"Crisis" and the North American Union
Three Articles
 

Excerpts:
The memoirs of Jean Monnet, regarded as the architect of European unity,
finally disclosed he had used a strategy of deceit, knowing his plan
 to form a European Union would never succeed if it were
openly disclosed. 

"There appears to be no evidence that the American people themselves
are even aware of the catastrophic events soon to overtake them."
-- Steve LeFemine, independent candidate for Congress

"Our worst fears confirmed! We are suffering a coup d,etat in America.
It is in the final stages of completion... ...the program to abrogate American Sovereignty.
May God have mercy on America."
-- Lawrence Patterson, Criminal Politics (May-June 2006)
 
PREFACE NOTE:
The United States was born in Revolution and war.  The Zionist "banksters" who deceptively privatized the U.S. Treasury via creation of the the Federal Reserve Bank -- with Constitution subterfuge every since -- tried to create the United Nations after they bankrolled World War I, finally succeeding after they bankrolled World War II, creating the Zionist State of Israel as part of the bargain.  Historical details at Zionism Exposed.
 
The same Zionist war profiteers were behind the 9-11 treason that led to the Iraq war, all on behalf of the Zionist State of Israel with their "war by deception" that originally created the policy of terrorism, assassination and demonizing of Palestinians while hiding behind a facade of holocaust sympathy as though Israel were the victim for treachery they perpetrate.  Since the mainstream media in the U.S. is 97.5% owned and controlled by Zionists -- see "Hidden Tyranny" -- many Americans believe the incessant media propaganda while U.S. troops die for the Zionist's "greater Israel" agenda in the Mid-East.
 
This history of Zionist deceit and treachery is now on the threshold of creating World War III.  This last weekend, both China and OPEC said they will convert their trade deficits to Euro's -- details at "Currency Crisis" -- just as Sadaam Hussein did before he was attacked.  But the Zionist mainstream media has blacked out this news to avoid a run on the banks with portents of collapse of the oil-backed U.S. dollar.  This is serious folks, but it is all part of Zionist plan to create a new order -- The North American Union -- out of economic crisis. 
 
Four U.S. aircraft carriers and attack ships are now off the coast of Iran with Israel likely to begin the attack, perhaps following a media ploy similar to the bogus Gulf of Tonkin incident used to justify entry into the Vietnam War.  Both China and Russia have major contracts with Iran for oil and the missiles could start flying.  But these Zionist and their neocon allies in Congress and the Pentagon are one-track in their agenda for global hegemony through control of oil to back a currency that is bankrupt due to bankrupt policies of creating war for profit and power.
.
This plot out of hell is being orchestrated during the darkest night of Winter Solstice while Americans are focused on bringing light and love to their families for Christmas.  Classic Zionist anti-Christ tactics to subvert the sacred with secular worship of the god of war.
 
For Christ's Sake, Keep the Faith - Love will Prevail,
- Christopher
 "When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and
love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time
they seem invincible but in the end, they always fall -- think of it, ALWAYS."
 -- "Mahatma" (Great Soul) Gandhi

 
--------- article follows:

World Net Daily Exclusive

Posted: December 15, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern

THE NEW WORLD DISORDER

North American Union leader says merger just crisis away

Leading intellectual force behind effort toward EU-style unity looks at future

By Jerome R. Corsi  - 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

American University Professor Robert Pastor

Robert Pastor, a leading intellectual force in the move to create an EU-style North American Community, told WND he believes a new 9/11 crisis could be the catalyst to merge the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

Pastor, a professor at American University, says that in such a case the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP -- launched in 2005 by the heads of the three countries at a summit in Waco, Texas  -- could be developed into a continental union, complete with a new currency, the amero, that would replace the U.S. dollar just as the euro has replaced the national currencies of Europe.

In May 2005, Pastor was co-chairman the Council on Foreign Relations task force that produced a report entitled "Toward a North American Community," which he has claimed is the blueprint behind the SSP declared by President Bush, Mexico's then=President Vicente Fox, and Canada's then-Prime Minister Paul Martin.

