Voil-

You beat me to it in part- our energy dependence is an artificial state that could have been remedied many times over the past decade. But political and corporate interests, as well as inherent economic factors, prevented this- not technological deficiencies.

Most people are not even aware of the fact that Rudolf Diesel's original engine was designed to run on biofuels- NOT petrochemicals. And the amount of money put into developing safe and effective renewable technologies like solar, thermal, etc. is but a fraction of the amount spent by energy companies for lobbyists to protect their interests.

Lack of resources and trade agreements are not to blame for our energy dependence. Our government is, we are...

I must say I a bit disappointed. Not in either of you two, but I thought surely that would generate some interesting controversy. I waited all day for someone to jump on that with all guns firing. Alas the night is yet in its final hour.

If I had somehow found something bad in my heart for Canada, I might have got Gypsy riled a little.. I shall have to suffer with what I did receive for now.

I do believe in America and our ability to accomplish anything. The problem is leadership, and my main reason for leaning towards Richardson has been his ideas of a National effort to acquire energy independence for America.

I have believed in this idea and its possible success for years! Bill Richardson has the same dream! He already has N Mexico leading the country in its efforts.

Kennedy showed during the Space Race that a National effort of this magnitude can be successful. Not only in its immediate goal, but also in creating National unity and jobs.

Everyone seems afraid of corporations in general and the Energy corporations in particular. I dont, and I think beyond that. I think they can be controlled and made to fear the American Public. After all we are the largest consumer market in the world, and without the need for oil we are self sufficient!

Oh Hum, Ive always dreamed big. I dont think I'll stop now!!!

Ok, good conversation. Not all SPP topics reviewed but at least the conversation is about one thing.

I've noticed that many Canadians are in agreement with Voil. They seem to have a better ability to accept such great changes, and view them with optimism. I envy such optimism and the idealism that these steps are futuristic, only because I would like to feel that way.

I don't feel that way, however. Not about this, not about the way it has progressed in the shadows, without so much as an opportunity to hear what those we put in our representative's seats have to say about it, not about whose behind it, and not the untold reasons for it's development.

Speaking as an American on this issue, not only are we a country divided by current internal affairs and many political battles regarding our rights, but we are in an extremely precarious economic state. At war, The recent bail out of the stock market, "money out of thin air", and the latest alarmist news about the power that China has amassed that could bring this country into a major recession. Not that we aren't or counldn't get there on our own. I do believe we are headed that way no matter what.

My point in all this is simply that we are not in a comfortable position to lead any kind of global policy. In fact I would think that our officials, or should I say those who have been behind this SPP movement, would have had the foresight to watch the situation In Europe with the Euro dollar and their policies to open borders and free trade and leaned from them first. I'm new into the world of such things, but even I read well enough to understand that there is much to worry about in that part of the world.

Why must we forge ahead, now, at this time when our nation is divided, restless, edging toward recession, unable to determine or cope with the hold of foreign investors, like China. I am not a bigoted person, however, I doubt that Canada will see the influx of Mexicans and feel the invasiveness of mass immigration as much as we will.

Truthfully, I can't understand why Canada would submit to taking on the ills that are looming over America today, and the poor that will be draining and dividing us even further, from Mexico.

So in the end of thoughts I can only say my opposition to this SPP, has nothing to do with a true desire to unite the world under one economic umbrella, however, how that is to be done, can not, should not exclude "the people" who will be forced to deal with the changes.

'Redy',

You wrote,

"... I've noticed that many Canadians are in agreement with Voil. They seem to have a better ability to accept such great changes, and view them with optimism. I envy such optimism and the idealism that these steps are futuristic, only because I would like to feel that way..."

I harbor no optimism, nor pessimism in regards to the changes you seem to refuse.

I'm probably as concerned and unsure about the future as you are 'red'. I am not enthusiastic about all that change!!! I have stated so in all kinds of different ways before.

