The Amero

[joobie]

that eagle looks way too wussy to ever be approved.

 

[ronpaulisright]

Don't you get it, maaaaan? They're all tentacles of the octopus maaaaan. MJ-12 and UFOS, Kennedy, 9/11, the Amero... IT'S ALL THE SAME CONSPIRACY MAAAAAN!!


[qimg]http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/bong.gif[/qimg]

I get the impression that you "critical thinkers" just shrug off all the mischief that goes on in the world. It's easy to say: "don't drink the kool-aid" "shut up, you're a conspiracy theorist."

I mean I give mad props to the TWO members here who attempted (but failed) to debunk all the entities like skull and bones,bilderberg, trilateral commission etc. But You guys are like ANTI-conspiracy theory. I AM a conspiracy theorist. And I know for a fact that I'm right on some of these issues. I may not see the big picture, but I know that there are people to blame for all the ugliness in the world. All you have to be is a critical thinker, and look around you.

 

[Minadin]

Your source for this paranoia was shown to be a complete fraud. Why do you persist?

 

[Confuseling]

Hominid DNA has been around for several million years.

Anatomically modern humans have been around for approximately 200,000 years.

The capacity to make fire, abstract representation, grammatical speech (it is assumed) and so forth have been around for approximately 40,000 years, since the 'cultural explosion'.

We have spent this entire time being really crappy to each other.

For what possible reason could you need conspiracy theories to explain anything?

 

[hamelekim]

Hominid DNA has been around for several million years.

Anatomically modern humans have been around for approximately 200,000 years.

The capacity to make fire, abstract representation, grammatical speech (it is assumed) and so forth have been around for approximately 40,000 years, since the 'cultural explosion'.

We have spent this entire time being really crappy to each other.

For what possible reason could you need conspiracy theories to explain anything?

This is why conspiracies happen! People want to do things that others wouldn't normally allow them to do, if they were freely known about.

Hence why you have the CIA, NSA, Special Forces teams, etc... They conspire all the time, conspiracies are the norm in the world.

Look at the rise of Hitler in Germany, or Communism in Russia, full of conspiracies. Hell, Bush was planning on painting a US plane in UN colours and have Saddam shoot it down over Iraq. That's a conspiracy too. The only difference is that we know about those conspiracies, they have been made public over time.

There are countless spy agencies that have ways to murder people to make it look like suicide or a natural death. If you don't believe this you are naive. What you have to look at when someone important dies is, who benefits from their death, and what were the circumstances behind those deaths?

The Amero makes perfect sense, just like the NAU makes perfect sense from a business perspective. The fact that most politicians are either former businessmen, or will end up in business afterwards leads one to believe that they would do things to benefit business. Then you look at the power and control that multi-national corporations have, and how the nation state really gets in the way, and you can easily paint a picture of conspiracy.

If the SPP was debated in parliament here in Canada, or in the US congress, it would likely never have passed. But it was done in secret, and only announced after it was signed by politicians and business. I would argue that is a conspiracy right there.

Conspiracy or not, there are Globalists who want to remove nation states and set up a world government. It makes sense from some perspectives although the way it is currently being set up won't work in the long run. The wealth inequality that neo-liberalism is generating world wide is going to cause revoltion and economic collapse in the end.

 

[Confuseling]

I agree with most of that.

But the point is that's all better explained by class, not conspiracies - it's simply a more coherent explanation, and doesn't appeal to unknown factors.

These things you are describing are just confluences of interests. If lots of capitalists act in their own interests, it'll look like they're coordinating. These things have happened everywhere where there has been no evidence of conspiracy, so why assume they are the necessary ingredient? They're a comprehension killing red-herring.

 

[hamelekim]

Further evidence that the Amero is an idea that many powerful business and banking people want to see.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7854

The concept of a North American currency has not only been the object of discussion within powerful big-business think tanks, but has, in fact, been discussed in government positions. In May of 2007, Canada’s then-Governor of the Bank of Canada, David Dodge, said that, “North America could one day embrace a euro-style single currency,” the Globe and Mail reported. Further, the article stated that, “Some proponents have dubbed the single North American currency the ‘amero’,” and further, “Answering questions from the audience after a speech in Chicago, Mr. Dodge said a single currency was ‘possible’.”

