up to projection.
So Ten... My question is
August 1, 2007 - 00:36 ET by bigtimerSo Ten...
My question is real simple tonight.
Do you think this group of leftists will accomplish their goals?
If good people do nothing,
August 1, 2007 - 01:46 ET by sarcasmoIf good people do nothing, or if they do the wrong thing, yes. And if globalist types really-were just on the political left, this problem would be far easier to fight. Sadly, they've infiltrated both "major" political parties IMO, and many people don't seem to want to see that.
JMR
sarc... When you say
August 1, 2007 - 01:55 ET by bigtimersarc...
When you say they...
It is not fair to real people who know who the real RINO's are or the enemy within...
As far as I am concerned people like Scowcroft and Kissinger are and have never been friends of my way of life...in other words the conservatives.
I agree with you about the infiltration...but they will not win in the end...they never have.
JMHO.
Well, I am trying to be
August 1, 2007 - 02:00 ET by sarcasmoWell, I am trying to be fair. I'm not as "up" on globalist issues as I am on spending issues. To me the globalist stuff is all stuffed into the "United Nations section" of my brain, filed under "shouldn't exist."
JMR
New filing system sarc
August 1, 2007 - 02:04 ET by dagdaMaybe you should file them under "shouldn't exist" and "people who propose things that shouldn't exist."
Our real problem, then, is not our strength today; it is rather the vital necessity of action today to ensure our strength tomorrow. Dwight Eisenhower
Well, it's my hope that with
August 1, 2007 - 02:07 ET by sarcasmoWell, it's my hope that with the profusion of small recording devices these days, one of these wonderful patriots listed above will decide for him or her self that the people need to know what's doing in these closed-door meetings. THAT recording, if it ever leaked, might lead to some real entertainment!! :)
JMR
Screening devices
August 1, 2007 - 02:10 ET by dagdaI think airport screening devices were originally invented to stop people from doing exactly this. Although, I would love to see it. Then again, Nixon and Johnson taped their offices and see what it got them. :)
Our real problem, then, is not our strength today; it is rather the vital necessity of action today to ensure our strength tomorrow. Dwight Eisenhower
Future, "Real simple", bigtimer, LOL
August 1, 2007 - 02:14 ET by Ten7s"Real simple", bigtimer, LOL, it depends on what you mean by success. They've already successfully reached some of their intermediate goals. For example, the Executive Branch of our Federal Government is implementing a set of "North American" policies in the form of the 'Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America' (the most obvious result of which is the lack of border enforcement, not to mention the push for GWP/Scamesty).
If by succeed you mean create a "North America" customs union and supra-national structure like the EU, I really don't know. If they don't succeed, I'm sure it won't be for lack of effort. Right now the Regionalists seem to have the wind at their backs from what J.D. Hayworth called the "Perfect Storm", a confluence of interests that seem opposed to Our Republic. But history has a way of stepping in and rearranging the circumstances.
Thanks ten... Just my
August 1, 2007 - 02:15 ET by bigtimerThanks ten...
Just my opinion...but they will not succeed.
I have been wrong before that is for sure.
I just do not see this.
QM put this great link in...just thought I would share it again.
Yeah, I've read "SPP Myths
August 1, 2007 - 02:39 ET by Ten7sYeah, I've read "SPP Myths vs Facts", and I've read the original SPP documents. And I've seen the corrosive effects of putting the SPP into action. So I think an appropriate subtitle would be "Do You Believe Me or Your Lying Eyes?" And it reminds of the President trying to tell me that the Immigration Bill didn't include amnesty.
Ten... Yeah well that is
August 1, 2007 - 03:06 ET by bigtimerTen...
Yeah well that is where we do agree..
I helped in my small way on this earth to defeat the Pres. and all his ilk when it came to this.
Catch ya later...
Hell yeah! Me too
August 1, 2007 - 07:34 ET by Six String Spiffsame here BT. I was was one of those faxes, and phone calls. That defeat gave me a much needed boost in morale for my country.
What the MSSM doesn't report can kill you.
