North Carolina has a North American Union hologram on the drivers license

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

You quoted a dictionary.com definition of sovereignty, then rambled on about a conspiracy theory while still providing no support whatsoever. Come on, you could at least try to pass of a WorldNetDaily or Newsmax article as "evidence".


It is "obvious" indeed.

Conspiracy theory? Which part? Don't be so vague and label it all that. Be specific so a discussion can be had. Besides, you inadvertently agreed with me with your post below lol

PC SurgeonWhen bushy boy signed this agreement with canada and mexico he gave those other countries say in what America does. Everything that we do will be in the scope of the NAU. This isn't hard to understand and I'm sure you are smart enough to see it. America will not act independently anymore. Furthered by the release of an "Amero" currency which ties us all together without the consent of the American people. It is obvious. Are you just playing devil's advocate?




Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
You're exactly right. It's quite ironic that people like PC Surgeon fear a hypothetical NAU, when the US would be by far the dominant player. Mexico and especially Canada (presuming votes would be distributed proportionately by population) are the ones that would have any reason to fear a NAU, not that US. Together, the two have barely over a third of the US's population, so even veto power would be worthless against the US.

Consenting anyone (other countries in this case) to have a vote over anything that has to do with our laws and/or our way of living violates the sovereignty of the United States.

Do you even know what sovereignty is? Did you read the definition? Do you not like the definition? Do you have a better one? Good luck on fighting this one, you've already damned yourself.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: bbdub333
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333

It's hopeless to argue with kids Rainsford... they adopt a rebellious viewpoint simply because nobody else accepts it, and find ways to legitimize it no matter what types of logical sacrifices they need to make.

They'll grow up eventually and realize how silly they were. Time has a way of doing that.

All of what you posted has nothing to do with the topic being discussed (actually should haave been a pm, which shows me the psychology behind your post, to get attention or accolades), didn't even bring one shred of evidence to back up your claims. As such, your post is trolling at best. Next time contribute instead of derailing off topic, there is a forum for that. Have a nice day :)

There is no discussion when it comes to these issues. No matter how much evidence you demand be brought to the table to refute your claims, none will be accepted by these so fervent in their beliefs. Your theories are childish, misinformed, contrary to logic, contrary to reality. I could show you a picture of a dog and you'd swear it was a cat because you don't want to believe "them". Grow up and contribute something to society other than idiotic schemes which do nothing but breed unwarranted paranoia.

Another one of your fact less posts? How long will they let you do this? Again, the psychology of your posts are most obvious. Only looking to gain favor and attention by calling people names, making yourself look better by putting others down. This is basic psychology. Please be kind, I have been to you so far. Add something to the topic or move on, this type of act is not needed. Have a nice day :)
 

ZebuluniteV

Member
Aug 23, 2007
165
0
0
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

You quoted a dictionary.com definition of sovereignty, then rambled on about a conspiracy theory while still providing no support whatsoever. Come on, you could at least try to pass of a WorldNetDaily or Newsmax article as "evidence".


It is "obvious" indeed.
Conspiracy theory? Which part? Don't be so vague and label it all that. Be specific so a discussion can be had. Besides, you inadvertently agreed with me with your post below lol



What part? The whole thing: you've presented no evidence whatsoever for the existence of any plans for a ?North American Union?. Since you allege that plans to create a NAU do exist, and seeing the lack of evidence you are implying that it is the result of a secret plot, it is by definition a conspiracy theory:

Dictionary.com - Conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theory:
1. a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
2. the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
When bushy boy signed this agreement with canada and mexico he gave those other countries say in what America does. Everything that we do will be in the scope of the NAU. This isn't hard to understand and I'm sure you are smart enough to see it. America will not act independently anymore. Furthered by the release of an "Amero" currency which ties us all together without the consent of the American people. It is obvious. Are you just playing devil's advocate?




Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
You're exactly right. It's quite ironic that people like PC Surgeon fear a hypothetical NAU, when the US would be by far the dominant player. Mexico and especially Canada (presuming votes would be distributed proportionately by population) are the ones that would have any reason to fear a NAU, not that US. Together, the two have barely over a third of the US's population, so even veto power would be worthless against the US.

Consenting anyone (other countries in this case) to have a vote over anything that has to do with our laws and/or our way of living violates the sovereignty of the United States.

Do you even know what sovereignty is? Did you read the definition? Do you not like the definition? Do you have a better one? Good luck on fighting this one, you've already damned yourself.


Okay, I guess you ?got? me on that one. I said that if a purely hypothetical NAU existed, it would presumably be set up like the EU and have all three countries have a say in decisions in the NAU. So yes, my hypothetical conception of a ?NAU? would on some level reduce the US's ability to act independently, and thus affect (reduce) its sovereignty on some level.

But that's debating my hypothetical setup of a hypothetical organization.

How about looking at my, and many other members's, main argument: that the NAU is a conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. Disagree? Then as I've said repeatedly now back up your claims with facts. Otherwise, admit you have nothing to back up your claims.



Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333

It's hopeless to argue with kids Rainsford... they adopt a rebellious viewpoint simply because nobody else accepts it, and find ways to legitimize it no matter what types of logical sacrifices they need to make.

They'll grow up eventually and realize how silly they were. Time has a way of doing that.

