Another Call for a North American Union

Originally posted by DYepes
Oh I am sick and tired of hearing this "we need to help Americans first" bulljive. Some of the poorest people in america still live better than as much as 50% of the worlds population.

U.S. citizens and governemts donate billions of dollars in aid around the world. What would you have us all do, join them in poverty? Oh, I know, it's that socialism thing again. All of us that work hard should be happy to have our income taken away by the state and given to those (around the world, now) that can't or won't work hard.

Its time you national supremesists stop thinking about oneself and consider the world at large, because we are part of the world. Start thinking of yourself as a global citizen.

Why should we have to do this? Just because you think so? Wrong.

The world is changing, get with it. Stop being afraid. If you want to remain unchanged, take up your arms and fight, and then get struck down by the majority of us who would not mind the change.

There is no majority of Americans that believes as you do. Prove it with a reputable poll (as in not financed by one of your special interest groups). That's a major problem with this "philosophy", its adherents mistakenly believe that because they think they are right, that they are also a majority - when poll after national poll shows just the opposite.

[edit on 2/1/2007 by centurion1211]

And as for this being treason, well nowhere in the constiution does
it say that the Union can not be dissolved.
What's treason is being close-minded an isolationist and hurting
America by staying isolated while the rest of the world becomes
economies grow due to cooperation and unions, while your own
fails because of such isolationist views.

It's being done without a vote, without people knowing it, treason. It's written in the NAU constitution, the US second amendment won't exist anymore. And it won't be democratic and freedom loving you know why? Because the croonies now at the head of the White House wrote it. They hate freedom. They hate the constitution. This is fact. Look at the past 6 years. They are militaring the police, putting cameras, wiretapping. They act like Nazi Germany. You think you're still free as you were 20 years ago, that's BS. You think voting = freedom and democracy. BS. Wake up. They want a north american police state, and I say that they are our enemies. And I'll kill them before they kill me or enslave me in their UK-like big brother crap.

Look at the European Union. It's worse in France than ever before because of the European Union. They try to impose a new constitution without a vote. A fraudulent constitution, it's too long, a constitution must be short and be able to understand by everyone, and be accepted. And then, paying for Mexico? WTF? A lot of illegal immigrants are coming in the US, saying that they will kill every whites and every black because it's their continent.

Mexico is smuggling drugs, smuggling China goods made by slaves, are corrupts, hell, to change mexico and raise the level to that of the canadian or american, it would take trillions of $$, less jobs in Canada and the US, and at least 20 years of indoctrination of mexicans to teach them to be not corrupt. And the amero, another fiat currency towards an international currency.

[edit on 1-2-2007 by Vitchilo]

Originally posted by iori_komei

Originally posted by DYepes
If the constitution dissapears tomorrow, it does not mean that the population of America will all of a sudden say "oh hey there is no such thing as equal rights, the right to free speech, or any of that crap". The people ultimately decide what goes into anything their country is goign to change into. You alarmists are the same ones who were terrified when America was first fighting the British for independance, and thought about tha travesty of disobeying the King.

He did'nt say you were the ones fighting for independance, he is
comparing you with those who did'nt want to split from England.

For Christ's Sake. I know he didn't single me out, and I also know that he was comparing me, or any one (or all) freedom movement persons, to those that are "alarmists"... the ones that were 1) fighting the British for independence and 2) those that thought about the travesty of disobeying the king. Those are not one of the same. They are the exact opposite. That's why I asked DYepes to clarify.

Originally posted by iori_komei
As for myself, I approve of an NAU, as long as it's free and demo-
cratic. though I would prefer freedom is considered more important
than democracy.

How, on God's green earth, do you think for one second that the North American Union will be "free" or "democratic"? Quoting from a previous post of mine...

Originally posted by Infoholic
The N.A.U. won't be following the Canadian Charter. The N.A.U. won't be following the U.S. Constitution. The N.A.U. won't be following the Mexican whatever.