The difference between your position and mine 'red', is more a matter of perspective.

You conceive it as upcoming 'change' which might be avoidable, given the right leadership, as 'Fanta' pointed out. You semm to imply, this is a matter that can be put off. That the US could address this at a time where it will be in a 'better' position.

I perceive it differently. My observations and findings have convinved me that this is not an upcoming change, but a new 'installed reality' which people are having an increasingly hard time to grasp, and adapt to. And that includes me, most Québécois and Canadians I know, and is the case of most of my US friends.

To me, 'red', the foundation for a different world order or world flow, as long been in place. The fall of the Mao regime back in the early - mid '70's might have been for me the window where something could have been done as you seem to suggest today. But more than 30 years later, the steam roller has gained speed, and has even given birth to another sleeping giant: India, and there isn't much you and I could do to stop it.

Much in the same manner the 20th century saw the US parlay its place, and work its integration in the world marketplace, that had been dominated by Englnad and France, China and India are parlaying their place into the world marketplace today.

And in much the same manner world circumstances (WWI & WWII) favored the US to gain their place under the sun, world circumstances are now favoring China and India to move in the fray of world players.

This is neither a resigned, pessimistic, or fatalistic view of things. It is simply what's so!!!

From that perspective, there are choices, and important decisions that are being made, and that will be made in the future to shape the new position of every world player in place.

To deny, reject, ignore or force the status quo against this new world order in making, is IMO the greatest danger. It would be forfeiting ones right to shape the future.

Voil,
I admit there are forces out there that would love to see this happen, but with out us its doomed!

I think its doomed. Already every politician running is running on the platform to make it unprofitable for corporations to move from the country and take our jobs with them!

The best chance it had to succeed is gone! I predict the momentum will shift, is already beginning to shift, and can not happen without the American peoples acceptance. With knowledge and understanding what is happening it will stop!

To answer you Redy,
I already said everyone but the US stands to benefit from this NAU conspiracy. Why wouldn't they accept it? The only chance it had to succeed was by keeping the American Public ignorant. Not that I thought the threat even existed, I dont!

Maybe I'm missing something, but the only benefit to America would be the cheap labor of Mexico. That only exists if we remain separate countries. The Mexican Government is corrupt and if we became one it would cost billions, maybe trillions of dollars, and a min. of 25 years to correct the problems that we would inherit. I dont think they could ever be corrected! Not a profitable enterprise for the government.

Go read this, it pretty much echos my comments for the last two days. Yes I know its wiki. but it still offers insight into the subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amero

a globalized world is just a pipe dream. the idea sounds very nice and welcoming but if you factor in all of the human aspects and corruption the only people that will benefit will be the ones in power.

Voil, I’d like to respond to your most recent post, then to Fanta’s and then pose some questions.
Voil says,
“””The difference between your position and mine 'red', is more a matter of perspective.

You conceive it as upcoming 'change' which might be avoidable, given the right leadership, as 'Fanta' pointed out. You semm to imply, this is a matter that can be put off. That the US could address this at a time where it will be in a 'better' position.”””

I have no doubt that change is close at hand. I understand that, at this point, it’s inevitable. It is not my wish to stop progress with regards to some kind of world order. It is my desire to achieve world order in some kind of orderly fashion, with full knowledge and awareness of the people, and a time period in which the people can voice concerns and questions and have them honestly answered by those leading such affairs.

Change of this nature is something we are all phenomenally unaccustomed to. With everything else that is happening that is affecting our daily lives, our stability, and our rights, to ask that we accept whatever is coming at us, without question or even some idea of what to expect in the future, is asking for the kind of faith one only puts into a god.

I understand your comments regarding, India, China, and let’s not forget Japan. In fact in many way, I can only say, it’s about time the American mass “ego” be put into check.

Voil says:
“””This is neither a resigned, pessimistic, or fatalistic view of things. It is simply what's so!!!

