?
-
Guest
http://www.ichblog.eu/content/view/444/1/
Canadian, U.S. and Mexican officials held secretive meeting on integration
Thursday, 08 February 2007
By Kelly Patterson
CanWest News Service
Canadian, U.S. and Mexican politicians discussed using
"stealth" to overcome public resistance to the
integration of the three countries at a confidential
meeting last year, according to documents just released
under U.S. Freedom of Information laws.
08/02/07 "Ottawa Citizen" -- -- Top military brass, corporate
executives and diplomats also attended the meeting in Banff, Alta.,
where participants discussed everything from the harmonization of food
and drug standards, to common immigration policies, and the pooling of
energy resources. The secret guest list of the North American Forum
included then-U.S. secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld, Canadian
Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier, Public Safety Minister
Stockwell Day, Pengrowth Corp. CEO James Kinnear and Lockheed Martin
executive Ron Covais.
Presentation outlines for the forum acknowledge that the concept of
North American integration - which some call a "North American Union"
- is unpopular, and note that it might be tough to sell as a concept.
"While a vision is appealing, working on the infrastructure might
yield more benefit and bring more people on board ('evolution by
stealth')," the notes said.
"Evolution by stealth" means using regulatory changes, such as food-
and drug-safety benchmarks, which don't require parliamentary
approval, to lay the infrastructure for North American integration.
This allows for change with little or no public debate, critics say.
Media were excluded from the September forum, and Day, who gave a
speech at the event, declined to reveal the contents of his talk. "It
was meant as a private meeting," said Melisa Leclerc, a spokeswoman
from Day's office, although she conceded he attended "in his capacity
as minister for public security."
"It is not encouraging to see the phrase 'evolution by stealth' in
reference to important policy debates such as North American
integration," said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a
Washington-based conservative watchdog group that obtained the
documents last week.
But, former finance minister John Manley, who attended the meeting,
said the forum was "not part of a nefarious plan to yield sovereignty
to the U.S. .... It was just some informed private citizens and
government officials having a conversation" on how best to co-operate
to ensure their citizens enjoyed a safe and prosperous future.
In fact, he said, Canada comes out stronger than ever from such
meetings, which force "some senior American officials to think about
Canada for a few days."
However, Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians said the reference
to stealth is "a very telling and important statement."
Many of the politicians who attended the forum have been pursuing
"integration by stealth" for the past two years, she said, pointing to
a little-known but top-priority agreement called the Security and
Prosperity Partnership.
The accord, kickstarted by U.S. President George W. Bush, then-prime
minister Paul Martin and former Mexican president Vicente Fox at a
2005 meeting in Waco, Texas, is designed to streamline everything from
food and drug safety standards to counter-terrorism measures.
Government officials from the three countries are expected to meet in
Ottawa later this month. However, Foreign Affairs spokespeople said
they did not yet know when it would be held or who would attend.
The partnership's stated goal is to protect North America from
security threats such as terrorism and flu pandemics as well as
economic threats from new global-market giants such as China.
Many of the accord's measures are not contentious, such as plans to
improve water quality, reduce sulphur in fuels, and co-ordinate
efforts to fight pandemics and avian flu. But it also covers a host of
hot-button issues such as plans to enhance data-sharing on high-risk
travellers, revamp safety and environmental regulations, centralize
the assessment of new chemicals and rework food safety standards.
Most of the 300 policy recommendations within the accord may not
require legislative changes, the Council of Canadians said.
Ottawa Citizen
CanWest News Service 2007
Link to this page: http://www.ichblog.eu/content/view/444/1/
CK1: ...
I don't like the sound of this one bit. And, I suspect they are just
laying the groundwork for the North American Union, and hoping for
some catalyst to make it come together -- like, say, a New Pearl
Harbor perchance? That could come in many forms, not just overt
"terrorism" or false-flag events -- it could be bird flu or an
engineered economic crisis (underway as we type). The AMERO is on the
horizon folks -- protect yourself from the coming dollar devaluation
as soon as you can.
Dollar Fall Is Catalyst For Predatory Global Government
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2006/011206dollarfall.htm1
February 08, 2007
Arvy: Not new news.
Although many Canadians remain unaware, this actually goes back to an
agreement entered into by our former Prime Minister, Paul Martin --
the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. It hasn't
been front page news because all of the politicos involved prefer to
keep us ordinary folks in the dark on this one.
It just goes to prove the point that has been made here by others. The
US isn't the only country whose politics is dominated by vested
interests under a "two-party" facade.2
February 08, 2007
kla: Secret is the word of times.
Everything is secret. When you have a lot to hide, that is, to
maintain the (ignoble) advantage, you keep it secret.
How is the football field north south across the continent
progressing. Have not had an update. When this happens, that will the
last time I leave New Mexico.
If anything were for the benefit of the public, it would be a
different matter. But maybe when adults behave like children, they
should be so treated.3
February 08, 2007
Hammurabi: This is reall scary for a lot of countries!
A Union of North America is a scary concept for the rest of the world.
All the strings will be pulled from Washington.
Think about that, world!
It will involve a lot of deeeeeeeeeeeeep changes. maybe none for the
better.4
February 08, 2007
Arvy: For the rest of the world?
I think it's even scarier for us who live here on the continent. The
so-called "security and prosperity partnership" sounds a lot like
"freedom and democracy".5
February 09, 2007
Turtle: ...
They get to take Canada seriously for a few days?
I'm sure some of the London street walkers felt the same way about
Jack the Ripper.
There goes the neighbourhood!!!
and so it all goes...
T.6
February 09, 2007
paulwhois: Why not a North American Union?
When you think about the benefits that have accrued to Europe with its
Union, we have to ask, "Why not Here?" The answer is that the fear
card may have been played here far too often. People see integration
as infiltration. Until our leaders find a way to get across the need
for integration it will remain that way. Assuming the three countries
can agree on basic regulations for protecting the environment,
security, and quality of life, we can combine technical and
engineering resources with a vibrant labor force, we can build a joint
economic engine that will compete with the Asian and European markets
of the world. For once our leaders have it right.7
February 09, 2007
a guest: Amilcar ----- From the CEO of Canada Paul Martin to the
MiniBush of Canada Harper, Canada is sold to the higher bidder ...