A new "harmonized" constitution will be used.

Here's what the New States Constitution will be.
www.sweetliberty.org...

Look at the new Constitution. Tell me that they made it so we can be "free" and/or "democratic".

Originally posted by iori_komei
In the end, no on knows what the NAU (or whatever it ens up being
called) will really be like, simply because it does not exist, and you
can not predict sociopolitical trends at the time.

There are some people, like the majority of people here, that think
it will be som horrible evil thing, but the truth is, you don't know that,
no on knows that, rgardless of what some conspiracy theorists (and
I say that in the bad, not good way) with some legal training says.


In reality Unions like this, and evenutally a world government are
inevitable part of living in a world that is as interconnected as it is
now.

And as for this being treason, well nowhere in the constiution does
it say that the Union can not be dissolved.
What's treason is being close-minded an isolationist and hurting
America by staying isolated while the rest of the world becomes
economies grow due to cooperation and unions, while your own
fails because of such isolationist views.

OMG!!! :shk:

Again, spoken like a true Anti-American.

Obviously we do know what's to come. The information has been given to us, and is readily available if you're willing to look for it.

Ignorance is being shown the proof, and not believing it, and you have made that perfectly clear.

It doesn't exist.... yet. And I'm certain that it won't be allowed to happen without a fight.

No I can't predict anything, but I sure as hell can make an educated conclusion based off of factual evidence.

Again, it's not a conspiracy when they have made the information readily available. Calling it a conspiracy is a great (although fruitless) means of disinformation.

I don't have any legal training or education. I have a brain. I have the capacity to make an educated conclusion for myself, without giving my future up to some con-artist to make my future for me.

Inevitable? What!? We have a choice to accept, or not accept, your (I'm including you in the terminology of Neo Cons) that wish to decieve all the people of the USA.

Obviously you have no clue of what treason is. Let me spell it out for you.

1 : the betrayal of a trust : TREACHERY
2 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family
source

By the U.S. governmental body trying to "overthrow" the government (which is set forth by the Constitution).... that is treason. Trying to dismantle the one fabric that formed the United States of America is in fact treason.

I'm a close minded isolationalist!!?!?!??!

I'm sorry, I like to see myself as a proud American. And I intend for it to remain that way.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
It's written in the NAU constitution, the US second amendment won't exist anymore. And it won't be democratic and freedom loving you know why?

Well, if you mean that thing about the newstates of America, it
was'nt that bad, there were parts I disagreed with, but all in all
it was'nt horrible.

As for the second ammendment, well we're one of the few coun-
tries in the western world with the right to own guns.
I mean don't get me wrong, I'm an advocate of gun rights, but it's
not like we'd be alone, and in fact the people who have lobbied to
get rid of guns, have generally had good intentions for the most part.

Look at the European Union. It's worse in France than ever before because of the European Union. They try to impose a new constitution without a vote. A fraudulent constitution, it's too long, a constitution must be short and be able to understand by everyone, and be accepted. And then, paying for Mexico? WTF? A lot of illegal immigrants are coming in the US, saying that they will kill every whites and every black because it's their continent.

Umm, France is one of most liberal countries in Europe, France
has'nt gotten better or worse since it joined the EU, there have
been riots recently because of racial strife though.

As for the EU constitution, well it did go up for vote,and it failed.

The American constitution is long and confusing to the average
person.

As for Mexico, if they were up to our standards, alot of those illegal
immigrants would'nt be coming here, considering that even being
payed below minimum wage here, is better to them than living in
Mexico.

True enough there is a small group who wants to retake land that
they consider to be there's, but they are from being a popular or
large organization.

Mexico is smuggling drugs, smuggling China goods made by slaves, are corrupts, hell, to change mexico and raise the level to that of the canadian or american, it would take trillions of $$, less jobs in Canada and the US, and at least 20 years of indoctrination of mexicans to teach them to be not corrupt. And the amero, another fiat currency towards an international currency.

