PDA

View Full Version : North American Union




jacmicwag
09-21-2007, 11:23 AM
I know for many of my fellow Ron Paul supporters, this is a huge issue. To be honest, it never seemed like that big of deal to me compared to Iraq and our sinking dollar. The Europe Union (minus England) has been around for a while and these countries seem to have maintained their language, traditions, and autonomy for the most part. I'm just not sure that the NAU should be the headline issue as it was in the last RP letter to supporters since I don't know how many average Joe voters will be energized to vote RP over this issue. Just my two cents.

But on the other side of the coin, I just read an article where the new President of France is unhappy with the European Central Bank because they will not lower interest rates like our Fed is doing. So now a whole bunch of European countries have to agree on a monetary policy and then convince their equivalent of our Fed to act. Hmmm...yes, I see a problem there.

Dustancostine
09-21-2007, 11:43 AM
So you think it is ok to have an authority that is higher than the Constitution?

Abobo
09-21-2007, 11:47 AM
I know a few people in Europe, and they hate the EU. It is more and more interfering in their day to day lives and taking control away from their governments. Most disturbing is the fact that it controls so much, but everyone controlling the EU is totally unelected and unaccountable.

apropos
09-21-2007, 11:56 AM
Goodbye Bill of Rights, goodbye representative government.

Sounds like a dictatorship to me.

Cap
09-21-2007, 12:38 PM
It's pretty obvious that we are facing a monetary crisis. IMO we are also being force fed the NAU. These two issues are intrinsically linked. It follows logic, that if the dollar devalues far enough, the economy totally collapses...anarchy ensues. Martial law follows with the suspension of The Constitution. Alas, then an argument can be made that we need to convert to a new currency and merge the 3 countries resources to compete on a global scale. We are facing a critical time in our countries history. Are you prepared? Tin foil??? Maybe.

MicroBalrog
09-21-2007, 12:45 PM
My German girlfriend is going on a 2-day protest tomorrow against the EU's abusive anti-privacy practices.

American
09-21-2007, 01:22 PM
Highly recommend this video, for those who dont know about the EU. Coming to continent near you...


The Real Face of the European Union

The EU has been sold to Britain as our best hope for the future . . . But behind the scenes, has another, more unsettling agenda been ... all » unfolding? The European Economic Community (EEC) began for Britain as a free-trade agreement in 1972. Today's European Union is well on its way to becoming a federal superstate, complete with one currency, one legal system, one military, one police force – even its own national anthem. In this shocking new documentary featuring EU insiders and commentators, independent author Phillip Day covers the history and goals of the European Union, as well as the disturbing, irrevocable implications this new government has for every British citizen. Whether the viewer is for or against Britain's participation, this film asks the troubling questions the mainstream media has refused to confront.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2699800300274168460

glts
09-21-2007, 01:41 PM
An easy way to understand why the NAU and world government is bad is to look at it this way. How much control or voice do you think YOU as an individual have in what goes on in the Federal Government? Not much or very very little. Now imagine when the government is expanded to a whole region or worse yet the whole world -now how much control or voice do you think you will have? ZERO! That is why local government and state governments are so great because the average citizen has so much more of an opportunity to have his voice heard.

RP4ME
09-21-2007, 03:36 PM
It's pretty obvious that we are facing a monetary crisis. IMO we are also being force fed the NAU. These two issues are intrinsically linked. It follows logic, that if the dollar devalues far enough, the economy totally collapses...anarchy ensues. Martial law follows with the suspension of The Constitution. Alas, then an argument can be made that we need to convert to a new currency and merge the 3 countries resources to compete on a global scale. We are facing a critical time in our countries history. Are you prepared? Tin foil??? Maybe.



Its not tin foil at all my friend and ANYONE who think so is woefully in denilal and in the dark. The dollar is being kept alive by printing money and when THEY ( central bankers) decide its time to pull the plug THEY can and if we lose our currency we LOSE OUR FREEDOM and that leaves 2 choices - compliance or physical revolution. Not pretty either way. Id rather work towards strengthing a broken system NOW so we never some to that fork in the road! It wont be pretty and they know this. Thsi may be why we have teh possiblity of MArshall law b/c it takes more and more control to keep this economic charade going! Instead of taking our medicine now we are allowing for lower interest rates and printing money......

NAU is THE ISSUE! WAKE UP FOLKS! IF WE DONT HAVE OUR CONSTITUTION WE DONT NEED TO WORRY ABOUT ARGUING OVER IMMIGARTION OR THE ECONOMY !!! It WOULD NOT BE AS PLEASANT A TRANSITION TO A NAU AS WAS IN EUROPE!

Also the EU is fascist! And becoming more so each day! Their new proposed constitution eliminates habeus corpus, trial by jury, you are guilty until you prove your innocence which is prolly hard to do from a jail....no more elctions - apoointments by who - is anyones guess and a 666 clause for a future singular leader to take over for life and a seat in parliment for thsi TBD individual numbered 666 . The parlimentary building was designed after the Tower of Babel (nice huh?) and the symbol that represents it is a woman riding a beast.....think revelation. Sounds like a great deal for the governed in Europe! Whether you are a christain or not doesnt matter - for what ever reason it seeems they wish to identify their govt with something that in the Christain faith is quite malevolent! Hmmmm>

Yes NAU is THE ISSUE b/c it is about the survival of the USA! We have to be careful to prepare financially....so we have choices....

Patriot
09-21-2007, 03:48 PM
I know for many of my fellow Ron Paul supporters, this is a huge issue. To be honest, it never seemed like that big of deal to me compared to Iraq and our sinking dollar. The Europe Union (minus England) has been around for a while and these countries seem to have maintained their language, traditions, and autonomy for the most part. I'm just not sure that the NAU should be the headline issue as it was in the last RP letter to supporters since I don't know how many average Joe voters will be energized to vote RP over this issue. Just my two cents.

But on the other side of the coin, I just read an article where the new President of France is unhappy with the European Central Bank because they will not lower interest rates like our Fed is doing. So now a whole bunch of European countries have to agree on a monetary policy and then convince their equivalent of our Fed to act. Hmmm...yes, I see a problem there.


The war in Iraq (Iran?), the sinking dollar and the NAU/NWO are all part of the same problem. The war is bankrupting the country, the dollar is sinking to hide the fact that we are going bankrupt. (a less valuable dollar makes the stock market seem to be stronger. (high stock prices in weaker money = no real gain in value). The MIC (elitists) are taking all the profit from the war. And when the dollar collapses, the solution offered by our government will be the NAU/Amero.

It's called Thesis, Anti-Thesis, Synthesis. Or more simply problem, reaction, solution. The globalist create a problem, wait for us to react (demand that they do something) and then offer us a lesser of two evils solution that is beneficial to them.

Cap
09-22-2007, 06:41 AM
The war in Iraq (Iran?), the sinking dollar and the NAU/NWO are all part of the same problem. The war is bankrupting the country, the dollar is sinking to hide the fact that we are going bankrupt. (a less valuable dollar makes the stock market seem to be stronger. (high stock prices in weaker money = no real gain in value). The MIC (elitists) are taking all the profit from the war. And when the dollar collapses, the solution offered by our government will be the NAU/Amero.

It's called Thesis, Anti-Thesis, Synthesis. Or more simply problem, reaction, solution. The globalist create a problem, wait for us to react (demand that they do something) and then offer us a lesser of two evils solution that is beneficial to them.


Patriot, thank you for the very lucid explanation. This is my take:

The fact that "We the People" are being set up by the global elite is infuriating to those of us that are paying attention (we are the minority). This begs the question, how do you get the people that are not paying attention, to pay attention? Is it human nature to bury ones head in the sand and be so easily brainwashed? Are we truly a herd animal, that's content to go with the flow? I am more convinced than ever, that this indeed is the case. The evidence pointing to this is overwhelming.

