|
August 29th, 2006 | #41 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
How NAFTA superhighway is built under radar screen
How NAFTA superhighway is built under radar screen
Officials say they see no budget 'earmarks,' because they don't know where to look Posted: August 29, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern © 2006 WorldNetDaily.com WASHINGTON – Ask some members of Congress about plans to build a "NAFTA superhighway" connecting Mexico and Canada via the U.S. and you might hear snickers. Some officials will tell you they have seen no "earmarks" for such a plan and question whether it even exists. But the plan does exist and the NAFTA superhighway is being built – under the radar screen. One need look no further than the $286 billion highway bill signed into law earlier this month by President Bush for some of the "earmarks." The measure gave the state of Tennessee more than $111 million to help plan and build Interstate 69, called "one of the most significant transportation projects in the region's history" by the Commercial Appeal. No one in Tennessee has any doubts about plans for the NAFTA superhighway. It is being built now with federal taxpayer dollars. And the plan calls for I-69 to extend from Michigan to Texas, linking the Canadian and Mexican borders. Those supporting the plan, like Transportation Secretary Mario Cino, say it will bring an unprecedented windfall not only to the regions it traverses but for all Americans, Mexicans and Canadians. Tennessee Department of Transportation Commissioner Gerald Nicely said I-69 "could help position the western part of the state as one of the world's new economic centers of power in the global marketplace." The entire I-69 project is expected to cost $8.8 billion in current dollars, with states picking up 10 percent of the tab. So where is the money hidden? It's not really. But nowhere in any highway bill is the project referred to as the "NAFTA superhighway." Since the money is doled out to states to spend on their portion of the project, the allocations look like any other highway spending. Ultimately, the Tennessee portion of the I-69 project is expected to cost $1 billion. It will shadow the present route of U.S. 51, connecting towns like Union City, Troy, Dyersburg, Ripley, Covington and Millington before following what is now I-40/240 through Midtown, according to the Commercial Appeal. The new highway bill focuses on the portion of I-69 through Northwest Tennessee about 80-110 miles north of Memphis. A 20-mile section of that segment – a four-lane stretch of U.S. 51 between Dyersburg and Troy – already is completed. Signs label it as part of the "Future I-69 Corridor." That leaves a 19-mile section to be built from Troy to the Kentucky line before one-third of the I-69 route through Tennessee is completed. "The route's already been laid out, with survey markers planted in fields and cryptic benchmarks painted on the pavement of country roads," reports the Commercial Appeal. Detailed drawings are expected to be finished next February. Right-of-way acquisition could begin early next year. Crews could start moving earth as early as 2008. So why are some officials still questioning whether the project is real? Last week, in Kansas, Sen. Pat Roberts, a Republican who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, seemed like he was short on domestic, backyard intelligence when he was asked in Saline about the NAFTA superhighway project – again, prompted by reports in WND. "There's nothing I'm aware of in any authorization bill," Roberts said with derision. "I don't know where these things get started. This is one of those blogosphere things that makes you wonder what's going on." When the Duluth News Tribune followed up WND reports about the project by turning to a local congressman for help, Mary Kerr, an aide to Rep.Jim Oberstar, said: "There are no earmarks for a superhighway like that." But you can't hide for long a superhighway, in some places, according to plans, four football fields wide. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=51730 |
August 29th, 2006 | #42 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
The very real NAFTA superhighway
Quote:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=51718 |
|
August 29th, 2006 | #43 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
The NAFTA superhighway: Coming soon - Pat Buchanan
Quote:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=51724 |
|
August 29th, 2006 | #44 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
A North American United Nations? - Ron Paul
Quote:
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story....1-f29a8b4a059c |
|
August 30th, 2006 | #45 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
Superhighway 'security' benefits questioned
Quote:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=51735 |
|
August 31st, 2006 | #46 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
August 31st, 2006 | #47 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
Harper Not Just Americanizing, But Abolishing Canada
Quote:
|
|
August 31st, 2006 | #48 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,613
|
Will the minutemen save us from the NAU???
If the NAU becomes a fact, our Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, becomes a distant memory. Everyone involved with the NAU has repeatedly stated that none of the three nations that the NAU will be comprised of will lose any of their sovereignty. The reality is, however, that once any kind of international treaty or government is put in place, all debates on immigration, trade, foreign companies operating our ports, international peacekeeping forces, etc. will mean nothing because all of these things and much, much more will be a fact engraved in stone, and no 'national' laws can stop them. When a nation loses its ability to control its borders for any reason, it has lost its right to be called a nation.
If you think the illegal spic invasion is bad now, wait until they can come here without worrying about the Border Patrol or ICE. Never fear, though, here come the minutemen to save the day: "The illegals are coming!!! (We aren't racist!!!) The illegals are coming!!! (We aren't racist!!!)" |
September 1st, 2006 | #49 | |||
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
September 2nd, 2006 | #50 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
SPP: Sovereignty & Prosperity Perversion
Quote:
|
|
September 3rd, 2006 | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,613
|
Wikipedia deletes North American Union article
Wikipedia has deleted the article on the North American Union. Although I did not create the article, I contributed to it. Here is some of the discussion regarding the article.
--------------------------------------------------------------- The result of the debate was delete. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 05:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC) North American Union ATTENTION! Original research, at least the article itself does not attempt to establish that it is a serious idea with even a marginal support. Bjarki 17:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Delete - no actual proposal exists and wikipedia is not a manifesto host. --Ajdz 17:24, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Tag it with a request for sources. If none are given, then delete it. Arctic Gnome 21:24, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Keep it this is only a theory or a philisophical idea. It's not an actual proposed union. This article does not need to be deleted since it is only a philisophical theory, it needs to be deleted just as much as the article on the theory of capitolism. TBH 06:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC) It's a non-notable, original research idea with no actual support. Comparison to capitalism is a false analogy. --Ajdz 14:55, 26 April 2006 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOR. Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. Ardenn 15:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC) Keep Great article, better than the other one-paragraph articles that are numerous on wiki. Keep there is a lot of room for growth in this idea if wikipedia does not censor it. 137.186.145.102 17:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC) Strong delete. Almost entirely original research. The thoughts and speculation of a handful of persons, and not particularly profound thoughts at that (e.g. "Cons: Each country would also lose something in the merging.")--Skeezix1000 21:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC) Delete as rather messy original research. Also per Ajdz. Stifle (talk) 00:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC) How about that. Articles abound on the NAU on the 'net, and he research was messy. Hmm. Sounds like the jews at Wikipedia don't like what is being said about it. |
September 5th, 2006 | #52 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
Wider Panama Canal Would Aid Chinese
Quote:
|
|
September 6th, 2006 | #53 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
The Globe and Mail just doesn’t get it
Quote:
|
|
September 9th, 2006 | #54 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
Canadians protest 'North American Union'
Quote:
|
|
September 12th, 2006 | #55 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
I-69: Yet Another NAFTA Super-Highway
Quote:
|
|
September 16th, 2006 | #56 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
Nafta's Failures Fuel Mexican Illegal Immigration
Quote:
|
|
September 16th, 2006 | #57 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
Free Trade Vital to Latin American Economies, Says JEW Official
Quote:
|
|
September 16th, 2006 | #58 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
North American Union: Myths, Facts - Truth
Quote:
|
|
September 16th, 2006 | #59 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
NAFTA Highway, The Regina Route
Quote:
|
|
September 17th, 2006 | #60 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Posts: 8,901
|
Dump the WTO, NAFTA and CAFTA and Bring Back Tariffs
Quote:
|
|
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|