All of what you posted has nothing to do with the topic being discussed (actually should haave been a pm, which shows me the psychology behind your post, to get attention or accolades), didn't even bring one shred of evidence to back up your claims. As such, your post is trolling at best. Next time contribute instead of derailing off topic, there is a forum for that. Have a nice day :)

There is no discussion when it comes to these issues. No matter how much evidence you demand be brought to the table to refute your claims, none will be accepted by these so fervent in their beliefs. Your theories are childish, misinformed, contrary to logic, contrary to reality. I could show you a picture of a dog and you'd swear it was a cat because you don't want to believe "them". Grow up and contribute something to society other than idiotic schemes which do nothing but breed unwarranted paranoia.

Another one of your fact less posts? How long will they let you do this? Again, the psychology of your posts are most obvious. Only looking to gain favor and attention by calling people names, making yourself look better by putting others down. This is basic psychology. Please be kind, I have been to you so far. Add something to the topic or move on, this type of act is not needed. Have a nice day :)

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You claim that the world's most powerful nation's sovereignty is going to be violated by an organization whose existence, planned or otherwise, no one has proved in the slightest...that's pretty damn extraordinary to me.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

You quoted a dictionary.com definition of sovereignty, then rambled on about a conspiracy theory while still providing no support whatsoever. Come on, you could at least try to pass of a WorldNetDaily or Newsmax article as "evidence".


It is "obvious" indeed.
Conspiracy theory? Which part? Don't be so vague and label it all that. Be specific so a discussion can be had. Besides, you inadvertently agreed with me with your post below lol



What part? The whole thing: you've presented no evidence whatsoever for the existence of any plans for a ?North American Union?. Since you allege that plans to create a NAU do exist, and seeing the lack of evidence you are implying that it is the result of a secret plot, it is by definition a conspiracy theory:

Dictionary.com - Conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theory:
1. a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
2. the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
When bushy boy signed this agreement with canada and mexico he gave those other countries say in what America does. Everything that we do will be in the scope of the NAU. This isn't hard to understand and I'm sure you are smart enough to see it. America will not act independently anymore. Furthered by the release of an "Amero" currency which ties us all together without the consent of the American people. It is obvious. Are you just playing devil's advocate?




Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
You're exactly right. It's quite ironic that people like PC Surgeon fear a hypothetical NAU, when the US would be by far the dominant player. Mexico and especially Canada (presuming votes would be distributed proportionately by population) are the ones that would have any reason to fear a NAU, not that US. Together, the two have barely over a third of the US's population, so even veto power would be worthless against the US.

Consenting anyone (other countries in this case) to have a vote over anything that has to do with our laws and/or our way of living violates the sovereignty of the United States.

Do you even know what sovereignty is? Did you read the definition? Do you not like the definition? Do you have a better one? Good luck on fighting this one, you've already damned yourself.


Okay, I guess you ?got? me on that one. I said that if a purely hypothetical NAU existed, it would presumably be set up like the EU and have all three countries have a say in decisions in the NAU. So yes, my hypothetical conception of a ?NAU? would on some level reduce the US's ability to act independently, and thus affect (reduce) its sovereignty on some level.

But that's debating my hypothetical setup of a hypothetical organization.

How about looking at my, and many other members's, main argument: that the NAU is a conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. Disagree? Then as I've said repeatedly now back up your claims with facts. Otherwise, admit you have nothing to back up your claims.



Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333

It's hopeless to argue with kids Rainsford... they adopt a rebellious viewpoint simply because nobody else accepts it, and find ways to legitimize it no matter what types of logical sacrifices they need to make.

They'll grow up eventually and realize how silly they were. Time has a way of doing that.

All of what you posted has nothing to do with the topic being discussed (actually should haave been a pm, which shows me the psychology behind your post, to get attention or accolades), didn't even bring one shred of evidence to back up your claims. As such, your post is trolling at best. Next time contribute instead of derailing off topic, there is a forum for that. Have a nice day :)

There is no discussion when it comes to these issues. No matter how much evidence you demand be brought to the table to refute your claims, none will be accepted by these so fervent in their beliefs. Your theories are childish, misinformed, contrary to logic, contrary to reality. I could show you a picture of a dog and you'd swear it was a cat because you don't want to believe "them". Grow up and contribute something to society other than idiotic schemes which do nothing but breed unwarranted paranoia.

Another one of your fact less posts? How long will they let you do this? Again, the psychology of your posts are most obvious. Only looking to gain favor and attention by calling people names, making yourself look better by putting others down. This is basic psychology. Please be kind, I have been to you so far. Add something to the topic or move on, this type of act is not needed. Have a nice day :)

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You claim that the world's most powerful nation's sovereignty is going to be violated by an organization whose existence, planned or otherwise, no one has proved in the slightest...that's pretty damn extraordinary to me.

Isn't the fact of "Amero" currency enough? Obviously its not just for Americans. And thanks for at least trying to discuss the issues :)

Amero currency

Heres the proof you wanted

Not so "hypothetical" after all is it?
 

ZebuluniteV

Member
Aug 23, 2007
165
0
0
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

You quoted a dictionary.com definition of sovereignty, then rambled on about a conspiracy theory while still providing no support whatsoever. Come on, you could at least try to pass of a WorldNetDaily or Newsmax article as "evidence".


It is "obvious" indeed.
Conspiracy theory? Which part? Don't be so vague and label it all that. Be specific so a discussion can be had. Besides, you inadvertently agreed with me with your post below lol



What part? The whole thing: you've presented no evidence whatsoever for the existence of any plans for a ?North American Union?. Since you allege that plans to create a NAU do exist, and seeing the lack of evidence you are implying that it is the result of a secret plot, it is by definition a conspiracy theory:

Dictionary.com - Conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theory:
1. a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
2. the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
When bushy boy signed this agreement with canada and mexico he gave those other countries say in what America does. Everything that we do will be in the scope of the NAU. This isn't hard to understand and I'm sure you are smart enough to see it. America will not act independently anymore. Furthered by the release of an "Amero" currency which ties us all together without the consent of the American people. It is obvious. Are you just playing devil's advocate?




Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
You're exactly right. It's quite ironic that people like PC Surgeon fear a hypothetical NAU, when the US would be by far the dominant player. Mexico and especially Canada (presuming votes would be distributed proportionately by population) are the ones that would have any reason to fear a NAU, not that US. Together, the two have barely over a third of the US's population, so even veto power would be worthless against the US.

Consenting anyone (other countries in this case) to have a vote over anything that has to do with our laws and/or our way of living violates the sovereignty of the United States.

Do you even know what sovereignty is? Did you read the definition? Do you not like the definition? Do you have a better one? Good luck on fighting this one, you've already damned yourself.


Okay, I guess you ?got? me on that one. I said that if a purely hypothetical NAU existed, it would presumably be set up like the EU and have all three countries have a say in decisions in the NAU. So yes, my hypothetical conception of a ?NAU? would on some level reduce the US's ability to act independently, and thus affect (reduce) its sovereignty on some level.

But that's debating my hypothetical setup of a hypothetical organization.

How about looking at my, and many other members's, main argument: that the NAU is a conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. Disagree? Then as I've said repeatedly now back up your claims with facts. Otherwise, admit you have nothing to back up your claims.



Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333

It's hopeless to argue with kids Rainsford... they adopt a rebellious viewpoint simply because nobody else accepts it, and find ways to legitimize it no matter what types of logical sacrifices they need to make.

They'll grow up eventually and realize how silly they were. Time has a way of doing that.

All of what you posted has nothing to do with the topic being discussed (actually should haave been a pm, which shows me the psychology behind your post, to get attention or accolades), didn't even bring one shred of evidence to back up your claims. As such, your post is trolling at best. Next time contribute instead of derailing off topic, there is a forum for that. Have a nice day :)

There is no discussion when it comes to these issues. No matter how much evidence you demand be brought to the table to refute your claims, none will be accepted by these so fervent in their beliefs. Your theories are childish, misinformed, contrary to logic, contrary to reality. I could show you a picture of a dog and you'd swear it was a cat because you don't want to believe "them". Grow up and contribute something to society other than idiotic schemes which do nothing but breed unwarranted paranoia.

Another one of your fact less posts? How long will they let you do this? Again, the psychology of your posts are most obvious. Only looking to gain favor and attention by calling people names, making yourself look better by putting others down. This is basic psychology. Please be kind, I have been to you so far. Add something to the topic or move on, this type of act is not needed. Have a nice day :)

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You claim that the world's most powerful nation's sovereignty is going to be violated by an organization whose existence, planned or otherwise, no one has proved in the slightest...that's pretty damn extraordinary to me.

Isn't the fact of "Amero" currency enough? Obviously its not just for Americans. And thanks for at least trying to discuss the issues :)

Amero currency

Heres the proof you wanted

Not so "hypothetical" after all is it?

I watched both videos.

Your proof is some random interviewee claiming that an Amero is in the works to a very skeptical interviewer, and a show by Lou Dobbs, who has been called xenophobic even by James K. Glassman, a senior fellow of the conservative American Enterprise Institute?

Wow...what next, are you going to post some Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Bill O'Reilly clips?

As I said before, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Yet you might as well have linked me to the forum postings of two other random people who share your baseless belief.

Although I do appreciate that you did make an attempt to prove your conspiracy theory, as weak as it may have been.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
You mean every time I look at a map of North America I am actually looking at the top secret plans for a North America Union? Damn.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

You quoted a dictionary.com definition of sovereignty, then rambled on about a conspiracy theory while still providing no support whatsoever. Come on, you could at least try to pass of a WorldNetDaily or Newsmax article as "evidence".


It is "obvious" indeed.
Conspiracy theory? Which part? Don't be so vague and label it all that. Be specific so a discussion can be had. Besides, you inadvertently agreed with me with your post below lol



What part? The whole thing: you've presented no evidence whatsoever for the existence of any plans for a ?North American Union?. Since you allege that plans to create a NAU do exist, and seeing the lack of evidence you are implying that it is the result of a secret plot, it is by definition a conspiracy theory:

Dictionary.com - Conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theory:
1. a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
2. the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
When bushy boy signed this agreement with canada and mexico he gave those other countries say in what America does. Everything that we do will be in the scope of the NAU. This isn't hard to understand and I'm sure you are smart enough to see it. America will not act independently anymore. Furthered by the release of an "Amero" currency which ties us all together without the consent of the American people. It is obvious. Are you just playing devil's advocate?




Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
You're exactly right. It's quite ironic that people like PC Surgeon fear a hypothetical NAU, when the US would be by far the dominant player. Mexico and especially Canada (presuming votes would be distributed proportionately by population) are the ones that would have any reason to fear a NAU, not that US. Together, the two have barely over a third of the US's population, so even veto power would be worthless against the US.

Consenting anyone (other countries in this case) to have a vote over anything that has to do with our laws and/or our way of living violates the sovereignty of the United States.

Do you even know what sovereignty is? Did you read the definition? Do you not like the definition? Do you have a better one? Good luck on fighting this one, you've already damned yourself.