From that perspective, there are choices, and important decisions that are being made, and that will be made in the future to shape the new position of every world player in place.”””

I don’t know what’s so. Therein lies the biggest issue I have been trying to get to. If there were an actual political forum, where, as citizens, we could relate our questions and have them answered with respect to how they relate to the current state of affairs, and how they interact with the changes intended, then I could say, “It’s simply what’s so”

As it is, we are kept in the dark, we are not given complete answers, and we are treated as children, unable to comprehend what’s being considered and what would be in the best interest of this country. We do not elect our officials to lord over us, to dictate what they are doing or even to decide if certain steps should be taken on their own. We are a democracy that elects those we feel will be most capable of communicating with us and “listening” to us, with regards to current events and affairs. From that communication they should be implementing documents which require our opinions/votes to determine if we GRANT the right to continue on the course.

Voil said:
“””To deny, reject, ignore or force the status quo against this new world order in making, is IMO the greatest danger. It would be forfeiting ones right to shape the future. “””

I will gladly forfeit the rights to shape a world future, if that future looks to me as if we are all to be ruled by the mighty and wealthy elite, without regard to all sharing the freedoms and equality as established and afforded us under our constitution. Until I am assured or reassured, by those who have the answers to my questions and concerns, I don’t believe in moving forward with the SPP or any future NAU agreements. In fact if we are to so instrumental in developing a new world order, than it should only be as a democratic country and not as a country whose elected officials disregard our rights in order to proceed. This is not a precedent I and I’m sure many others would like to have set forth in a new world order.

See next post for response to Fanta and questions.

Fanta said

“””To answer you Redy,
I already said everyone but the US stands to benefit from this NAU conspiracy. Why wouldn't they accept it? The only chance it had to succeed was by keeping the American Public ignorant. Not that I thought the threat even existed, I dont! “””

In many ways I agree with you. Some of the disadvantages that you did not mention include the cost of running this whole affair. Where is the money coming from, going to come from to hire “appropriate” negotiators, all the “groups” and “teams” to put everything into action. To continue to support and obviously to continue to negotiate weather it be with Corporations, foreign investors, legal adherences, and all the expenses of maintaining such commitment?

And will we follow suit and create another member of the world central bank?
After all Ben Bernanke ( member of Federal Reserve Bank) in now Running World’s Central Bank for remainder of decade) – VOIL – IS THIS PART OF “ALL THE PLAYERS IN PLACE” that you were speaking of?

If that’s the case then to what purpose would the Federal Reserve be assigned?

Then there is the other side of the coin, Fanta. What if China decides to pull all it’s financial strings backing out all their ‘reinvested’ American dollars in America. Could this not act similar to a stock market crash? What if, in so doing, other such investors, out of fear of loosing to the devaluation of our dollar, rush in to claim their funds before there are none left to claim. Bringing American to economic ruin. Will that not adversely affect Canada and Mexico, after all, is that not part of the plan with this new SPP deal, the NAU implementation, to HELP in such times of crisis, or at the very least, expect them to suffer the devaluation with us, as we “negotiate” a bail out unilaterally?

These and many more are my concerns. There is no one “in power” to address them. Maybe they are out of the ball park, maybe my ignorance seems too impertinent to bother with. But in the end, I live in a democratic society, which has been founded on certain rights. I have the right to ask such questions, I have the right be part of OUR future, regardless of my uneducated concerns. I’m not stupid and I do want to know and I do and can learn, but I can not do it when the information is not forthright, honest or even available. No can I do it, when those in power feel restrained because they have to answer to those who “elected” them.

Damn, that's a lot of thinking and a lot of typing redy!
I dont think your a dummy, and your thoughts show your not.

I respect your thoughts and your willingness to learn the facts. I to try to learn more and more everyday!

Also like you I do not think the change to globalization is an inevitable change! I will fight it with everything I have, and that is what I mean when I say it cant happen without us.

