Canamerexico -- The North American Union

2007-11-24 18:21:35

#1

CommieChipmunk: Member; +488|7010|Portland, OR, USA

Well, I recently found the time to watch The Zeitgeist Movie and I really don't know how much of it is true -and if any of it is true we're fucked- but the thing that really caught my attention was the idea of this North American Union. Supposedly there have been secret meetings between the leaders of America, Canada and Mexico in an effort to produce a borderless union very much like the EU with a common currency called the Amero and an end to the current US Constitution. The movie went on to say that similar unions would be formed in Asia and eventually the ultimate goal of a one government world would be achieved (NWO). While it is a "conspiracy theorist" video, it's very well done and in my opinion worth a watch.

For those who have actually seen the entire movie (not just people who've heard about the idea of the NAU through a media outlet), do you think that this could actually happen or is it just fear-mongering?

2007-11-24 19:27:21

#2

TeamOrange: Don't be that guy; +84|6751

I'll watch it tomorrow but does anyone have a higher quality stream or dl?

2007-11-24 19:33:34

#3

Spearhead: Gulf coast redneck hippy; +731|7130|Tampa Bay Florida

Sounds Orwellian.

2007-11-24 21:01:18

#4

CommieChipmunk: Member; +488|7010|Portland, OR, USA

teamorange wrote:
I'll watch it tomorrow but does anyone have a higher quality stream or dl?

I found it at stage.6 divx something or other and dled to my ipod.. audio sync gets off and the quality isn't good but it's still a very interesting movie.

Spearhead wrote:
Sounds Orwellian.

Very Orwellian.. they talk to a former friend of one of the Rockefeller's at the end of the movie, and he explains how the media will get everyone to "demand" tracking chips in their bodies and how they'll be able to just "turn the chip off" if the person does something they don't like... it's hard to explain, here's a clip

2007-11-24 21:02:48

#5

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6885|The Land of Scott Walker

9/11 conspiracy videos. Zzzzzzz.

As for the NAU, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that it will happen someday. Nullifying the US Constitution would result in war first, I would think.

2007-11-24 21:05:18

#6

CommieChipmunk: Member; +488|7010|Portland, OR, USA

Stingray24 wrote:
9/11 conspiracy videos. Zzzzzzz.

As for the NAU, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that it will happen someday. Nullifying the US Constitution would result in war first, I would think.

A small part of it is about 9/11... but yeah, you would hope that it would result in a war, but American's are so unmotivated I wouldn't be surprised if we just bite the pillow and take it.

2007-11-24 21:23:13

#7

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6851|'Murka

So, if the meetings were secret, how did the movie producers 1) learn the meetings took place and 2) learn what was discussed at the meetings?

A single source for the Rockefeller thing? Pardon my skepticism.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2007-11-24 21:25:30

#8

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6885|The Land of Scott Walker

They wrapped together all the conspiracy theories about religion, Kennedy's assassination, and the Federal Reserve together with opposition to income tax, anti-war movement, and 9/11 crafting one mega conspiracy theory. If each are analyzed on their own, they're not so convincing, hence mashing them together to make them appear valid by sheer volume of information. Add in some suspenseful music for emotional effect and we have a well-produced load of crap. They even worked in a jab at Fox News.

Last edited by Stingray24 (2007-11-24 21:33:39)

2007-11-24 21:34:12

#9

CommieChipmunk: Member; +488|7010|Portland, OR, USA

Stingray24 wrote:
They wrapped together all the conspiracy theories about religion, Kennedy's assassination, and the Federal Reserve together with opposition to income tax, anti-war movement, and 9/11 crafting one mega conspiracy theory. If each are analyzed on their own, they're not so convincing, hence mashing them together to make them appear valid by sheer volume of information. Add in some suspenseful music for emotional effect and we have a well-produced load of crap.

Hey, ignorance is bliss.. but I'd rather be overly critical and worrisome then just get my information from the nightly news.