Okay, I guess you ?got? me on that one. I said that if a purely hypothetical NAU existed, it would presumably be set up like the EU and have all three countries have a say in decisions in the NAU. So yes, my hypothetical conception of a ?NAU? would on some level reduce the US's ability to act independently, and thus affect (reduce) its sovereignty on some level.

But that's debating my hypothetical setup of a hypothetical organization.

How about looking at my, and many other members's, main argument: that the NAU is a conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. Disagree? Then as I've said repeatedly now back up your claims with facts. Otherwise, admit you have nothing to back up your claims.



Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333

It's hopeless to argue with kids Rainsford... they adopt a rebellious viewpoint simply because nobody else accepts it, and find ways to legitimize it no matter what types of logical sacrifices they need to make.

They'll grow up eventually and realize how silly they were. Time has a way of doing that.

All of what you posted has nothing to do with the topic being discussed (actually should haave been a pm, which shows me the psychology behind your post, to get attention or accolades), didn't even bring one shred of evidence to back up your claims. As such, your post is trolling at best. Next time contribute instead of derailing off topic, there is a forum for that. Have a nice day :)

There is no discussion when it comes to these issues. No matter how much evidence you demand be brought to the table to refute your claims, none will be accepted by these so fervent in their beliefs. Your theories are childish, misinformed, contrary to logic, contrary to reality. I could show you a picture of a dog and you'd swear it was a cat because you don't want to believe "them". Grow up and contribute something to society other than idiotic schemes which do nothing but breed unwarranted paranoia.

Another one of your fact less posts? How long will they let you do this? Again, the psychology of your posts are most obvious. Only looking to gain favor and attention by calling people names, making yourself look better by putting others down. This is basic psychology. Please be kind, I have been to you so far. Add something to the topic or move on, this type of act is not needed. Have a nice day :)

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You claim that the world's most powerful nation's sovereignty is going to be violated by an organization whose existence, planned or otherwise, no one has proved in the slightest...that's pretty damn extraordinary to me.

Isn't the fact of "Amero" currency enough? Obviously its not just for Americans. And thanks for at least trying to discuss the issues :)

Amero currency

Heres the proof you wanted

Not so "hypothetical" after all is it?

I watched both videos.

Your proof is some random interviewee claiming that an Amero is in the works to a very skeptical interviewer, and a show by Lou Dobbs, who has been called xenophobic even by James K. Glassman, a senior fellow of the conservative American Enterprise Institute?

Wow...what next, are you going to post some Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Bill O'Reilly clips?

As I said before, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Yet you might as well have linked me to the forum postings of two other random people who share your baseless belief.

Although I do appreciate that you did make an attempt to prove your conspiracy theory, as weak as it may have been.

If CNN is not credible, then no one is credible. It is now apparent to me it makes no difference what I show you, you will keep your head buried in sand.
 

ZebuluniteV

Member
Aug 23, 2007
165
0
0
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

You quoted a dictionary.com definition of sovereignty, then rambled on about a conspiracy theory while still providing no support whatsoever. Come on, you could at least try to pass of a WorldNetDaily or Newsmax article as "evidence".


It is "obvious" indeed.
Conspiracy theory? Which part? Don't be so vague and label it all that. Be specific so a discussion can be had. Besides, you inadvertently agreed with me with your post below lol



What part? The whole thing: you've presented no evidence whatsoever for the existence of any plans for a ?North American Union?. Since you allege that plans to create a NAU do exist, and seeing the lack of evidence you are implying that it is the result of a secret plot, it is by definition a conspiracy theory:

Dictionary.com - Conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theory:
1. a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
2. the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
When bushy boy signed this agreement with canada and mexico he gave those other countries say in what America does. Everything that we do will be in the scope of the NAU. This isn't hard to understand and I'm sure you are smart enough to see it. America will not act independently anymore. Furthered by the release of an "Amero" currency which ties us all together without the consent of the American people. It is obvious. Are you just playing devil's advocate?




Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
You're exactly right. It's quite ironic that people like PC Surgeon fear a hypothetical NAU, when the US would be by far the dominant player. Mexico and especially Canada (presuming votes would be distributed proportionately by population) are the ones that would have any reason to fear a NAU, not that US. Together, the two have barely over a third of the US's population, so even veto power would be worthless against the US.

Consenting anyone (other countries in this case) to have a vote over anything that has to do with our laws and/or our way of living violates the sovereignty of the United States.

Do you even know what sovereignty is? Did you read the definition? Do you not like the definition? Do you have a better one? Good luck on fighting this one, you've already damned yourself.


Okay, I guess you ?got? me on that one. I said that if a purely hypothetical NAU existed, it would presumably be set up like the EU and have all three countries have a say in decisions in the NAU. So yes, my hypothetical conception of a ?NAU? would on some level reduce the US's ability to act independently, and thus affect (reduce) its sovereignty on some level.

But that's debating my hypothetical setup of a hypothetical organization.

How about looking at my, and many other members's, main argument: that the NAU is a conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. Disagree? Then as I've said repeatedly now back up your claims with facts. Otherwise, admit you have nothing to back up your claims.



Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333

It's hopeless to argue with kids Rainsford... they adopt a rebellious viewpoint simply because nobody else accepts it, and find ways to legitimize it no matter what types of logical sacrifices they need to make.

They'll grow up eventually and realize how silly they were. Time has a way of doing that.

