http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58110
WASHINGTON – Mexico's former President Vicente Fox is making no secret of his desire to promote a "North American Union" to compete economically with Europe and the Far East.
Fox shocked many in the U.S. earlier in the week when he told CNN's Larry King that he and President Bush had agreed to work toward a common currency not only for North America but for Latin America as well.
This is just another example of how Bush is helping sell America's borders out.
When will this insanity end?
Do these morons even know where the U.S.- Mexico border is?
I don't want to see that and the U.S. Canada border erased AT ALL!
Once that God forbid happens, America will seize to exsist.
It's scary.
Let's all fight for one of the top indentities of America.
HER BORDERS!
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
2007-10-12 04:40:34 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
to any liberals who agree with me and the rest of the Conservatives, God Bless you.
2007-10-12 04:47:13 · update #1
People here commonly make an error with regards to viewing me as a Bush bot.
I'm not.
I disagree with bush on many, many issues!
Shame on George for not securing our borders!
2007-10-12 04:49:32 · update #2
I sure don't like it at all. But I think a good idea would be to annex Mexico to the United States and gradually change that country into a vibrant healthy economy with traditional values such as ours. It is a shame that such a beautiful country with such a rich culture should live next door to the greatest nation of God's green Earth and live so low on the totem pole(so to speak) compared their norther neighbour.
North American Union is generally a bad idea all around. Its bad for everybody.
I Cr 13;8a
2007-10-12 09:10:16 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When as they are building the nafta super highway, the first customs checkpoint is going to be in kansas. So they do not know where the borders are and they do not care.
I think securing the border is the most serious issue on the platform right now.
But as I seen on fox "leg crosser" news the other day, the mexicans are leaving america and invading canada for all the freebies they can get there.
The insanity is never going to end, not unless you take me to the room with all the buttons and let me push them :)
2007-10-12 05:20:44 · answer #2 · answered by WhereTheBuffaloRoam 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
quote from the Transcript of the interview:
"KING: E-mail from Mrs. Gonzalez in Elizabeth, New Jersey. "Mr. Fox, I would like to know how you feel about the possibility of having a Latin America united with one currency?"
FOX: Long term, very long term. What we propose together, President Bush and myself, it's ALCA, which is a trade union for all of the Americas. And everything was running fluently until Hugo Chavez came. He decided to isolate himself. He decided to combat the idea and destroy the idea...
**STOP QUOTE**--there is no mention by Fox of the word "Amero" or one currency. He said trade union.
**CONTINUE QUOTE**
KING: It's going to be like the euro dollar, you mean?
FOX: Well, that would be long, long term. I think the processes to go, first step into is trading agreement. And then further on, a new vision, like we are trying to do with NAFTA. "
**END QUOTE**
He never said the words "Amero," or "One Currency," or anything about surrender of sovereignty. The only reason Bush is interested is because it brings in cheap labor for his big business buddies. It's all about making an easy buck for his rich friends. Nothing more.
Some may claim "expert" status and say that "trade union" means a single currency...some of these same experts are the ones that have come up with the 9/11 conspiracy scenarios. Their expert engineers have degrees...in paper airplane construction.
2007-10-12 06:16:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Uh, in the Larry King interview, Fox only said that was in the "very, very long term" more like a future vision many, many years from now, not something being worked on now. Not a unified superstate, nor a unified currency.
The only thing being worked on is free trade agreements.
Besides, neither Bush nor any future president can force a change in currency or sovereignty. They don't have that power.
2007-10-12 04:54:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your preaching the same message I have been putting out for years. Have been trying to find any interest groups that are trying to squash this before it goes much further.
Of course Fox wants the NAU. Everyone in Mexico wants it. GWB wants probably more than Fox does and there are multiple reasons for that and they all have to do with oil and the huge deficit he's run up.
2007-10-12 04:52:47 · answer #5 · answered by From Yours Trully 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Now how do you like your buddy George Bush?
NAFTA started it, now it's erase the borders. A neo-cons dream come true. I agree with you on this issue. Unions have been talking about this for a long time.
2007-10-12 04:48:22 · answer #6 · answered by Zardoz 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
well i feel dirty for agreeing with you. but yes, both cons and libs in high positions of power and wealth stand to benefit from this union. they know that the American people do not support it. that is why they are going to sneak it on us slowly, and that is why NO ONE in either party will do anything about illegal immigration.
2007-10-12 04:45:07 · answer #7 · answered by Free Radical 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hell has officially frozen over. I actually agree with you here. But I'm sure you'll post more anti-american, UnConstitutional drivel eventually.
2007-10-12 04:49:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
On the rare occasion that I agree with you, this is one of them!
2007-10-12 04:45:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I sure have.... just curious. Check your debit card.... does it expire in 2010?
2007-10-12 05:16:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