(sigh)
August 1, 2007 - 07:28 ET by UnsaneI have too, and the SPP is a stupid bureaucratic talk-shop that means less than nothing. But as I suspect even thinking of there being an Outside World beyond the borders of the United States overwhelms you with COMPLETE and TOTAL PARALYZING FEAR, that will do little but elicit a mocking response.
Tell me, has the OAS taken over the hemisphere from the Bering Strait to the Beagle Channel? And what of the Pan American Highway? Why hasn't THAT led to the subjugation of the United States? Or, why haven't we been forced to merge with Canada as a result of the construction of the ALCAN?
(Yes, the Immigration Bill did suck. I was thrilled to see that go down in flames.)
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Um, wasn't the Immigration
August 1, 2007 - 07:33 ET by sarcasmoUm, wasn't the Immigration Bill that sucked an integral part of this whole plan? That's what people allege, anyway. As I've said, I don't know that much about it, but I don't think it does your argument too much good to try to paint opponents as scared of free trade when they're actually scared of creeping UN-control over the USA, and pro free-trade. I like cashews, too, and they taste good no matter where farmers grow 'em (but California's are best!) so let trade be free!
JMR
sarc - You should know that
August 1, 2007 - 07:58 ET by Unsanesarc - You should know that the crowd that buys into this nonsense have different motivations. Many, I suspect, are anti-free trade, period, and are looking for any boogeyman that they can. Pat Buchanan comes to mind.
Besides, this is the part that gets me most:
The government can't deliver my mail to the right address. They can't send my my voter registration card. They consistently turn out functional illiterates and otherwise botch most other things they get involved in. Yet, they are going to - with total apple-pie ease - forcibly merge Canada and Mexico together with the United States - without anyone knowing about it. Vision will blind, severance ties...true are ALL lies; off I go to be asphyxiated with oxygen, to a new level where the absence of air LETS me breathe (h/t, Meshuggah).
CA's cashews may be best, but are they the cheapest? After all...
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
I honestly didn't know
August 1, 2007 - 08:13 ET by sarcasmoI honestly didn't know about Pat Buchanan's view on the SPP/NAU issue but I'll take your word for it. Would you agree that "managed" trade (featuring a rule-book seemingly designed to employ lawyers which is thousands of pages long) might not be the same thing -- at least in some minds -- as free trade? That's how I see government-managed trade, because I live in a state where criminal politicians have tried to defy the free market to keep politically-giving non-US citizens (that's right, the Fanjuls are Spaniards!) in the sugar business because all of this subsidy-stupidity supposedly somehow hurts Fidel Castro. You can see how well this brilliant policy has worked so-far as he dies, slowly, of old age...
And I'm in total agreement with you that the government's incompetent at most jobs they attempt, but the fears I've seen (from people who are into this stuff like I'm into spending) of an eventual UN takeover seem to always invoke nightmareish stuff like the movie "Red Dawn" instead of apple pie ease. I'm more agnostic on the issue, so I just sit there wondering "if everything's so hunky dory about this bunch, how 'bout televising or at least recording their now-secret meetings??" For people like me, I guess the analogy is how Hillary's secret health care plan would have seemed to Republicans, or maybe like Cheney's secret oil talks seemed to the Democrats a few years later. Chances are all three, if run on C-Span, might be distilled boredom, but the secrecy-aspect brings out the people who doubt that, and as you've seen yourself, it's difficult to refute them in these circumstances.
JMR
Really, no explanations are needed
August 8, 2007 - 04:04 ET by UnsaneSarc, you don't have to tell me that the free trade agreements aren't pure free trade. The Canadians would, for one, throw a hissy if a Barnes & Noble opened in, say, suburban Toronto. (They have to protect their bookstores and publishers against the drowning influence of the evil Americans, don't you know. Publishing and books were off-limits items in the initial U.S-Canadian free trade deal of 1988.) And that is just ONE example.
For another, look into what was done to save the ever-important corn-broom industry!!!