At American University in Washington, D.C., Pastor directs the Center for North American Studies where he teaches a course entitled "North America: A Union, A Community, or Just Three Nations?" As WND previously has reported, Pastor is on the board of the North American Forum on Integration, the NAFI, a non-profit organization that annually holds a mock trilateral parliament for 100 selected students drawn from 10 universities in the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

Pastor had published an interview in Spanish in the Oct. 24 issue of Poder y Negocios. He told the magazine crises can force decisions that otherwise would not be made.

"The 9/11 crisis made Canada and the United States redefine the protection of their borders," Pastor explained. "The debt crisis in Mexico forced the government to adapt a new economic model. The crises oblige the governments to make difficult decisions."

This was the first time WND had found a major intellectual leader behind the push to integrate North America suggesting that a crisis of 9-11 proportions might be just what was needed to advance the process toward establishing a North American Union and the amero. WND reached Pastor in his office at American University and conducted a telephone interview to make sure the Spanish publication accurately reflected his views.

He affirmed the Spanish interview represents his thinking.

"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."

Pastor noted, for example that "Europeans, facing the crisis of two World Wars, turned to the European Community as a means to prevent war and advance their economic interests."

"The United States turned to the Marshall Plan when faced with the crisis of Western Europe falling into the hands of communism," he said. "So, I'm not advocating, or encouraging, or wanting a crisis, I'm only saying that in order to take important initiatives, sometimes one manner in which this occurs is when there is a crisis to which leaders need to respond."

Pastor told WND he lamented that the leadership of the three North American countries is not positioned to make the type of tough decisions needed to advance a North American Community agenda.

In his interview with Poder y Negocios, he argued, "Canada has a minority government and Mexico will soon have a minority government that will be confronted with what amounts to an uprising that we hope will be peaceful. The United States has a lame duck president whose principle preoccupation is the war in Iraq and instability in the Middle East."

Pastor further told WND Mexico's Fox made a tactical mistake by laying out an overly ambitious agenda to integrate with the United States. "President Bush then took on the issue of illegal immigration, and it proved to be much more difficult than anticipated," he said. In the absence of strong North American leadership, is a crisis the way greater North American integration can be expected to happen?

"There are alternatives to a crisis for getting a major decision adopted by the president and by the congress," Pastor responded. "But what I am saying is that we lack the kind of North American leadership we need. Our founding fathers created a system of governance that was not designed to be efficient but was designed to protect freedom. Therefore, you created checks and balances that did protect freedom but also made it difficult to move forward on important issues."

Pastor was asked what North American leaders would need to do to move toward integration.

"We need to form a customs union to move North American integration to a new level," Pastor argued. "A customs union would eliminate rules of origin on the border and agree to a common external tariff. This would not be easy but not as difficult as NAFTA was, and it would lead to efficiencies in our economies and in the end contribute to a better standard of living for all parties."

Pastor also called for a North American Investment Fund to invest in Mexico's infrastructure.

"If we had a North American Investment Fund," Pastor explained, "over the long term, you would narrow the income gap between Mexico and the U.S."

WND previously reported Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, dropped his support for legislation (S. 3622) he introduced in the 109th Congress to create a North American Investment Fund after WND pointed out the proposed law would advance an important part of Pastor's agenda to create a North American Community.

Pastor was careful to distinguish that his proposals were designed to create a North American Community and that he never has proposed to create a North American Union as an EU-style regional government.

"What I am recommending is a series of functional steps that are more than incremental," Pastor admitted. "Each of the proposals I have laid out represent more than just small steps. But it doesn't represent a leap toward a North American Union, or even to some confederation of any kind. I don't think either is plausible, necessary, or even helpful to contemplate at this stage."

The idea seems to be to put new structures in place that change the look of the landscape. WND pointed out to Pastor that this step-by-step approach is the same approach taken to create the European Union. The memoirs of Jean Monnet, regarded as the architect of European unity, finally disclosed he had used a strategy of deceit, knowing his plan to form a European Union would never succeed if it were openly disclosed.

Pastor was asked if he thought a North American Union was a bad idea. "No," he replied. "I don't think a political union of North America is an inherently bad idea, nor do I think it is a good idea for North America right now. I teach a course at American University in which I look at the different options for political integration of North America, and I put the options before the students."

Then why is a North American Union a bad idea right now?