What will happen if China suddenly reneges and tries to collect the money for the bonds they have purchased.
Good question, and while my immediate thought go to war, I must admit I'll have to think on it and study the possibilities!

Right now, Im tired, but I promise to dive into this with more thought tomorrow!!!

Good Fanta. You know very often we are on a similar platform. I think most of the time when you disagree with me, it is, I, who have not been able to communicate on your level. This also happens with Voil. The best mentors I have ever had throughout my life have been those who honest to the extreme.

Just a little light story. I once had a ex-pro pool player take a great interest in my game. He agreed to give me some private lessons. Lessons that cost $150 an hour minimum 2 hours, for free, hail yea. He was an extreme task master. I was shooting on a table one night and without my knowing he came and sat and was watching. I broke a rack, shot a few in and saw a bank shot I had missed the night before, so I figured I'd take it, for practice. I missed. All of the sudden there was a scream "what the fck are you doin?" I smiled and said, "practicing". He responded "practicing f'kn what? Missing?"

I began to explain about the shot, and with about 20 people listening he proceeded to yell and swear a lesson to me about practice.

One guy asked me if I wanted his help to shut that guy up. I said no, he was right.
I got better, and learned a great deal from him.

I admire honesty, sincerity and those who have the patience to teach. But I learn best from those who make me feel that I can do better or those who push me to do better.

Thanks to all of you, who push my buttons. I'm learning a great deal. And so if I occasionally have to eat crow - can we all do it over a drink?

Good night all!

It has always

'redy',

YOU'RE ONE OF A KIND!!!


... and I mean THE GREATEST OF ALL KINDS!!!


It is fascinating debating with you!!! (... and with you too Fanta!!!)

:)

I would have lots to respnd to from your latest contributions 'red', but I got to run for now.

I said to Fanta that we have no fundamental disagreement on this topic, and I maintain my call. And I certainly have no fundamental disagreement with you 'red' with respect to the manner in which this is being treated and 'non-presented' by our inept and cowardly top officials. That is the true scandal, and should be enough to call for a 'peaceful REVOLUTION'!!!

As for advantages for Canada Fanta, there are no more advantages to Canada in this can of worms, has evolved so far, as there aren't for the US.

It is an ill thought out and ill presented dish. Canadians as well as Americans must send the 'Chefs' back to the kitchen, but only after they ask very clearly what the people are ready and willing to eat!!! (how's for a culinary metaphor!!!)

Canada is just as cold to this whole approach and current 'fascist' from the current 'bozos' whom are follingt around with these most fundamental issues.


More later!!!


Very good discussion 'red'!!! (and fanta too of course :)

Sorry , lots of typos!!!

But the worst one is from the last paragraph:

"... from the current 'bozos' whom are (follingt) FOOLING around..."

http://www.spp.gov/myths-vs-Myth.asp

Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.

Fact: The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is not an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was ever signed.

Myth: The SPP is a movement to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union and establish a common currency.

Fact: The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.

Myth: The SPP is being undertaken without the knowledge of the U.S. Congress.

Fact: U.S. agencies involved with SPP regularly update and consult with members of Congress on our efforts and plans.

Myth: The SPP infringes on the sovereignty of the United States.

Fact: The SPP respects and leaves the unique cultural and legal framework of each of the three countries intact. Nothing in the SPP undermines the U.S. Constitution. In no way does the SPP infringe upon the sovereignty of the United States.

Myth: The SPP is illegal and violates the Constitution.

Fact: The SPP is legal and in no way violates the Constitution or affects the legal authorities of the participating executive agencies. Indeed, the SPP is an opportunity for the governments of the United States, Canada, and Mexico to discuss common goals and identify ways to enhance each nation’s security and prosperity. If an action is identified, U.S. federal agencies can only operate within U.S. law to address these issues. The Departments of Commerce and Homeland Security coordinate the efforts of the agencies responsible for the various initiatives under the prosperity and security pillars of the SPP. If an agency were to decide a regulatory change is desirable through the cooperative efforts of SPP, that agency is required to conform to all existing U.S. laws and administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment.