Indeed former CEO/PM of Canada Paul Martin signed the so called
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. Did you
know??!!! This asshole Paul Martin did not pay taxes on his
multi-million Shipping Company running under a Bahamas Flag of
Convenience (FOC)
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/martin_paul/flagsofconvenience.html
There goes Canada... most recently the present neo-con Canadian PM
Harper/Bush's whore who his election campain has been partially
financed by Evangelical Christian Amrerican "friends" has just created
the Canadian AIPAC/Jewish Caucus! And again they did not talk about it
that much in the Canadian MSM...The Canadian Public has always been
kept in dark...Told you same **** different flag!!! Amazing indeed!
What's happening to this F world?
8
February 09, 2007
dragomir: sucks
Don't get me wrong, but it's a bad idea in every way. What we need is
decentralization, not the opposite.
NO, the EU has not brought good to Europe, it has brought monopoly to
a handful of organizations and has removed the sovereignty and
Independence of a lot of people. The seeming prosperity is only the
result of globalization, of exploitation of the poor countries by the
EU. This we do not see or take into account when looking at the EU
normally. The EU is a block and it only works as long as the rest of
Europe, Asia and Africa are poor. The EU alone is useless as it can
not support its neoliberal policies and prosperity without exploiting
poor defenseless people. As long as a few people have a monopoly over
all trade in the EU, the rest of the World will have to go through
them. There is also the neoliberal ASEAN block in Asia. Africa has the
neoliberal African Union block. South America is being rocked by
Chavez and his social policies which are not aligned with the rest of
the trading blocks, he's doing a wonderful job of restoring
sovereignty to his people and to South America in general.
The North American block, which already has foundations in CAFTA,
NAFTA and other FTAs, is going to be another neoliberal block. We'll
have 4 huge neoliberal blocks. What are the odds that these blocks
will unite partialy or fully?... THAT is globalization at its peak.
Let me say a simple truth: money made out of thin air by private banks
WILL NEVER BRING LASTING PROSPERITY. Whether it's the AMERO, the LOONY
or the PESSO, it will never ever work because it's -mathematically
impossible- .
What we need is decentralization, organized anarchy, power at a local
level - where people can democratically control it.
The only thing which will result from the 4 major neoliberal blocks,
uniting, will truly be the world of "Nineteen Eighty-Four" as depicted
by George Orwell and if you haven't read the book or seen the movie
(1984), please do so now.
(my homepage here) 9
February 09, 2007
a guest: Amilcar
Canada is being put to rest by the Zionist Corporatocry...
RIP Canada10
February 09, 2007
a guest: mallee ...
& ditto Australia11
February 09, 2007
vicjoe: vicjoe-different social psychologies
The Americans and US-wannabe's may be in for a surprise. The varieties
of social character, that collection of values and attitudes that
determine how people see their relationship to each other, to
government and to neighbouring countries, etc., are distinctly not the
same in all three countries. Michael Adams' book _Fire and Ice: the
United States, Canada and the Myth of Converging Values_ is an
in-depth scientific comparison and contrast of social character
clusters of values in each country. Though the American values are
largely 'fire' they are of a reactionary/polarized nature and fit well
with the identification of American unique exceptionalism as espoused
by their elites, whereas the 'ice' characterization of Canadians point
to a whole different view of such things as authority, exclusion
(in-group/out-group perceptions), status and security, etc. US is a
melting pot, Canada is a Cultural Mosaic. Most of the attitudes of
Canadians are like the iceberg, 9/10ths are hidden below the surface.
Once these "harmonization" moves become widely known, there will be
quiet but protracted resistance, that is predicted from the data. And,
though I don't have any data on social character in Mexico, it is a
fact that at least half of Mexico's population is angrily aware
already of having been ripped off in their fraudulent presidential
election, and have engaged in forms of protest that you'd never see in
the USA. So, between the cool but determined Canadians and the Red Hot
Pepper characteristics of the Mexicans, this will never wash in the
long run. Canadians do take special vengeance at the polls and
Mexicans don't hesitate to hit the streets and take over whole cities
in protest, etc.
As for the "Amero" it matters not that it is supposedly backed by
gold; if holders can't actually exchange it for gold, it will receive
no greater global recognition than the ruined dollar that preceded it.
But, it is quite possible that it will be created, especially since
Canada has the largest concentration of gold mining companies on
Earth, and the Canadian Mint has been hoarding gold for years (they
plan to release a few massive 200 kg gold coins in the next month,
valued at over $1 million). Much has been said about the "Federal
Reserve" being in fact a private corporation, but not as many know
that the "Bank of Canada" is a "crown corporation" with the same
characteristics (gov't. appointed board members, but otherwise
private/non-publicly held). But, where does this leave Mexico, which
has neither the gold or huge GNP? I doubt they will get Amero's as a
gift, they'll have to pay dearly to stay in the game, which will
trickle down to the poorest and most disenfranchized citizens, who
having nothing to lose may very well ratchet up their already strong
tendency to collective defiance. The only benefit to the US of the
Amero is that countries like China (and Japan and Canada) who hold
massive amounts of US bucks, will be forced to trade them in at about
a 3 to 1 concession rate.
So, it won't take long for the world to recognize that the Amero is
another crackpot scheme and to reject it in favor of the Euro, gold or
no gold for backing. Uh, as an aside, what happened to the masses of
gold that disappeared in truck loads from the basement of the WTC
buildings right after Sept. 11? Hmmm. 12
February 09, 2007
Resistant: ...
What does corporate U.S. want from Canada? Oil, water, a
'complimentary' economy, political compliance including a few soldiers
and ships (as the H.M.C.S. Ottawa to the Persian Gulf now). Having
slid from under British hegemony into essential economic control by
the U.S. prior to 1900 (!), Canadians have a tough time evading
thought-control. 13
February 09, 2007
forrwen: This is NAFTA on steroids
The Canadian Action Party (www.canadianactionparty.ca) has been
talking about this since the agreement was initially signed by Paul
Martin, George Bush and Vincente Fox in 2005, and finalized by Stephen
Harper in 2006. This crosses party lines - there is no difference
between Liberals and Conservatives (they are corporatists) and the NDP
is asleep at the switch. And it all spells the end of sovereignty of 3
nations, and the two that will suffer the most will be Canada and
Mexico. They are even proposing a common currency called the Amero.
