North American Union to Replace USA?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can you say, "Only a chump would defend corruption in a congressman -- and then complain about how the government was run?"
Click to expand...
He might be suggesting that a lot of them never get investigated at all, because they play along and don't make waves.
 
Vern,

You're getting tired and repeating yourself.

And, yes, $100K is chump change for the Feds. I just came from a part of
the world where "we" were wrapping 10 times that in saranwrap and putting
it in filing cabinets, not to mention "misplacing" scores of expensive SUVs
that turned out were just parked in a different lot inside the same "zone"
gathering another inch of sand while members of the Hill, DoD. etc. wondered
where they were......;)
 
So you approve of Congressmen taking bribes, as long as it's only $100K?

Question: How many $100K bribes does a Congressman have to take before it's no longer "chump change?"
 
Roger that, Waitone. But, as everyone can hopefully see, the object of
the antagonist was to divert discussion of the NAU and the process that
backs it within our country.....

So you approve of Congressmen taking bribes, as long as it's only $100K?
Click to expand...

What's next? A question about when I stopped beating my wife? :rolleyes:
 
"It won't happen at all -- this is spin, and untrue. But the Democrats -- who WILL sell our soverignty -- would love to have you believe it."




It's puzzling. The articles quoted are from right winger Phyllis Schlafly and the Far, Far Right's hate-spewing Jerome Corsi, yet people smell those insidious Democrats underneath it all. Are Hill and Billary hiding under every bed?
 
gc70,

The holes are written in plain english, on their website you cited, on the opening page. It really has nothing to do with my level of expertise in actually conducting audits.

Having some other private corporations overseeing it within their limted scope inspires no confidence. Having spent a good deal of time working for some large corporations with some government overlap, I have seen this public-private interface firsthand.

And the bottom line is this; Congress had no assigned power to delegate such a task to a private bank in the first place. Mixing the public purse with the interests of a private bank was a crime - and has assured our economic slavery. As in the 1930s, we will be seeing the fruits of this folly which are just over the horizon.

---------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
 
Here is PriceWaterhouseCoopers' report on its 2005 audit of the Federal Reserve, which clearly answers (and refutes) the question of "Why has there never been an audit of the "Federal" Reserve Bank?"

Maybe it is "Not very convincing to outsiders to audit your own stuff" if you are unaware that it is standard practice (particularly given the legal requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) for all large corporations to have independent internal auditors to watch the business fulltime.

Of course, the above means little "in light of the fact that this unconstitutional system has been in place since 1913." Unless someone can cite a supporting Supreme Court decision, that would be a personal opinion.
Click to expand...

Oh no you don't, buddy. It doesn't take nine government hand-picked lawyers to read the simple wording of the Constitution or interpret it accurately. It means what it reads. And it reads:

(Amendment 10) The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Now, since you think he's only stated a personal opinion with little or no weight vs. that of your hotshot elite champions in DC, tell me: where in the Constitution is it delegated?
 
gc70,

The holes are written in plain english, on their website you cited, on the opening page. It really has nothing to do with my level of expertise in actually conducting audits.

Having some other private corporations overseeing it within their limted scope inspires no confidence. Having spent a good deal of time working for some large corporations with some government overlap, I have seen this public-private interface firsthand.

And the bottom line is this; Congress had no assigned power to delegate such a task to a private bank in the first place. Mixing the public purse with the interests of a private bank was a crime - and has assured our economic slavery. As in the 1930s, we will be seeing the fruits of this folly which are just over the horizon.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't waste too much time, LAK. You're talking to someone who thinks the law is what the Supreme Court says it is. And maybe it was, once--before politics corrupted the Court. But not now, regardless of how blindly some sheep will worship its decisions and declare them "valid because they said so."
 
Phetro,

I do not contend that your interpretation of the Constitution is right or wrong. But, until a court rules that the Federal Reserve Act is unconstitutional, the government considers the Federal Reserve Banks to be legally valid and the government's view is backed by the enforcement powers of the government.
 
by LAK:
Rather selective to say the least, and a long way short of a complete audit.
Click to expand...
If the Federal Reserve had a "complete audit" of its transactions, it would ONLY involve individually inspecting:
  • Fedwire funds and securities transactions - over 150 million per year.
  • FedACH electronic funds transfers - over 6 billion per year.
  • Check clearing - over 12 billion per year.
Reviewing one transaction a minute, 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, and 52 weeks in the year would ONLY require 145,000 auditors. Maybe that's why the auditors use risk-based auditing and statistical sampling.
 
by LAK:
Interesting; and where can we all see how much actual gold is actually currently held?
Click to expand...
The gold that the Federal Reserve holds for the US government is clearly listed in the Fed's financial statements. As to gold held in safekeeping for other countries:
In addition to holding U.S. dollar-denominated assets, the New York Fed provides vault facilities to international official institutions for the deposit and safekeeping of gold, and releases gold upon request by a customer. The Bank keeps the identity of all account holders strictly confidential. The Bank charges account holders fees to move gold, either when transferring gold from one account to another or when releasing it to a customer.

