Barack Obama: no evidence of North American Union, confirms NAFTA Superhighway (?), says not CFR member
In Lancaster, Pennsylvania on 3/31/08, an audience member asked Barack Obama whether he's a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and asks about the North American Union. He denied being a member of the CFR, and said he didn't see any evidence of the NAU. However, in his discussion of the NAU he described something sounding an awful lot like the NAFTA Superhighway. If you go to one of his appearances, read back his statements (below) and tell him that he came close to verifying something that we're told doesn't exist.
And, if Obama is truthful when he says he sees no evidence of the NAU - for instance as a gleam in the eyes of powerful people - then he's not qualified for major public office. But, we knew that already. Were he an honest and brave politician he'd acknowledge that there are plenty of signs that powerful forces want something like a NAU, and he'd work to oppose them.
Details after the clip (NOTE: see the update).
Regarding the CFR, Obama says he doesn't know whether he's an "official member", but says he's spoken there in the past. He then says:
"the CFR is basically just a forum where a bunch of people talk about foreign policy... so there's no official membership... I don't have a card or an [inaudible, perhaps 'special'] handshake or anything like that..."
For the last part of that he was mocking the questioner, causing the audience to laugh right along with him. And, of course, he was lying about them just being a forum; they're obviously much more and almost all top government officials for the past several administrations have been members. In fact, here's CFR member Dick Cheney - standing next to David Rockefeller - laughing about not telling the folks back in Wyoming that he's a member: link.
Obama then pretends not to remember that the final word in NAU is "Union", asking the original questioner for the word. He says he sees no evidence of it taking place. Then, perhaps saying more than his handlers would like him to say, he goes on:
It was based partly on the fact that there's this highway being built in Texas that will facilitate more transportation and travel between Mexico and the intercontinental United States, on up to Canada so people have perceived that this potentially means that somehow there's gonna be this Union like the European Union... there's no evidence that that's taking place.
So, it runs from Mexico to Canada, and will facilitate transportation. Sounds like... an intercontinental trade corridor, no? In fact, it certainly sounds like the NAFTA Superhighway, something that hacks have worked night and day to deny. In fact, most of them, if they acknowledge the Trans Texas Corridor (TTC) at all, stop right there and don't go past, say, Oklahoma. But, brave soul that he is, Obama went all the way up to Canada.
hepcat (not verified)
Thu, 04/03/2008 - 07:53
HS 14217 2008-04-03T09:53:40-05:00
For someone who talks like he's barely heard of an NAU, it's interesting that, on his own, he brings up the EU, the incremental model the North American common market/community/union advocates wish to emulate.
Smitty (not verified)
Thu, 04/03/2008 - 16:41
HS 14218 email@example.com 2008-04-03T18:41:15-05:00
Obama is not fit for public office but he's still "more fit" than McCain, Obama is a far lesser evil and will be far less effective at getting his policies instituted, I foresee a finger from the Republican Congress and some moderate Democrats, he may even lose seats in both houses if his Communist policies are enacted or attempted to be enacted. There's a nanometer of difference between McCain & Obama (primarily the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan), they both vote consistently on most issues, the only difference between Obama & McCain will be over who will get "credit" for ruining America the most. If Obama is elected hopefully we'll have gridlock. If McCain is elected we'll have another Bush in spades. I'd prefer Obama get the credit and the Democrats lose seats than McCain getting credit & Republicans losing seats. McCain can't even tell the truth to himself, at least Obama is honest in his political positions.
Fred Dawes (not verified)
Thu, 04/03/2008 - 16:48
HS 14219 firstname.lastname@example.org 2008-04-03T18:48:11-05:00
Barack has been told not to say anything about what the system is doing to you and sad to say most people have no ideals on what the NAU Is and most people are really stupid about what is happening inside the USA. Like Hillary and McCain all will act dim-witted about the design and intent of what will happen with this evil actions of our so called leaders. Barack Obama has been picked by the world Oligarchies and millions from the muslim/ world bank/CFR counties has and is going to make him President for some evil race ideals. Buy Guns.