"The reason the political integration is not a good idea at this stage now, perhaps never, is because of people like yourself who immediately begin to fear that their sense of America could disappear," Pastor responded. "Somehow, if you're fearful that America's sovereignty will disappear, you won't even take small steps forward. You just get mired in the status quo. The problem is that the world is moving very rapidly, and you can't stay competitive if you don't move."

Pastor did not reject the idea that a North American Union could form, but only after further continental economic integration and the development of a North American Community in which people are able to think as citizens of North America.

Is China the winner in the NAFTA super-corridors being planned for North America?

"If you define trade in zero-sum terms, China may be the winner in the transportation corridors," Pastor conceded. "But even in zero-sum terms, consumers benefit from the increasing imports that give them more choice and give them more quality. In the final analysis, we are all consumers."

Pastor affirmed he favors globalism.

"I believe," he explained to WND, "that globalization is a net plus for the world economy, for the middle class, and for all people."

[That's the deception folks.  The greatest treachery is also foisted in the name of the greatest good.  Globalism without freedom of, by and for the Constitution of LOVE -- and love of the Constitution -- is just another name for tyranny. - CR]

More- http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53378

###

Related articles:  treason, hidden tyranny, Blood for Oil and Media Zionism.

For inspirational balance, read "The deepest mysteries of religion and spirituality"

--------- Two more articles on the "Amero" and "North American Union"
 

1st article, July 28, 2006
2nd article, Dec. 7, 2006
 


First article from From the David Icke website:
Friday, 28 July 2006

North American Union - "Don't Tell The People"
Politicians don't want the public to know until it's a done deal

From Texe Marrs
07-26-06

"There appears to be no evidence that the American people themselves
are even aware of the catastrophic events soon to overtake them."
-- Steve LeFemine, independent candidate for Congress

"Our worst fears confirmed! We are suffering a coup d,etat in America.
It is in the final stages of completion... ...the program to abrogate American Sovereignty.
May God have mercy on America."
-- Lawrence Patterson, Criminal Politics (May-June 2006)

The evidence is overwhelming. There is absolutely a wicked and devastating plot and conspiracy to overthrow America. The traitors are now confident they will soon wash over 225 years of American tradition and history down a sinkhole. If their foul plan suceeds, the vision we as patriots once had of a strong, prosperous nation of liberty, freedom and prosperity will soon vanish beneath a cavernous cesspool of forgotten dreams.

(left)This is the Council on Foreign Relations document requiring President Bush and the U.S. Congress to dissolve the United States as an independent nation and allow Mexican illegal aliens free access to America's land and resources.

The CFR has even published its despicable plan in a book, entitled Building A North American Community. Authored by three elite members of the New York-based organization, the book calls for the ending of American sovereignty and the overthrow of the American Constitution and government.

Over the years I have personally withstood a torrent of abuse and ridicule over my assertion that a small clique of traitorously evil men and women were plotting to bring down the walls of history. Still, I soldiered on, enduring the cruel arrows of ignorant and malicious critics. I refused to play along and keep quiet, and I have done my best to expose their heinous plot to shutdown the fabled American experiment in freedom and self-government.

Among the evil culprits I fingered over the years were such anti-American globalist groups as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Bilderbergs. All play important roles in the on-going conspiracy. But behind them all is the satanic influence and power of Zionists (Jews). Zionist Jews, in fact, are the real, but, so often, unheralded authors of the globalist plot.

Stepping Out Of the Shadows

Now, finally, this traitorous clique of elitists has stepped out of the shadows into the light. No longer need they fear public disapproval. So effective has been their psychological brainwashing campaign and their dumbing down of the citizenry, the arrogant plotters believe they can finally come out and defiantly show themselves. Evidently, they think that no one is able to stop or even delay their bold plot to murder "yes, murder" America.

 The CFR's membership of 4,275 conspirators, backed by the organization's predominantly Zionist Jew leadership, demands that, by the year 2010, America as we once knew it will no longer exist. By that date, the Illuminati intends that the following be achieved:

 (1) A new currency, called the Amero, replace the dollar.

 (2) All borders between Mexico, the U.S.A., and Canada be erased and the Border Patrol retired.

 (3) A North American Parliament Group, composed of Mexican politicians and U.S. quislings, take over legislative authority, superseding our own Senate and House.

