NAFTA superhighway? Let's try something else.

[jeffhenderson]

If I were to make a suggestion to Ron Paul, it would be to stop using the term 'NAFTA superhighway'.

I am afraid that the term is confusing, and causes people to think that there is a project underway called the 'NAFTA Superhighway'. And then they look things up on the internet and find that nothing called the 'NAFTA Superhighway' is being planned, and simply from that assume that Ron Paul is a conspiracy nut worried about things that don't exist.

Now, Ron might have legitimate worries about the Trans-Texas Corridor, which is a massive highway system could eventually extend from Mexico to Canada. I think it would be more helpful to express these worries in those terms, so people who haven't heard of it will easily be able to find out what he's talking about.

But using terms like 'NAFTA Superhighway" is just asking for lazy reporters to make articles like this:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-highway30nov30,1,4646522.story?coll=la-news-politics-national

[paulitics]

If I were to make a suggestion to Ron Paul, it would be to stop using the term 'NAFTA superhighway'.

I am afraid that the term is confusing, and causes people to think that there is a project underway called the 'NAFTA Superhighway'. And then they look things up on the internet and find that nothing called the 'NAFTA Superhighway' is being planned, and simply from that assume that Ron Paul is a conspiracy nut worried about things that don't exist.

Now, Ron might have legitimate worries about the Trans-Texas Corridor, which is a massive highway system could eventually extend from Mexico to Canada. I think it would be more helpful to express these worries in those terms, so people who haven't heard of it will easily be able to find out what he's talking about.

But using terms like 'NAFTA Superhighway" is just asking for lazy reporters to make articles like this:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-highway30nov30,1,4646522.story?coll=la-news-politics-national

All these CFR schmucks do is play verbal semantics. The trans texas corridor is a major stretch of what was coined the Nafta Super Highway...for all intents in purposes it is that, but the elite are not going to call it that. So they play verbal semantics.

They admit to planning and not implementing a "North AMerican Community", which for all intents and purposes is the NAU. Basically, one continental perimeter, with open borders between countries, and integration of economies and culture. Sure the phase in period will be 5 to 10 years. But we have pretty much open borders, NAFTA, and highways being built, land being grabbed and sold to foreign companies, admistrative law being changed. We are 50% there.

All it is, is verbal semantics, and they know 90% of America will fall for it, despite Europe being taken over by stealth, and all of the evidence. Just call it a conpiracy, and proceed with operations.