The Fathers of Confederation and the Founding Fathers of America would
turn over in their graves.
Check out: Hoodwinked: The Myth of Free
Tradehttp://stopspp.com/stopspp/?page_id=11
Secret Banff Meeting of CEOs and the Defense Establishment :
Militarization and the Deconstruction of North America:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20060919&articleId=3274
Stephen Harper's "Quisling" government pursues further
talks for U.S. take-over of Canada
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NOR20060916&articleId=3243
14
February 09, 2007
Dante: You can't have unity with Bullies
why not an AMERICAN union? Encompassing the continent named AMERICA in
its entirety, north, central and south? Impossible because the U.S.
will only want to be front and center, like a spoiled brat. That
Mexico has been included in this is surprising, but don't fret people,
Canada and the U.S. will benefit from their work force. More people to
work for less than minimum wage, more people to kick out when they've
outlived their usefulness. Bigotry knows no bounds.15
February 09, 2007
a guest: Raven: North American Union has interesting aspects
Albeit having the appaerance of a positive development on first sight,
a North American Union would be only a stepping stone towards One
World Government, a NAU would be a province of the One World. The
European Union is only just that. We will have an African Union and a
Far Eat Union, including Oceania. Everything is ready and planned for
long ago. If you respect a soveign nation and a sovereign culture,
this is a develoment which cannot be accepted. As for the NAU, read
about the Monroe doctrine: Canada and Mexico are of historical
necessity to become underUS control16
February 09, 2007
kla: dragomir bigger the unit, bigger the king
Exactly right. A comparison can be made with business; when there were
countless telephone companies and instead of two or three in the US.
everything about it was better as there were no great, greedy lords
over it all. Contrary to all other facets of business in the US, steel
went from huge (all in Pittsburgh) to decentralized, years ago. Good
move.17
February 09, 2007
lday: U.S.'s FDA, USDA corrupted
Since Reagan's team 'cut red tape' and 'fought bureaucracy' U.S.'
standards have severely deteriorated as a web search for aspartame or
Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone will demonstrate. Why Canada would
want to harmonize standards is truly baffling.18
February 09, 2007
a guest: Total Control
The people behind the North American Union are the same finance driven
globalists who are behind the EU, behind the African Union, behind the
formation of the UN, etc. The goal is global integration and a single
global economy.
For example, the signers of the EU Constitution agree to surrender
their sovereign authority to the EU. They maintain their existing
government structures and law making bodies, but they haved signed
over their rule of law to the authority of the EU - which is
Constitutionally bound to follow the primary tenets of the United
Nations.
That structure would likely be implemented in North America as
well.The goal of the globalist financiers who are running the effort
is total control. China is likely a model state for their ultimate
objectives - a controlled society that is geared towards the support
of industry to profit private finance.
The only effective solution is to resist international integration in
favor of free states that pursue individual liberty rather than
integrated states who force dependence upon government.19
February 09, 2007
BekkaPoo: ...
"Top military brass, corporate executives and diplomats also attended
the meeting..."
Enough said. Guess who's interests will be served..? Not yours. : )20
February 09, 2007
a guest: Canada could use this to its advantage.
Note: A crown corporation CANNOT be privately owned unless privatized.
The Bank of Canada, regulated by the Bank of Canada Act, was
originally a private corp, but it was nationalized as a Crown
Corporation in 1938. So I'm sorry, that's merely a conspiracy theory
with little substance.
The integration is scary, very true. However, look at it this way: If
Canada were to give it's 6 month notice on NAFTA (which guarantees the
US 68% of our energy exports), and teamed up with Mexico who also
supplies a lot of the US' oil, that leverage can be very powerful. The
US can ignore WTO resolutions against it, so that's not an issue. Use
energy as a potent force. And for those who worry about the "invasion
of Canada" scenario, it will never happen. That gives China a pretext
to declare war against the US, and the US military can't compete with
that kind of man(woman)power at the moment.
This is if we move to a more global governing structure. Personally, I
feel we do need an effective world government with teeth, so that
things like Darfur or Rwanda can't go unpunished with appeasement.21
February 09, 2007
trollmannen: Rumsfeld Makes The Cast? Surprise, surprise...
PNAC, New World Order, Bushco, etc. Are we connecting the dots?
Rumsfeld was not fired. Anybody who believes that is fooling
themselves. He was reassigned to another front in the same war for a
one world government. This should be no surprise to anybody.
In his Defense Dept. job, Wolfowitz was taking a lot of heat in the
press and by public opinion. He was reassigned to another New World
Order post. Fir crying out loud, he runs The World Bank!! No outcry,
as most people are clueless about this post.
The scary part isn't that Bushco does these things. It's that they are
done so openly, which suggests public opinion is no longer relevant.
This has been recently proven by the new and worthless democrapic
congress...22
February 09, 2007
Arvy: @ guest #21
THANK YOU for that clarification on Crown Corps. As a retired public
servant, I sometimes wonder were the pseudo-expertise on the Canadian
system exhibited here and elsewhere comes from. There are plenty of
real problems that need to be addressed without adding any inventions.
As for a truly Canadian energy policy (with or without Mexico's
participation) you're right in saying that we'd have to abrogate NAFTA
to get there. Personally, I think it would be well worth it,
especially since the US honours it only when convenient (i.e., to its
own advantage) as with all of its other treaty obligations.
Unfortunately, we have our own share of misguided
corporatist-continentalists.23
February 09, 2007
a guest: Goodbye Nationality!
The U. S. will have it's way with neighbors exactly the same way it
wields authority in the middle east. Might (and total media spin
control) makes right. If the merger happens, the traditional ways of
Canada and Mexico will slowly disappear, and the new mode of
"civilization" as defined by American media, will consume these
societies and their respective economies from the youth up. Carefully
planned homogenization of present diversity into a unified front will
enable detente with the European Union to establish a foothold for
"western" global dominance.24
February 09, 2007
Helen from Canada: ...
whats amazing is that they are talking about pooling our energy
sources. what this really means is pooling canadians energy sources so
that the americans take advantage of yet another scam.
the last conservatives signed the free trade agreement behind our
backs and we lsot billions to america, imagine how much we will be
losing this time.