(4) A North American Judicial Council, or Tribunal, take over the judicial function and demote the U.S. Supreme Court to an advisory only role.

(5) A joint Executive Authority be set up, possibly with its capitol in Mexico City or Toronto, to dictate to U.S. citizens the terms of surrender.

(6) The 106 million citizens of Mexico be given full rights by the defunct U.S.A. and be allowed to enter our territory, re-conquer and seize whatever lands and property they wish within the once sovereign U.S.A.

(7) The Bill of Rights be abolished and a new North American "Declaration of Rights" be drawn up. It will comprise a shrunken list of abridged, government granted privileges more suitable to the changed times.

(8) Over 100 million Mexicans living South of the Border, plus 20 million more Mexicans now residing illegally in the U.S.A., will be awarded full social security and medicare benefits and have full job, voting and other rights granted to them. American taxpayers will foot the bill.

(9) Mexican workers will be given affirmative action and preferential job quotas. Millions of Anglo-Americans will lose their jobs.

(10) Hispanic-owned corporations will be favored with government grants and contracts. The economies of Mexico, the former U.S.A., and Canada will be totally merged and a 4-football fields wide NAFTA super highway is already being built. Thousands of air-polluting Mexican trucks and vehicles will rumble up I-35 and disperse to the various states.

(11) The 50 existing American states will be formally dissolved and the former U.S.A. will be divided into ten weakened administrative regions. Some will have Mexican leaders appointed over the local, formerly American citizens.

(12) Spanish and English will both be recognized as joint official languages. Mexican textbooks critical of United States history and disrespectful of American "gringo" traditions will be required in all North American schools.

(13) The North American Union will join the European Community and the ASEAN (Asian) Union as the three major subdivisions of the planned global governance system, as envisioned by Rockefeller's Trilateral Commission.

Bush, Mexico's President Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Martin relax and chat just after signing a new, CFR-prepared pact designed to dissolve the United States as a separate and independent nation. President Bush and congressional leaders are now pushing for amnesty and full citizenship for all Mexican illegals in the U.S.A. That is only one of scores of changes that must take place by the year 2010, according to theCFR agenda.

This is Nothing Short of Treason!

As shocking as the CFR plot is, equally upsetting is that President George Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin met in Waco, Texas, March 23, 2005, and signed a secret pact called the Security and Prosperity Partnership. That pact, prepared by CFR and Bilderberg administrators, sets forth step-by-step what each nation must do to insure the new, merged slave "nation," the North American Union, is fully operational by the year 2010.

Forget about the fact that the U.S. Consitution requires the President to submit treaties such as this to the Senate for a vote. Imperial dictator Bush knows that no U.S. Senator dare utter one word of protest against the CFR Plot. That would be the kiss of death for his or her senatorial career.

Masonic handshake: Mexican President Vicente Fox shares a Masonic handshake with Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin as U.S. President George Bush looks on. The three met in Waco, Texas in 2005 and jointly signed a pact requiring the United States to be dismantled as an independent nation and integrated into a CFR-planned North American Union.

 Having disposed of American sovereignty, the "New World Order" forged by Bush and Gorbachev in the 80s and cemented by traitorous Clinton-Bush, Democrat-Republican alliances will finally become a reality. The fly in the ointment, of course, will be the small contingent of true American patriots that remain. This is why the Bush Administration recently gave Halliburton a $385 million contract to build new detention camps. It is also why NSA computers have all our names tagged in its "dissident" database list. If necessary, they will get rid of us "permanently.?

American military forces will enforce the New World Order. Mexican and other foreign officers will no doubt be given high military commands to guard against mutiny by angry U.S. soldiers.

A few rogue nations "Venezuela, Cuba, etc."must be dealt with. The hapless Islamic masses will not be a major problem. They are to be enslaved and/or killed off, just as is happening now in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their oil resources will be expropriated.

The Zionist Connection: The CFR is Dominated by Jews

The Zionist Connection is the sinewy thread that ties this entire, vast, traitorous enterprise together. The Bush Administration is only a puppet operation. The Council on Foreign Relations has among its leading members such Zionist fanatics and servants as Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condi Rice, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. In all, over seventy percent of the membership of the CFR is Jewish!

