Talk:Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America

Neutrality

This article seems very biased towards the plan. I plan on adding the POV template to this article some time in the next day or two unless someone shows it to not be biased. There is little about it, but the Council of Canadians has a page up against it [1].

--Jpardey 03:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, no reply. From what I have heard, there are many of the same oppositions to this plan as there are to other free trade agreements such as NAFTA. However, there are more concerns, such as the possibility of a continental ID card. Again, see the Council of Canadians site --Jpardey 02:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can tell as of March 30, 2006, the article doesn't appear biased either for or against the plan, but criticisms are important, thus legitimate criticisms should be included in a seperate section. - Rudykog 08:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biased

This is so biased it seems that the SSP themselves made this page. In need of a major re write with opposition views.

Lets act on this - I agree its imbalanced. One would think Mrs. Phyllis Schafly is the only person in North America who is critical of this. It doesn't need a separate section - constructive criticisms should be right along side the info supporting this plan.

If you look at one of the earliest versions and do a search on some of the phrases, it is obviously a direct ripoff of a press release. — Saxifrage ✎ 17:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]