All of what you posted has nothing to do with the topic being discussed (actually should haave been a pm, which shows me the psychology behind your post, to get attention or accolades), didn't even bring one shred of evidence to back up your claims. As such, your post is trolling at best. Next time contribute instead of derailing off topic, there is a forum for that. Have a nice day :)

There is no discussion when it comes to these issues. No matter how much evidence you demand be brought to the table to refute your claims, none will be accepted by these so fervent in their beliefs. Your theories are childish, misinformed, contrary to logic, contrary to reality. I could show you a picture of a dog and you'd swear it was a cat because you don't want to believe "them". Grow up and contribute something to society other than idiotic schemes which do nothing but breed unwarranted paranoia.

Another one of your fact less posts? How long will they let you do this? Again, the psychology of your posts are most obvious. Only looking to gain favor and attention by calling people names, making yourself look better by putting others down. This is basic psychology. Please be kind, I have been to you so far. Add something to the topic or move on, this type of act is not needed. Have a nice day :)

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You claim that the world's most powerful nation's sovereignty is going to be violated by an organization whose existence, planned or otherwise, no one has proved in the slightest...that's pretty damn extraordinary to me.

Isn't the fact of "Amero" currency enough? Obviously its not just for Americans. And thanks for at least trying to discuss the issues :)

Amero currency

Heres the proof you wanted

Not so "hypothetical" after all is it?

I watched both videos.

Your proof is some random interviewee claiming that an Amero is in the works to a very skeptical interviewer, and a show by Lou Dobbs, who has been called xenophobic even by James K. Glassman, a senior fellow of the conservative American Enterprise Institute?

Wow...what next, are you going to post some Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Bill O'Reilly clips?

As I said before, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Yet you might as well have linked me to the forum postings of two other random people who share your baseless belief.

Although I do appreciate that you did make an attempt to prove your conspiracy theory, as weak as it may have been.

If CNN is not credible, then no one is credible. It is now apparent to me it makes no difference what I show you, you will keep your head buried in sand.

So if CNN interviewed Hitler, his views on the Jews would be credible? That's essentially your argument.

CNN is credible. Those it is interviewing aren't necessarily.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

You quoted a dictionary.com definition of sovereignty, then rambled on about a conspiracy theory while still providing no support whatsoever. Come on, you could at least try to pass of a WorldNetDaily or Newsmax article as "evidence".


It is "obvious" indeed.
Conspiracy theory? Which part? Don't be so vague and label it all that. Be specific so a discussion can be had. Besides, you inadvertently agreed with me with your post below lol



What part? The whole thing: you've presented no evidence whatsoever for the existence of any plans for a ?North American Union?. Since you allege that plans to create a NAU do exist, and seeing the lack of evidence you are implying that it is the result of a secret plot, it is by definition a conspiracy theory:

Dictionary.com - Conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theory:
1. a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
2. the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
When bushy boy signed this agreement with canada and mexico he gave those other countries say in what America does. Everything that we do will be in the scope of the NAU. This isn't hard to understand and I'm sure you are smart enough to see it. America will not act independently anymore. Furthered by the release of an "Amero" currency which ties us all together without the consent of the American people. It is obvious. Are you just playing devil's advocate?




Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
You're exactly right. It's quite ironic that people like PC Surgeon fear a hypothetical NAU, when the US would be by far the dominant player. Mexico and especially Canada (presuming votes would be distributed proportionately by population) are the ones that would have any reason to fear a NAU, not that US. Together, the two have barely over a third of the US's population, so even veto power would be worthless against the US.

Consenting anyone (other countries in this case) to have a vote over anything that has to do with our laws and/or our way of living violates the sovereignty of the United States.

Do you even know what sovereignty is? Did you read the definition? Do you not like the definition? Do you have a better one? Good luck on fighting this one, you've already damned yourself.


Okay, I guess you ?got? me on that one. I said that if a purely hypothetical NAU existed, it would presumably be set up like the EU and have all three countries have a say in decisions in the NAU. So yes, my hypothetical conception of a ?NAU? would on some level reduce the US's ability to act independently, and thus affect (reduce) its sovereignty on some level.

But that's debating my hypothetical setup of a hypothetical organization.

How about looking at my, and many other members's, main argument: that the NAU is a conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. Disagree? Then as I've said repeatedly now back up your claims with facts. Otherwise, admit you have nothing to back up your claims.



Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333

It's hopeless to argue with kids Rainsford... they adopt a rebellious viewpoint simply because nobody else accepts it, and find ways to legitimize it no matter what types of logical sacrifices they need to make.

They'll grow up eventually and realize how silly they were. Time has a way of doing that.

All of what you posted has nothing to do with the topic being discussed (actually should haave been a pm, which shows me the psychology behind your post, to get attention or accolades), didn't even bring one shred of evidence to back up your claims. As such, your post is trolling at best. Next time contribute instead of derailing off topic, there is a forum for that. Have a nice day :)

There is no discussion when it comes to these issues. No matter how much evidence you demand be brought to the table to refute your claims, none will be accepted by these so fervent in their beliefs. Your theories are childish, misinformed, contrary to logic, contrary to reality. I could show you a picture of a dog and you'd swear it was a cat because you don't want to believe "them". Grow up and contribute something to society other than idiotic schemes which do nothing but breed unwarranted paranoia.

Another one of your fact less posts? How long will they let you do this? Again, the psychology of your posts are most obvious. Only looking to gain favor and attention by calling people names, making yourself look better by putting others down. This is basic psychology. Please be kind, I have been to you so far. Add something to the topic or move on, this type of act is not needed. Have a nice day :)

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You claim that the world's most powerful nation's sovereignty is going to be violated by an organization whose existence, planned or otherwise, no one has proved in the slightest...that's pretty damn extraordinary to me.