Kennedy is perfectly convincing on it's own, as is the 9/11 conspiracy. While their is actual tangible evidence for both and we could argue back and forth forever about it, the most convincing is the secrecy that the government surrounds such issues with. The government will reveal all of their 'evidence' supporting the lone gunman theory about the Kennedy assassination coming up in the next? decade (though they've already cleaned and refurbished the limo he was killed in and somehow "lost" his brain), the FBI supposedly came into hotels and gas stations around the pentagon and collected all of the security tapes showing what happened.

If they're telling the truth why the secrecy?

2007-11-24 21:35:42

#10

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7202

oh my.

I thought these tin foil hat basement experts could not get any worse. I was wrong.

2007-11-24 21:38:07

#11

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6885|The Land of Scott Walker

CommieChipmunk wrote:
Stingray24 wrote:
They wrapped together all the conspiracy theories about religion, Kennedy's assassination, and the Federal Reserve together with opposition to income tax, anti-war movement, and 9/11 crafting one mega conspiracy theory. If each are analyzed on their own, they're not so convincing, hence mashing them together to make them appear valid by sheer volume of information. Add in some suspenseful music for emotional effect and we have a well-produced load of crap.
Hey, ignorance is bliss.. but I'd rather be overly critical and worrisome then just get my information from the nightly news.

Kennedy is perfectly convincing on it's own, as is the 9/11 conspiracy. While their is actual tangible evidence for both and we could argue back and forth forever about it, the most convincing is the secrecy that the government surrounds such issues with. The government will reveal all of their 'evidence' supporting the lone gunman theory about the Kennedy assassination coming up in the next? decade (though they've already cleaned and refurbished the limo he was killed in and somehow "lost" his brain), the FBI supposedly came into hotels and gas stations around the pentagon and collected all of the security tapes showing what happened.

If they're telling the truth why the secrecy?

I don't get my info from the nightly news either. But, gimme a break, all entertainment and media is meant to keep us distracted so the super secret group of evil men can take over? Riiiiiiight. And I'm sure the whole plan in the modern world was revealed on one phone call.

Last edited by Stingray24 (2007-11-24 21:46:31)

2007-11-24 21:46:48

#12

Catbox: forgiveness; +505|7156

9/11 was a conspiracy.... whatttttt? I didnt know that... holy cow that Bush is slick... lmao

Love is the answer

2007-11-24 21:50:00

#13

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6885|The Land of Scott Walker

Yes and Bush is tied to the Nazis, too.

2007-11-24 22:19:15

#14

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6845|North Carolina

I don't believe in the 9/11 conspiracy theories, but the North American Union idea is quite feasible in the distant future. This would be much more likely if the gap closed between America's standard of living and Mexico's. Until then, it wouldn't work very well.

Hopefully, it'll never happen anyway.

2007-11-24 22:33:02

#15

Spearhead: Gulf coast redneck hippy; +731|7130|Tampa Bay Florida

Not much of a conspiracy theorist myself. But can you really blame people for thinking that way? I sure don't. I'd rather be safe than sorry. Worrying about your civil liberties is never wrong.

2007-11-25 02:56:23

#16

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6851|'Murka

CommieChipmunk wrote:
If they're telling the truth why the secrecy?

You're confusing secrecy with the government not responding to every nutjob conspiracy freak who hurtles unfounded or fabricated accusations at them.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2007-11-25 02:58:01

#17

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6851|'Murka

Spearhead wrote:
Not much of a conspiracy theorist myself. But can you really blame people for thinking that way? I sure don't. I'd rather be safe than sorry. Worrying about your civil liberties is never wrong.

There is a significant difference between worrying about your civil liberties and accusing the government and its employees/leadership of nefarious criminal activity during every major crisis.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2007-11-25 03:10:22

#18

mikkel: Member; +383|7041

Media isn't biased just for the hell of it. As long as you don't know who's responsible for the bias, anything is a possibility, really. Media is controlled by a handful of big corporations that all have sketchy deals with governments on some level to enforce their collective monopoly, so the pretext for global media manipulation is certainly there. As long as you don't know, you can't really say anything for sure.