Canadians have to stand up now before its to late. with the backing of
the american corporate gov't we wont have a chance to throw out this
immoral gov't that has so undoubtedly sold canada to the americans.
I refuse to let this go through without a fight. and if all canadians
stand up they wont be able to get away with it.
as far as i'm concerned the americans can pay for the resources just
like eveyrone else. 25
February 09, 2007
Dante: #24
The U.S. already HAS its way with neighbors, especially with their
southern neighbors. 26
February 09, 2007
a guest: Mike Evans: An American
The few Americans who are even aware of the NAU are against it. Just
like you all. Most Americans are too self-centered, distracted, or
brain-washed to even know this is happening, but if they did know
they'd also be against it. The only people in America who are for the
NAU are the ones who dreamed it up. The ones who profit. The Corporate
elite. I just though the distinction should be made between America
the contry and the American people who live here. Not that they
deserve it. Stupid sheeple.27
February 09, 2007
Resistant: ...
Canadians who favour this are serving the interests of further
subsumption of 'the true North strong and free' (ha) by the U.S. In
this bargain with the devil, Canadians will always be seen as
inferiors, sitting on resources that propoerly belong to the
Superpower. If your values (using the term loosely) are USian, you
have the neoConservatives, many 'Liberals', and most of the
manufacturers of consent on your side. Like the Austrians circa. 1935.
But you haven't won yet. And don't bother to blame the Zionists, who
only have the clout the overarching system allows them because of
common aims. 28
February 09, 2007
Arvy: That distinction is difficult to maintain.
Although the reality is an ever-widening gulf between the "ruling
class" (no, the US is not a classless society) and ordinary Americans,
the United States of America claims very loudly and very frequently to
be "the greatest democracy on earth". It is on that basis, in fact,
that it deems itself worthy and awards itself the "manifest destiny"
of delivering its style of "freedom and democracy" to others.
While the rest of world (including many of your near neighbours) may
dismiss the propaganda for what it is, it tends to place a
considerable burden of responsibility on "the people" just the same,
especially since most of them seem to endorse all of those ritualistic
exceptionalist claims themselves. You can claim that you didn't
actually elect the current war criminal President, but he remains in
office for a second term nevertheless.29
February 09, 2007
a guest: otto
From Canada, and with Maude Badlow and Council of Canadians, there are
issues of Canadian sovereigndty being lost. The U.S. already has
Canada locked into sending most of idts oil dto the U.S. because of
NAFTA - while having to import oil for Canadians from abroad. The next
big thing is water, which the U.S. wants to send by pipeline to
southern states from Canada. Barlow says water is the next big issue,
in her book "Blue Gold". Most Canadians don't know what's going on,
and Harper is pretty well a Bush fan. Also, British Columbia and
Alberta are pushing for TILMA, which looks like intergration between
provinces but like NAFTA moves to integration with the States and loss
of Canadian sovereignty; it has rules like NAFTA.30
February 09, 2007
a guest: ...
So long as each nation can remain a nation within the Economic Union
of North America, it's for the good. If we do not cooperate
economically then our separate economies will be smothered by the
Chinese nation, the European Union, the Commonwealth Of Independent
States (Russia, Kazakhstan mostly) and eventually an Indian Union
(India-Indonesia). Each country in the EU is still independent but all
cooperate for an increasingly stronger economy. What they are doing,
Americans (USA, Canada and Latin America) can do as well or better. Do
you other guys really want the nations of the Americas dominated by
China? It's not giving up being nations but common sense
cooperating.31
February 09, 2007
kla: the label democracy - why not some hybrids?
`United States of America claims very loudly and very frequently to be
"the greatest democracy on earth".' So much propaganda, standard of
the days.
The candidates for the greatest "democracy" might be any one of the
Scandinavian countries. Can't say, not being an authority. However,
have a lot of connections with Denmark and they are complaining.
The POWER has no national boundaries, as does not (and not
disconnected) the financial world. Its nominal base now is the US,
which is being had, big time. Nationalism is not in its vocabulary,
except to pump up the fools, and it is safe to claim that there has
never been an equal to the collection of fool currently in the US.
There is too much cooperation evolving from Canada, Australia, and
Germany. Could become clones, wall to wall Starbucks. Already a McFats
in every Altstadt in Germany. 32
February 09, 2007
moonwolf: We're not done yet!
Many more Canadians than USA'ns are up to date on a least the
superficial information from countries around the world, and few of us
believe much of what our central government says about anything,
unlike our USA'n neighbours who are in the thrall of their dumbass
president.
As Canadians we tend to eschew violence and overt behaviour and employ
reason and conversation, but do not for a moment think that when
certain lines are crossed we won't take matters into our own hands.
We also have no history of world wide imperialist ventures.
Many Canadian federal governments have been turfed out with extreme
prejudice on a variety of issues and I do not believe that all the
main Canadian Political parties nor MP's are onside with globalization
and rampant capitalism.
Canada is unique in the world as it rides the back of the elephant
with all the challenges that presents and yet reaps the benefits of
such a position as well. Though we tow the line in many ways we have
in the past and will in the future follow our own path regardless of
the stinky elephant.
The third party in this triad is Mexico, and though Canada is rather
sedate and avoids confrontation the Mexican people have been fighting
oppression and possession for centuries and will not be afraid to
violently oppose such a union, in fact watch the news; they already
are!
What many people forgoet too is that Canadians turned back an invasion
by the USA, pushed down deep into the uS militarily and burned the
Whitehouse! No other country in the world has done so!
We remain quiet, and try every other avenue, and then we explode
becoming one of the most formidable groups of fighters on the
planet.33
February 09, 2007
a guest: Integration
Why would Canada want to be integrated with the U.S.? We are not
universally hated around the world, we do not cause murder and mayhem
everywhere we go, we do not rape and pillage third world countries and
we do not believe that might makes right! In other words we have
nothing at all in common with the U.S.34
February 09, 2007
vicjoe: Crown Corporation - case study
Official definition:
Crown corporation (soci
Canadian, U.S. and Mexican officials held secretive meeting on integration
Thursday, 08 February 2007
By Kelly Patterson
CanWest News Service
Canadian, U.S. and Mexican politicians discussed using
"stealth" to overcome public resistance to the
integration of the three countries at a confidential
meeting last year, according to documents just released
under U.S. Freedom of Information laws.