Isn't the fact of "Amero" currency enough? Obviously its not just for Americans. And thanks for at least trying to discuss the issues :)

Amero currency

Heres the proof you wanted

Not so "hypothetical" after all is it?

I watched both videos.

Your proof is some random interviewee claiming that an Amero is in the works to a very skeptical interviewer, and a show by Lou Dobbs, who has been called xenophobic even by James K. Glassman, a senior fellow of the conservative American Enterprise Institute?

Wow...what next, are you going to post some Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Bill O'Reilly clips?

As I said before, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Yet you might as well have linked me to the forum postings of two other random people who share your baseless belief.

Although I do appreciate that you did make an attempt to prove your conspiracy theory, as weak as it may have been.

If CNN is not credible, then no one is credible. It is now apparent to me it makes no difference what I show you, you will keep your head buried in sand.

So if CNN interviewed Hitler, his views on the Jews would be credible? That's essentially your argument.

CNN is credible. Those it is interviewing aren't necessarily.

Like I said there is no more point in continuing a discussion with you.
 

ZebuluniteV

Member
Aug 23, 2007
165
0
0
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

You quoted a dictionary.com definition of sovereignty, then rambled on about a conspiracy theory while still providing no support whatsoever. Come on, you could at least try to pass of a WorldNetDaily or Newsmax article as "evidence".


It is "obvious" indeed.
Conspiracy theory? Which part? Don't be so vague and label it all that. Be specific so a discussion can be had. Besides, you inadvertently agreed with me with your post below lol



What part? The whole thing: you've presented no evidence whatsoever for the existence of any plans for a ?North American Union?. Since you allege that plans to create a NAU do exist, and seeing the lack of evidence you are implying that it is the result of a secret plot, it is by definition a conspiracy theory:

Dictionary.com - Conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theory:
1. a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
2. the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
When bushy boy signed this agreement with canada and mexico he gave those other countries say in what America does. Everything that we do will be in the scope of the NAU. This isn't hard to understand and I'm sure you are smart enough to see it. America will not act independently anymore. Furthered by the release of an "Amero" currency which ties us all together without the consent of the American people. It is obvious. Are you just playing devil's advocate?




Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
You're exactly right. It's quite ironic that people like PC Surgeon fear a hypothetical NAU, when the US would be by far the dominant player. Mexico and especially Canada (presuming votes would be distributed proportionately by population) are the ones that would have any reason to fear a NAU, not that US. Together, the two have barely over a third of the US's population, so even veto power would be worthless against the US.

Consenting anyone (other countries in this case) to have a vote over anything that has to do with our laws and/or our way of living violates the sovereignty of the United States.

Do you even know what sovereignty is? Did you read the definition? Do you not like the definition? Do you have a better one? Good luck on fighting this one, you've already damned yourself.


Okay, I guess you ?got? me on that one. I said that if a purely hypothetical NAU existed, it would presumably be set up like the EU and have all three countries have a say in decisions in the NAU. So yes, my hypothetical conception of a ?NAU? would on some level reduce the US's ability to act independently, and thus affect (reduce) its sovereignty on some level.

But that's debating my hypothetical setup of a hypothetical organization.

How about looking at my, and many other members's, main argument: that the NAU is a conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. Disagree? Then as I've said repeatedly now back up your claims with facts. Otherwise, admit you have nothing to back up your claims.



Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333

It's hopeless to argue with kids Rainsford... they adopt a rebellious viewpoint simply because nobody else accepts it, and find ways to legitimize it no matter what types of logical sacrifices they need to make.

They'll grow up eventually and realize how silly they were. Time has a way of doing that.

All of what you posted has nothing to do with the topic being discussed (actually should haave been a pm, which shows me the psychology behind your post, to get attention or accolades), didn't even bring one shred of evidence to back up your claims. As such, your post is trolling at best. Next time contribute instead of derailing off topic, there is a forum for that. Have a nice day :)

There is no discussion when it comes to these issues. No matter how much evidence you demand be brought to the table to refute your claims, none will be accepted by these so fervent in their beliefs. Your theories are childish, misinformed, contrary to logic, contrary to reality. I could show you a picture of a dog and you'd swear it was a cat because you don't want to believe "them". Grow up and contribute something to society other than idiotic schemes which do nothing but breed unwarranted paranoia.

Another one of your fact less posts? How long will they let you do this? Again, the psychology of your posts are most obvious. Only looking to gain favor and attention by calling people names, making yourself look better by putting others down. This is basic psychology. Please be kind, I have been to you so far. Add something to the topic or move on, this type of act is not needed. Have a nice day :)

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You claim that the world's most powerful nation's sovereignty is going to be violated by an organization whose existence, planned or otherwise, no one has proved in the slightest...that's pretty damn extraordinary to me.

Isn't the fact of "Amero" currency enough? Obviously its not just for Americans. And thanks for at least trying to discuss the issues :)

Amero currency

Heres the proof you wanted

Not so "hypothetical" after all is it?

I watched both videos.

Your proof is some random interviewee claiming that an Amero is in the works to a very skeptical interviewer, and a show by Lou Dobbs, who has been called xenophobic even by James K. Glassman, a senior fellow of the conservative American Enterprise Institute?

Wow...what next, are you going to post some Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Bill O'Reilly clips?

As I said before, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Yet you might as well have linked me to the forum postings of two other random people who share your baseless belief.

Although I do appreciate that you did make an attempt to prove your conspiracy theory, as weak as it may have been.

If CNN is not credible, then no one is credible. It is now apparent to me it makes no difference what I show you, you will keep your head buried in sand.