JWC- The Spoiler (not verified)
Wed, 04/09/2008 - 21:01
HS 14220 email@example.com 2008-04-09T23:01:02-05:00
That person who asked the question was ME.... He's full of crap and did indeed try to discredit the question right off the bat. he failed to answer BOTH question properly... His wife is a director in this Globalist- CFR... Tell your friends and if you can...go to these rallys and ask them TOUGH questions...
Enrique (not verified)
Mon, 05/19/2008 - 04:36
HS 14221 firstname.lastname@example.org 2008-05-19T06:36:03-05:00
If Obama went around saying the plain truth, like Dr. Paul, he would be discredited or ignored by the media, and would have no chance at winning the White House. Nevertheless, Obama is an honest and patriotic man, who has the best interests of his country and compatriots at heart. The CFR oligarchs are a fact of life, and we can't just wish them away. We can however, push back on their selfish greed, and show them the mighty strength of the will of the brave, free, American People. Peace!
unlawflcombatnt (not verified)
Wed, 05/21/2008 - 20:49
HS 14222 unlawflcombatntX@yahoo.com 2008-05-21T22:49:42-05:00
Still more reasons NOT to vote for Obama. Though it was encouraging to hear Obama say he "was against NAFTA," his lack of conviction was obvious. I hadn't previously been aware of his connection with the Council on Foreign relations. This is yet another reason not to vote for him. Though I'm a registered Democrat (at least for the time being), I'll probably vote for McCain if Obama is his opponent. There are some good reasons for populist-oriented Democrats to vote for McCain over Obama. McCain will never get elected for a 2nd term (unless he has a brain transplant), while Obama probably could deceive enough Americans into electing him a 2nd time. With a President McCain, we'd at least have a new Democratic candidate for President in 2012. And with a McCain Presidency, the Republicans will get the blame for the impending collapse of the economy. A disastrous McCain Presidency will help Democrats get elected to Congress, while a disastrous Obama Presidency will help elect Republicans. Though McCain is wrong on almost everything, he's probably the best candidate to handle the Housing Bubble. McCain is less likely to exacerbate the Housing collapse -- by his likely refusal to bail out lenders, speculators, and other financial gangsters with taxpayers' money. McCain is also more likely to go after government & Corporate corruption than Obama, since he's actually done so in the last several years. In fact, McCain is not hesitant to go after corrupt members of his own party. McCain has also demonstrated some willingness to change his own course, evidence by his public acknowledgement that Americans are more adamant about border security, than about providing amnesty for 12-20 million illegal immigrants. Though McCain's sincerity on his recent position is questionable, at least he's willing to make the claim, indicating that he's "changed the course" when it comes to illegal immigration. That being said, however, I'll still vote for Clinton is she's the Dem nominee, but will probably vote for McCain if Dems chose Obama. If Ron Paul throws his hat into the ring in a race between Obama & McCain, I might vote for him.
Harvey Vernon (not verified)
Sat, 06/14/2008 - 17:13
HS 14223 Harveyvernon@msn.com 2008-06-14T19:13:18-05:00
I am for obama,it's a very simple reason to me,mccaine will be a nother bush,war like,with oboma we should see new idea's,i'd like to see the u.s,canada,mexico,be united as one.I for one want to go forward into freedom for all.that hight way,i mean a real 8 lane highway sould go both south and north,should go into mexico,across the united states,into canada,we all ready have free trade with these country's,so why not free travel.I am not fearful of mexican's,or canada people.infact if it were possible,the whole world needs to break down it's walls.sure would solve a lot of problems.some day there will be no walls any where,i pray.peace on earth,good will toward all mankind.
harpo (not verified)
Wed, 10/15/2008 - 16:00
HS 14224 email@example.com 2008-10-15T18:00:03-05:00
I pulled up several CFR membership lists and none of them had Obama or Michelle Robinson or Michelle Obama listed as members.
lordesher (not verified)
Mon, 10/27/2008 - 00:57
HS 14225 firstname.lastname@example.org 2008-10-27T02:57:30-05:00
mccain and obama are both fronts.socialism is already here and nothing will stop these people as long as you think there is a choice.