I wish I had a link for you, but Pat Buchanan indeed came up with an article I read on townhall,com where he was throwing his own tantrum on an alleged NAFTA Superhighway that is supposed to run from Laredo to Kansas City, and is supposed to be under construction right now. (As one who spends quite a bit of time on the road these days, I can assure you this is BS, as not a spadeful of dirt has been turned over on that interstate since, well, since ever, on many stretches.) Buchanan HATES the idea of free trade with a passion.
One thing that the posters cannot fathom (do you?) is that the nightmare scenario they all so deeply FEAR is feared even more so north and south of the border. Anytime I point this simple fact out, a fact borne of history stretching back centuries, I just get pilloried for it. No matter, I intend to hang around until the critical thinking lights turn on. Do I think it is a bad idea to closely monitor what our government is doing? NOT AT ALL; but I do think some perspective and prioritizing is in order. As one who has to face the risk of personally dealing with the consequences of a world gone insane on a daily basis, I have an incentive to monitor as closely as possible potential threats to the United States. I just cannot see one here; though I suppose it makes for great drama and entertainment. (Not to mention is great cover for those who hate ANY free trade.)
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Your tagline Unsane
August 8, 2007 - 04:21 ET by Cool ArrowYour tagline describes you perfectly.
A man is forced to keep his word when no one else will take it.
Not verbatim, but the literal only comes close.
Buckets of cold water
August 1, 2007 - 07:22 ET by UnsaneI realize your dream is of an America that is a complete autarky; one that is so closed to the world that it makes Enver Hoxha's Albania look friendly to tourists...but bear with me.
(Takes a swipe of cashews, I have been craving these things for some time, as I love cashews...hmmmm...[reads the label on the jar] contains cashews from India, Brazil, Vietnam and Indonesia. Horrors!!! We just cannot have that, can we???)
Oh, sure, the EU was just as apple-pie easy to carry out...
ONLY AFTER the deaths of about 20-30 million people in war, the complete destruction of economies and nations, and the need to pool resources against an even bigger threat called the Soviet Union.
Even so, voters in 2005 rejected an "EU Constitution" in France and the Netherlands. And even after 50 years, the "union" in Europs is nowhere near complete. Not all the nations in the EU belong to the Schengen Pact or to the Euro, for example.
Instead of building the Himalayas out of a molehill, and reading up on the Conspiro websites all day, why not join me in backing:
- An English-as-an-official-language amendment to the Constitution,
- Securing the southern border against drug smuggling and illegal immigration, while keeping free trade (oh, I forgot, you are a hardened protectionist who simply will not admit it, even when presented with a "yes" or "no" question)
- Radical tax simplification and privatizing Social Security and Medicare (much bigger threats to the nation than you think).
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Who is this imaginary person
August 1, 2007 - 13:55 ET by Ten7sWho is this imaginary person to whom you address your confused comments? No matter, maybe they will materialize and translate your posts for everyone.
Don't hold your breath. I
August 1, 2007 - 18:48 ET by WhichWingDon't hold your breath. I think he just goes on random drive-by insultings, tossing out as many of his favorite keywords as he can manage. His latest and greatest is "protectionist." Apperently, from what I've read on here, anyone who dares discuss the possibility of the NAU/SPP is a protectionist.
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
For WhichWhine
August 8, 2007 - 00:51 ET by UnsaneWhichWhine, I now see why you are an atheist. Your mind is too addled with other fantasies to be bothered with religion. Inculding the idea of my participating in "drive-by insultings" (and you wonder why I call you WhichWhine).
If this NAU/SPP is just going to wipe away centuries of history and cultural development as you and especially your buddy Chicken Little (who you know as Ten7s)...
...actually, I am going to ask a different question this time.
It seems that the Canadians are buying a few extra vessels to patrol the waters of the Arctic Archipelago. They claim sovereignty over them. The United States is totally opposed to such a claim. Now, if these two countries, along with Mexico, are supposed to merge in 2010 in this ballyhooed conspiracy, then why is this purchase being made? Why are the Canadians taking actions to defend their sovereignty?