Well, I don't have a problem with drugs, in fact I'm for drug legali-
zation.

I am not a fan of China, so I don't mind any bad mouthing of it.

I doubt it would cost trillions, maybe a few hundred billion at the
most, but consider ho much money we've spent on the war.

It won't cause less jobs in America or Canda if Mexico is brough up
to our standards, well unless you mean the jobs illegal immigrants do.

As for a unified currency, well I really would'nt mind, it would save resources and money that is spent on currency translation, even if
that is a small amount.

Originally posted by Infoholic
For Christ's Sake. I know he didn't single me out, and I also know that he was comparing me, or any one (or all) freedom movement persons, to those that are "alarmists"... the ones that were 1) fighting the British for independence and 2) those that thought about the travesty of disobeying the king. Those are not one of the same. They are the exact opposite. That's why I asked DYepes to clarify.

Well, you did'nt sound like you understood, sorry for trying to
answer your question.

Originally posted by Infoholic
How, on God's green earth, do you think for one second that the North American Union will be "free" or "democratic"? Quoting from a previous post of mine...

The N.A.U. won't be following the Canadian Charter. The N.A.U. won't be following the U.S. Constitution. The N.A.U. won't be following the Mexican whatever.

A new "harmonized" constitution will be used.

Here's what the New States Constitution will be.
www.sweetliberty.org...
Look at the new Constitution. Tell me that they made it so we can be "free" and/or "democratic".

I did read that, I disagree with some of it, but it does give freedom
and democracy, in fact I read almost all of the freedoms guaranteed
in the American constitution within it.

And just to add, I am an advocate of gun rights.

Originally posted by iori_komei
Again, spoken like a true Anti-American.

I am not Anti-American, though I do admit I dislike alot of what has
been going on in America, and the limits of freedom that have exis-
ted for quite sometime.

Ignorance is being shown the proof, and not believing it, and you have made that perfectly clear.

So because I don't agree with you/believe your point, or some less
than reliable so called sources, I'm ignorant.

It doesn't exist.... yet. And I'm certain that it won't be allowed to happen without a fight.

There is always fighting when changes of such a magnitude can ocur.
Though violent fighting, unless the other side starts, is the wrong
thing to do, and quite cowardly.

I don't have any legal training or education. I have a brain. I have the capacity to make an educated conclusion for myself, without giving my future up to some con-artist to make my future for me.

I was'nt referring to you when I made that comment, I meant any of
the people who run sites who see conspiracies in nothing, or atleast
blow them out of proportion.

Inevitable? What!?

We have a choice to accept, or not accept, your (I'm including you in the terminology of Neo Cons) that wish to decieve all the people of the USA.

I mean inevitable as in as time progresses more and more people
will stop caring about what country they are from, or someone else
is from, and be in favour of a regional and eventually world govern-
ment, of course there will be debate over exactl what the government
will be like, what to include and how to structure the systems and all,
but that's normal, and a good thing.

I'm a close minded isolationalist!!?!?!??!

I'm sorry, I like to see myself as a proud American. And I intend for it to remain that way.

I suppose I ned to be more precise when I talk, I am not talking
about you in particular, actually at the time Lou Dobbs was on, and
even though I do agree with him on some things, other times I'd
like to punch him, and it happened to be one of those times I'd like
to punch him, I was more thinking of him when I said that.

[edit on 2/1/2007 by iori_komei]

Umm, France is one of most liberal countries in Europe, France
has'nt gotten better or worse since it joined the EU, there have
been riots recently because of racial strife though.

Well it's worse, people are losing their jobs.

As for the EU constitution, well it did go up for vote,and it failed.

Yeah but Angela Merkel is trying to push it without a vote.

Well, I don't have a problem with drugs, in fact I'm for drug legali-
zation.