08/02/07 "Ottawa Citizen" -- -- Top military brass, corporate
executives and diplomats also attended the meeting in Banff, Alta.,
where participants discussed everything from the harmonization of food
and drug standards, to common immigration policies, and the pooling of
energy resources. The secret guest list of the North American Forum
included then-U.S. secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld, Canadian
Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier, Public Safety Minister
Stockwell Day, Pengrowth Corp. CEO James Kinnear and Lockheed Martin
executive Ron Covais.
Presentation outlines for the forum acknowledge that the concept of
North American integration - which some call a "North American Union"
- is unpopular, and note that it might be tough to sell as a concept.
"While a vision is appealing, working on the infrastructure might
yield more benefit and bring more people on board ('evolution by
stealth')," the notes said.
"Evolution by stealth" means using regulatory changes, such as food-
and drug-safety benchmarks, which don't require parliamentary
approval, to lay the infrastructure for North American integration.
This allows for change with little or no public debate, critics say.
Media were excluded from the September forum, and Day, who gave a
speech at the event, declined to reveal the contents of his talk. "It
was meant as a private meeting," said Melisa Leclerc, a spokeswoman
from Day's office, although she conceded he attended "in his capacity
as minister for public security."
"It is not encouraging to see the phrase 'evolution by stealth' in
reference to important policy debates such as North American
integration," said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a
Washington-based conservative watchdog group that obtained the
documents last week.
But, former finance minister John Manley, who attended the meeting,
said the forum was "not part of a nefarious plan to yield sovereignty
to the U.S. .... It was just some informed private citizens and
government officials having a conversation" on how best to co-operate
to ensure their citizens enjoyed a safe and prosperous future.
In fact, he said, Canada comes out stronger than ever from such
meetings, which force "some senior American officials to think about
Canada for a few days."
However, Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians said the reference
to stealth is "a very telling and important statement."
Many of the politicians who attended the forum have been pursuing
"integration by stealth" for the past two years, she said, pointing to
a little-known but top-priority agreement called the Security and
Prosperity Partnership.
The accord, kickstarted by U.S. President George W. Bush, then-prime
minister Paul Martin and former Mexican president Vicente Fox at a
2005 meeting in Waco, Texas, is designed to streamline everything from
food and drug safety standards to counter-terrorism measures.
Government officials from the three countries are expected to meet in
Ottawa later this month. However, Foreign Affairs spokespeople said
they did not yet know when it would be held or who would attend.
The partnership's stated goal is to protect North America from
security threats such as terrorism and flu pandemics as well as
economic threats from new global-market giants such as China.
Many of the accord's measures are not contentious, such as plans to
improve water quality, reduce sulphur in fuels, and co-ordinate
efforts to fight pandemics and avian flu. But it also covers a host of
hot-button issues such as plans to enhance data-sharing on high-risk
travellers, revamp safety and environmental regulations, centralize
the assessment of new chemicals and rework food safety standards.
Most of the 300 policy recommendations within the accord may not
require legislative changes, the Council of Canadians said.
Ottawa Citizen
CanWest News Service 2007
Link to this page: http://www.ichblog.eu/content/view/444/1/
CK1: ...
I don't like the sound of this one bit. And, I suspect they are just
laying the groundwork for the North American Union, and hoping for
some catalyst to make it come together -- like, say, a New Pearl
Harbor perchance? That could come in many forms, not just overt
"terrorism" or false-flag events -- it could be bird flu or an
engineered economic crisis (underway as we type). The AMERO is on the
horizon folks -- protect yourself from the coming dollar devaluation
as soon as you can.
Dollar Fall Is Catalyst For Predatory Global Government
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2006/011206dollarfall.htm1
February 08, 2007
Arvy: Not new news.
Although many Canadians remain unaware, this actually goes back to an
agreement entered into by our former Prime Minister, Paul Martin --
the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. It hasn't
been front page news because all of the politicos involved prefer to
keep us ordinary folks in the dark on this one.
It just goes to prove the point that has been made here by others. The
US isn't the only country whose politics is dominated by vested
interests under a "two-party" facade.2
February 08, 2007
kla: Secret is the word of times.
Everything is secret. When you have a lot to hide, that is, to
maintain the (ignoble) advantage, you keep it secret.
How is the football field north south across the continent
progressing. Have not had an update. When this happens, that will the
last time I leave New Mexico.
If anything were for the benefit of the public, it would be a
different matter. But maybe when adults behave like children, they
should be so treated.3
February 08, 2007
Hammurabi: This is reall scary for a lot of countries!
A Union of North America is a scary concept for the rest of the world.
All the strings will be pulled from Washington.
Think about that, world!
It will involve a lot of deeeeeeeeeeeeep changes. maybe none for the
better.4
February 08, 2007
Arvy: For the rest of the world?
I think it's even scarier for us who live here on the continent. The
so-called "security and prosperity partnership" sounds a lot like
"freedom and democracy".5
February 09, 2007
Turtle: ...
They get to take Canada seriously for a few days?
I'm sure some of the London street walkers felt the same way about
Jack the Ripper.
There goes the neighbourhood!!!
and so it all goes...
T.6
February 09, 2007
paulwhois: Why not a North American Union?
When you think about the benefits that have accrued to Europe with its
Union, we have to ask, "Why not Here?" The answer is that the fear
card may have been played here far too often. People see integration
as infiltration. Until our leaders find a way to get across the need
for integration it will remain that way. Assuming the three countries
can agree on basic regulations for protecting the environment,
security, and quality of life, we can combine technical and
engineering resources with a vibrant labor force, we can build a joint
economic engine that will compete with the Asian and European markets
of the world. For once our leaders have it right.7
February 09, 2007
a guest: Amilcar ----- From the CEO of Canada Paul Martin to the
MiniBush of Canada Harper, Canada is sold to the higher bidder ...