Considering the people who've been through presidencies, and how they got there, it seems like you can get anyone into the White House if you have enough money and control of the media, too. Look at what we have sitting now. His decisions were horrible in retrospect, and people had three years of it, but he managed to stay in office on an argument so thin that only the constant positive media about it could have made it count.

It's gullible to believe that the the best person for the job is the son/wife of a former president.

Last edited by mikkel (2007-11-25 03:17:57)

2007-11-25 07:08:53

#19

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6885|The Land of Scott Walker

Constant positive media about GWB? Buahahahahahaha!

2007-11-25 07:19:32

#20

mikkel: Member; +383|7041

Stingray24 wrote:
Constant positive media about GWB? Buahahahahahaha!

There was plenty of it at the last election.

2007-11-25 07:23:53

#21

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6885|The Land of Scott Walker

Plenty of criticism which has continued since the day GWB was elected in 2000. To theorize that it was "media control" that kept Bush in office is laughable. The mainstream media is no friend of GWB and neither is most of cable media. Consider the negative narrative regarding the Iraq war. That alone proves your theory false.

2007-11-25 08:05:53

#22

mikkel: Member; +383|7041

Stingray24 wrote:
Plenty of criticism which has continued since the day GWB was elected in 2000. To theorize that it was "media control" that kept Bush in office is laughable. The mainstream media is no friend of GWB and neither is most of cable media. Consider the negative narrative regarding the Iraq war. That alone proves your theory false.

There's no need to be so hostile, little friend. No one is theorising anything. The fact of the matter is that if it hadn't through the media been imprinted on people how much they needed him in office to fight terrorism, and if it hadn't been distributed through media that a democrat in office would be detrimental to the safety of the US, he likely wouldn't have been reelected, as his actions alone bore far from sufficient merit.

You can interpret that any way you like.

Last edited by mikkel (2007-11-25 08:06:53)

2007-11-25 08:14:54

#23

Hurricane: Banned; +1,153|7071|Washington, DC

I don't want an NAU, especially if the currency gets a shitty name like "Amero."

2007-11-25 08:53:57

#24

Spearhead: Gulf coast redneck hippy; +731|7130|Tampa Bay Florida

FEOS wrote:
Spearhead wrote:
Not much of a conspiracy theorist myself. But can you really blame people for thinking that way? I sure don't. I'd rather be safe than sorry. Worrying about your civil liberties is never wrong.
There is a significant difference between worrying about your civil liberties and accusing the government and its employees/leadership of nefarious criminal activity during every major crisis.

I realize that. But I'd take them over some smug false-patriot who believes almost every other word the government shovels into his ears.

While these people are probably just nutjobs, and most of the stuff they're saying isn't exactly true, I'm glad these people exist. Because when something real and valid comes up, which has already happened a few times in the years since 9/11, they are the first to cry out. The narrators evidence wasn't too good, but he at least showed an understanding of how facsism works and an awareness of how that id card/implant would destroy society, which is something a lot of people in the states wouldn't notice until it's too late.

2007-11-25 09:23:21

#25

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6845|North Carolina

FEOS wrote:
Spearhead wrote:
Not much of a conspiracy theorist myself. But can you really blame people for thinking that way? I sure don't. I'd rather be safe than sorry. Worrying about your civil liberties is never wrong.
There is a significant difference between worrying about your civil liberties and accusing the government and its employees/leadership of nefarious criminal activity during every major crisis.

True enough, but I thought it was conservatives who didn't trust the government.

Personally, I wouldn't put something like this past the government, but I agree that most conspiracy theories are bogus. Basically, it seems that keeping a distrustful eye toward the government is a very wise thing to do, as long as you don't go overboard with it.

I guess it's the difference between being wary and being paranoid.

BF2S Forums Canamerexico -- The North American Union

teamorange wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

Board footer