One of the basic questions AMERICANS ought to ask and answer is, Do we wish to remain an independent country, or do we wish to merge into some transnational entity?

The fact that some people want to end the independence of the UNITED STATES (as Bill Clinton the so called President of these United States) and replace it with a WORLD government is not a right-wing fantasy. It is, in fact, an old idea. There are a number of public organizations that advocate it, and it has been talked about and written about for years.

Richard Gardner, now the UNITED STATES ambassador to Spain, proposed in an article in Foreign Affairs (spring 1988), "an end-run around national sovereignty eroding it piece by piece."

The push for this comes, as it always has, from international finance and business. One top IBM executive said, "The world's political structures are completely obsolete. They have not changed in at least a hundred years and are woefully out of tune with technological progress.... the critical issue of our time is the conceptual conflict between the search for globalization of resources and the independence of nation-states.

In the 1976 book "Global Reach" by Richard J. Barnet and Ronald E. Muller, the authors write, "A little more than a generation after the withering of the wartime dream of world brotherhood ... a new breed of globalists have launched an attack on the nation-state more radical than anything proposed by world federalists."

So the issue is a real one. Now what does it mean?

Simply put, to remain an independent nation-state is to govern ourselves. We adopt what constitutions we please, pass what laws we please. If some international organization, some foreign government or some cabal of foreign governments doesn't like it, then it can file objections where only a proctologist will ever see them.

That, I believe, is the position of a majority of AMERICANS.

To lose our independence simply means that someone else we don't elect outside our borders will govern us with laws and rules we don't adopt. To lose our independence would be the same as being conquered and occupied by a FOREIGN POWER, the only difference being that we would have surrendered before the war even started.

This is clearly a question to be decided by the AMERICAN people. Unfortunately, the ruling elite is doing just what Gardner proposed - making end-runs around sovereignty.

For example, let's look at the World Trade Organization. We passed a law that says we don't import tuna from countries that allow their tuna fishermen to kill dolphins in the process of catching tuna. Mexico took it to the WTO. The WTO has ruled that our law is a barrier to trade and we must either repeal it or pay a penalty. If that isn't a loss of sovereignty, skunks don't stink.

Traditionally, treaties were nothing more than agreements between sovereign nation-states governing their relationship. For example, a defense treaty simply says one signer will come to the aid of the other, if the other is attacked.

More recently, treaties are being used as an end-run around sovereignty, The treaty on children's rights, for example, does not govern relationships between nations. Rather, it dictates to nations how they must govern their own citizens within their own borders.

No such treaty should ever be ratified by the UNITED STATES SENATE. Under no circumstances should we allow foreign or international control of domestic issues to be imposed on the AMERICAN people by the subterfuge of a treaty.

Under no circumstances should we ever allow one single AMERICAN citizen to be subject to anyone's jurisdiction except that of our country based on his own country's laws.

INDEPENDENCE is an issue that should not be compromised.

WAKE UP AMERICA, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE TO STOP IT, and we become the slaves of a WORLD government, instead of just slaves to the government of the UNITED STATES, as we are now.