RP4ME, you made an excellent point concerning fascism. If people think that the fascism today is out of control, just wait until the NAU/NWO comes to fruition.

We freedom loving people are in for a very bumpy ride.

TheDuke
09-22-2007, 11:13 AM
Going into an alliance like that, means that the nations involved will lose their sovereignty (obviously), Canada and Mexico will probably end up with our government :confused: are they crazy??

Also the problem of the ECC, the Euro brought Europe unity and easy access to eachothers markets... but they have an intrest rate that is just a compromize for the entire Union, and not adapted to the needs of each individual country. That's the problem too with the Federal Reserve (and the individual States, New York and California don't need the same rate as Louisiana), but a North American-Union would expand that problem instead of dealing with it. In the end, it prevents the optimization of economic growth... in a way that is not matched by the benefits of the open borders.

Of course, the entire concept isn't based on an economic agenda....

Syren123
09-22-2007, 01:37 PM
Patriot, thank you for the very lucid explanation. This is my take:

The fact that "We the People" are being set up by the global elite is infuriating to those of us that are paying attention (we are the minority). This begs the question, how do you get the people that are not paying attention, to pay attention? Is it human nature to bury ones head in the sand and be so easily brainwashed? Are we truly a herd animal, that's content to go with the flow? I am more convinced than ever, that this indeed is the case. The evidence pointing to this is overwhelming.

RP4ME, you made an excellent point concerning fascism. If people think that the fascism today is out of control, just wait until the NAU/NWO comes to fruition.

We freedom loving people are in for a very bumpy ride.

Through many many days and hours spent in all sorts of efforts to raise awareness of Ron Paul, I have come to the conclusion that the majority of people don't deserve to live in the free country that was given to them by the sheer accident of birth. They're uniformed, easily led/distracted, and far too lazy to become informed. This applies even to my own family and friends.

My son (14 yrs old) and I were discussing this yesterday. I told him that when this very thing has happened throughout history - a brilliant civilization crumbles for whatever reason - there was always a percentage of the population who were aware, informed, and active in some way. They were the ones who hid the books or kept the vital information intact somehow, formed secret groups who passed on these things over long periods until the time came and civilization flourished again. It's happened over and over and over.

So while the masses insist on taking us with them into the tyranny unto which they so willingly and blindly succumb, there are the Ron Pauls and Lew Rockwells and Andrew Napolitanos and many, many more who will keep the principles alive.

It's just such a waste of time, this descent into socialism which has never ever worked ever in history. That's what pisses me off. We could be elevating ourselves to untold heights of creativity, academia, technology, prosperity, philosophy...but instead we have to wallow around with the lowest common denominator.

Seriously. If the Ron Paul message weren't so important, I wouldn't be out among the general population for any length of time. It's depressing.

Manible
09-22-2007, 08:04 PM
I know for many of my fellow Ron Paul supporters, this is a huge issue. To be honest, it never seemed like that big of deal to me compared to Iraq and our sinking dollar. The Europe Union (minus England) has been around for a while and these countries seem to have maintained their language, traditions, and autonomy for the most part. I'm just not sure that the NAU should be the headline issue as it was in the last RP letter to supporters since I don't know how many average Joe voters will be energized to vote RP over this issue. Just my two cents.

But on the other side of the coin, I just read an article where the new President of France is unhappy with the European Central Bank because they will not lower interest rates like our Fed is doing. So now a whole bunch of European countries have to agree on a monetary policy and then convince their equivalent of our Fed to act. Hmmm...yes, I see a problem there.

The central bank is the problem, it owns all of these countries. The French can do little to stop it. That's why it worked so hard for everyone to adopt the Euro.

ropor
11-24-2007, 12:18 PM
<b>"I am a U.S. Citizen!"</b>

All 2008 presidential candidates are members of the prestigious cabal called the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), except a few. "We the People of the United States of America", are headed towards a one world government, if the members of the CFR have their way. The old NAFTA treaty, the CAFTA treaty, and the recently implemented Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) are stepping stones towards a "New World Order"(NWO).

The hidden agenda of the CFR is to further diminish U.S. sovereignty, in order to foster free trade, which will benefit the owners of large multi-national corporations. The late Mr. Arthur M. Schlesinger wrote in the August 1995 edition of Foreign Affairs, "In defense of the world order ... U.S. soldiers would have to kill and die".

Today the European Union (EU) consists of 27 states, except Switzerland. On March 4, 2001 the Swiss voted on March 4, 2001 with a 77.3% majority to remain Swiss citizens, and not join the EU. The new EU Constitution has only been fully ratified by 16 of the 27 states.

I stand together with the proud Swiss, and prefer to remain a citizen of my own country, rather than a citizen of a supranational union. I like our present form of government established by the U.S. Constitution, and our liberties guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

Ms. Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D., gave a speech in Salt Lake City, UT, on September 9, 2006 entitled "America is a Constitutional Republic . . . NOT a Democracy". The contempt of the U.S. Constitution shown by our current president is evidenced by the part of her speech cited in the next paragraph.

..."In fact, the Constitution is far more than 'outmoded,' according to President Bush who rebuffed GOP leader's request to soft pedal some parts of the 'Patriot Act' by saying: "I don't give a goddamn . . . I'm the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way." Then, responding to an aide who stated: "There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution." Bush screamed back: "Stop throwing the constitution in my face . . . It's just a goddamned piece of paper!""...

In case you may be wondering, which presidential candidates are not members of the CFR, one answer is on the sign in front of my house, please look at it when you pass by. Additional information about the North American Union can be found at Dr. Peterson's website StopTheNorthAmericanUnion.com. Other information on the NWO can be found at YouTube.com.

Lexx78
11-24-2007, 03:00 PM
Shouldn't ignoring the constitution be considered as treason?

thebestofronpaul
11-26-2007, 07:41 PM
This is the time to resist against North American Union, it is one word

TREASON

lucius
11-26-2007, 08:27 PM
Watch Dr. Paul denounce the North American Union at the four minute mark. An interesting note but he remarks that politicians against the NAU are labeled by the media as ‘CONSPIRATORIAL’. See how Dr. Paul eloquently speaks to the support of Israel in the first four minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4Jn2xCF92Y

RP4ME
11-26-2007, 09:26 PM
teh nau is not something we can vote on.....it wont come as a vote - THEY know it woudl neever pass in teh states .....they will destroy teh dollar - create a new currency that merges all three together ......

Its funny teh Swiss have rejecte dit but they are surrounded geographically by EU so in time they coudl be FORCED to join it......

weatherbill
11-26-2007, 11:23 PM
I bet they add in the central american nations as well........that would make 10 nations total, from canada to panama, entry into south america...... the beast with 7 heads and 10 horns???

could be......what would be great is if all of us can make an eligence, sacrifice, pick up and move to the same area and form a non 501-c-3 church or community and use our economics to protect and defend us from this tyranny, create our own media, our own economy, our own preparations as a completely constitutional community of our own.....I don't see much getting done for resistance unless we band together somehow and be a resistance, then a preparation for if all hell breaks loose in an economic collapse....right now, we a re vulnerble.....who would be willing to pay the price to move to a common area and work to preserve this republic????
Le'ts jsut hope Ron paul gets in and awakens america!

weatherbill
11-26-2007, 11:52 PM
oh wait....about banning together........ I forgot....... they already tried that........ it was called Waco!

dsentell
11-27-2007, 12:00 AM
I know for many of my fellow Ron Paul supporters, this is a huge issue. To be honest, it never seemed like that big of deal to me . . .I'm just not sure that the NAU should be the headline issue

You have got to be kidding. The NAU is the ONLY ISSUE! If the US loses its sovereignty and is destroyed, none of the other issues really matter. Our Constitution will be gone, we will no longer be free and what the people want will not matter. They are pushing the NAU on us without our consent -- we will have no say once it arrives.