Indeed former CEO/PM of Canada Paul Martin signed the so called
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. Did you
know??!!! This asshole Paul Martin did not pay taxes on his
multi-million Shipping Company running under a Bahamas Flag of
Convenience (FOC)
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/martin_paul/flagsofconvenience.html
There goes Canada... most recently the present neo-con Canadian PM
Harper/Bush's whore who his election campain has been partially
financed by Evangelical Christian Amrerican "friends" has just created
the Canadian AIPAC/Jewish Caucus! And again they did not talk about it
that much in the Canadian MSM...The Canadian Public has always been
kept in dark...Told you same **** different flag!!! Amazing indeed!
What's happening to this F world?
8
February 09, 2007
dragomir: sucks
Don't get me wrong, but it's a bad idea in every way. What we need is
decentralization, not the opposite.
NO, the EU has not brought good to Europe, it has brought monopoly to
a handful of organizations and has removed the sovereignty and
Independence of a lot of people. The seeming prosperity is only the
result of globalization, of exploitation of the poor countries by the
EU. This we do not see or take into account when looking at the EU
normally. The EU is a block and it only works as long as the rest of
Europe, Asia and Africa are poor. The EU alone is useless as it can
not support its neoliberal policies and prosperity without exploiting
poor defenseless people. As long as a few people have a monopoly over
all trade in the EU, the rest of the World will have to go through
them. There is also the neoliberal ASEAN block in Asia. Africa has the
neoliberal African Union block. South America is being rocked by
Chavez and his social policies which are not aligned with the rest of
the trading blocks, he's doing a wonderful job of restoring
sovereignty to his people and to South America in general.
The North American block, which already has foundations in CAFTA,
NAFTA and other FTAs, is going to be another neoliberal block. We'll
have 4 huge neoliberal blocks. What are the odds that these blocks
will unite partialy or fully?... THAT is globalization at its peak.
Let me say a simple truth: money made out of thin air by private banks
WILL NEVER BRING LASTING PROSPERITY. Whether it's the AMERO, the LOONY
or the PESSO, it will never ever work because it's -mathematically
impossible- .
What we need is decentralization, organized anarchy, power at a local
level - where people can democratically control it.
The only thing which will result from the 4 major neoliberal blocks,
uniting, will truly be the world of "Nineteen Eighty-Four" as depicted
by George Orwell and if you haven't read the book or seen the movie
(1984), please do so now.
(my homepage here) 9
February 09, 2007
a guest: Amilcar
Canada is being put to rest by the Zionist Corporatocry...
RIP Canada10
February 09, 2007
a guest: mallee ...
& ditto Australia11
February 09, 2007
vicjoe: vicjoe-different social psychologies
The Americans and US-wannabe's may be in for a surprise. The varieties
of social character, that collection of values and attitudes that
determine how people see their relationship to each other, to
government and to neighbouring countries, etc., are distinctly not the
same in all three countries. Michael Adams' book _Fire and Ice: the
United States, Canada and the Myth of Converging Values_ is an
in-depth scientific comparison and contrast of social character
clusters of values in each country. Though the American values are
largely 'fire' they are of a reactionary/polarized nature and fit well
with the identification of American unique exceptionalism as espoused
by their elites, whereas the 'ice' characterization of Canadians point
to a whole different view of such things as authority, exclusion
(in-group/out-group perceptions), status and security, etc. US is a
melting pot, Canada is a Cultural Mosaic. Most of the attitudes of
Canadians are like the iceberg, 9/10ths are hidden below the surface.
Once these "harmonization" moves become widely known, there will be
quiet but protracted resistance, that is predicted from the data. And,
though I don't have any data on social character in Mexico, it is a
fact that at least half of Mexico's population is angrily aware
already of having been ripped off in their fraudulent presidential
election, and have engaged in forms of protest that you'd never see in
the USA. So, between the cool but determined Canadians and the Red Hot
Pepper characteristics of the Mexicans, this will never wash in the
long run. Canadians do take special vengeance at the polls and
Mexicans don't hesitate to hit the streets and take over whole cities
in protest, etc.
As for the "Amero" it matters not that it is supposedly backed by
gold; if holders can't actually exchange it for gold, it will receive
no greater global recognition than the ruined dollar that preceded it.
But, it is quite possible that it will be created, especially since
Canada has the largest concentration of gold mining companies on
Earth, and the Canadian Mint has been hoarding gold for years (they
plan to release a few massive 200 kg gold coins in the next month,
valued at over $1 million). Much has been said about the "Federal
Reserve" being in fact a private corporation, but not as many know
that the "Bank of Canada" is a "crown corporation" with the same
characteristics (gov't. appointed board members, but otherwise
private/non-publicly held). But, where does this leave Mexico, which
has neither the gold or huge GNP? I doubt they will get Amero's as a
gift, they'll have to pay dearly to stay in the game, which will
trickle down to the poorest and most disenfranchized citizens, who
having nothing to lose may very well ratchet up their already strong
tendency to collective defiance. The only benefit to the US of the
Amero is that countries like China (and Japan and Canada) who hold
massive amounts of US bucks, will be forced to trade them in at about
a 3 to 1 concession rate.
So, it won't take long for the world to recognize that the Amero is
another crackpot scheme and to reject it in favor of the Euro, gold or
no gold for backing. Uh, as an aside, what happened to the masses of
gold that disappeared in truck loads from the basement of the WTC
buildings right after Sept. 11? Hmmm. 12
February 09, 2007
Resistant: ...
What does corporate U.S. want from Canada? Oil, water, a
'complimentary' economy, political compliance including a few soldiers
and ships (as the H.M.C.S. Ottawa to the Persian Gulf now). Having
slid from under British hegemony into essential economic control by
the U.S. prior to 1900 (!), Canadians have a tough time evading
thought-control. 13
February 09, 2007
forrwen: This is NAFTA on steroids
The Canadian Action Party (www.canadianactionparty.ca) has been
talking about this since the agreement was initially signed by Paul
Martin, George Bush and Vincente Fox in 2005, and finalized by Stephen
Harper in 2006. This crosses party lines - there is no difference
between Liberals and Conservatives (they are corporatists) and the NDP
is asleep at the switch. And it all spells the end of sovereignty of 3
nations, and the two that will suffer the most will be Canada and
Mexico. They are even proposing a common currency called the Amero.
