1) I haven’t seen any of this silly NAU business outside of FR and WND, so I am highly skeptical it exists outside of a possible NAFTA-style trade agreement with a mini-NATO thrown in on the side.
2) Even if it were true, I don’t see that happening without a war happening, and a short one at that. As if the US military and the rest of the people would stand by when they woke up one morning and the president was all “No more Constitution, LOL”. That’s just silly. :p
How much Internet reading do you do outside of FR? Have you ever Googled “North American Union” (998,000 hits) or “North American Community”? (76,900 hits) (with the quotations marks)
Here is an August Review report.
http://www.augustreview.com/issues/regionalization/toward_a_north_american_union_200608181/
You do understand what NAFTA is. Good! What you don't understand is how large it is intended to grow. Have you ever read this before;
** For more discussion concerning the delicate balance between Community-wide regulation and national sovereignty struck by Community measures, see reference 35.
This short review of the European experience has suggested by analogy the broad outlines of a future North American Social Policy. The European Community, a much more mature regional zone, makes use of several institutions that have neither been contemplated nor included in the text of NAFTA. Policy makers in Canada, the us, and Mexico might consider adding some of the legislative and judicial institutions used to promote European integration to those measures, primarily the activities of the North American Labor Commission, already established by text of NAFTA and its side agreements.
The movement to harmonize workplace health and safety laws and regulations as demonstrated by the recent EC Action Programme is a necessary first step towards building this North American Social Policy. This measure would help North America develop a level playing field on the continental level, free from distortions created by differing social conditions such as labor costs, regulatory structures, and trade union organization. The side agreements on Labor Cooperation place national laws and standards outside of the bounds of NAFTA, relying on the expression of general principles in Annex I to the Labor Agreement to guide the implementation of labor standards in all three countries. The lack of harmonized regulations will hinder any administrative efforts to determine whether one nation is guilty of undercutting the efforts of another by providing a laxer regulatory environment in the workplace. The NAFTA nations should adopt a framework of legislative instruments similar to those used by the EC to harmonize regulatory norms at the continental level.
The enforcement of a group of regional laws, norms, and regulations, would require the functions of a North American Court of Justice. The Arbitral Panels of the Agreement on Labor Cooperation fall far short of the judicial authority granted to the European Court of Justice. Though these panels theoretically have the right to impose economic and trade sanctions against infractors, they do little to establish the relation of national law to those regional interests that will be created by increased trade and investment relations at the continental level. Without reliable North American laws, a court system with the authority to enforce such standards, and a judicial philosophy such as the doctrine of community pre-emption to guide the development of continental law, the dream of an even playing field in North America driven by closer ties of integration will remain only partially fulfilled.
Most importantly, the leaders and citizens of North America must recognize the value of a social agenda to the development of free trade. Concerns over "social dumping" in Europe have produced a more profound social integration, while, in North America, fears of industrial flight and the export of hazardous industries to Mexico threaten to cut short the life of NAFTA and the project for North American regional integration contemplated in its clauses. The success of NAFTA will depend upon our acknowledgment of the lessons suggested by the European experience and our willingness to apply these lessons to the development of an integrated North American social agenda.
This is the NAU that they're talking about! Yes, VOL.36, No.6, "the development of an integrated North American social agenda." This is what they were talking about back in 1994. Today, this isn't just about trade. This has to do with how the future workers are educated, housed, ajudicated, medicated, you name it and that damn agreement has it in there somewhere.
What is not included in there is a single word about individual liberty or private property rights or the peoples control over their government or Israel. There is lots in there about trade, which is what they intended for you and me to believe it was all about.
What does this have to do with Israel? As I said, when the US budget no longer includes help for Israel that's when the SHTF.