The New York Fed's gold vault stores approximately $63 billion of monetary gold at $300 per troy ounce. The vault is the largest concentration of monetary gold in the world, constituting one-quarter of the world's official gold supply.
Click to expand...
And before you have a revelation about the fact that the identify of account holders is strictly confidential, consider whether you would want your bank to publish a list of the things you keep in your safety deposit box.
 
Groups that continually espouse the ways and means to erode and destroy our Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence, and National Sovereignty.:

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
Trilateral Commission (TC)
Bilderberg Group / Conference

Members of these groups have grown prolific and are encountered within all branches of elected and appointed government as well as critical infrastructure.

Not unlike the UN, they don't do much anymore to keep their ideas, plans, and actions secret. Verifiable and credible sources of quotes, minutes, essays, etc. produced from these members and org meetings are available on the net.
A wealth of damning evidence can be found on the above mentioned organizations' websites.

Some of the old "conspiracy theories" have indeed become "conspiracy facts".
 
I am still waiting for someone to answer my question about almost virtually every president, whether Democrat or Republican, along with almost the entire membership of their advisory staffs, being members of the CFR since its founding. Vern, that means you. Or are you suggesting that they are just a debating club for politicos and policy wonks, having no particular political leanings? This, of course, is patently absurd if one only reads their publications, however. They are clearly dedicated to internationalism via the UN, unitary world government and unitary world banking, while also being dedicated to the submersion of national sovereignties. What would the Democrats think if they discovered that every president and presidential advisory staff since, say Eisenhower, were active, dues paying, participating members of the John Birch Society? Think any one would find that suspicious?
 
I am still waiting for someone to answer my question about almost virtually every president, whether Democrat or Republican, along with almost the entire membership of their advisory staffs, being members of the CFR since its founding. Vern, that means you.
Click to expand...

For those of us who aren't conspiracy buffs, explain why being a member of the Council for Foreign Relations is so bad.

Are they like the Carbonari, Illuminati, or the Free Masons?:p
 
Not unlike the UN, they don't do much anymore to keep their ideas, plans, and actions secret. Verifiable and credible sources of quotes, minutes, essays, etc. produced from these members and org meetings are available on the net.
A wealth of damning evidence can be found on the above mentioned organizations' websites.
Click to expand...

Why keep secret what the preponderance of the "elites" considers noble, progressive, and inevitable? The agenda of every K-12 classroom could have been drawn up in Davos.
 
I really like the use of that term " ... Partnership" within the little circle of crooks in the SPP. It sounds so ... so ..... friendly and warm ;)

The EU was fronted as "The Common Market" all those years ago. You know; just "trade". The SPP is already riding intergrated "security" in addition to "trade" ("Prosperity").

These guys are in a hurry.
..... to provide our people and our infrastructure with the highest possible common level of protection from terrorists and other criminal elements, as well as from the common threats of nature.
Click to expand...
And they are quite open about where they want to take this. Some interesting and open-ended terminology here too.
For those of us who aren't conspiracy buffs, explain why being a member of the Council for Foreign Relations is so bad.
Click to expand...
Say Vern Humphrey; what if they were all .... Catholic?

Do you think the minutes of their cozy little meetings, their publications, poltical activity - and the path they are leading us - would be so tranquil then? ;)

An afterthought; let's say I had worked my way up the ladder in the Pentagon, and applying for even a moderately sensitive position I am questioned about this little "club" I and a fellow in another section are members of. The "Bull & Scones".

My reply is, with a smirk and a wink; "It's so secret I can't talk about it".

What are my chances of a) Getting the position b) Remaining working for the Federal government at all? ;)

------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
 
Last edited:
Just like the "GWB regardless, radical republican" limens, they will ignorantly follow him right upto the brink of the cliff where he will step aside and let them walk right on over the edge.:banghead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
FOIA request filed to expose plans for 'North American union'
Replies
10
Views
899
LAK
L
L
  • Locked
who's behind the "North American Union?"
Replies
13
Views
749
Preacherman
P
L
  • Locked
the NEW NORTH AMERICAN UNION
Replies
2
Views
601
hso
hso
P
  • Locked
North American Union: The end of our Constitution and Bill of Rights
Replies
5
Views
486
Art Eatman
A
I
  • Locked
CFR suggests North American Union/Fun item
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Ira Aten
I
Back
Top