Also on the CFR's rolls: Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve; Robert Rubin, Clinton's former Secretary of the Treasury; and Madleine Albright, Clinton's former Secretary of State. Every one of these persons is a Jew and a Zionist Agent. Their first allegiance is to the Jewish World Authority.

Here are some other top Jewish names that dominate the CFR. Indeed, the CFR is nothing more than America's premier Zionist Secret Society, a traitorous front for global Jewish interests and headquarters for the furtherance of the Zionist plot for a global Jewish Utopia: Carla Hills, Henry Bienen, Kenneth Duberstein, Martin Feldman, Richard Salomon, Bart Friedman, Maurice Greenberg, Morton Janklow, Ira Lipman, Seymour Sternberg, Frank Wisner, Michael Moscow, Roger Altman, Jessica Einhorn, David Greenberg, Louis Perlmutter, Joshua Steiner, Anita Wien, Douglas Schoen, Malcolm Weiner, Charles Schumer, Nancy Soderberg, Peter Tannoff, Abraham Lowenthal, Marc Thiessen, Daniel Yergin, Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, Carl Gershman, Peter Rosenblatt, Joseph Lieberman, Mortimer Zuckerman.

All of those listed are CFR Jews. All are globalists. As CFR conspirators and associates, all, in my opinion, are deceitful traitors, guilty of treason, enemies of the Constitution of the United States of America. They deserve to be arrested, indicted, and, if found guilty by a jury of 12 honest American Patriots, sent to prison or executed.

The Trap Has Been Set

Dear friends, the trap has been set. The media are not on our side. Neither are the leaders of the Christian religious establishment. They are owned by Jewish Wall Street corporation interests. Neither can we count on either of the two major political parties to rescue us. The Congress and the State Capital delegations are packed with CFR traitors who have already sold out the American Republic for a pot of porridge. Today in America, we have the best politicians and clergy that money can buy!

Please, I encourage you: Call today and order the audiotape/CD special report I have just released revealing the facts you need to know to understand and survive the horrible crisis now facing us all: The Murder of America-The Council on Foreign Relations Plot to Dissolve the United States and Establish a North American Union (Available in 2-Audiotape Set or 2-CD Set).

Be aware of the facts, and remember, though the storm clouds gather and the twilight hour is at hand, there is One who is able to lift us up and bring the Adversary to heel. We can cast out fear and face the future with zest and confidence. Jesus, you may recall, said it simply and powerfully: "Only believe."

http://texemarrs.com/murder_of_america.htm

 


2nd article forwarded from Ed [mailto:highv@pbtcomm.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:52 AM
Subject: FW: WILL THE NORTH AMERICAN UNION BE AMERICAN PATRIOTS' LAST STAND?
This is long and complicated but you better read it. The American People had better start caring as the federal government, including Congress doesn't give a shit about this country or the people in it. Get off thy asses and start to let the Congress that you are against the selling and giving away of this country our fathers (and mothers) died to preserve. If you don't give a crap about yourself, at least think of your children and grandchildren. - Ed
WILL THE NORTH AMERICAN UNION BE AMERICAN PATRIOTS' LAST STAND?
Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
December 7, 2006 ;  NewsWithViews.com
http://newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin49.htm

 
No one who peruses even the Establishment's pet media, let alone alternative sources of information, can remain unaware of the political maneuvers now on-going in aid of creating a so-called "North American Union" composed of the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Yet notwithstanding this publicity, conspicuous by its absence has been a detailed answer to the question: Exactly where in the Constitution lurks any power for the General Government, or the States, or both together, somehow to "merge" the United States, Canada, and Mexico into a single super-national entity?
To answer this question requires reversion to fundamental principles.
First, as its very title attests, the purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to claim and to justify Americans' national independence. Not, however, simply as a matter of fact, but also and especially as a matter of law. The Declaration came into being when "it [became] necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them." And the Declaration asserted "That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; * * * and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do." For Americans "to dissolve * * * political bonds" and "to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them" were not simply historical events with no moral or legal components, but acts that invoked and relied upon the highest legal authority, and entailed profound legal consequences.

