MT not so secure
Posted By: give me my money on 2008-11-13
In Reply to: What a mess! More bad news about ....sm - oldtimer
The company managing the hospital I worked for went bankrupt and new company refused to pay our invoices for October. I am without a month's pay until I can chase down bankrupt company to make good. To make it worse, they sent me a check for first half of month which bounced. Luckily, I had not written any checks off it or I would have been racking up bank fees.
New company offered to keep us on at a 1/3 pay cut. I said Adios!
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
She seems pretty secure to me.
her every word" because she likes the truth and when someone posts a big fat lie on this board, she can see it and can prove it wrong. I know those annoying "FACTS" can get in the way of someone who is trying to spread fodder that contains little or no truth. She seems to have inner peace, and many of her posts on this board are pretty funny too so I guess her sense or humor and "joy" are intact as well. Unlike you, I won't be arrogant enough to pretend to know anything about her personal life. Just how do you know she doesn't have a "life of joy with true friends and family"? And how do you know she doesn't have a life other than one that "consists of I guess just basically having a life other than transcribing, hating Bush and proclaiming to be an atheist."? Have you ever met her? How many family members does she have? How many friends does she have? What color is her hair? Her eyes? Does she prefer puppies over kittens or both or none? How tall is she? With the "knowledge" you claim to have, those questions should be pretty easy for you to answer, and I look forward to reading those answers. 
She seems pretty secure to me.
her every word" because she likes the truth and when someone posts a big fat lie on this board, she can see it and can prove it wrong. I know those annoying "FACTS" can get in the way of someone who is trying to spread fodder that contains little or no truth. She seems to have inner peace, and many of her posts on this board are pretty funny too so I guess her sense or humor and "joy" are intact as well. Unlike you, I won't be arrogant enough to pretend to know anything about her personal life. Just how do you know she doesn't have a "life of joy with true friends and family"? And how do you know she doesn't have a life other than one that "consists of I guess just basically having a life other than transcribing, hating Bush and proclaiming to be an atheist."? Have you ever met her? How many family members does she have? How many friends does she have? What color is her hair? Her eyes? Does she prefer puppies over kittens or both or none? How tall is she? With the "knowledge" you claim to have, those questions should be pretty easy for you to answer, and I look forward to reading those all-knowing answers.
Palin is strong, secure.
nm
Thanks for your suggestion, but I don't want to trade one non-secure site for another.
I'm looking for a site where the administrator is neutral and ethical and doesn't threaten people with their ISP numbers.
If there is one out there, I'd appreciate knowing about it.
As far as your posting here, that's your decision. I couldn't care less because I'm only staying on this board long enough to see if anyone else it appalling that an administrator would track ISP numbers of posters for telling the truth about their employer. Then I won't be coming back any more, to any of the boards here.
And thanks for finally being honest and saying it's your preference, instead of the disingenuous I'll leave. Are you happy now? type comments that I doubt anyone believed, anyway.
This explains why Bush won't secure our *borders.*
![src=http://www.humaneventsonline.com/images/header-print.gif]()
The Plan to Replace the Dollar With the 'Amero'
by Jerome R. Corsi
Posted May 22, 2006
*If President Bush had run openly in 2004 on the proposition that a prime objective of his second term was to form the North American Union and to supplant the dollar with the “Amero,” we doubt very much that President Bush would have carried Ohio, let alone half of the Red State majority he needed to win re-election.*
The idea to form the North American Union as a super-NAFTA knitting together Canada, the United States and Mexico into a super-regional political and economic entity was a key agreement resulting from the March 2005 meeting held at Baylor University in Waco, Tex., between President Bush, President Fox and Prime Minister Martin.
A joint statement published by the three presidents following their Baylor University summit announced the formation of an initial entity called, “The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” (SPP). The joint statement termed the SPP a “trilateral partnership” that was aimed at producing a North American security plan as well as providing free market movement of people, capital, and trade across the borders between the three NAFTA partners:
We will establish a common approach to security to protect North America from external threats, prevent and respond to threats within North America, and further streamline the secure and efficient movement of legitimate, low-risk traffic across our borders.
A working agenda was established:
We will establish working parties led by our ministers and secretaries that will consult with stakeholders in our respective countries. These working parties will respond to the priorities of our people and our businesses, and will set specific, measurable, and achievable goals.
The U.S. Department of Commerce has produced a SPP website, which documents how the U.S. has implemented the SPP directive into an extensive working agenda.
Following the March 2005 meeting in Waco, Tex., the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) published in May 2005 a task force report titled “Building a North American Community.” We have already documented that this CFR task force report calls for a plan to create by 2010 a redefinition of boundaries such that the primary immigration control will be around the three countries of the North American Union, not between the three countries. We have argued that a likely reason President Bush has not secured our border with Mexico is that the administration is pushing for the establishment of the North American Union.
The North American Union is envisioned to create a super-regional political authority that could override the sovereignty of the United States on immigration policy and trade issues. In his June 2005 testimony to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Robert Pastor, the Director of the Center for North American Studies at American University, stated clearly the view that the North American Union would need a super-regional governance board to make sure the United States does not dominate the proposed North American Union once it is formed:
NAFTA has failed to create a partnership because North American governments have not changed the way they deal with one another. Dual bilateralism, driven by U.S. power, continue to govern and irritate. Adding a third party to bilateral disputes vastly increases the chance that rules, not power, will resolve problems.
This trilateral approach should be institutionalized in a new North American Advisory Council. Unlike the sprawling and intrusive European Commission, the Commission or Council should be lean, independent, and advisory, composed of 15 distinguished individuals, 5 from each nation. Its principal purpose should be to prepare a North American agenda for leaders to consider at biannual summits and to monitor the implementation of the resulting agreements.
Pastor was a vice chairman of the CFR task force that produced the report “Building a North American Union.”
Pastor also proposed the creation of a Permanent Tribunal on Trade and Investment with the view that “a permanent court would permit the accumulation of precedent and lay the groundwork for North American business law.” The intent is for this North American Union Tribunal would have supremacy over the U.S. Supreme Court on issues affecting the North American Union, to prevent U.S. power from “irritating” and retarding the progress of uniting Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. into a new 21st century super-regional governing body.
Robert Pastor also advises the creation of a North American Parliamentary Group to make sure the U.S. Congress does not impede progress in the envisioned North American Union. He has also called for the creation of a North American Customs and Immigration Service which would have authority over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security.
Pastor’s 2001 book “Toward a North American Community” called for the creation of a North American Union that would perfect the defects Pastor believes limit the progress of the European Union. Much of Pastor’s thinking appears aimed at limiting the power and sovereignty of the United States as we enter this new super-regional entity. Pastor has also called for the creation of a new currency which he has coined the “Amero,” a currency that is proposed to replace the U.S. dollar, the Canadian dollar, and the Mexican peso.
If President Bush had run openly in 2004 on the proposition that a prime objective of his second term was to form the North American Union and to supplant the dollar with the “Amero,” we doubt very much that President Bush would have carried Ohio, let alone half of the Red State majority he needed to win re-election. Pursuing any plan that would legalize the conservatively estimated 12 million illegal aliens now in the United States could well spell election disaster for the Republican Party in 2006, especially for the House of Representative where every seat is up for grabs.
|