In November of 2007, the Globe and Mail reported that, “Canada should replace its dollar with a North American currency, or peg it to the U.S. greenback, to avoid the exchange rate shifts the loonie has experienced, renowned money manager Stephen Jarislowsky told a parliamentary committee yesterday,” and quoted Jarislowsky as saying, “I think we have to really seriously start thinking of the model of a continental currency just like Europe.”17 The article continued, “Mr. Jarislowsky, a former Canfor Corp. director, said the loonie's rise to above par with the U.S. dollar is destroying manufacturing and could devastate the forest sector,” and that, “Mr. Jarislowsky said Canada could either aim for a common North American currency or peg the loonie to the U.S. greenback at about 80 cents (U.S.), allowing it to float within a small band.” Jarislowsky, a billionaire often considered to be Canada’s Warren Buffet, is a member of several corporate boards, and is also a member of the board of directors of the C.D. Howe Institute.18

Appearing on Larry King Live recently, former Mexican President and initial signatory to the Security and Prosperity Partnership, Vicente Fox, when asked a question about whether or not it was possible to see a common currency for Latin America, responded by stating, “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,” to which Larry King interjected, “It's going to be like the euro dollar, you mean?” and Fox responded, “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.”19

Of course Fox would say that it was very long term. The idea would outrage people if he said they wanted it soon. Of course it would likely take a while to implement such a currency, look at how long the EU took to fully develop. Although our three economies are already so close it might not be such a difficult task to implement such a union and currency.

They know that people are very nationalistic about their currencies, and they like to keep control of their country, including its money. So how would you go about getting people to switch over to the Amero? How about completely debasing the defacto world currency, the USD? Cause economic instability which will consolidate more wealth in the hands of the few and powerful, and create a problem where the solution is a new currency for North America.

It would be difficult to do. I mean, a total of 6 people met to decide the economic fate of the world when the bear sterns thing happened. When you have private businessmen worth tens of billions of dollars, who are looking out for their selfish interest. It's not hard to see how they could shape corporate and bank policy in order to bring about certain economic ends.

Then you look at how much influence corporations have over politicians, and you can see how politicians would give into business in order to get elected again, as well as having jobs once they leave the political realm.

 

[hamelekim]

I agree with most of that.

But the point is that's all better explained by class, not conspiracies - it's simply a more coherent explanation, and doesn't appeal to unknown factors.

These things you are describing are just confluences of interests. If lots of capitalists act in their own interests, it'll look like they're coordinating. These things have happened everywhere where there has been no evidence of conspiracy, so why assume they are the necessary ingredient? They're a comprehension killing red-herring.

Confluence of interests which work against the public interest in private. I would argue that's a conspiracy.

 

[Confuseling]

The problem, though is factionalism.

You have a bunch of people who decide to 'screw over the little man' and control the world economy to their own design, and there's no reason that one of them couldn't defect, come clean about the conspiracy, have the rest locked up and the thanks of the people.

Unless... it's in his interests for the design they were going for to continue. In other words, the only people who are going to be loyal to this conspiracy are the rich. The conspiracy is the maintenance of richness.

It's capitalism - not a conspiracy.

ETA: crosspost. What I'm saying is if all capitalists act to further their self interest, it makes no difference if they join Masonic Lodges - they'd do the same things anyway! They may well join Masonic Lodges. I don't care: it has no explanatory value.

 

[hamelekim]

The problem, though is factionalism.

You have a bunch of people who decide to 'screw over the little man' and control the world economy to their own design, and there's no reason that one of them couldn't defect, come clean about the conspiracy, have the rest locked up and the thanks of the people.

Unless... it's in his interests for the design they were going for to continue. In other words, the only people who are going to be loyal to this conspiracy are the rich. The conspiracy is the maintenance of richness.

It's capitalism - not a conspiracy.

ETA: crosspost. What I'm saying is if all capitalists act to further their self interest, it makes no difference if they join Masonic Lodges - they'd do the same things anyway! They may well join Masonic Lodges. I don't care: it has no explanatory value.

Well, in this case it isn't illegal. Also, it would likely be ignored as most things are by the mainstream media and public.

Then you have the more sinister ideas, like threatening family and friends with death if the person reveals anything. I don't think it goes that far, but who knows, in some factions, maybe it does.

I wouldn't put it past some of the elite to off people because their power and wealth were threatened. There are certain personality traits that the elite have, and a lot of them are not generally positive.

I think the problem here is the definition and use of conspiracy. Until we define what we mean by conspiracy, then there can be no agreement on whether or not there is one.

I mean, what does it say about a government when they don't include inflation of energy and commodities in their numbers? Those are the only two numbers that really matter because they affect a majority of peoples lives. Or the fact that the FED doesn't post M3 numbers anymore. They do this because they are printing so much money, it would freak people out if they knew the real numbers. I would argue those are both conspiracies. They are lies to cover up the truth, that detrimental policies are in place that hurt the majority of people.

 

[uk_dave]

I get the impression that you "critical thinkers" just shrug off all the mischief that goes on in the world. It's easy to say: "don't drink the kool-aid" "shut up, you're a conspiracy theorist."