So if CNN interviewed Hitler, his views on the Jews would be credible? That's essentially your argument.

CNN is credible. Those it is interviewing aren't necessarily.

Like I said there is no more point in continuing a discussion with you.

Because you've come to realize, if ever so slightly, that you have no evidence whatsoever to back up your wild claims, or because you're convinced that if I don't see "the truth" by now I must be one of "them" wishing to impose a NAU on you?
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

You quoted a dictionary.com definition of sovereignty, then rambled on about a conspiracy theory while still providing no support whatsoever. Come on, you could at least try to pass of a WorldNetDaily or Newsmax article as "evidence".


It is "obvious" indeed.
Conspiracy theory? Which part? Don't be so vague and label it all that. Be specific so a discussion can be had. Besides, you inadvertently agreed with me with your post below lol



What part? The whole thing: you've presented no evidence whatsoever for the existence of any plans for a ?North American Union?. Since you allege that plans to create a NAU do exist, and seeing the lack of evidence you are implying that it is the result of a secret plot, it is by definition a conspiracy theory:

Dictionary.com - Conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theory:
1. a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
2. the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
When bushy boy signed this agreement with canada and mexico he gave those other countries say in what America does. Everything that we do will be in the scope of the NAU. This isn't hard to understand and I'm sure you are smart enough to see it. America will not act independently anymore. Furthered by the release of an "Amero" currency which ties us all together without the consent of the American people. It is obvious. Are you just playing devil's advocate?




Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV
You're exactly right. It's quite ironic that people like PC Surgeon fear a hypothetical NAU, when the US would be by far the dominant player. Mexico and especially Canada (presuming votes would be distributed proportionately by population) are the ones that would have any reason to fear a NAU, not that US. Together, the two have barely over a third of the US's population, so even veto power would be worthless against the US.

Consenting anyone (other countries in this case) to have a vote over anything that has to do with our laws and/or our way of living violates the sovereignty of the United States.

Do you even know what sovereignty is? Did you read the definition? Do you not like the definition? Do you have a better one? Good luck on fighting this one, you've already damned yourself.


Okay, I guess you ?got? me on that one. I said that if a purely hypothetical NAU existed, it would presumably be set up like the EU and have all three countries have a say in decisions in the NAU. So yes, my hypothetical conception of a ?NAU? would on some level reduce the US's ability to act independently, and thus affect (reduce) its sovereignty on some level.

But that's debating my hypothetical setup of a hypothetical organization.

How about looking at my, and many other members's, main argument: that the NAU is a conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. Disagree? Then as I've said repeatedly now back up your claims with facts. Otherwise, admit you have nothing to back up your claims.



Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: bbdub333

It's hopeless to argue with kids Rainsford... they adopt a rebellious viewpoint simply because nobody else accepts it, and find ways to legitimize it no matter what types of logical sacrifices they need to make.

They'll grow up eventually and realize how silly they were. Time has a way of doing that.

All of what you posted has nothing to do with the topic being discussed (actually should haave been a pm, which shows me the psychology behind your post, to get attention or accolades), didn't even bring one shred of evidence to back up your claims. As such, your post is trolling at best. Next time contribute instead of derailing off topic, there is a forum for that. Have a nice day :)

There is no discussion when it comes to these issues. No matter how much evidence you demand be brought to the table to refute your claims, none will be accepted by these so fervent in their beliefs. Your theories are childish, misinformed, contrary to logic, contrary to reality. I could show you a picture of a dog and you'd swear it was a cat because you don't want to believe "them". Grow up and contribute something to society other than idiotic schemes which do nothing but breed unwarranted paranoia.

Another one of your fact less posts? How long will they let you do this? Again, the psychology of your posts are most obvious. Only looking to gain favor and attention by calling people names, making yourself look better by putting others down. This is basic psychology. Please be kind, I have been to you so far. Add something to the topic or move on, this type of act is not needed. Have a nice day :)

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You claim that the world's most powerful nation's sovereignty is going to be violated by an organization whose existence, planned or otherwise, no one has proved in the slightest...that's pretty damn extraordinary to me.

Isn't the fact of "Amero" currency enough? Obviously its not just for Americans. And thanks for at least trying to discuss the issues :)

Amero currency

Heres the proof you wanted

Not so "hypothetical" after all is it?

I watched both videos.

Your proof is some random interviewee claiming that an Amero is in the works to a very skeptical interviewer, and a show by Lou Dobbs, who has been called xenophobic even by James K. Glassman, a senior fellow of the conservative American Enterprise Institute?

Wow...what next, are you going to post some Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Bill O'Reilly clips?

As I said before, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Yet you might as well have linked me to the forum postings of two other random people who share your baseless belief.

Although I do appreciate that you did make an attempt to prove your conspiracy theory, as weak as it may have been.

If CNN is not credible, then no one is credible. It is now apparent to me it makes no difference what I show you, you will keep your head buried in sand.

So if CNN interviewed Hitler, his views on the Jews would be credible? That's essentially your argument.

CNN is credible. Those it is interviewing aren't necessarily.

Like I said there is no more point in continuing a discussion with you.

Because you've come to realize, if ever so slightly, that you have no evidence whatsoever to back up your wild claims, or because you're convinced that if I don't see "the truth" by now I must be one of "them" wishing to impose a NAU on you?

No, you will never see the truth till its too late. It doesn't matter what I show you, you will not believe it. Which was your intention in the first place.
 

ZebuluniteV

Member
Aug 23, 2007
165
0
0
Originally posted by: dualsmp
http://www.spp.gov/ <-- This web site is a conspiracy theory. It doesn't exist, please don't click on it.

