Replies

NOTHING in this document suggest making Mexico a US territory

DING DING DING

There is only ONE Constitutional option and that is to allow the Mexican people to VOTE to become a US territory. The CFR does not take the CONSTITUTIONAL option for merging the two countries. You have made my point for me! Thank you!

I'm sorry hedgetrimmer, but I'm not following this line of thought.

If, as we agree, the goal is to merge/meld the three individual, sovereign, countries into one entity which has no separate soveregnty, that is already against the US Constitution. The entity now known as the "North American Union" (NAU) certainly does not and will not be bound by the United States Constitution. That document is being thrown overboard.

By the time the "melding" is complete, or nearly so, the United States Constitution would have already been trampled. What would be the point to "revive" the U.S. Constitution and proceed with such a farce of actually looking to it as at that juncture? The US Constitution will have already been laid by the wayside, as it does not now control either Canada or Mexico.

Just wanted to say thanks for including me in this conversation. Unfortunately, now that I am not falling down tired, and therefore have the potential to be more articulate...I have to do real work.

I will continue to follow this thread, but didn't want to seem to be abandoning my position that the original story is a bit tinfoily and overly alarmist. It is only that I do not currently have the time to pursue this with due diligence and therefore would not contribute effectively to the discussion therein.

I hope to participate again on this topic at some future date. Of course, if you can figure out a way to make money by Freeping...; )

I hope you have a terrific day.

"There is only ONE Constitutional option and that is to allow the Mexican people to VOTE to become a US territory. The CFR does not take the CONSTITUTIONAL option for merging the two countries. You have made my point for me! Thank you!"

Actually, you continue to make my point for me. After a SINGLE post from you in which you actually did what you claimed you wanted to do over 700 posts ago, you run through the first paragraph of a 70 page document, and then start making claims the document doesn't even talk about (as evidenced by your lack of annotation or reference to them which you managed to do in your first few comments in your post). So in good faith, I respond to your post, point by point. Agreeing and disagreeing and using nothing by data from the document to back my positions. And after all that, your response is to comment on your fantasy and unsupported belief that the CFR document advocates absorbing Mexico as a US territory? Of course CFR doesn't have a "Constitutional option" in their document concerning Mexico. It also doesn't have an option for declaring the world flat, for dealing with visitors from Mars, or for regulating how men walk on water. None of those things are discussed in the document, and neither is your phony Mexico territory issue.

Again...you still haven't read the whole document, have you. I guess I'm glad you at least read the first page. It's a start.