I repeat, we will have no freedom, we will have no rights!

Sorry, but you need to WAKE UP!

ConstitutionGal
11-27-2007, 12:02 AM
....right now, we a re vulnerble.....who would be willing to pay the price to move to a common area and work to preserve this republic????

Check out the Free State Project.

ConstitutionGal
11-27-2007, 12:07 AM
You have got to be kidding. The NAU is the ONLY ISSUE! If the US loses its sovereignty and is destroyed, none of the other issues really matter. Our Constitution will be gone, we will no longer be free and what the people want will not matter. They are pushing the NAU on us without our consent -- we will have no say once it arrives.

I repeat, we will have no freedom, we will have no rights!

Sorry, but you need to WAKE UP!

I think the coming NAU has a great deal to do with our wide-open borders. I think the continued, unchecked illegal immgration from south of our border is being allowed to happen for a purpose that has nothing to do with 'willing workers' and everything to do with homogenizing the U.S. for easier integration with Mexico. I honestly think that Canada being included in the merger with happen after the merger with Mexico has begun. Everything is happening for a reason and, sadly, most people are more concerned with American Idol than with our Liberty and Freedom. Bread and circuses -- seems to still work just fine to keep the people complascent.

RickSp
11-27-2007, 07:34 AM
Let's see - we have real and immediate problems. Fine Americans are dying in a needless war. We have a president ready to start another illegal war (or two.) The Constitution is being ignored and our basic rights to privacy and due process are under attack. The country is being bankrupted by foreign wars and domestic profligacy. And you folks think the issue is some fantasy union with Canada and Mexico? Well, OK.

Urban legend of "North American Union" feeds on fears

pcosmar
11-27-2007, 12:29 PM
Let's see - we have real and immediate problems. Fine Americans are dying in a needless war. We have a president ready to start another illegal war (or two.) The Constitution is being ignored and our basic rights to privacy and due process are under attack. The country is being bankrupted by foreign wars and domestic profligacy. And you folks think the issue is some fantasy union with Canada and Mexico? Well, OK.

Urban legend of "North American Union" feeds on fears

Please post your proof.
Several congressmen and Ron Paul have taken positions against the North American Union.
The CFR on there own website have a pdf of "Building a North American Community"
www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NorthAmerica_TF_final.pdf -
Bush was in Canada at a conference earlier this year on the SPP.
This is NO fantasy.
This is serious and you are either misinformed, willfully Ignorant, or just plain stupid.

RickSp
11-27-2007, 12:40 PM
Please post your proof.
Several congressmen and Ron Paul have taken positions against the North American Union.
The CFR on there own website have a pdf of "Building a North American Community"
www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NorthAmerica_TF_final.pdf -
Bush was in Canada at a conference earlier this year on the SPP.
This is NO fantasy.
This is serious and you are either misinformed, willfully Ignorant, or just plain stupid.

LOL. Post my proof? You support a tin-hat conspiracy and ask me for proof. Are you that afraid of Canadians? Or even Meskins? "Building a North American Community"? Oh, "community" is such a nasty word. And Bush went to Canada? Oh scary. (Just a pity he came back.) Free trade with two of our largest trading partners doesn't seem like such a terrible idea to me.

Feel free to call me stupid anytime you want. Considering the source it doesn't bother me one bit.

pcosmar
11-27-2007, 12:47 PM
LOL. Post my proof? You support a tin-hat conspiracy and ask me for proof. Are you that afraid of Canadians? Or even Meskins? "Building a North American Community"? Oh, "community" is such a nasty word. And Bush went to Canada? Oh scary. (Just a pity he came back.)

Feel free to call me stupid anytime you want. Considering the source it doesn't bother me one bit.

From your other posts it is easy to see that you support a Globalist Agenda,
You are No supporter of Ron Paul and are working to undermine his positions.
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=515

American Independence and Sovereignty

So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation. They transfer power from our government to unelected foreign elites.

The ICC wants to try our soldiers as war criminals. Both the WTO and CAFTA could force Americans to get a doctor’s prescription to take herbs and vitamins. Alternative treatments could be banned.

The WTO has forced Congress to change our laws, yet we still face trade wars. Today, France is threatening to have U.S. goods taxed throughout Europe. If anything, the WTO makes trade relations worse by giving foreign competitors a new way to attack U.S. jobs.

NAFTA’s superhighway is just one part of a plan to erase the borders between the U.S. and Mexico, called the North American Union. This spawn of powerful special interests, would create a single nation out of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, with a new unelected bureaucracy and money system. Forget about controlling immigration under this scheme.

And a free America, with limited, constitutional government, would be gone forever.

Let’s not forget the UN. It wants to impose a direct tax on us. I successfully fought this move in Congress last year, but if we are going to stop ongoing attempts of this world government body to tax us, we will need leadership from the White House.

We must withdraw from any organizations and trade deals that infringe upon the freedom and independence of the United States of America.

Stupid is as stupid does.

DragonTattooz
11-28-2007, 12:28 AM
[QUOTE=Patriot;204535]...[QUOTE]

Sorry, off topic. Your sig is great!!!:D:cool:

Lexx78
11-28-2007, 06:17 AM
when even cnn talks about it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T74VA3xU0EA

the EU began with talks too, and now I have a currency that inflated at least 30% since introduction.

jon_perez
11-28-2007, 06:26 AM
But on the other side of the coin, I just read an article where the new President of France is unhappy with the European Central Bank because they will not lower interest rates like our Fed is doing.Sarkozy is probably unhappy because high ECB interest rates prop up the Euro, make it more expensive for businesses to expand and borrow, and French (and other EU member country) exports more expensive.

The US Fed on the other hand, has to make a choice between lowering interest rates to save the US from recession or increasing/maintaining them and protecting from inflation that's starting to become visible. However lower interest rates also contribute to weakening the USD.

Or so goes the conventional analysis. Naturally ;) , Austrian economics (what Paul and other libertarians believe in) has a pretty different take on the matter...



So now a whole bunch of European countries have to agree on a monetary policy and then convince their equivalent of our Fed to act. Hmmm...yes, I see a problem there.The politicians are unhappy because they are unable to bend the Central Bank to their will. The European Central Bank in particular, emphasizes that their #1 goal is to keep annual inflation between 1% and 3% no matter what the cost is, even if that leads to recession or keeps the Euro very expensive and thus hurts exports. Their reasoning there is that it protects the value of the people's savings.

A particular doctrine holds that the more independent the central banks are from the government the better, because the government cannot manipulate the central bank into adopting policies that benefit the ruling party by having short term effects that are popular, but are destructive in the long run.

[ For example, Sarkozy wants more legitimacy for his right-wing economic policies and in order for them to succeed a low-interest rate climate might be more amenable. But that low-interest climate will have its own repercussions for other countries of Europe. Suffice to say that in exchange for the enormous benefits of having an integrated economy and a single european currency, the europeans also have learn to work around some disadvantages and inflexibilities. ]


On the other hand, there are those who see in the independence of central banks a means through which the elite can collude to enrich themselves in a manner that is beyond the power of governments to control.

Personally, I think the truth is somewhere in between. There are responsible, competent central bankers and egregious ones. Same thing goes for politicians. I personally believe you cannot count on the structure of power to give you 100% perfect checks and balances, at some point in time you still need people of integrity to be in charge.

This is why even if I find myself disagreeing with some of Ron Paul's stances, I still believe he has a lot of integrity and principle (and don't forget, intelligence) and that such will go a long long way towards making things better.

RickSp
11-28-2007, 08:14 AM
From your other posts it is easy to see that you support a Globalist Agenda,
You are No supporter of Ron Paul and are working to undermine his positions.
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=515


Yah right, bucko. Tell me another whopper.

I support Ron Paul because of his opposition to the war and the attack on our civil rights. His views on international agreements directly contradict his claims to support free markets.