So? That's very far from a "North American Union" superseding the US Constitution/Sovereignty.

If that's your standard of the US losing its sovereignty, than I guess we haven't been sovereign since NAFTA...or for that matter the formation of the UN.
 

ZebuluniteV

Member
Aug 23, 2007
165
0
0

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

Because you've come to realize, if ever so slightly, that you have no evidence whatsoever to back up your wild claims, or because you're convinced that if I don't see "the truth" by now I must be one of "them" wishing to impose a NAU on you?

No, you will never see the truth till its too late. It doesn't matter what I show you, you will not believe it. Which was your intention in the first place.

What truth? A random interviewee and a very biased news commentator?

That's quite literally all you have shown me...how about some solid facts if you are so certain of the "truth"?


Edit: I removed a lot of our previous posts...no sense continuing reposting all 20 or so of them.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

Because you've come to realize, if ever so slightly, that you have no evidence whatsoever to back up your wild claims, or because you're convinced that if I don't see "the truth" by now I must be one of "them" wishing to impose a NAU on you?

No, you will never see the truth till its too late. It doesn't matter what I show you, you will not believe it. Which was your intention in the first place.

What truth? A random interviewee and a very biased news commentator?

That's quite literally all you have shown me...how about some solid facts if you are so certain of the "truth"?


Edit: I removed a lot of our previous posts...no sense continuing reposting all 20 or so of them.

Agreed with the post removal.

No its ok, believe as you wish, I am not your teacher. This is what I see and know its coming. If in the near future we do have an "Amero" currency, remember PC Surgeon told you. If in the near future there is not an "Amero" currency then I will have been proven wrong. Life goes on regardless of what I think. Have a nice day :)
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,083
5,611
126
Since July 4 2006, when as you may recall the UN came into your home and took your Guns, you have no recourse to stop it!!!


:D:D
 

DangerAardvark

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2004
7,581
0
0
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: Darthvoy
the world is changing fast. Those of you who think things will stay the same are in for a big surprise. Those who don't adapt get left behind.

Threatening a people?s sovereignty is the surest way to begin a war.


I support your war with North America.
 

DangerAardvark

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2004
7,581
0
0
Oh shit, my Hawaii driver's license has the island chain on it AND part of the Pacific ocean. Who let the ocean into the state? Fuck fish!
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: dualsmp
http://www.spp.gov/ <-- This web site is a conspiracy theory. It doesn't exist, please don't click on it.

Oh my God, we have a relationship with our two neighbors...the dissolving of the US as a sovereign country is right around the corner!
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Time will tell who's really retarded....

Maybe, but I'd argue that coming to the correct conclusion through faulty logic is not proof of intelligence. It may be that the North American Union is right around the corner and the US will lose all sovereignty, but even if that happens, the fact that you're finding proof in driver's license holograms still makes your brainpower a little suspect.

In any case, the EU seems to be working out pretty well for Europe...even if this conspiracy theory is true, who gives a shit?

Oh, if you are an American, you need the "Tired of the Constitution" forum...

Who's talking about loss of constitutional freedoms? As by far the largest and most powerful member of the "NAU", I imagine the US would have an enormous say as to the laws and regulations. People made that same argument, and still make that argument, about the UN, and I have yet to see UN troops seizing anyone's guns. Face it, you guys are ALWAYS wrong about this stuff...

Well that doesn't matter, those Constitutional freedoms were taken way before the NAU. Patriot act ring a bell? Thought so...

Isn't that a different problem then? I don't like the Patriot Act either (and I hate the Orwellian name), but your argument makes no sense. "The NAU is going to take away our constitutional freedoms, and my proof is that the Patriot Act already took away our constitutional freedoms"? Huh?
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
85
91
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Citrix
Originally posted by: Phokus
Ok, i'm against any NAU type agreements, but that's just stupid... that's not proof at all.

Proof?? dude IT IS BEING PUT ON NC DRIVERS LICENSES!!! i know those links suck but its the best i could find. Its been talked about on the radio where people in NC called in to bitch about it because it IS ON THEIR LICENSE.

I have no idea why major news agencies are not reporting on this.

Because all illegals will be getting Driver's licenses gratis for every state very soon.

Many states such as Tennessee already do.

Tennessee stopped that. People complained about the 5 hour waits at the DMV because every illegal immigrant in the nation was coming to Tennessee to get a drivers license. Plus all the neighboring states complained about illegals with Tennessee drivers licenses and no insurance causing too many wrecks.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ZebuluniteV

Because you've come to realize, if ever so slightly, that you have no evidence whatsoever to back up your wild claims, or because you're convinced that if I don't see "the truth" by now I must be one of "them" wishing to impose a NAU on you?

No, you will never see the truth till its too late. It doesn't matter what I show you, you will not believe it. Which was your intention in the first place.

What truth? A random interviewee and a very biased news commentator?

That's quite literally all you have shown me...how about some solid facts if you are so certain of the "truth"?


Edit: I removed a lot of our previous posts...no sense continuing reposting all 20 or so of them.

Agreed with the post removal.

No its ok, believe as you wish, I am not your teacher. This is what I see and know its coming. If in the near future we do have an "Amero" currency, remember PC Surgeon told you. If in the near future there is not an "Amero" currency then I will have been proven wrong. Life goes on regardless of what I think. Have a nice day :)


This will require a change in our laws and constitution. Show me a politician who has begun the drive to get 75% of state houses and 2/3rds of the congress to form this thing.