Here is an email reply I sent to someone about the NAU.

Thanks for the link. I don't remember now if I've heard that interview, but I know about Corsi and what he says and thinks. I think he's wrong. (and I question him, his agenda, and his intent)

As an example, on the page you link to, it states, "the current efforts by President George W. Bush to merge the United States with Canada and Mexico into a regional, trilateral government called The North American Union."

That is basically an out-and-out lie. If you wanted to be nice about it, you could say it is misinformation; if you wanted to be paranoid, you could say it's disinformation.

But it is a gross misrepresentation and fallacious interpretation of what the NAU is, to the point where it is a simple falsity.

The NAU is an economic union — nothing more, nothing less. Similar to the EU. And just like you would be wrong to say, or characterize, the EU as "one government", where each member country has lost its sovereignty, so would you be absolutely incorrect in doing the same with the NAU.

Also, the NAU will be created (if it's created) via an economic treaty, which is not law. At least, not U.S. law. It's kind of International Law. But the U.S. doesn't recognize the International Court. We barely recognize the United Nations. And just like we break other treaties at the drop of a hat, in part, or in full, economic, or otherwise, whenever we feel like it, we could do the exact same thing with the NAU if we wanted to after it was passed.

So I'm not worried. I think the NAU is just as bad as GATT, NAFTA, the WTO, etc., and I don't want it. But I also see it for what it really is, and think people should not misrepresent it as something it is not.

And I think that the American people either will not allow the NAU to pass, or will freak out so bad about it after the fact, that it would end up being thrown out. (especially if they tried to make people switch to an "amero" — you don't mess with the American dollar — they found that out back when they wanted to start printing our money in color like some (most?) other countries, and the American people freaked and that stopped that real quick)

Of course, I still have some hope and faith in the American people.

And I'm always open to the possibility that I am wrong, and continue to watch the NAU thing along with all the rest, reading about it and what people say about it, etc. Just in case.

I suppose I would be interested if you could logically argue about what I say above with facts and evidence and the like, but I really don't think you can.

Imo, the NAU, just like some of the other similar stuff some people freak about, is used for fear-mongering, just like the gubmint does their fear-mongering against the American populace (and the world at large) the way they do it and what they do it with. And it's all wrong.

And ftr here is the link they sent me: (and, no, they could not respond to my points in kind)

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/Interview_Corsi.html

I also made the following post reply to an NAU blog post which for some inexplicable reason was not published. (neither was another) What's that all about? (the bold parts of the five items I show were the only sections that the post showed, which I think is misinformation and disinformation)

Subject: You people are like Prader-Willi's of Paranoia

It's a freaking economic treaty, like NAFTA and GATT!!!

Nothing more, nothing less.

How about a little Truth in Advertising: (or can you not handle that?)

(from http://www.ceocouncil.ca/publications/pdf/716af13644402901250657d4c418a12e/presentations_2003_01_01.pdf)

The North American Security and Prosperity Initiative (NASPI)*
launched in January 2003 by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives
calls for action on five fronts:

• Reinventing borders by eliminating as many as possible of the
barriers to the movement of people and goods across the internal
border and by shifting the emphasis to protection of the approaches
to North America;

• Maximizing economic efficiencies, primarily through
harmonization or mutual recognition across a wide range of
regulatory regimes;

• Negotiation of a comprehensive resource security pact,
covering agriculture and forest products as well as energy, metals
and minerals, based on the two core principles of open markets and
regulatory compatibility;

Reinvigorating the North American defense alliance (???)
• Rebuilding Canada's military capability both to defend our own
territory and to do our share in ensuring continental and global
security; and

• Creating a new institutional framework based not on the
European model but on cooperation with mutual respect for
sovereignty, perhaps using joint commission models to foster coordination
and to prevent and resolve conflicts.

Jeezuz Gawd you people are seriously starting to lose it big time.

(and, no, I don't want it, or think we need it, and I don't think it's going to happen anyway, except maybe in some limited form, and then, like most treaties, we (the U.S.) will break parts of it any time we damn well please)