Second, WE THE PEOPLE who composed the "Free and Independent States" then entered into the Constitution, not to repudiate or relegate to the dustbin of history either the fact of national independence that the Declaration announced or the principles of law that the Declaration embodied, but (as the Preamble to the Constitution states) in order "to form a more perfect Union" amongst themselves. That is, to secure the fact of independence and make the principles upon which it rested even more effective in practice than they had been theretofore.

Third, the legitimacy of the Constitution depends upon the Declaration of Independence; and therefore the Constitution's powers cannot contradict the Declaration's principles. For, were the Declaration not an actual law both prior in time and superior in authority to the Constitution, and the source of WE THE PEOPLE'S authority to enact the Constitution, the Constitution itself would not be valid. After all, before they could enact their own laws, binding on anyone, including themselves, Americans had to win legal independence from Great Britain. They secured that independence only under the aegis of the Declaration. Therefore, they could enact only such subsequent laws as were entirely consistent with the principles the Declaration set forth.  

Fourth, the "more perfect Union" of the Constitution in no way rejected the sovereign status of "the several States" incorporated within the Constitution's federal system. Rather, it modified that status only insofar as WE THE PEOPLE, through the Constitution, explicitly limited some of the powers of the States in ways favorable to the Union. (In particular, see Article Article I, Section 10, Clauses 1 through 3, and Article VI, Clause 2.) And out of the limitations on the sovereignties of the States, the Constitution created a sovereign status for the Union as a whole among the nations of the world. (In particular, see Article I, Section 8, Clauses 3, 4, 11, 12, and 13; Article I, Section 9, Clause 8; Article I, Section 10, Clauses 1 and 3; and Article II, Section 2, Clause 2.)

Thus, the Constitution was not a repudiation of national independence, but a transferral of some of the powers of "Free and Independent States" from the individual States to the "more perfect Union" of them all, and thereby a perfection of national independence. For it enabled all of the States together to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty" in ways more effective than any of the States could have put into operation individually.

Fifth, although in theory wholly "FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES" could merge with foreign states, in practice under the Constitution this is not possible. Perforce of the Constitution, WE THE PEOPLE have caused the States to surrender their primordial ability to do so, and have delegated no competence to the General Government in that particular.
(a) The most basic rule of constitutional interpretation is that the States retain all of their original sovereign powers that the Constitution does not take away from them. Conversely, the General Government can exercise only those powers that the Constitution delegates to it. And "[p]owers not granted are prohibited." United States v. Butler, 297 U.S 1, 68 (1936).
(b) The Constitution provides that [n]ew States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1. Thus, the Constitution withdraws from the States the powers they originally enjoyed to divide or to consolidate themselves solely on their own initiatives. And the Constitution denies to the Union any power to split up or to merge the States, in whole or in part, solely on its own initiative.
(c) The Constitution says nothing about the States' merging on their own initiatives with foreign nations to form some new super-national entity. As practical matter, however, any such merger would require some form of legally binding agreement between at least one State, on the one hand, and one foreign nation, on the other. And the Constitution does provide that "[n]o State shall, without the Consent of Congress, * * * enter into any Agreement or Compact * * * with a foreign Power." Article I, Section 10, Clause 3.
Moreover, "any Agreement or Compact * * * with a foreign Power" aimed specifically at creating a new super-national entity could not be constitutional. For the States are required to treat the Constitution as "the supreme Law of the Land". Article VI, Clause 2. And State officials "shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution." Article VI, Clause 3. "[A]ny Agreement or Compact * * * with a foreign Power" to form a new super-national entity, however, would have to absolve State officers from their "Oath[s] or Affirmation[s], to support this Constitution" as "the supreme Law of Land," because the new entity would necessarily be subject to some law other than and to the exclusion of the Constitution. But for State officials to enter into such an "Agreement or Compact" would itself violate their "Oath[s] or Affirmation[s]," and therefore be illegal from its inception.

To be sure, "all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States" become part of "the supreme Law of the Land." Article VI, Clause 2. Arguably, a State's "Agreement or Compact * * * with a foreign Power" is not a "Treat[y]." Even if it were, "a treaty cannot change the Constitution or be held valid if it be in violation of the Constitution." The Cherokee Tobacco, 78 U.S. (11 Wallace) 616, 620 (1871). And surely an "Agreement or Compact" of less legal status than a "treaty" cannot do so, either. So no such "Agreement or Compact" can absolve a State, or its officials, from their "Oath[s] or Affirmation[s], to support this Constitution." And to the extent it purports to do so, it is unconstitutional, and therefore cannot be given any legal effect by any State or any State officials.