I get the impression that conspiracy theorists will believe any old conspiracy crap simply because someone proffers it and spins the statements of others to make it seem as if they have actual evidence for the conspiracy.

So, what is it about the mentality and the lives of conspiracy theorists which makes them such willing followers of woo?

Could it be that they lack certain social skills but strongly desire to be part of an exclusive group?

Could it be that they suffer daily set-backs in their lives but retain an arrogant belief in their own self importance and so must construct a reason for their failures which revolves around secret machinations by others?

Is it boredom?

 

[Confuseling]

Look, you have 500 companies, all of whom make more money if environmental protection legislation is relaxed.

They all lobby parliament. They all try to bribe their way into owning an MP... perhaps something even more sinister. Blackmail. Murder... who knows?

My point is they all act in concert. Hopefully politics restricts these people's ruthless behaviour - that's the class war.

But you HONESTLY don't need to imagine them sitting in a smokey room, rolling around in money, deciding how to screw everyone over. They know perfectly well how to screw everyone over on their own.

Yes, occasionally groups may meet up, and engage in some odious plot. But that happens on top of the class interests that determine their apparently coordinated behaviour. Do you honestly believe that if all the conspiracies vanished tomorrow, the world would look any different? Do you think suddenly, stripped of their black robes and their owl worship, the oil company execs would realise the error of their ways and embrace flowers and bunny rabbits?

Conspiracies do exist. Sometimes they are even significant. But the vast majority of things tick along quite nicely - or nastily - without them. It may well be the case that even some of the people IN the conspiracies don't realise this, but they do not hold that much influence. How do I know? Because every time a society has disintegrated, or been torn apart from the outside, you get to see all these bits of intrigue, these nefarious cabals and plots. And they amount to almost nothing.

 

[uk_dave]

Of course Fox would say that it was very long term. The idea would outrage people if he said they wanted it soon.

Your spin. What makes you think 'people' would be outraged anyway? Do you have special insight into what people do and don't want? If so, maybe you should go into politics. Stand for election.

Of course it would likely take a while to implement such a currency, look at how long the EU took to fully develop.

Ohhhh so it is 'very long term' then. Make up your mind, you just flip flopped. Definite politician material.

Although our three economies are already so close it might not be such a difficult task to implement such a union and currency.

You mean it wouldn't be a whole lot different than the current situation? What're you worried about then? Frightened of losing the pyramid and 'all seeing eye' off of your currency? Hmmmmm, maybe you're a Mason too.

They know that people are very nationalistic about their currencies

Well you certainly appear to be and, like a good politician, what's good for you is good for everyone else, right?

, and they like to keep control of their country, including its money. So how would you go about getting people to switch over to the Amero?

How indeed...

How about completely debasing the defacto world currency, the USD?

Hmmmmm the strength of the dollar is based upon the strength of your economy. How does debasing your economy help with a new currency? You'd just enter it at exactly the same weak level you believe the dollar is at right now.

Cause economic instability which will consolidate more wealth in the hands of the few and powerful, and create a problem where the solution is a new currency for North America.

Really? So if the economy tanks, bill gates gets richer? Interesting economic model you have there. I suggest you stick with politics and Freemasonry

It would be difficult to do. I mean, a total of 6 people met to decide the economic fate of the world when the bear sterns thing happened.

Bear Sterns had nothing whatsoever to do with the economic fate of the world.

When you have private businessmen worth tens of billions of dollars, who are looking out for their selfish interest. It's not hard to see how they could shape corporate and bank policy in order to bring about certain economic ends.

Do these wealthy business people have all their wealth in gold or silver or what? Currency? But that's tanking in your world view. Shares? They're going to tank in your world as well. Where's the money? Show me the money!!

Then you look at how much influence corporations have over politicians, and you can see how politicians would give into business in order to get elected again, as well as having jobs once they leave the political realm.

You've got your future all mapped out, haven't you?

 

[Drudgewire]

I get the impression that you "critical thinkers" just shrug off all the mischief that goes on in the world. It's easy to say: "don't drink the kool-aid" "shut up, you're a conspiracy theorist."

I mean I give mad props to the TWO members here who attempted (but failed) to debunk all the entities like skull and bones,bilderberg, trilateral commission etc. But You guys are like ANTI-conspiracy theory. I AM a conspiracy theorist. And I know for a fact that I'm right on some of these issues. I may not see the big picture, but I know that there are people to blame for all the ugliness in the world. All you have to be is a critical thinker, and look around you.

