I am a Minority

[Anonymous]

ocm,

Even though you have already proven yourself the clear loser here with your inability to answer my questions regarding OCM's position paper on your topic of choice (CAFTA-DR), I'm going to be a good sport and jump right in the middle of your comfort zone ("regional integration" / North American Union) but it will be on my terms which are more than fair.

Your position is that CAFTA-DR will be another step towards "regional integration" or the creation a "North American Union".

FWIW, my opinion is that this allegation is nothing more than typical, "liberal", fear mongering bullsh*t. That's my opinion but we aren't dealing with opinions here are we? No, were dealing in facts that support our opinions so that's where we are going.

Again, your position is that CAFTA-DR will be another step towards "regional integration" or "the creation of a North American Union" with NAFTA being the first step and here is how you have defined that position:

The European Union is the premier example of regional integration.

As applied to North America it would mean.

Common Markets--no tarriffs, no quotas

Common Currency--Do away with the currencies of the US, Canada, Mexico and other participants and replace them with a common currency(like the Euro in Europe)

Establishment of a Regional Government--Europe currently has the European Parliament that already reviews the laws of participating countries and "harmonizes" them.

Complete and unrestrained access by all citizens of all participating countries. (This means that any citizen of any participating country could legally go anywhere in any other participating country and work--the European Union has already established this principle)

Bottom line--it means more and bigger government, like the UN only regional and more powerful.

You have stated that NAFTA started the process of "regional integration" or the creation of a "North American Union", which you have defined above, and you claim that CAFTA-DR continues that process. The burden of proof is on you to prove that allegation.

My simple challenge to you is for you to provide me the actual wording within either the NAFTA or CAFTA-DR agreement that would support your contention that CAFTA-DR would continue towards a process of:

1. Eliminating all tarriffs and all quotas
2. Creating a common currency between participating countries
3. Establishing a regional or governments
4. Allowing unrestrained access by all citizens of all participating countries.

My second challege to you is for you to provide me any real life examples of any actions that have been taken with NAFTA that would also support this same contention.


You picked the topic, you picked OCM's position on that topic, you picked the issue within that topic that you wanted to discuss, and you defined that issue.

All you have to do is back your position of "regional integration" and the creation of a "North American Union" with supporting evidence from the actual agreements. If CAFTA-DR would do what you say it will do, it should be a simple matter for you to back that position by showing everyone the wording within the document that supports your contention or any action taken during the NAFTA era that would also support your contention.


DANCE AND DIVERT OCM, DANCE AND DIVERT!



~SH~

 

[ocm]

I said previously:

I have presented two FACTS and a syllogism (for those in Rio Linda, that an element of logic)

FACT 1 -- CAFTA advances "regional integration"
Support for the fact--It is stated by the US Government, specifically the US Dept of Commerce in its argument in favor of CAFTA.
www.ita.doc.gov/cafta/why_cafta.asp

FACT 2 -- "Regional integration" means the movement toward the creation of a North American Union.
Support for the fact--This is how the phrase "regional integration" is used almost universally on the web. If the US Dept of Commerce had something else in mind it would be completely out of line with the mean of the phrase as it is consistently used elsewhere.
If you want to redefine it, the burden of proof is on you to show that it means something different than how it is used virtually 100% of the time.
But if you want to make the effort to redefine it......hey, I've heard some people even like redefining the word "is."

SYLLOGISM

CAFTA advances regional integration.
Regional integration is the creation of a North American Union
Therefore CAFTA advances the creation of a North American Union.

This was after you accusing me of only expressing OPINIONS and NOT FACTS.

I asked you to show me what element above only expresses an OPINION----YOU HAVE REFUSED TO ANSWER So far TWO TIMES.

Sandhusker warned me that you would continually try to divert and dodge. He was right--in spades.

So answer which statement above is opinion? Can't or won't--you lose.

 

[Anonymous]

Answer the questions you coward.


~SH~