North American Union
Posted July 24th, 2007 by Jane Aitken
I am getting emails from concerned supporters who think that Ron is not emphasizing this problem enough. However, he is very aware of this CFR effort. Whenever any other candidate is asked about this they either pretend not to know about it or won't answer, usually because they are CRF members..
Remember, this is not 'free' trade but MANAGED trade.
Lou Dobbs...
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Judicial Watch Seeks Access to North American Competitiveness Co
http://www.judicialwatch....
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.
Thomas Jefferson
Stan Jones of Montana warns of NAU during Debate on CSPAN
If some of you haven't seen this footage, you must drop everything and watch it now !!!
This is one of the greatest speeches in the history of the United States concerning what is about to happen if the globalists aren't stopped.
This is Stan Jones during a debate for his senatorial run in Montana. Sadly, but not surprisingly, he lost:
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Notice the looks on the faces of the sheeple in the audience as his speech unfolds.
They were internally bleating (no pun intended) like typical sheeple for him to shut up.
Also, notice the comment from the snake at the very end.
north american union
i appreciate the fact that our presidential canidate ron paul frequently refers to this topic. i think it is treasenous of the white house to entertain such a notion as the north american union. may i suggest that anyone wishing to learn more on unifying of the u.s. with canada and mexico go to the website using the name-"the silver bear cafe .com". they are always posting articles regarding this "union". there is a video titled "the corperate north american union" done by connie fogal-canadian action party leader-which is excellent. i think that all u.s. citizens should be challenging their political representatives as to their knowledge and postion for this common union-just another piece of the neocon puzzle which i find despicable.
Chosing one's battles
.
The proposed North American Union, if enacted, would pretty much mean the end to the U.S. and life as we have known it. Interestingly, it is Rudy Giuliani's law firm that represents the Spanish conglomerate, Cinta, which has been given the contract to build the super-highway from Laredo, TX, north to various cities. The N.A.U. is to be modeled on the European Union, where the currency is the Euro. Our weakened dollar would be ended, as would the Canadian dollar and the Mexican peso: we would all have Ameros. That is the short description of what may happen in 2 1/2 years.
Ron Paul mentioned his opposition to the N.A.U. in the first televised debate, but has since wisely kept his public speaking to issues such as the war in Iraq, our financial instability (i.e., the trillions of U.S. debt) and emphasizing personal freedom and responsibility by restoring the Constitution.
For him to bring up the N.A.U. now would not be wise. Despite the merits of the case, it would smack (to many) of conspiracy theories; and, while there has been a lot of smoke on the issue, there is no significant fire today. Perhaps, in the months to come, there will be more to discuss. But I think it would be a liability for Dr. Paul to spend much time on it now.
Hardly a conspiracy..
At this point it's been in the press enough that it's hardly a conspiracy theory....especially since when you ask about it, they won't tell you anything more or pretend they don't know.
It's easy: Major media keeps quiet as instructed, then they can say you are making it up.
Bush will meet with heads of the other two countries in Canada on the 21st of August and the RMCP and US Army have been called out to make sure no one else gets near the meeting or has a forum near it.
Sounds fishy to me! Human Events does not think it's a conspiracy and Robert Pastor from the CFR admits it will be an excuse to do Real ID.
http://www.humanevents.co...
Tell that to MSM
I brought this subject up at a Town Hall meeting and was accused of trying to "scare citizens with conspiracy theory". To top it off, in the local paper, first paragraph in the report about the meeting stated that the speaker, "derailed malicicious conspiracy theoriest". This was only the icing on the cake. I purchased an excellent tape from Freedom.org explaining the NAU/SSP plan, and offered it to friends. I was told, "Please don't offer me that conspiracy crap." Perhaps it's why I defend "truthers"?
Rudy's law firm
http://www.dailyyonder.co...
http://www.nytimes.com/20...
sure takes on some "interesting" cases. And note the relative slap to the wrist for pharmaceutical executives, while excellent pain specialist Doctors are repeatedly locked in cages. Yeah, that tax & spend drugwar is about as fair as it is logical...
JMR
Avoiding the smear is worse
Avoiding the smear is worse than the smear itself. I disagree with you who say Ron
Paul should soften his rhetoric and avoid certain subjects. I would like to see, in the next debate, Dr. Paul call attention to Giuliani's associations with NAU/SPP and call him a traitor for it.
Famous Quote from Justice William O. Douglas
"The Constitution is not neutral.
It was designed to take the government
off the backs of people."