Myth: The U.S section of the SPP is headed by the Department of Commerce.

Fact: The SPP is a White House-driven initiative. In the United States, the Department of Commerce coordinates the ‘Prosperity’ component, while the Department of Homeland Security coordinates the ‘Security’ component. The Department of State ensures the two components are coordinated and are consistent with U.S. foreign policy.

Myth: The U.S. Government, working though the SPP, has a secret plan to build a "NAFTA Super Highway."

Fact: The U.S. government is not planning a NAFTA Super Highway. The U.S. government does not have the authority to designate any highway as a NAFTA Super Highway, nor has it sought such authority, nor is it planning to seek such authority. There are private and state level interests planning highway projects which they themselves describe as "NAFTA Corridors," but these are not Federally-driven initiatives, and they are not a part of the SPP.

Myth: The U.S. Government, through the Department of Transportation, is funding secretive highway projects to become part of a “NAFTA Super Highway”.

Fact: Many States in the American Midwest are proposing or undertaking highway projects to improve or build roads as Federal-aid and State or private sector revenue becomes available. All projects involving Federal-aid funds or approvals are subject to normal Federal-aid requirements, such as review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), including public involvement. This public involvement, the common thread among all these activities, makes them anything but “secret.” In addition, Congress directs Department of Transportation funding for specific highway projects.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) will continue to cooperate with the State transportation departments as they build and upgrade highways to meet the needs of the 21st century. Rather than evidence of a secret plan to create a NAFTA Super Highway that would undermine our national sovereignty, the FHWA’s efforts are a routine part of cooperation with all the State transportation departments to improve the Nation’s highways.

Myth: U.S. Government officials sponsored a secret SPP planning meeting in Banff, Alberta in September 2006.

Fact: The U.S. Government did not sponsor the meeting in Banff. The North American Forum, a private initiative that is separate from the U.S. Government, hosted the September 12-14, 2006 conference “Continental Prosperity in the New Security Environment.” Academics, businesspersons, private citizens, and government officials from the U.S., Mexican, and Canadian governments attended the conference. The North American Forum is not a product of the SPP.

Myth: The SPP will cost U.S. taxpayers money.

Fact: The SPP is being implemented with existing budget resources. Over the long-term, it will save U.S. taxpayers money by cutting through costly red tape and reducing redundant paperwork. This initiative will benefit the taxpayers through economic gain and increased security, thereby enhancing the competitiveness and quality of life in our countries.

Myth: The working groups and SPP documents are a secret and not available to the public.

Fact: The SPP’s initiatives and milestones with timelines can be found by clicking the Report to Leaders link at www.spp.gov. The Web site contains a section to enable interested persons to provide input directly to the various working groups.

Myth: The SPP seeks to lower U.S. standards through a regulatory cooperation framework.

Fact: The framework will support and enhance cooperation and encourage the compatibility of regulations among the three partners while maintaining high standards of health and safety. Any regulatory changes will require agencies to conform to all U.S. administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment. Enhanced cooperation in this area will provide consumers with more affordable, safer, and more diversified and innovative products.

Myth: The SPP is meant to deal with immigration reform and trade disputes.

Fact: Immigration reform is a legislative matter currently being debated in Congress and is not being dealt with in the SPP. Likewise, trade disputes between the United States, Canada, and Mexico are resolved in the NAFTA and WTO mechanisms and not the SPP.

Myth: The SPP will result in the loss of American jobs.

Fact: The SPP seeks to create jobs by reducing transaction costs and unnecessary burdens for U.S. companies, which will bolster the competitiveness of our firms globally. These efforts will help U.S. manufacturers, spur job creation, and benefit consumers.

Myth: The SPP will harm our quality of life.