Me too, so the real people who run the black market will be exposed. (CIA)

I doubt it would cost trillions, maybe a few hundred billion at the
most, but consider ho much money we've spent on the war.

Yeah but it's not that much a thing of money, it's a thing of consciousness, people in Mexico are corrupt, how many years would it take to stop it? Would it be possible?

It won't cause less jobs in America or Canda if Mexico is brough up
to our standards, well unless you mean the jobs illegal immigrants do.

Yeah but after that, jobs will go to south america and China.

The American constitution is long and confusing to the average
person.

Well, the amendments are really clear and they sums it up.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Yeah but Angela Merkel is trying to push it without a vote.

Well even so, unless it is acceptable by all the memberstates and there people (the people are the ones who got there member-states to not accept it after all), it would'nt go through, and add to that not everyone is exactly a fan of Ms. Merkel.

Yeah but it's not that much a thing of money, it's a thing of consciousness, people in Mexico are corrupt, how many years would it take to stop it? Would it be possible?

Well think of it this way, there was a lot of corruption during the prohibition era because alcohol was made illegal, as soon as prohibition was repealed, the crime and corruption started to drop drastically, true enough it was'nt completely gone, but it lost most of it's influeence and became less of an occurence.
The same thing is aplied with Mexico, legalize drugs and bring them up to our standards, and the crime and curruption will start to drop, it won't be overnight obviously, but it will happen at an observable rate.

Yeah but after that, jobs will go to south america and China.

Well yes there will be some jubs that will continue to be outsourced, but alot of things that illegal immigrants do can't be outsourced.

Well, the amendments are really clear and they sums it up.

Not really, the ammendments don't explain what powers which part of
the government has, in fact the ammendments were originall just the
addition of rights and civil liberties, and over time more were added
to change the constitution as society changed, like getting rid of slavery.

Well yes there will be some jubs that will continue to be outsourced, but alot of things that illegal immigrants do can't be outsourced.

Yes, but after that people will ask that we bring the whole world to the US standart living, and that's impossible.

Not really, the ammendments don't explain what powers which part of
the government has, in fact the ammendments were originall just the
addition of rights and civil liberties, and over time more were added
to change the constitution as society changed, like getting rid of slavery.

Yeah but at least the amendment are clear concerning what is important for the average citizen, what inalienable rights he have.

Originally posted by iori_komei

Originally posted by Infoholic

Originally posted by DYepes
If the constitution dissapears tomorrow, it does not mean that the population of America will all of a sudden say "oh hey there is no such thing as equal rights, the right to free speech, or any of that crap". The people ultimately decide what goes into anything their country is goign to change into. You alarmists are the same ones who were terrified when America was first fighting the British for independance, and thought about tha travesty of disobeying the King.

Can you reword this paragraph. You make no sense. 1st, we're afraid of change, then we're the ones that stood up to the king. Which is it?

He did'nt say you were the ones fighting for independance, he is
comparing you with those who did'nt want to split from England.




As for myself, I approve of an NAU, as long as it's free and demo-
cratic. though I would prefer freedom is considered more important
than democracy.

In the end, no on knows what the NAU (or whatever it ens up being
called) will really be like, simply because it does not exist, and you
can not predict sociopolitical trends at the time.

There are some people, like the majority of people here, that think
it will be som horrible evil thing, but the truth is, you don't know that,
no on knows that, rgardless of what some conspiracy theorists (and
I say that in the bad, not good way) with some legal training says.


In reality Unions like this, and evenutally a world government are
inevitable part of living in a world that is as interconnected as it is
now.

People don't care as much if your British, or German or Canadian,
what matters is the individual.


And as for this being treason, well nowhere in the constiution does
it say that the Union can not be dissolved.
What's treason is being close-minded an isolationist and hurting
America by staying isolated while the rest of the world becomes
economies grow due to cooperation and unions, while your own
fails because of such isolationist views.