That the Constitution allows Congress to give its "Consent" to a State's "Agreement or Compact * * * with a foreign Power" does not change this result. For Congress's "Consent" cannot enlarge Congress's own constitutional powers, or diminish its constitutional disabilities. The only power of Congress relevant to possible "merger" of foreign nations with the United States is the power to admit new States to the Union. Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1. The Constitution delegates no power to Congress to license any State?let alone all of them?to leave the Union and be incorporated into some other super-national entity. And "[p]owers not granted are prohibited."

Furthermore, Congress cannot extend its "Consent" to a violation of the Constitution by the States or their officials. So Congress cannot give its "Consent" to any purported "Agreement or Compact" for a State to merge "with a foreign Power," because that would amount to "Consent" for that State to set aside the Constitution and for her officials to violate their "Oath[s] or Affirmation[s], to support this Conitution."

Similarly, Members of Congress themselves must respect the Constitution as "the supreme Law of the Land," and are "bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution." Article VI, Clauses 2 and 3. So Congressmen cannot possibly give "Consent" to any purported "Agreement or Compact" for a State to merge "with a foreign Power," because that would contradict "the supreme Law of Land" by enabling them to subject part or even all of the United States to the laws of some new super-national entity, to the exclusion of the Constitution.
(d) On its own initiative, Congress could "merge" Canada, Mexico, and the United States by admitting Canada and Mexico as two or more new States pursuant to Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1 of the Constitution (quoted above). But that is not what is being proposed for the North American Union. Under the plan now being stealthily put into operation, Canada and Mexico are not to be incorporated as new States within the United States, subject to her Constitution, but along with the United States are to be restructured into some new Northern-Hemispheric superstate subject to some supra-constitutional legal system. The Constitution delegates no such power to Congress. And "[p]owers not granted are prohibited."
 
