You did mention logical fallacies, so I'll add a comment about them here. I've given you three or four admitted results of the SPP agreement, that are not evidence of "conspiracy to form the NAU" (unless you argue otherwise--I'm waiting). That is standard rhetorical procedure when engaged in a logical argument. Just what exactly are you waiting for . . . you cannot shrug them off as my "opinion." So if you want a logical argument, get on with one.
The fact that I've not only done so, but gone way beyond doing so, speaks volumes about your dishonesty.
The fact that you CONTINUE to post NOTHING but your empty opinions, the fact that you continue to post NOTHING but sweeping and broad generalizations about a post which took HOURS to put together and contains my opinions, supported by cites and links to documents evidencing, with specificity, how my conclusions and connections were made, from and between each document, speaks to YOUR: 1) inability to COMPREHEND anything past 2nd grade reading ability; or, more likely 2) you're a paid shill whose job it is to do nothing but post empty, unsupported opinions for the sole purpose of discrediting the fact that this government intends, incrementally, to put into place the blueprint laid out by the Council on Foreign Relations: forming an NAU.