Lets see where to start..
I'll start with the links you posted.
Mexico sends troops to the border.
"The Mexican government has ordered 2,000 troops to the U.S.-Mexico border in response to a wave of drug-related violence that is blamed for 200 deaths since January, officials announced Thursday."
From the article itself.
This act by the Mexican Government is a form of peacekeeping within the country as the looming military presence is a deterrent to any ILLEGAL drug trafficking acts and any violent acts. I'm sorry but if I lived in Mexico and the violence was taking place, I would want my government to help out and deter these individuals. Do you want the government to go up to these cartels with a nicely worded letter politely asking them to stop murdering people and stop the drug trafficking? Sorry but I would want a powerful presence to deter these individuals not some pussyfoot actions.
Onto:
North American Army created without OK by Congress to be used against AMERICANS
This is a bad thing?
Sorry but signing a treaty to help both countries in their time of need whenever that may be.
Quote from the article
"Unity of effort during bilateral support for civil support operations such as floods, forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes and effects of a terrorist attack, in order to save lives, prevent human suffering an mitigate damage to property, is of the highest importance, and we need to be able to have forces that are flexible and adaptive to support rapid decision-making in a collaborative environment."
Sorry, I didn't know that assisting one another is a bad thing. So if you're in need and suffering.. you wouldn't want any form of assistance form anyone at all? You'd rather suffer and/or die? Surely you would take any form of support you possibly could.
This has already happened in Canada the Canadian troops were used against the FLQ in the October Crisis where the War Measures Act was enacted by Trudeau. The military helped in the ice storms in Quebec and Montreal where there was a large natural disaster bringing suffering to many citizens. The army helped out.
Next:
9/11
Hasn’t this been happening SINCE the attacks virtually day 1/2?, its basically a game of choosing sides.
Either
A) You realize what had happened and those behind it
B) You question the happenings and question who is behind it.
This happens throughout history not only with the WTC / Pentagon attacks
Look at JFK, there are conspiracies and theories about this too
Look at the other link you posted about RFK it’s a theory that has had doubt cast upon it already as the people recognized in the film are not the CIA operatives they were once labeled as.
It’s a theory.
The fact that you can get celebrities and big name people to question the happenings on sept 11 is nothing special. Cool you can drop big names to support your point. You can make films like loose change etc to help try to prove your theories about 9/11.
Although I have seen the loose change films and others regarding the WTC and Pentagon attacks and they do bring up several questions about the day’s events. It is a theory with a lot more factual evidence that opens up a lot of questions.
Next:
RFK Assassination
Educate yourself, this information you posted in the link has already had doubts cast upon it from O’Sullivan himself. If you had done more research into this incident, maybe even a Google search you would have found this quote regarding the “new evidence”
“After further investigation, O'Sullivan produced the feature documentary, RFK Must Die. The film casts some doubt on the earlier identifications and ultimately reveals that the man previously identified as Gordon Campbell was in fact Michael D. Roman, a now-deceased Bulova Watch Company employee, who was at the Ambassador Hotel for a company convention. O'Sullivan ultimately expresses his doubt that the "Morales" in the film footage at the Ambassador Hotel and the man positively identified as Morales in later photographs are the same man.”
Unfortunately I was unable to open the last link as it would not show up for me but I would definitely have liked to read it. It looks like someone had some spare time and searched through "infowars.com" and pasted some links
I do not see how Our government is not against the people. It may not appeal to every single person, but it appeals to the majority in the country. Granted I do not live in the states and do not thoroughly follow their politics, in Canada our government helps us out. Although there may be some hastles and some problems, in the long run, the Canadian government has helped its citizens. I bring up the ice storms in montreal, the government helped, the october crisis, the government helped, the government has helped its citizens and is for the majority.
Id like you to explain how "we wont have our countries soon enough"... Why would I rise up against Canada to preserve our heritage when the Canadian government has allocated funds and support to help support it for us. The cultural mosaic of Canadian society allows all traditions and heritages to be preserved.
You go on from this to preach a third world war will be soon etc. The end is near etc. Please realize George Bush is soon to be out. Problems that sprouted with Bush Sr. have followed Bush into the office and actions have been taken. When Bush is out, many problems will be solved or cease to exist.
Although you state Iran supporting democracy I suggest research to gather all points of view. One link I have found is
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06...nion/ediran.php
Entitled Iran's Sham Democracy.
I do however believe that promoting a proper democracy is important.
I do not see a full fledge third world war taking place in the very near future. We will see what the future holds.
As for your statements on the government being against the people, I'd like to see further information on this and proof. Although yes the government seems to be against "the people" in certain cases, in the majority it is for the people.