I support free trade which obviously you do not. You should adjust that tin-foil hat of yours. It has fallen over your eyes.

pcosmar
11-28-2007, 08:27 AM
Yah right, bucko. Tell me another whopper.

I support Ron Paul because of his opposition to the war and the attack on our civil rights. His views on international agreements directly contradict his claims to support free markets.

I support free trade which obviously you do not. You should adjust that tin-foil hat of yours. It has fallen over your eyes.

The WTO, NAFTA , CAFTA and other Organizations do not promote FREE trade.
Those are managed Trade, and subsidized Trade.
I am for free Trade, and National Sovereignty.

FreeTraveler
11-28-2007, 09:14 AM
His views on international agreements directly contradict his claims to support free markets.

I support free trade which obviously you do not. You should adjust that tin-foil hat of yours. It has fallen over your eyes.

Ron Paul supports FREE trade, not MANAGED trade, including international "agreements" like NAFTA. Better get that mote out of your eye before you start adjusting others tin-foil hats!

jmdrake
11-28-2007, 10:14 AM
Let's see - we have real and immediate problems. Fine Americans are dying in a needless war. We have a president ready to start another illegal war (or two.) The Constitution is being ignored and our basic rights to privacy and due process are under attack. The country is being bankrupted by foreign wars and domestic profligacy. And you folks think the issue is some fantasy union with Canada and Mexico? Well, OK.

Urban legend of "North American Union" feeds on fears

Former Mexican President Vicente Fox admitted the existence of the North American Union on Larry King Live (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58052). He even admitted that there were plans to replace the currencies of all three countries with the equivalent of the Euro. I'm guessing you hadn't read this? Because anyone who has and still thinks the North American Union is an "urban legend" is just delusional! Take of your OWN "tin foil hat" and face the truth!

This issue is crucially important. And it helps the campaign on two fronts. It explains why Ron Paul isn't being "mean spirited" on the abortion issue. It also is good for talking to conservatives who aren't sold on Ron Paul's war position yet.

Regards,

John M. Drake

SeanEdwards
11-28-2007, 10:53 AM
I actually think it's a great idea, as long as Ron Paul is in charge.

Really, the monetary situation is so bad, we're all gonna be wanting an influx of Canadian dollars down here pretty soon. Believe it. The only way out of this crushing debt and obligations the thieves in Washington have put on us, is if we can share the debt with the dumbass Canadians and Mexicans. They'd have to be crazy to want to form a union with us at this point though.

"Welcome to America! You now owe uncle Sam $500k"

jmdrake
11-28-2007, 11:20 AM
I actually think it's a great idea, as long as Ron Paul is in charge.


That's like say "The war in Iraq and going to war with Iran would be a great idea as long as Ron Paul is in charge." Ron Paul would NOT be in charge of a North American Union because he would NOT go along with such treason.



Really, the monetary situation is so bad, we're all gonna be wanting an influx of Canadian dollars down here pretty soon. Believe it. The only way out of this crushing debt and obligations the thieves in Washington have put on us, is if we can share the debt with the dumbass Canadians and Mexicans. They'd have to be crazy to want to form a union with us at this point though.

"Welcome to America! You now owe uncle Sam $500k"

If you believe that then you don't believe or understand anything Ron Paul has been saying for this entire campaign! The way to deal with the debt is to stop overspending and to quit printing money out of thin air. Period!

Really, some of you need to start listening to Alex Jones more often. He's had this whole Amero thing pegged for years. It's "problem reaction solution". The central bank has caused the "problem" of the falling dollar. Have you not watched the youtube clips of Ron Paul grilling the fed chief? The "reaction" to the falling dollar is people being scared instead of thinking straight. The "solution" is the Amero. Jumping ship and going to the Amero to stave off economic problems coming from the falling dollar is like splashing around in shark invested waters in order to "scare them off".

Regards,

John M. Drake

voytechs
11-28-2007, 11:26 AM
I know for many of my fellow Ron Paul supporters, this is a huge issue. To be honest, it never seemed like that big of deal to me compared to Iraq and our sinking dollar. The Europe Union (minus England) has been around for a while and these countries seem to have maintained their language, traditions, and autonomy for the most part. I'm just not sure that the NAU should be the headline issue as it was in the last RP letter to supporters since I don't know how many average Joe voters will be energized to vote RP over this issue. Just my two cents.

But on the other side of the coin, I just read an article where the new President of France is unhappy with the European Central Bank because they will not lower interest rates like our Fed is doing. So now a whole bunch of European countries have to agree on a monetary policy and then convince their equivalent of our Fed to act. Hmmm...yes, I see a problem there.

Surrendering your sovereignty is not big deal! come on! EU mandates trade, health, worker unions, environment, sea, you name it they regulate it. No EU country has any say in it. 15% tax on every EU citizen; this is in addition to local taxes. And wait that is just the beginning. Now they are pushing through an EU constitution that will supersede every other countries constitution. Talk about loosing your rights and become a global communist state.

No thank you, I do not want that for the US. With Mexico for G*d's sake. Wake up.

SeanEdwards
11-28-2007, 05:07 PM
That's like say "The war in Iraq and going to war with Iran would be a great idea as long as Ron Paul is in charge." Ron Paul would NOT be in charge of a North American Union because he would NOT go along with such treason.


Wouldn't be treasonous if it was handled in a manner compatible with our constitution. As a for instance, if the other nations entered the U.S. in the same manner that states joined the union during the early days of the growth of the U.S.



If you believe that then you don't believe or understand anything Ron Paul has been saying for this entire campaign! The way to deal with the debt is to stop overspending and to quit printing money out of thin air. Period!


Um, the debt is already piled on, as well as the unfunded future liabilities. Social security, and the retirement of the baby boomers is GONE, without a massive influx of new suckers willing to pitch in to keep the ponzi scheme afloat. We're headed for a situation where the ratio of retired workers to wage earners will be 2 workers per retired person. When SS was founded the ratio was more like 35 workers per retired person. The math is just not going to work.



Really, some of you need to start listening to Alex Jones more often.


I can't say I'm surprised that Alex Jones is where you get your information.

jon_perez
11-29-2007, 08:52 AM
Yah right, bucko. Tell me another whopper.

I support Ron Paul because of his opposition to the war and the attack on our civil rights. His views on international agreements directly contradict his claims to support free markets.

I support free trade which obviously you do not. You should adjust that tin-foil hat of yours. It has fallen over your eyes.I sympathize with your viewpoint RickSp. I am as much a fan of Ron Paul as these tin-foil hatters claim to be, but I don't quite understand his distinction between "managed trade" vs. "free trade".

It'd be interesting to hear Ron Paul expound more on this. What I'd like to hear are specifics pertaining to laws that he would like repealed and those that he would like to put in place that are related to such trade issues.

jon_perez
11-29-2007, 09:02 AM
Wouldn't be treasonous if it was handled in a manner compatible with our constitution. As a for instance, if the other nations entered the U.S. in the same manner that states joined the union during the early days of the growth of the U.S.Correct. All this conspiracy talk is very disingenuous. The Europeans forming a Union is really not that much different from the States forming a Union! There are pros and cons, certainly.

Texans, I guess, have always had a secessionist bent. It is certainly valid for people to desire varying styles and breadth of governance, but resorting to scaremongering and conspiracy theories to push one's political agenda, I find to be very dishonest. Such an approach is bound to alienate people and backfire. Not all of us naive fools who will fall for concocted scare stories.

pcosmar
11-29-2007, 09:17 AM
Ron Paul: Our National Sovereignty is Under Threat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ATJNnhNMT4

This is from the CNN debate.
Ron words.

jmdrake
11-29-2007, 10:49 AM
Wouldn't be treasonous if it was handled in a manner compatible with our constitution. As a for instance, if the other nations entered the U.S. in the same manner that states joined the union during the early days of the growth of the U.S.