Fact: The SPP improves the safety and well-being of Americans. It builds on efforts to protect our environment, improves our ability to combat infectious diseases, such as avian influenza, and ensures our food supply is safe through the exchange of information and cooperation ─ improving the quality of life for U.S. citizens. Americans enjoy world class living standards because we are engaged with the world.

Myth: The SPP creates a NAFTA-plus legal status between the three countries.

Fact: The SPP does not seek to rewrite or renegotiate NAFTA. It creates no NAFTA-plus legal status.

OleJeb, Thanks, I saw this also. I came across the first, before I had ever linked NAFTA, and the NAU together with the SPP.

It was further research through media links, and political reviews, and other on-line sites, that regarded, NAU,NAFT, the Federal Reserve and current candidate information that left skeptical. I began a review of the SPP, where it came, who backed it,and tried to understand the validity of it. It's benefits, where it could lead and finally found the .gov link with the outline of the SPP directive.

It is just an outline and what it says, trips over obstacles that are in plain sight. It uses wording that tends to highlight in shades of gray, and perhaps it was the skepticism with which I first came to view, but I felt as if I was being intentionally misled.

After all the conversation here, and in another forum I communicate int, I intend to continue my research, and I have already forwarded emails to some government official, hoping for a response.

In the mean time, thanks for the info, keep sending it in, more info, is better than none, and the research one does, even into bad info, can lead to more knowledge.

Voil - absolutely adored your culinary metaphor, might as well have well prepared food, to go with the wine, if crow is ever on the menu.

Red, thank you very much for this topic. I wish we had more time, today is the 17th., monday the 20th. I plan to email my representatives and senators but if they read them it will probably be, at the earliest, monday.

If, oh IF, we the people had, over the last several decades, looked beyond the retoric, researched and stayed informed of the important issues...just maybe we would not be so devided today. To me all the bickering and blameing is sickening, dems vs reps, libs vs conservs, etc.
I admit that I'm not blameless.
Congress cannot agree on anything, except maybe a pay raise for themselves. When was the last time you heard the word "statesman'? And we the people are devided pretty much down the middle also. We need to wake up and open our eyes!!

A 'comedy of errors'!!!

Like falling dominoes which people just watch, mesmerized, the Bush administration, obsessed only with finishing 'daddy's' job in Iraq, abdicated the responsibility of dealing with (secondary in admin's mind) homeland security issues to the SPP. We have all been watching the dominoes fall eversince.

That is the a perspective where some sense can be made out the confusion and abuses of the current state of the SPP initiatives.

It all started with 'homeland' security. First Patriot Act: limitation of individual rigts, tightening borders (air, ground, water), increase viligance on immigration laws, broadening international cooperation for intelligence information.

The first domino impact of these initial moves, was internal US trade.

This the 'business or trade component of the equation.

Tighten inefficiently your own borders to air, ground and water 'people' and 'merchandise' traffic, astronomically affect GNP and the US economy. Increasing debt and decrseasing competitiveness is not a good recipe.

Couple that with galopping decrease in competitiveness with China, greater trading integration, with the security constraint, was becoming the impossible challenge.

End of 2002, a year and a bit following 9/11, SPP started imposing on Canada and Mexico, existing and stringent US trading laws.

Another admin domino effect was Ha! yeah! the economy!!! Forgot!!! Well, let's make the borders friendlier to people and 'goods' that are crucial to our economy, and downright ruthless with the rest.

Well, you need increased collaboration with neighboring countries for implementing this complicated discrimination between the axis of good and bad people and merchandise. All this, at exhorbitant costs, and all at the request of the US.

It shouldn't come as a surprise that 'funny deals' are supected to being going on. Requests made on Mexico and Canada, are softened by some form of negligible appeasements from the US. Kind of a 'here's what I'm willing to do if you give me your 'Wayne Gretsky' collector item!!!'.