[edit on 2/1/2007 by iori_komei]

it's impossible for a union to form with the US, canada and mexico because it would violate the US constitution in regards to our sovereignty, NAFTA and SPP etc are international 'treaties', the US defines 'treaties' as a 'CEA' ( congressional executive agreements ) which are under strict constraint by the US constitution. the US is not a party of the vienna convention and the U.S. habitually includes in treaty negotiations the reservation that it will assume no obligations that are in violation of the U.S. Constitution. If such a violation were to take place such as our sovereignty being stripped and our borders we fought and died for erased you would see a MASSIVE UPROAR not only in the US but in canada aswell, im pretty sure the mexicans would try to make it a holiday to rejoice. the American view is that international agreements become part of the body of U.S. federal law therefor legislation can be passed and Congress can modify or repeal treaties by subsequent legislative action, even if this amounts to a violation of the treaty under international law.

politicans in the long run if the right amount of pressure is put on them will act in favor of the people, americans wont stand for a union with canada and especially mexico. however I am worried about the TTC, i mean it's owned by a mexican company and it's first customs checkpoint is in kansas which would violate our sovereignty as a nation, this is already a hot topic and more and more americans are not liking it, especially the imminent domain crap.

I suggest educating yourself a bit about this country before calling people close minded and ignorant.


if anyone thinks for a minute a constitution can just be imposed on us then they are not only misinformed I question if they are actually a US citizen. this country is split red/blue, a union with canada means this country becomes liberal and dominated by liberals, this would alter the delecate balance we have in this country.



[edit on 1-2-2007 by ape]

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Yes, but after that people will ask that we bring the whole world to the US standart living, and that's impossible.

Well, we're not trying to, atleast not in a short time, imroving Mexico would be good for America in the end.

Over time other countries, either by themselves, or through help-
ing themselves and help from the international community will
have there standards raised.

Well, we're not trying to, atleast not in a short time, imroving Mexico would be good for America in the end.

oh please highlight? you're going to give me the immigration line? we are in the process of pushing legislation to replace our federal income tax code with the fairtax bill HR.25. this bill will tax all illegal immigrants in this country something that does not happen right now, eventually since immigration will be a presidential platform we will tighten up our borders ( we are already doing so ). so we will be taxing the current immigrants while properly funding the government to get rid of them. works me, we have no obligation to improve that corrupt hell hole, let them deal with their own crap it's not mine nor my families problem.


[edit on 1-2-2007 by ape]

however I am worried about the TTC, i mean it's owned by a mexican company and it's first customs checkpoint is in kansas which would violate our sovereignty as a nation, this is already a hot topic and more and more americans are not liking it, especially the imminent domain crap.

Well it's own by an australian corporation but it says it all.

It's not just in Texas, even if Texas is the main corridor.
Privatisation of highways, state by state

Silence opposition?
Buy by the toll road company of 40 newspapers in Texas who were critics of the NAU
Another source

Toll roads prices 3 times higher
Social security agreement with Mexico
Cheering USA: Insults
NAU tribunals over supreme court

Next crisis: NAU "What I'm saying is that a crisis is an event which can force democratic governments to make difficult decisions like those that will be required to create a North American Community," he said. "It's not that I want another 9/11 crisis, but having a crisis would force decisions that otherwise might not get made."

Call for an american union

And anyone who think that those who wrote it want our well being, think again. Isn't them that started Iraq on lies? That did 9/11? That are smuggling drugs? That are supporting dictatorships? That are raping mother earth? That only cares about profits? That are pushing for a police state? That raped the constitution? That allow torture on childrens?

Hell if you give your confidence to those guys, you're crazy.

i thought i read it was owned by a mexican company and they are funding it? are you sure? anyways americans will not play to this, it will be political suicide for anyone if they try to dissolve our borders, they will probably get hanged.

Originally posted by ape
oh please highlight?

There would be less crime as Mexico became less corrupt for one.

We would have another trading partner that we could form a
symbiotic bond with like we have with Canada.