(e) The President does have the "Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur." Article II, Section 2, Clause 2. But this would hardly serve for creating some new super-national entity from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. "A treaty is, in its nature, a contract between two nations," or "a compact between independent nations." Foster v. Neilson, 27 U.S. (2 Peters) 253, 314 (1829); Head Money Cases, 112 U.S. 580, 598 (1884). Therefore, a mere "treaty" cannot merge two or more independent nations into one, because that would be to dissolve the independence of at least one of them.
Moreover, even if a "treaty" could in some sense "merge" the United States, Canada, and Mexico, Congress always could override and nullify it by subsequent legislation. "Congress by legislation, and so far as the people and authorities of the United States are concerned, [can] abrogate a treaty made between this country and another country which has been negotiated by the President and approved by the Senate." La Abra Silver Mining Co. V. United States, 175 U.S. 423, 460 (1899). And if the "treaty" purported to deny Congress this constitutional authority (or any other authority, for that matter), it would be unconstitutional. For "a treaty cannot change the Constitution or be held valid if it be in violation of the Constitution." The Cherokee Tobacco, 78 U.S. (11 Wallace) 616, 620 (1871). So the purported "merger" would constitute, not a true "union" at all, but at most some sort of loose association for mutual cooperation, with inherent impermanence because of the possibility of its dissolution by Congress at any time. Which, one must presume, is not what the proponents of the North American Union have in mind.
(f) It appears that the foundations of the North American Union are now being poured out of various international trade deals, economic arrangements, agreements among regulatory bureaucrats, and faits accomplis (such as the superhighway being constructed from Mexico through the very center of America's heartland, and eventually to continue into Canada), all of them with "commercial" character (as befits a scheme designed by, and intended to serve the special interests of, international big business and high finance). Although these machinations are taking place primarily among executive officials in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, at some point the North American Union will need at least colorable support from Congressional legislation. And Congress does have the power "[t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." Article I, Section 8, Clause 3.
The power "[t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations," however, self-evidently presumes the permanent existences as independent nations of the entities involved in the "Commerce." So any North American Union could never be the result of "regulat[ing] Commerce with foreign Nations," because a "merger" of the United States, Canada, and Mexico into one super-national entity would destroy and thereafter render impossible "Commerce with foreign Nations" between the United States and those two "foreign Nations," which with respect to the United States would no longer be "foreign Nations" at all. And if, pursuant to the "merger," Canada and Mexico were not constitutionally transformed into States within the United States, or somehow fancifully equated with "Indian Tribes," no rational basis could possibly exist for saying that the North American Union was justified under the Commerce Power.
(g) Although the Constitution can be amended, it is difficult to imagine how any amendment could provide for the "more perfect Union" to "merge" into some other, super-national entity. After all, a new super-national entity distict from the United States (that is, where Canada and Mexico were not simply admitted as one or more new States) would have to operate under a charter of government decidedly different from the Constitution. So the putative "amendment" would actually have to supersede the Constitution in its entirety, in the same way that the Constitution superseded the Articles of Confederation.
Even if such an "amendment" could be drafted, it would nevertheless have to satisfy the standards of the Declaration of Independence, because the power of amendment is a constitutional power and therefore subject to the selfsame principles of the "higher law" that governs all constitutional powers. Among those principles are the following: The insurmountable practical problem for any "merger" of the United States, Canada, and Mexico into a North American Union by means of a putative "amendment" of the Constitution is that neither Canada nor Mexico satisfies the standards of the Declaration of Independence, by a long shot. And therefore no North American Union that simply incorporated those two countries, fundamentally unchanged, could meet the Declaration's standards, either.
(h) Therefore, the only way to create a North American Union that could absorb Canada and Mexico without radically reforming their regimes would be to repeal the Declaration of Independence, repudiate the principles on which it stands, and replace them with some new set of contradictory principles consistent with the way political business is carried on in Canada and Mexico. This could not be accomplished simply by an "amendment" of the Constitution, because the power of amendment in Article V is to "propose Amendments to this Constitution," not amendments to or replacements for the Declaration of Independence. Instead, it would be necessary to adopt a new Northern-Hemisperic "Declaration of Interdependence" that reduced the United States morally, as well as politically, to the level of Canada and Mexico.
Little imagination is necessary to posit what the noxious principles of such a "Declaration of Interdependence" would have to be: Can the Establishment convince Americans to repudiate the principles of the Declaration of Independence, and to substitute for them the grotesque counter-principles of a Northern-Hemispheric totalitarian state? Probably not, if the matter were openly and honestly presented in that way. Which means that the matter will be presented in some other way. Most likely, the Establishment's minions will simply skirt the question entirely, claiming that some combination of "statutes," "treaties," "executive orders," and "executive agreements" will suffice to create the North American Union.

In sum, NO constitutional grounds for a North American Union exist. Indeed, the whole project is patently illegal. That fact, however, will prove to be of merely theoretical significance unless WE THE PEOPLE oppose the creation of a North American Union with every form of exposure, denunciation, protest, obstruction, and resistance that the Constitution permits. And as soon as possible. For all the evidence indicates that the Establishment considers the North American Union a top priority, its foundations at the least to be poured into place with the next few years.  

To prevail in the coming struggle to preserve America, however, patriots must first overcome the centrifugal tendencies that have all too often rendered them ineffective on other fronts by enabling the Establishment successfully to concentrate its forces and to employ divide-and-conquer tactics.  

Revitalizing "the Militia of the several States" could provide the necessary focal point for the political zeal, skills, and experiences of many patriotic groups now engaged in isolated, mutually unsupportive activities. Perhaps other projects could also serve the same unifying, directing, and (most importantly) empowering purpose. In any event, the time for patriots to stop working in isolation, and instead to engage in coordinated, concerted action is as close at hand as it is short. If America is not saved soon, there will soon be nothing left of her to save.

Copyright, 2006 Edwin Vieira, Jr. - All Rights Reserved

 
Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).

For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their employment.

He has written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals, and lectured throughout the county. His most recent work on money and banking is the two-volume Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2002), the most comprehensive study in existence of American monetary law and history viewed from a constitutional perspective. www.piecesofeight.us

He is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an engineered crash of the Federal Reserve System, and the political upheaval it causes. www.crashmaker.com

His latest book is: "How To Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary"

He can be reached at:
13877 Napa Drive
Manassas, Virginia 20112.
E-Mail: Not available