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Your denial can only last so
August 8, 2007 - 02:03 ET by WhichWingYour denial can only last so long. Although, I expect it to last until the day after the NAU is signed into law, at least.
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
On lacking any intellectual honesty and critical thinking skills
August 8, 2007 - 02:13 ET by UnsaneIf you lack the intellectual honesty and critical thinking skills to answer my very basic question, all you need to do is to just say so.
Have some more.
If this is such an APPLE-PIE EASY thing to pull off, why did the Canadians throw a fit at the mere suggestion that Customs laws and procedures be harmonized with the United States after 11 September 2001?
Why did the Mexicans come within 0.6% of the vote from electing a president so isolationist that he has never even left Mexico for any reason?
"Denier!" "You are an evil bastard who hates the Constitution, Unsane!!!" "You're head is in the sand!" and like replies will be taken by me as an admission that your brains are simply too weak to handle a basic activity like critical thinking.
P.S. The government can't educate our children, can't manage spending, and can't even deliver the mail to the correct addresses, yet they can just wave their magic wands, wipe away centuries of history and cultural development with extreme ease, and force the merger of three nations, two of which look upon the United States wearily in the BEST of times, no problem.
Contradictions have a nasty habit of collapsing. Now, excuse me while I asphyxiate myself with oxygen (h/t, Meshuggah).
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
}}---> Ostrich behavior
August 8, 2007 - 02:32 ET by Cool ArrowContrary to your statement, ostriches do not bury their heads in the sand. A prime example of the Liberal axiom that if you tell a lie often enough, the people will believe it.
Not a good example to throw out there when your argument stands pretty strong on its own.
Just an old saw
August 8, 2007 - 02:47 ET by UnsaneThat's nothing more than an "old saw". Besides, the Conspiros here have been using the term freely, not I.
But I thank you for your assistance.
:-)
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Am I the only person that
August 8, 2007 - 04:31 ET by WhichWingAm I the only person that has noticed Unsane repeats the same little catch phrases everyday, with slight variations based on the subject of the thread?
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
}}---> No, WhichWing
August 8, 2007 - 04:49 ET by Cool ArrowHe's ranting about how we're "doomed" because of foreign debt now.
Translate?
August 8, 2007 - 00:54 ET by UnsaneTranslate my posts? Why, I didn't flip into Cyrillic, though I COULD do that quite easily.
Actually, I am addressing a poster named Ten7s, who is so terrified and full of total FEAR of the Outside World, I have called him "Chicken Little". And its only fitting, as he has in the past misconstrued my posts, quite on purpose, and has repeatedly impugned my patriotism in the past.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Starting to lose it 'Non Compos Mentis' one
August 8, 2007 - 03:40 ET by Ten7sI really think you're starting to lose it 'Non Compos Mentis' one. You certainly can't be referring to me; perhaps you've mistaken me for another poster. I've never "impugned" your patriotism. I've questioned your reading skills, knowledge, ability to think coherently, but not your patriotism. I have no doubt that you are sincerely patriotic.
On my losing it
August 8, 2007 - 04:10 ET by UnsaneThat last sentence shows that your memory is much shorter than mine. Reference exchanges from the spring of 2006.
Besides, unlike many on here, my reading skills are superior. Why? Because unlike even yourself, I don't just read what I WANT to read, believe what I WANT to believe, and acquire the knowledge I WANT to acquire.
That is what critical thinking does to people. Try it sometime. I don't pose the questions that I do for my health. I do that to inspire critical thinking.
(You know, writing people off as simply "losing it" and packing them off to psychiatric wards was a great way for the Soviet Union to deal with people they didn't like in the 1960s onwards. It was much easier than dealing with the questions posed by the dissidents, I guess.)
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
You are correct unsane, you
August 8, 2007 - 18:23 ET by ThoughtPoliceYou are correct unsane, you don't read things, believe things, and acquire the knowledge that YOU want...but what others would have you do.
Your comment in parentheses is funny, I find the irony ovewhelming when concerning the 9/11 truth movement.
INDEED!
August 9, 2007 - 07:23 ET by WhichWingINDEED!