President Giuliani
Avoiding the smear isn't worse than the smear itself, not by a long shot. This is politics. Right now it's a smear to make the NAU an issue in the election. Ron Paul can either address the NAU and hand Giuliani the nomination, or he can shut up about it, win the nomination, and actually have a chance to do something about the NAU. Your call - should Ron Paul he right, or should Ron Paul be effective. In my opinion, while it's good to be right, it's better to be effective, because no matter how right you are, it doesn't matter in the end if you can't do anything about it.
I think he could just point
I think he could just point out Rudy's interests and let voters draw their own conclusions. Ron Paul doesn't need to call Rudy names, he needs to run a Reagan style campaign in that sense IMO. But then he needs to KEEP promises like getting rid of the Department of Education entirely (a promise Reagan made, too, but needless to say the Department that Educates No Child has grown a lot since.).
JMR
Regardless of Paul's
Regardless of Paul's position on the CFR or the NAU, neither should be the centerpiece of his campaign. Dr. Paul has gained a great degree of credibility and mainstream attention, in part because he has tempered a lot of the "conspiracy" angle that he could have otherwise taken. If he starts headlining with accusations about the CFR and the NAU, he will quickly be sidelined. Having a strong grassroots will get a unique candidate noticed, but that's not the only ingredient in the soup. Paul has done a great job moderating a very extreme message so that people in the mainstream will be able to consume it, but he's walking a tightrope, and it's a tightrope he's going to have to walk if he wants this to go anywhere.
For those Paul supporters who subscribe to the CFR/NAU problem, let it wait. Let Paul keep his agenda the way it is and win the office. You know that Paul is sympathetic, and that he'll address it once he no longer has to win an election. But now is not the time.
Nicely Professional
I appreciate the professionalism of this piece!
Between some of the YouTube spots during the Dem Debate last night, and some of the crazy and slovenly crafted vids that have appeared even in the cause of Dr. Paul's Candidacy, we would do well to raise our level of respectability in our presentations, lest Dr. Paul suffer the consequences of negative associations.
Cheers.
When I mentioned this a week
When I mentioned this a week or so back, I suggested Ron Paul should go to Montebello to support the protesters. The comments here were that Ron Paul shouldn't do anything that could connect him to a 'conspiracy theory'.
NAU/SPP is better termed a conspiracy fact. The mind kontrollers make good use of the charge 'conspiracy theorist' as it is very effective in silencing opposition.
I wonder if Thomas Jefferson would have worried about being called a conspiracy theorist?
Famous Quote from Justice William O. Douglas
"The Constitution is not neutral.
It was designed to take the government
off the backs of people."
Playing poker
.
You may be right; it might be a good thing for Dr. Paul to expose the North American Union and to blast its probable horror. Many would applaud his courageous candor.
But it would only further marginalize him, and he is still not considered a top-tier candidate by most. The NAU is a little known issue at this point compared to, say, the 911 event---about which there is much evidence that suggests a controlled demolition. Nobody in the presidential race will go near this, and for good reason: it is political suicide.
Politics is playing poker: you do not show your cards, not let on what you are holding. Dr. Paul knows plenty about the North American Union, and, I suspect, other nasty plots. But he is wisely keeping his focus on getting the nomination; and not to say or do things to mess that up. He can show his cards later on, when his position is more secure.
I guess we can all be
I guess we can all be grateful that Duncan Hunter is not afraid of being called a conspiracy kook.
http://www.house.gov/list...
Famous Quote from Justice William O. Douglas
"The Constitution is not neutral.
It was designed to take the government
off the backs of people."
Those who support the NAU and open borders
Oddly enough this is a subject that has been rising again and again in my associations as well. But one thing that keeps bugging me...(and I would bet my entire months' income), that the majority of those who are in support of globalization and open borders, lock their doors and windows each night, and probably the car in the driveway, too. Others, like the Rockefellers, no doubt have expensive high-tech security systems or guards. Why?
Is it just me, or is there something really wrong with this picture?
Olympia-SW Washington Meetup group for Ron Paul in 2008!
TO Vali585
You are exactly right!
Now then, this is NOT a conspiracy theory but something that is happening now, in the press (Lou Dobbs, how mainstream can you get?) and the only reason half the time they call this a conspiracy theory is because they purposely have buried it and then say because it's not talked about it doesn't exist..
I've always said you have more to fear from what the press DOESN'T tell you.
Remember the Rockefeller quote about the cooperation of Time, and the NYT and other publications?
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."Â
-- David Rockefeller... Baden-Baden, Germany 1991Â
Also Jerome Corsi writes often about it:
http://www.humaneventsonl...