You're living in a fantasy land if you think Mexico and Canada plan to become vassals of the U.S.



Um, the debt is already piled on, as well as the unfunded future liabilities. Social security, and the retirement of the baby boomers is GONE, without a massive influx of new suckers willing to pitch in to keep the ponzi scheme afloat. We're headed for a situation where the ratio of retired workers to wage earners will be 2 workers per retired person. When SS was founded the ratio was more like 35 workers per retired person. The math is just not going to work.


You're math is what doesn't work out. You claim (without really paying attention) that the U.S. economy is SO FAR beyond Mexico and Canada. (Again, Canada has caught up dollar wise and may soon pass us.) Still, going by your own logic the "ponzi scheme" will be working in REVERSE! Social security doesn't just give benefits to people who have spent a lifetime paying in. There is also supplimental social security. In other words, benefits that basically amount to welfare.

The problems we face ARE fixable. Read up more on Ron Paul's economic plans and get back to us.



I can't say I'm surprised that Alex Jones is where you get your information.

I'm sure you meant that as an insult. But Ron Paul and Alex Jones are far closer on this issue than either of them are to your position. Where do you get your information from? Sean Hannity? Dennis Kucinich?

The bottom line is this is bad for America. And Ron Paul wouldn't be caught dead going along with anything like an NAU. He's got better sense than that.

Regards,

John M. Drake

jmdrake
11-29-2007, 10:56 AM
Correct. All this conspiracy talk is very disingenuous. The Europeans forming a Union is really not that much different from the States forming a Union! There are pros and cons, certainly.


Except:

A) European countries have been seperate for centuries. The states were seperate for only a few years.

B) European countries all have their own distinct language and culture. The states all spoke English.

C) The Europeans were lied to and told initially that they were just forming a "common market". They only realized latter that something more ominous was afoot.

There's really no HONEST comparison.



Texans, I guess, have always had a secessionist bent. It is certainly valid for people to desire varying styles and breadth of governance, but resorting to scaremongering and conspiracy theories to push one's political agenda, I find to be very dishonest. Such an approach is bound to alienate people and backfire. Not all of us naive fools who will fall for concocted scare stories.

This is NOT secessionism you twit! It's not about Texas leaving the United States. (And I'm not from Texas.) It's about the United States remaining the United States! Furthermore Ron Paul was speaking out against the North American Union before he even announced he was running for president, so it's a bit insulting to his candidacy to call those of us who are also concerned "naive fools". And finally, several years ago you could have said talk of the Amero was a "concocted scare story". But now it's been publicly announced! Maybe you think it's a good idea. But it's dishonest to call it a "conconcted story" at this point. I think had you been around in 1776 you would have told Paul Reveire to quit making such a racket because you were trying to sleep.

Regards,

John M. Drake

jmdrake
11-29-2007, 11:06 AM
I sympathize with your viewpoint RickSp. I am as much a fan of Ron Paul as these tin-foil hatters claim to be, but I don't quite understand his distinction between "managed trade" vs. "free trade".

It'd be interesting to hear Ron Paul expound more on this. What I'd like to hear are specifics pertaining to laws that he would like repealed and those that he would like to put in place that are related to such trade issues.

You might learn something if you would open your mind and quit calling everyone who says something you don't understand a "tin foil hatter". The fact is that I do not want to be merged with Canada and Mexico. Neither does Ron Paul. Ron Paul believes in strengthening the U.S. dollar by rolling back the American "empire" experiment and returning to the gold standard. His major goals are in direct opposite to that of the Amero supporting Bush administration. This is really just as important as the Iraq war if not more so. This is the reason why the border issue is actually important.

A few years ago people called those who talked about the Amero "tin foil hatters" because they claimed plans for it didn't exist. Now that it's been admitted you ostrich feather hatters (since you stick your collective heads in the sand) call your fellow Ron Paul supporters (and by extension Ron Paul himself) "tin foil hatters" just because we don't think it's a good idea! And you don't see the irony here? Ron Paul has unequivocally said he's against this, but some people say "Well if Ron Paul would just take over it would be good." It's crap thinking like that which got us George Bush and the war in Iraq. "Nation building is bad under Clinton. But now that George W. Bush is in charge, and we're in a 'post 9/11 mindset' then it must be ok." Ron Paul's principles (which include a strong belief in national security) are far more important than Ron Paul's personage.

Regards,

John M. Drake

braumstr
11-29-2007, 05:18 PM
I lived in Germany for nearly 10 years and I was there for the transition to the Euro. For about a year there was a price freeze as wages and prices were fixed and the currency could be distributed.

The freeze was lifted and prices shot skyward. Almost at once, the proud German worker had his wages and savings cut effectively in half. How, you ask? Prices shot up, wages stayed the same. It was a fix for the "over priced German worker". Thats what it was about, or at least thats what I saw. It became a joke as you began to see shop owners with signs that had the DM lined through it with the Euro symbol in its place. Price rose up to and stablized at or near where they were prior to currency conversion, while the peoples savings were converted to Euros at an exchange rate of 2-1!

Say what you want, but do your reading on this subject and get informed. It was not pleasant for our old friends on the continent. Maybe we can do it better, or more likely it we will take it in the shorts propping up whats left of the Mexican economy.

Germany is also awash in immigrants from Turkey and eastern block countries.

EU has not been so good for them. There is a reason why they call their currency the Teuro, a play on the currency and the German word for expensive.

icon57
12-03-2007, 06:53 PM
Anyone know the target period for such a union of the 3 countries?

weatherbill
12-07-2007, 03:23 PM
didn't know if anyone caught this, but RUDY GIULINANI is directly involved with this!

Cintra signs contract for Trans-Texas Corridor
Yesterday at 10:39am Cintra signs contract for Trans-Texas Corridor; investment of 1.3 bln usd UPDATE

"A consortium led by Cintra Concesiones Infraestructuras SA said it has signed its first contract to build a section of the Trans-Texas Corridor toll road project in the US and will invest 1.3 bln usd."

This is a foreign company based in Spain and is planning on investing it's own 1.3 billion and taking on debt to cover the rest of the cost. This will be a toll road to recuperate the cost of construction and this way they can bypass the American political system.

Cintra is represented by a law firm by the name of Bracewell & Giuliani, based in Houston, TX. Giuliani is better known as Rudolph Giuliani, former mayor of NYC and Presidential hopeful.

The Trans-Texas Corridor is phase 1 of the NAFTA superhighway that will stretch from TX to Canada and allow foreign trucks to cross into this nation unchecked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracewell_&_Giuliani
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1659391/posts

For more info on the TTC visit:
http://www.corridorwatch.org/ttc/index.htm

Dr.3D
12-13-2007, 02:08 PM
You might find more about this in the following thread.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=592479#post592479

Oliver
12-13-2007, 03:46 PM
You might find more about this in the following thread.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=592479#post592479



No, you don't.


Quoting the CFR-Document:

THE COUNCIL TAKES NO INSTITUTIONAL POSITION ON POLICY ISSUES AND HAS NO AFFILIATION WITH THE U.S. GOVERNMENT. ALL STATEMENTS OF FACT AND EXPRESSIONS OF OPINION CONTAINED IN ITS PUBLICATIONS ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR OR AUTHORS.

pcosmar
12-13-2007, 05:20 PM
No, you don't.

And yet the SPP is following the "Building a North American Community" document put out by the CFR.

Oliver
12-13-2007, 06:09 PM
And yet the SPP is following the "Building a North American Community" document put out by the CFR.


Do you have evidence that the SPP is "following",
or are they rather addressing the same issue without
being connected to each other?

Does the SPP mention the CFR - or the CFR the SPP?

Neither CFR nor SPP are saying that "We need an
own EU in form of a NAU-Government".