The Fathers of Confederation and the Founding Fathers of America would
turn over in their graves.
Check out: Hoodwinked: The Myth of Free
Tradehttp://stopspp.com/stopspp/?page_id=11
Secret Banff Meeting of CEOs and the Defense Establishment :
Militarization and the Deconstruction of North America:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20060919&articleId=3274
Stephen Harper's "Quisling" government pursues further
talks for U.S. take-over of Canada
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NOR20060916&articleId=3243
14
February 09, 2007
Dante: You can't have unity with Bullies
why not an AMERICAN union? Encompassing the continent named AMERICA in
its entirety, north, central and south? Impossible because the U.S.
will only want to be front and center, like a spoiled brat. That
Mexico has been included in this is surprising, but don't fret people,
Canada and the U.S. will benefit from their work force. More people to
work for less than minimum wage, more people to kick out when they've
outlived their usefulness. Bigotry knows no bounds.15
February 09, 2007
a guest: Raven: North American Union has interesting aspects
Albeit having the appaerance of a positive development on first sight,
a North American Union would be only a stepping stone towards One
World Government, a NAU would be a province of the One World. The
European Union is only just that. We will have an African Union and a
Far Eat Union, including Oceania. Everything is ready and planned for
long ago. If you respect a soveign nation and a sovereign culture,
this is a develoment which cannot be accepted. As for the NAU, read
about the Monroe doctrine: Canada and Mexico are of historical
necessity to become underUS control16
February 09, 2007
kla: dragomir bigger the unit, bigger the king
Exactly right. A comparison can be made with business; when there were
countless telephone companies and instead of two or three in the US.
everything about it was better as there were no great, greedy lords
over it all. Contrary to all other facets of business in the US, steel
went from huge (all in Pittsburgh) to decentralized, years ago. Good
move.17
February 09, 2007
lday: U.S.'s FDA, USDA corrupted
Since Reagan's team 'cut red tape' and 'fought bureaucracy' U.S.'
standards have severely deteriorated as a web search for aspartame or
Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone will demonstrate. Why Canada would
want to harmonize standards is truly baffling.18
February 09, 2007
a guest: Total Control
The people behind the North American Union are the same finance driven
globalists who are behind the EU, behind the African Union, behind the
formation of the UN, etc. The goal is global integration and a single
global economy.
For example, the signers of the EU Constitution agree to surrender
their sovereign authority to the EU. They maintain their existing
government structures and law making bodies, but they haved signed
over their rule of law to the authority of the EU - which is
Constitutionally bound to follow the primary tenets of the United
Nations.
That structure would likely be implemented in North America as
well.The goal of the globalist financiers who are running the effort
is total control. China is likely a model state for their ultimate
objectives - a controlled society that is geared towards the support
of industry to profit private finance.
The only effective solution is to resist international integration in
favor of free states that pursue individual liberty rather than
integrated states who force dependence upon government.19
February 09, 2007
BekkaPoo: ...
"Top military brass, corporate executives and diplomats also attended
the meeting..."
Enough said. Guess who's interests will be served..? Not yours. : )20
February 09, 2007
a guest: Canada could use this to its advantage.
Note: A crown corporation CANNOT be privately owned unless privatized.
The Bank of Canada, regulated by the Bank of Canada Act, was
originally a private corp, but it was nationalized as a Crown
Corporation in 1938. So I'm sorry, that's merely a conspiracy theory
with little substance.
The integration is scary, very true. However, look at it this way: If
Canada were to give it's 6 month notice on NAFTA (which guarantees the
US 68% of our energy exports), and teamed up with Mexico who also
supplies a lot of the US' oil, that leverage can be very powerful. The
US can ignore WTO resolutions against it, so that's not an issue. Use
energy as a potent force. And for those who worry about the "invasion
of Canada" scenario, it will never happen. That gives China a pretext
to declare war against the US, and the US military can't compete with
that kind of man(woman)power at the moment.
This is if we move to a more global governing structure. Personally, I
feel we do need an effective world government with teeth, so that
things like Darfur or Rwanda can't go unpunished with appeasement.21
February 09, 2007
trollmannen: Rumsfeld Makes The Cast? Surprise, surprise...
PNAC, New World Order, Bushco, etc. Are we connecting the dots?
Rumsfeld was not fired. Anybody who believes that is fooling
themselves. He was reassigned to another front in the same war for a
one world government. This should be no surprise to anybody.
In his Defense Dept. job, Wolfowitz was taking a lot of heat in the
press and by public opinion. He was reassigned to another New World
Order post. Fir crying out loud, he runs The World Bank!! No outcry,
as most people are clueless about this post.
The scary part isn't that Bushco does these things. It's that they are
done so openly, which suggests public opinion is no longer relevant.
This has been recently proven by the new and worthless democrapic
congress...22
February 09, 2007
Arvy: @ guest #21
THANK YOU for that clarification on Crown Corps. As a retired public
servant, I sometimes wonder were the pseudo-expertise on the Canadian
system exhibited here and elsewhere comes from. There are plenty of
real problems that need to be addressed without adding any inventions.
As for a truly Canadian energy policy (with or without Mexico's
participation) you're right in saying that we'd have to abrogate NAFTA
to get there. Personally, I think it would be well worth it,
especially since the US honours it only when convenient (i.e., to its
own advantage) as with all of its other treaty obligations.
Unfortunately, we have our own share of misguided
corporatist-continentalists.23
February 09, 2007
a guest: Goodbye Nationality!
The U. S. will have it's way with neighbors exactly the same way it
wields authority in the middle east. Might (and total media spin
control) makes right. If the merger happens, the traditional ways of
Canada and Mexico will slowly disappear, and the new mode of
"civilization" as defined by American media, will consume these
societies and their respective economies from the youth up. Carefully
planned homogenization of present diversity into a unified front will
enable detente with the European Union to establish a foothold for
"western" global dominance.24
February 09, 2007
Helen from Canada: ...
whats amazing is that they are talking about pooling our energy
sources. what this really means is pooling canadians energy sources so
that the americans take advantage of yet another scam.
the last conservatives signed the free trade agreement behind our
backs and we lsot billions to america, imagine how much we will be
losing this time.
