[Ben Ficklin]

I've read all that. I am well informed on the cons and I am well informed on the pros. I am certain that I know more about cons than you do about the pros. There are a number of documents on the internet that show the points of contention side by side. The Congressional Research Service's Issue Brief written for Congress is one.

While Phyllis Schlafly may be anti, her opinion is irrelevant in comparison to the admirals/pentagon's support. Gaffney's opposition is nothing compared to the US intelligence agencies' support. The sheer number and credibility of those supporting overwhelms the anti group, who can be characterized as reincarnated Birchers and Dixiecrats plus senile old-timers with a 30-50 year old worldview.

[processing please hold]

Ahh, you’re a one worlder, Ben, I understand now.

[Czar]

Nice try, Ben, but as usual you are putting all your faith in the wrong places. And, predictably, you again come down on the side of the NWO/NAU traitors.

The problem any loyal American conservative would have with your sources is that they are either federal government (could we possibly trust them any less) or others who think the UN is just fine and national sovereignty along with the rest of the Constitution is outmoded and should be discarded. And I'll take Gaffney any day over your other Washington heroes.

Travis has a particularly appropriate word for people who line up on your side of this and similar issues. A harsh word, perhaps, but quite accurate.

You're nothing if not consistent.