There is no evidence whatsoever for that. And I'm
actually trying to find a document that would clarify
Ron's stance.

Being opposed to Globalism is one thing, to state
there are real policies in place that have the same
goal as the European Union, is speculation without
having factual evidence supporting this claim.

NAFTA doesn't have to be related to a NAU - even
if it could. But as long there is no evidence for those
things actually being directly related, I refuse to
assume anything.

And no - think tanks and their philosophies aren't
undoubtable evidence unless we're talking about
some kind of Wolfowitz doctrine that clearly transformed
into actual policy.

Smiley Gladhands
12-13-2007, 07:26 PM
It's been proven that some people with the power and money to influence people in governments, are globalists who would are in favor of a a common North American currency (examples: David Rockefeller and Vicente Fox).

To achieve their admitted goals they would have to take many small steps along the way...some have already been taken, some are yet to be taken. One of the last few steps would be the adoption of a common currency and a stronger 'union' between the nations than currently exists.

Will these globalists achieve their final goals? I don't know and I sure hope not. But certain steps along the way have been, and could be, justified pretty easily in certain circumstances such as an economic collapse or a dollar collapse.

Personally, I don't want Mexican truckers driving around on American roads. But that was in danger of happening before all the "NAU Tin-Foil Hatters" raised a stink. George Bush was just gonna let them roll on in, Mexican plates (and 'insurance' I think) and all. Why? Because it was agreed-upon in NAFTA. And because apparently Dubbya has some globalist leanings as well.

The more people in power who are globalists, the more likely these supranational organizations will come into being and gain more power over our lives. That's why we need to vote for Ron Paul, one of the FEW in government nowadays who seeks to protect our national sovereignty. If there are more people like him in power the NAU will remain a 'conspiracy theory'. If the globalists keep gaining more power and taking their steps, you'll finally see NAU on a government document...but only when it's too late.

therealjjj77
12-13-2007, 08:47 PM
Do you have evidence that the SPP is "following",
or are they rather addressing the same issue without
being connected to each other?

Does the SPP mention the CFR - or the CFR the SPP?

Neither CFR nor SPP are saying that "We need an
own EU in form of a NAU-Government".

There is no evidence whatsoever for that. And I'm
actually trying to find a document that would clarify
Ron's stance.

Being opposed to Globalism is one thing, to state
there are real policies in place that have the same
goal as the European Union, is speculation without
having factual evidence supporting this claim.

NAFTA doesn't have to be related to a NAU - even
if it could. But as long there is no evidence for those
things actually being directly related, I refuse to
assume anything.

And no - think tanks and their philosophies aren't
undoubtable evidence unless we're talking about
some kind of Wolfowitz doctrine that clearly transformed
into actual policy.

In essence it needs to be understood that Bush is a member of the CFR and as a member he will(and has) push their agenda. It also needs to be understood that he met with the leadership in Canada and Mexico, as stated by CFR, back in 2005? to move forward with plans that would blur the lines. Call it whatever you wish to call it. These names are simply semantics. It is ultimately the idealogy that the majority of the population has expressed opposition to.

These ideologies do exist and are very real within Washington, DC. Also, these plans are intended to be accomplished by 2010. A statement like this from the organization CFR means that these plans are being brought to fruition. CFR has enough influence in D.C. to accomplish their goals. Hopefully an RP presidency would reverse these plans.

Oliver
12-14-2007, 09:46 AM
In essence it needs to be understood that Bush is a member of the CFR and as a member he will(and has) push their agenda. It also needs to be understood that he met with the leadership in Canada and Mexico, as stated by CFR, back in 2005? to move forward with plans that would blur the lines. Call it whatever you wish to call it. These names are simply semantics. It is ultimately the idealogy that the majority of the population has expressed opposition to.

These ideologies do exist and are very real within Washington, DC. Also, these plans are intended to be accomplished by 2010. A statement like this from the organization CFR means that these plans are being brought to fruition. CFR has enough influence in D.C. to accomplish their goals. Hopefully an RP presidency would reverse these plans.


Yes, the Ideas exist - and they have influence in current politics,
especially concerning the competitiveness of ones country and
concerning the Nations future as a whole.

Nothing new. Nothing scary.
It's called Globalization.


So what's the fuss about in the first place? I fail to understand it.
What happens as soon you have an EU-like NAU?

pcosmar
12-14-2007, 10:26 AM
So what's the fuss about in the first place? I fail to understand it.
What happens as soon you have an EU-like NAU?

We lose our Constitution.
We have Civil War.
It will NOT be allowed.

Dr.3D
01-26-2008, 07:26 PM
Yes, the Ideas exist - and they have influence in current politics,
especially concerning the competitiveness of ones country and
concerning the Nations future as a whole.

Nothing new. Nothing scary.
It's called Globalization.


So what's the fuss about in the first place? I fail to understand it.
What happens as soon you have an EU-like NAU?

Well, they then proceed to join the EU with the NAU to make a world government.

One government controlling the world. Like the idea?

Wendi
01-26-2008, 10:37 PM
We have already surrendered most of our national sovereignty to the UN, and our dict... I mean our president... has said the constitution is just a piece of paper.

gaazn
01-27-2008, 02:12 AM
we're going back to the spheres of influence days.

GoApe4RonPaul2008
01-27-2008, 10:46 AM
Yes, the Ideas exist - and they have influence in current politics,
especially concerning the competitiveness of ones country and
concerning the Nations future as a whole.

Nothing new. Nothing scary.
It's called Globalization.


So what's the fuss about in the first place? I fail to understand it.
What happens as soon you have an EU-like NAU?

Nothing scary? So sacrificing liberties for a world government isnt scary? Having a microchip implanted in your skin isnt scary? (Mark of the Beast) How is non of this scary to you? Are you that blind? Imagine.. if you say one thing that pisses anyone off.. any idividualism they can shut ur microchip off and you are cut off from your money. That is their goal.. yes its sad. It is the most scary thing out there. A world government would ensure that the United States would be the world police. Us "Freedom lovers" would all die first. Because we were once under the constitution.. they want to break that. They want to defeat all freedom and free will of mankind. They want absolute power which we all know.. Power corrupts absolute power corrupts absolutly. We, as citizens of the republic of the united states MUST do everything we can to keep this country an independant nation. We need not to rely on other nations. We must survive this. If we can defeat the CFR in the united states... We can stop the world government in its tracks.

Vote Ron Paul.
Vote for freedom.
Power To The People.

InLoveWithRon
01-27-2008, 11:19 AM
Do you have evidence that the SPP is "following",
or are they rather addressing the same issue without
being connected to each other?

Does the SPP mention the CFR - or the CFR the SPP?

Neither CFR nor SPP are saying that "We need an
own EU in form of a NAU-Government".

There is no evidence whatsoever for that. And I'm
actually trying to find a document that would clarify
Ron's stance.

Being opposed to Globalism is one thing, to state
there are real policies in place that have the same
goal as the European Union, is speculation without
having factual evidence supporting this claim.

NAFTA doesn't have to be related to a NAU - even
if it could. But as long there is no evidence for those
things actually being directly related, I refuse to
assume anything.

And no - think tanks and their philosophies aren't
undoubtable evidence unless we're talking about
some kind of Wolfowitz doctrine that clearly transformed
into actual policy.

Umm. What you have to do is understand that the Trilateral Commission is directly involved with the SPP/NAU.. ..

Remember what Barry Goldwater said about the Trilateral Commission.. By the way, David Rockefeller is the chairman of this commission-- And if you don't know what Rockefeller has stated and told us about his desire for a one world government, then you need to do some research my friend and read Rockefeller's books and other quotes by him.