It is a domino, piece-meal, affair which is so foreign to any form of integrated deal, that suggesting 'NAU' as JBS does is pure heresy!!!

So where's the real issue?!?!!? (IMO)

Incompetence! with a good dosage of the current US admin. dictatorship and undemocratic style!!!

The secretive, infantilizing way this administration has shown in its dealings with the people of the US, and its downright corrupt relationship with our shared democratic values, is at ht heart of this issue.

I am confident that if thi (SPP intent) were conducted with the expected and deserving transparency, we wouldn't be busy inventing cataclismic end-of world motives.

If it where transparent, organizers wouldn't be telling us that one of the critical few topics to be addressed at the Montebello conference, between our 3 chiefs, is '...clothes labelling!!!...'

Of course that is taking everyone in our 3 countries for pure idiots. You don't bring 3 national leaders together (one of whom is the representative of the most powerful nation in the world) to discuss clothes labelling!!!

North American Integration challenges are real. China IS a steam roller menace. It is closing down North American factories like there is no tomorrow, and the 3 countries still don't have a clue how to address the problem. They must react together, but they have no idea how.
The little they have done so far, distracted with the business of war, bickering LIB-CON cat fights, and pro-or-con 'evolution' sterile debates, brings the 3 countries together around a shared threat. That is extremely far from the hysteria of a silly NAU as suggested by JBS.

The source of this problem with this topic isn't some sort of 'cataclysmic change' or unknown threat. The threats are all too well known. The source of this problem, is SECRECY. The unacceptable attitude of secrecy adopted by our 3 national leaders in this affair.

Furthermore, the constituing ingredients of this secrecy, are incompetence and profound arrogance.

THEY are hiding the fact that THEY DON'T KNOW!!! While we're supecting that they're hiding something only THEY know about, ... AND WE'RE DESPERATELY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS.

Bottom line: THEY ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING EFFECTIVE ABOUT THE THREAT. THEY STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT. They just sense that it concerns the 3 nations equally, and that they should discuss seek out solutions together. That's it. They don't know, and they don't what to tell us tat theydon't know!!!

Let's just scream our anger for transparency!!! That is the only scandal!!! And it is a huge scandal for no other reason than the fact that it is going against every democratic principles and values that our free societies are based upon.


Let's get real, and attack the undemocratic conduct of our 3 leaders and their admnistations. Let's stick to that alone!!! Bringing up hysterical issues such as NAU, is giving them an out. They'll simply discard the ludicrous illegetimacy of NAU as totally irrelavent, and we will have missed the real issue:

... Be transparent with the poeple or be gone!!! PERIOD!!!

Redy,

I have been reading and looking into what would jappen if China were to suddenly cash in the bonds it holds as their part of our National debt.

First I found that Japan holds 47% of our debt, and China holds about the same. The portion hels by Japan has decreased by 3% in recent years, and indeed China has threatened repeatedly to cash theirs in.

If they did, mind you Im an economic dumbass, but experts say, it could trigger a dollar crash as well as a spike in US bond yields. This could have many effects, and we may actually be seeing these now.

The experts say this could cause the US housing market to falter and maybe tip the economy into recession. China holds an estimated $900bn in of US bonds.

Many countries it is said are going away from using the US dollar as a standard for their currencies worried about our debt.

Ironically, they are switching to the gold standard. I say Ironically because we hold almost 3 times the amount of gold reserves in this country as anyone else.

This is truly my weak link and I am afraid I could study economics for 20 years and still claim ignorance. I promised you I would look and I did my best. Maybe it helped and maybe, like me, it just confuses you more!


Just to show what I meant by our monopoly on the worlds Gold Reserves I am listing the top three, these numbers represent tonnes:
United States of America 8,133.5
Germany 3,427.8
International Monetary Fund 3,217.3

As far as I can gather from what the experts have to say, we have had worse rcessions in this country before than China all of a sudden collecting their portion of our debt could cause.