Is there anything in the future NAU constitution about expo facto laws? Or will they be able to inact retroactive laws to persecute dissenters as well as take away citizens' right to guns?

this will never happen, it's political suicide to dissolve a countrys borders without the approval of the citizens, anyone who does this will get lynched. millions of americans would protest, this will never happen.

this is america, not europe.

america will not rebuld mexico, neither will the canada. the mexicans can do it themselves.





[edit on 1-2-2007 by ape]

Man this is probably going to get me seriously flamed, but here goes:

Someday, a NAU might be the wisest course of action. In the face of the new global superpowers of an imperialist China and a growing EU, I think in order to stay competitive economically, militarily, and population-wise, the formation of a NAU might just be what is needed.

That is not to say, however, that I think it's needed now, or that we'd form it because someone owed someone else something. I think it would be more a matter of sharing a common landmass, border, and people.

A lot of people attribute this to the beginning of a OWG. Indeed, admittedly, that is a potential direction it could go. I believe, however, that there is an equal possibility that it might just be the next step in the evolution of government civics.

I hope this doesn't get me branded a NWO disinfo agent. I just think there's potential situations out there where a NAU might not be such a bad idea is all.

Well facts disagree with you.

U.S.-Mexico Pact Revealed: Billions to Non-citizens

Arizona State University Promotes The Destruction Of The United States Of America

ASU have put up a website, www.asu.edu... intended to be an instructional tool to assist and encourage professors to teach the concept of “North America” to their unwitting student body. The site, appropriately titled “Building North America”, was created in cooperation with the North American Center for Transborder Studies at ASU, which must, therefore, be the actual nest of the traitors residing at ASU.

This stuff is real and outrageous. The firsts ``fights`` will be in Texas. If Texas fails to stop it, we'll be in big trouble. And they don't care about political suicide, Hillary, Bush, Obama all those wants it. The only ones who don't want it are Ron Paul and 3 others, I don't remember their names.

Originally posted by ape
this will never happen, it's political suicide to dissolve a countrys borders without the approval of the citizens, anyone who does this will get lynched. millions of americans would protest, this will never happen.

Well, considering the fact that it won't be for decades after an NAU
is established before the member states merged into one sovereign
super state, there would'nt be a problem.

I mean the EU is'nt going to become a truly sovereign superstate
for atleast 20-30 years.

It will progress similiar to the EU, it will become a common region
with common laws and currency, but still distinct sovereign nations.

And over time each generation, and some of the previous genera-
tions will get use to it, until eventually people will support becoming
a single sovereign superstate

Originally posted by thelibra
Man this is probably going to get me seriously flamed, but here goes:

Someday, a NAU might be the wisest course of action. In the face of the new global superpowers of an imperialist China and a growing EU, I think in order to stay competitive economically, militarily, and population-wise, the formation of a NAU might just be what is needed.

That is not to say, however, that I think it's needed now, or that we'd form it because someone owed someone else something. I think it would be more a matter of sharing a common landmass, border, and people.

A lot of people attribute this to the beginning of a OWG. Indeed, admittedly, that is a potential direction it could go. I believe, however, that there is an equal possibility that it might just be the next step in the evolution of government civics.

I hope this doesn't get me branded a NWO disinfo agent. I just think there's potential situations out there where a NAU might not be such a bad idea is all.

honestly, this is crazy. to compete in the 21st to counter these 'growing economies' all we need to do is replace our federal tax code with the fair tax bill HR25. princeston university did a study and it concluded that 400 out of 500 overseas companies stated they would open up factories and plants in the US when fairtax is enacted, 100 said they would relocate corporate headquarters to th US. this tax plan literally causes jobs to be outsourced to the US as it would be the most attactive place to do business.

my suggestion to all you liberals out there, instead of making up crazy policies that you think would work how about you educate yourself on our federal tax policy and visit this website - fairtax.org...


[edit on 1-2-2007 by ape]