'The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States, they will rule the future.' --Barry Goldwater, U.S. Senator: 1964


The North American continent is being transformed from three sovereign nations (Canada, USA, Mexico) into one regional corporate power base, the North American Union.

the union is being created by stealth, is already well on its way to fruition, and is being imposed on us by our own "elected" representatives and government with no opposition

The ultimate enforcement mechanism for the North American Union is a police state. The tools for the police state are "anti-terrorist" laws. Anti Terrorist laws are a ruse to strip the people of their liberties in order to prevent dissent. The Orwellian justification is "security", "safety".

The plan of this Canada-U.S.-Mexico task force is to establish a continent-wide customs union with a common approach to trade, energy, immigration, law enforcement and security that would virtually eliminate existing national borders.

a common security perimeter by 2010
a North American Border Pass with biometric identifiers.
a unified border and expanded customs facilities
a single economic space
a common external tariff.
seamless movement of goods within North America.
A North American energy strategy -as a regional alternative to Kyoto.
Review those sectors of NAFTA that were excluded.
A North American regulatory plan that would include "open skies and open roads" and a unified approach on food, health, and the environment.
Expand temporary worker programs and create a "North American preference" for immigration for citizens of North America.
A North American Investment Fund to build infrastructure to connect Mexico's poorer regions in the south to the market to the north.
Restructure and reform Mexico's public finances.
Fully develop Mexican energy resources (Mexico wisely kept their energy out of NAFTA)
A permanent tribunal for trade and investment disputes.( Here is where any vestige of democratic government disappears)
An annual North American summit meeting.
A Tri-national Competition Commission with a common approach to trade remedies.
Scholarships for a network of Centers for North American Studies. (To serve the corporations)
Below is the list of the Members of the Independent Task Force on North America- Many are members of the Trilateral Commission - a similar corporate interest group from the USA, Japan and Western Europe )

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/nafta_gatt/community.html


AND-

The United States of America, once—long ago—a Constitutional republic, is being erased. The erasure of America isn’t reported on the 6 o’clock news, of course. It isn’t much noticed, because it is happening too slowly—although the pace has increased over the past couple of decades. Be this as it may, there is no need to speak of “conspiracy theories.” For one thing, it isn’t a theory. It is as much a fact as gravity.

It is being carried out in plain sight, not behind closed doors in smoke filled rooms. Anyone with Web access can follow the process. Those in the business of erasing America know, however, that they are operating in a culture whose educational system has been strip-mined, so to speak. America’s masses by and large don’t know what a Constitutional republic is, and use the Web the same way they use television—for entertainment.

Go, for example, to the website of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). There you will find a document entitled Building a North American Community. It first appeared on the site this past spring. Checking in at 47 pages excluding acknowledgements and other front matter, Building a North American Community provides a blueprint for the integration of the United States, Mexico and Canada under a single supranational authority. This plan would, for all practical purposes, dissolve the borders between each nation and end the lip-service that must still be paid to the Constitution within our own.



http://www.newswithviews.com/Yates/steven11.htm

chiplitfam
01-27-2008, 11:24 AM
By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
December 17, 2007
NewsWithViews.com

In order to bring about a North American Union (NAU), the public first has to be conditioned to think of themselves as North Americans. In that regard, Thomas Donohue (president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce) on June 16, 2006 remarked that "for CEOs, North America is already a single market, and business decisions are no longer made with a Mexico strategy---or a Canada strategy---but, rather, with a North American strategy....I think it's pretty clear now that it no longer makes sense to talk about U.S. competitiveness and Mexican competitiveness---or, for that matter, about the competitiveness of Canada. We are all in this together---we, as North Americans."

Also relevant to this process is the publication of NORTH AMERICAN INTEGRATION MONITOR since 2002 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Very soon, CSIS also will publish (and has agreed to send me) their final document on their "North American Future 2025 Project." The Project has "an emphasis on regional integration," and the year 2025 A.D. was selected "on the basis of the data presently available on overall global projections." Seven closed-door roundtable sessions have been looking at the methodology of global and North American projections, as well as labor mobility, energy, the environment, security, competitiveness, and border infrastructure and logistics.

Zbigniew Brzezinski has been a CSIS counselor, and at Mikhail Gorbachev's first State of the World Forum in 1995, Brzezinski revealed: "We cannot leap into world government through one quick step....The precondition for eventual and genuine globalization is progressive regionalization because by that we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units." This is why the CSIS Project has "an emphasis on regional integration." (Brzezinski also described the regions that would be formed, that Israel and the Palestinians would be part of a Middle Eastern region, how Communist China would be brought into an Asian region, and that Iran would be part of a Central Asian region which would have important oil and gas pipelines constructed.)

At this point, it is worth remembering that in Stalin's January 1913 address in Vienna, he advocated national loyalties becoming subservient to regions. And 3 years later, Lenin in 1916 proclaimed: "The aim of socialism is not only to abolish the present division of mankind into smaller states and all-national isolation, not only to bring the nations closer to each other, but also to merge them."

You may recall that in Brzezinski's BETWEEN TWO AGES (1970), he praised Marxism, and he claimed that "the nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty." One aspect of American sovereignty that is being yielded is ownership of American companies by Americans. In the first 9 months of 2007, 69 companies in New England alone have been sold to foreign buyers. Nationally, the French company Alcatel bought Lucent Technologies in the U.S. last year, and in September 2007 announced it will be cutting thousands of jobs.

Relevant to this, Alan Tonelson (research fellow at the U.S. Business and Industry Council) said foreign companies are "acquiring control over the most dynamic pieces of the American economy, and they're acquiring control over America's future." Also relevant to this was the assessment by Donald Klepper-Smith (chief economist at DataCore Partners) regarding decisions made overseas and how they would effect American workers. He opined: "It raises some red flags and some real questions about our independence."

Part of the conditioning process to cause Americans to accept a NAU is the role of past and present government officials explaining the alleged economic benefits of such a union. For example, Harry Roegner in a letter titled "An economic union would be beneficial" in THE GREENVILLE (South Carolina) SUN (October 15, 2007) pointed out the large oil reserves of both Canada and Mexico that would be useful to the U.S., as well as Mexico's excess manpower who, as immigrants, would help support U.S. and Canadian economic growth. Roegner was an adviser on foreign trade issues to the U.S. Department of Commerce from 1984 to 1994, and in his letter said: "A North American economic union would provide the free flow of capital and labor across national borders needed to address many of the (aforementioned) imbalances."

Often regional economic integration into some type of union is argued on the basis of free trade. However, John Fonte (who had an office next to mine at the U.S. Department of Education) of the Hudson Institute has explained that the concept of regional economic arrangements or trading blocs actually is contrary to free trade to an extent. For example, in a NAU, there would be trading arrangements among the 3 nations which would limit the ability of the U.S. to trade freely with nations outside the NAU trading bloc.

But hasn't President Bush recently said all this talk about a NAU is nonsense? On August 21, 2007 at the concluding press conference for the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) in Montebello, Quebec, Fox News reporter Bret Baier asked if the SPP is a prelude to a NAU similar to the European Union (EU), and if there are plans to build some kind of superhighway connecting all 3 countries. President Bush replied: "If you've been in politics as long as I have, you get used to that kind of technique where you lay out a conspiracy and then force people to try to prove it doesn't exist."

The truth, of course, is that the U.S., Canada and Mexico are being connected by 4 Trade Corridors. On November 20, 2007, Lt. Governor John Harvard of Manitoba delivered a "Speech From The Throne," in which he revealed: "Manitoba has been working with the Canadian government and state governments in the U.S. to protect and enhance our access to key trade markets. In response to U.S. border and security measures, Manitoba will begin offering an enhanced driver's license as an affordable and secure form of identification for travelers. The new license will be available in the Fall of 2008. Manitoba is also taking a major role in the development of a Mid-Continent Trade Corridor, connecting our northern Port of Churchill with trade markets throughout the central United States and Mexico. To advance the concept, an alliance has been built with business leaders and state and city governments spanning the entire length of the Corridor. When fully developed, the trade route will incorporate an 'in-land port' in Winnipeg with pre-clearance for international shipping."