Canadians have to stand up now before its to late. with the backing of
the american corporate gov't we wont have a chance to throw out this
immoral gov't that has so undoubtedly sold canada to the americans.
I refuse to let this go through without a fight. and if all canadians
stand up they wont be able to get away with it.
as far as i'm concerned the americans can pay for the resources just
like eveyrone else. 25
February 09, 2007
Dante: #24
The U.S. already HAS its way with neighbors, especially with their
southern neighbors. 26
February 09, 2007
a guest: Mike Evans: An American
The few Americans who are even aware of the NAU are against it. Just
like you all. Most Americans are too self-centered, distracted, or
brain-washed to even know this is happening, but if they did know
they'd also be against it. The only people in America who are for the
NAU are the ones who dreamed it up. The ones who profit. The Corporate
elite. I just though the distinction should be made between America
the contry and the American people who live here. Not that they
deserve it. Stupid sheeple.27
February 09, 2007
Resistant: ...
Canadians who favour this are serving the interests of further
subsumption of 'the true North strong and free' (ha) by the U.S. In
this bargain with the devil, Canadians will always be seen as
inferiors, sitting on resources that propoerly belong to the
Superpower. If your values (using the term loosely) are USian, you
have the neoConservatives, many 'Liberals', and most of the
manufacturers of consent on your side. Like the Austrians circa. 1935.
But you haven't won yet. And don't bother to blame the Zionists, who
only have the clout the overarching system allows them because of
common aims. 28
February 09, 2007
Arvy: That distinction is difficult to maintain.
Although the reality is an ever-widening gulf between the "ruling
class" (no, the US is not a classless society) and ordinary Americans,
the United States of America claims very loudly and very frequently to
be "the greatest democracy on earth". It is on that basis, in fact,
that it deems itself worthy and awards itself the "manifest destiny"
of delivering its style of "freedom and democracy" to others.
While the rest of world (including many of your near neighbours) may
dismiss the propaganda for what it is, it tends to place a
considerable burden of responsibility on "the people" just the same,
especially since most of them seem to endorse all of those ritualistic
exceptionalist claims themselves. You can claim that you didn't
actually elect the current war criminal President, but he remains in
office for a second term nevertheless.29
February 09, 2007
a guest: otto
From Canada, and with Maude Badlow and Council of Canadians, there are
issues of Canadian sovereigndty being lost. The U.S. already has
Canada locked into sending most of idts oil dto the U.S. because of
NAFTA - while having to import oil for Canadians from abroad. The next
big thing is water, which the U.S. wants to send by pipeline to
southern states from Canada. Barlow says water is the next big issue,
in her book "Blue Gold". Most Canadians don't know what's going on,
and Harper is pretty well a Bush fan. Also, British Columbia and
Alberta are pushing for TILMA, which looks like intergration between
provinces but like NAFTA moves to integration with the States and loss
of Canadian sovereignty; it has rules like NAFTA.30
February 09, 2007
a guest: ...
So long as each nation can remain a nation within the Economic Union
of North America, it's for the good. If we do not cooperate
economically then our separate economies will be smothered by the
Chinese nation, the European Union, the Commonwealth Of Independent
States (Russia, Kazakhstan mostly) and eventually an Indian Union
(India-Indonesia). Each country in the EU is still independent but all
cooperate for an increasingly stronger economy. What they are doing,
Americans (USA, Canada and Latin America) can do as well or better. Do
you other guys really want the nations of the Americas dominated by
China? It's not giving up being nations but common sense
cooperating.31
February 09, 2007
kla: the label democracy - why not some hybrids?
`United States of America claims very loudly and very frequently to be
"the greatest democracy on earth".' So much propaganda, standard of
the days.
The candidates for the greatest "democracy" might be any one of the
Scandinavian countries. Can't say, not being an authority. However,
have a lot of connections with Denmark and they are complaining.
The POWER has no national boundaries, as does not (and not
disconnected) the financial world. Its nominal base now is the US,
which is being had, big time. Nationalism is not in its vocabulary,
except to pump up the fools, and it is safe to claim that there has
never been an equal to the collection of fool currently in the US.
There is too much cooperation evolving from Canada, Australia, and
Germany. Could become clones, wall to wall Starbucks. Already a McFats
in every Altstadt in Germany. 32
February 09, 2007
moonwolf: We're not done yet!
Many more Canadians than USA'ns are up to date on a least the
superficial information from countries around the world, and few of us
believe much of what our central government says about anything,
unlike our USA'n neighbours who are in the thrall of their dumbass
president.
As Canadians we tend to eschew violence and overt behaviour and employ
reason and conversation, but do not for a moment think that when
certain lines are crossed we won't take matters into our own hands.
We also have no history of world wide imperialist ventures.
Many Canadian federal governments have been turfed out with extreme
prejudice on a variety of issues and I do not believe that all the
main Canadian Political parties nor MP's are onside with globalization
and rampant capitalism.
Canada is unique in the world as it rides the back of the elephant
with all the challenges that presents and yet reaps the benefits of
such a position as well. Though we tow the line in many ways we have
in the past and will in the future follow our own path regardless of
the stinky elephant.
The third party in this triad is Mexico, and though Canada is rather
sedate and avoids confrontation the Mexican people have been fighting
oppression and possession for centuries and will not be afraid to
violently oppose such a union, in fact watch the news; they already
are!
What many people forgoet too is that Canadians turned back an invasion
by the USA, pushed down deep into the uS militarily and burned the
Whitehouse! No other country in the world has done so!
We remain quiet, and try every other avenue, and then we explode
becoming one of the most formidable groups of fighters on the
planet.33
February 09, 2007
a guest: Integration
Why would Canada want to be integrated with the U.S.? We are not
universally hated around the world, we do not cause murder and mayhem
everywhere we go, we do not rape and pillage third world countries and
we do not believe that might makes right! In other words we have
nothing at all in common with the U.S.34
February 09, 2007
vicjoe: Crown Corporation - case study
Official definition:
Crown corporation (soci