I was a CTer for a good decade. Bottom line is the movement is full of liars who ignore any real evidence because it flies in the face of their beliefs while embracing nonsense because it doesn't. Take agendas out of them, take paranoia out of them, and take the desire to think you're "special" because you know a "truth" the spood-fed masses don't out of them and you're left with nothing (and make no mistake about it. It does make you "special"... just not the good kind).

I don't trust the government as far as I can throw them, but with maturity hopefully comes the ability to think critically... and that has led me to trust the kooks a whole lot less.

As for attempting to answer your questions "without ugliness." I'm happy to do this to those who show the same courtesy. Every thread you've started was stand-offish and accusatory from the OP forward, and clearly shows you haven't taken a moment to use the search feature where we've intelligently discussed these fantasies to death. Therefore, instead of engaging you openly I'll treat you like the whiny child you are and smack you on the hand and threaten to not give you any candy if you continue making a scene in public.

 

[Gazpacho]

So hamelekim, do you believe that US and Mexican officials meeting to improve relations between the two countries is, by itself, evidence that an NAU conspiracy is afoot?

 

[abenja1]

I thought we were supposed to be going cashless at least according to Alex Jones. Now we have the amero?

 

[ronpaulisright]

I was a CTer for a good decade. Bottom line is the movement is full of liars who ignore any real evidence because it flies in the face of their beliefs while embracing nonsense because it doesn't. Take agendas out of them, take paranoia out of them, and take the desire to think you're "special" because you know a "truth" the spood-fed masses don't out of them and you're left with nothing (and make no mistake about it. It does make you "special"... just not the good kind).

I can respect this.

Too many suspect groups out there to think that nothing is wrong.

Bilderberg group? come on? nothing to worry about?

 

[ronpaulisright]

come clean about the conspiracy, have the rest locked up and the thanks of the people.

Well you had that general fallon guy resign. That's SOMETHING.

 

[Gazpacho]

Too many suspect groups out there to think that nothing is wrong.

Bilderberg group? come on? nothing to worry about?

Are they related to the Articles of Zion? And what are those, anyway?

Also, by listening to Norteño music, despite being a natural-born US citizen, have I become an agent of the NAU? Please answer so I can correct myself if necessary.

 

[Corsair 115]

The Amero makes perfect sense, just like the NAU makes perfect sense from a business perspective.

Uh, no, the NAU does not make perfect sense from a business perspective. Why? Because it all comes down to which nation's rules do you use for this union? U.S. rules? Canadian rules? Mexican rules? Some amalgam of all three? How would that be decided? I'll note that American companies operating in Canada have found that they have considerably lower health care costs than in the United States, and that saves them money (even after accounting for higher tax rates).

If the SPP was debated in parliament here in Canada, or in the US congress, it would likely never have passed.

*sigh*

The SPP is not legislation, nor is it laws, nor rules, nor regulations, nor even solid suggestions. The SPP is nothing more than a discussion group about harmonizing certain rules and regulations between the three countries. That's it. Can you point to even a single thing which has been implemented by the SPP over its three years? You can't because there aren't any, it's all just talk (and talk and talk). Any changes to rules, regulations, and legislation would have to pass through the legislatures of the individual governments.

(Side question vis-a-vis the Canadian political system: exactly how would legislation be enacted without passing through Parliament? I'm not aware of any such method offhand.)

When it comes to the SPP, the "NAFTA superhighway," and the "North American Union," whatever you do, do not listen to Lou Dobbs. He drones on about this stuff from time to time, and he's completely and utterly wrong, wrong, wrong. (I realized Dobbs was full of baloney a couple of years ago when he strongly implied Canada was just another "cheap foreign labor market" stealing away American jobs.)

Then you look at how much influence corporations have over politicians, and you can see how politicians would give into business in order to get elected again, as well as having jobs once they leave the political realm.

I would point out that the Canadian political system is very different from the American political system. Canada has, for example, strict spending limits on the parties in federal election campaigns (see: Elections Canada's current investigation into overspending by the Conservatives during the last federal election and the political scandal that might turn out to be). We have three national parties (four if you count the Green Party, though it has yet to win a seat in Parliament) plus a strong regional party. That does much to colour how Parliament works since the electorate has more choices, plus the electorate has shown its willingness to decimate political parties if sufficiently displeased (see: 1984, 1993 federal elections).

Furthermore, no Canadian politican ever lost a lot of votes by touting some measure of anti-Americanism.

Lastly, a union won't happen because it'll be Canada and Mexico which will lose their identity and sovereignty, not the United States. It is the U.S. which dominates the continent economically, politically, and culturally. Any union will be on their terms, and no one else's.

And so I end up back at my original point: anyone who knows anything about Canadian politics would realize the NAU stuff is pure fantasy.