The SPP is also an important part of the power elite's plan for a techno-feudal fascist world government because it is a "partnership." For years, the American people and their leaders have been conditioned to accept educational and other partnerships as solutions to their problems. For example, city governments strapped for funds are approached by corporations or their related private foundations with plans and funds to improve education, which the city leaders are only too glad to accept. This conditions the people eventually to accept government/corporate rule. This is a form of Socialism known as fascism, and it will be the type of world government the power elite plans ultimately to bring about and control. In this government, the power elite will control politicians who will become government leaders who will promulgate laws, rules and regulations favorable to certain transnational corporations (controlled by the power elite) and unfavorable to any possible competition to those select corporations.

So why did President Bush ridicule Bret Baier's question, especially since there are already 47 Mexican Consulates across the U.S.? Lou Dobbs in his CNN commentary "Beware the Lame Duck" (October 17, 2007) wrote: "Although many conservatives refuse to accept the reality, George W. Bush is a one-world neo-liberal who drove budget and trade deficits to record heights....President Bush has pressed hard for the Security and Prosperity Partnership, the first step toward a North American Union that will threaten our sovereignty. The administration has permitted American businesses to hire illegal aliens, encouraged the invasion of 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens and has given Mexico and corporate America dominion over our borders and our immigration policy....The assault on our national sovereignty continues....The president is urging the Senate to act favorably on our accession to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea....The treaty will submit the United States to international tribunals largely adverse to our interests, and dispute resolution mechanisms are stacked against the United States....The treaty would undermine our national sovereignty and act as a back door for global environmental activists to direct U.S. policy." Fortunately, in Congress, House Concurrent Resolution 40 states: "Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada."

If I could have followed up Bret Baier's question with one of my own, here's what I would have asked: "So, President Bush, will the massive 10-lane toll road TransTexas Corridor funded by Cintra of Spain and to be built by Zachry Construction of Texas come to a screeching halt at Oklahoma's border?" What are all the vehicles supposed to do---merge all of a sudden into a small road? I don't think so ! And by the way, Cintra is legally represented in Texas by leading Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani's law firm Bracewell & Giuliani, which also just happens to have an office in Dubai (remember Dubai Ports was about to take over operation of a number of America's largest ports) ! Perhaps before President Bush was too critical of people warning about a NAU, he should have read what Mexico's President Vicente Fox said May 16, 2002 at Club 21 in Madrid: "Eventually, our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union" (or as Gorbachev refers to the EU, the "European Soviet").

I would also have asked President Bush at the press conference why on September 6, 2007 at 9pm did he open all U.S. highways to Mexican trucks? Earlier in the day, U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio said President Bush was "_ _ _ _ bent" on getting Mexican trucks in the U.S. by stealth. Currently, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration website lists 10 Mexican carriers that are approved to transport goods throughout the U.S., and nearly 40 more Mexican carriers will soon join them on the list.

Will all Mexican truck drivers be stopped at the border to see if they can read road signs in English, if they have criminal backgrounds, and how long they already have been driving that day (U.S. law prohibits more than 10 consecutive hours)? I doubt it, since no more than 2% of Mexican trucks entering the U.S. today are inspected ! Many of these trucks will be a danger to Americans' safety, and could be used for smuggling drugs, illegal aliens, and terrorists into the U.S.




Many countries deliberately release their criminal elements into the U.S., often coming across the Mexican border. And if the criminals are caught, our federal government releases them into American society if their own countries refuse to take them back. Our government knows how to solve this problem (e.g., stop issuing visas to people from those countries), but has refused to take such action most of the time. Ask yourself why our government would release murderers, rapists, arsonists, and other criminals into our society to commit violent crimes against us. Think about it !

Returning to Bret Baier's question to President Bush about the SPP being a prelude to a NAU similar to the EU, what would we get if we became like the EU, which has certain characteristics of fascism? Mrs. Kitty Werthmann (a survivor of Hitler's reign and Soviet rule afterward) recently returned to Europe and interviewed many senior citizens. They informed her they were told conversion to the Euro would bring prosperity via free trade, lower prices for goods, etc. In reality, though, their money was devalued greatly, and they're now living on welfare and food stamps. Unemployment in Europe is high while guest workers are brought in, and the people are angry.

In terms of what is planned for Americans relevant to the EU and the Euro, Vicente Fox on CNN's "Larry King Live" show October 8, 2007 explained that what he and President Bush agreed to "is a trade union for all the Americas," and he suggested that eventually there would be a regional currency. He made similar comments on the "Daily Show" the same day. Earlier in 2007, Bolivian President Evo Morales proposed a single currency for all South American nations.

Concerning North American nations, in June 1991, Dallas Federal Reserve publication no. 9115, "Free Trade and the Peso" by Darryl McLeod and John Welch, analyzed the potential for a single North American currency. In 1999, former Canadian parliament member Herbert Grubel published "The Case for the Amero: The Economics and Politics of a North American Union," giving 2010 as the possible date for introducing the "amero" as the new North American currency. And in the Atlanta Federal Reserve's ECONOMIC REVIEW (4th quarter, 2000), Michael Chriszt (director of the Reserve's Latin America Research Group) wrote "Perspectives on a Potential North American Monetary Union" in which one reads that "the idea of a single currency for NAFTA is on the table." In July 2000, Vicente Fox had already proposed a North American common market with a continental monetary policy.

More recently, David Dodge, Governor of the Bank of Canada, in May 2007 said that a common currency with the U.S. is definitely possible. What will happen is the power elite will cause the dollar to be devalued to the point where Americans reluctantly will accept the amero. As Bob Chapman in his December 2006 newsletter, INTERNATIONAL FORECASTER, said: "(The amero) will be presented to the American public as the administration's solution for dollar recovery."

On June 14, 2007 BankIntroductions.com told their clients that in the next 10-20 years, as the global economy moves toward regional trading blocs, the amero or "North American Monetary Unit" (NAMU) will be introduced. The power elite's plan is to form regional unions with their own currencies and then link them into a world government with one global currency. Relevant to this, Reuters reporter Emmanuel Jarry on October 23, 2007 wrote "Sarkozy (French President) Calls for Mediterranean Union Launch in 2008." And the African Union's African Central Bank plans to mint the "Gold Mandela" as a single African currency by 2010 (the date the NAU is supposed to form).



If you look at the top of the website for the Single Global Currency Association (SGCA), there is a quote by former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, saying: "A global economy requires a global currency." The SGCA "is dedicated to the goal of implementing a single global currency by 2025...managed by a single international central bank." I have already indicated that on the cover of THE ECONOMIST (June 9, 1988) is a picture of "The Phoenix," a global currency suggested for implementation in 2018.



Whatever the date of the global currency's introduction, it will be advertised as facilitating world trade, which the power elite will control. This will be like in the days of Solomon when he fortified Gezer, Hazor and Megiddo (the Har, or Mount, of Megiddo would be called Armageddon). Through this fortification, he controlled the Via Maris and world trade, thereby controlling the world of his day. The power elite today plans to do likewise, but in a Biblical sense their plan will lead to the Battle of Armageddon.


© 2007 Dennis Cuddy - All Rights Reserved






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dennis Laurence Cuddy, historian and political analyst, received a Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (major in American History, minor in political science). Dr. Cuddy has taught at the university level, has been a political and economic risk analyst for an international consulting firm, and has been a Senior Associate with the U.S. Department of Education.

Cuddy has also testified before members of Congress on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice. Dr. Cuddy has authored or edited twenty books and booklets, and has written hundreds of articles appearing in newspapers around the nation, including The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and USA Today. He has been a guest on numerous radio talk shows in various parts of the country, such as ABC Radio in New York City, and he has also been a guest on the national television programs USA Today and CBS's Nightwatch.