Archive for the ‘North American Union (NAU) agenda’ Category
Make a Donation. Support more articles like this one.
by Allison Wells
As some of you may know, Canada is in the process of aligning its policies with those of the USA. Very quietly. Without public debate. It is all part of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP-NAU) signed in Waco, Texas, 2005. This is not a left-right issue — Martin signed the accord, Harper is ardently continuing it. This seems to be a corporate-driven venture.
What does SPP mean for Canadians?
We are in the process of adopting U.S. immigration, security and foreign policy. SPP also commits Canada to supporting U.S.-lead wars on terror and increased military spending. Our military is now led by USA’s NORTHCOM. We now have no-fly lists. We are likely to have to accept fingerprinting and other biometrics. We will be required to treat immigrants and refugees differently.
Our resources will be proportionally shared. Huge areas of the U.S. are short of water. Our government is currently moving toward bulk exporting of water. Oil export will increase (now 63%) due to ‘proportional sharing’.
Lowered environmental and health protection. NAFTA already allows corporations to sue our federal governments when their regulations stand in the way of profit. SPP allows corporations to sue provincial and municipal governments — which is where many safety standards rest.
Loss of democracy — it is intended that Canada, USA and Mexico will merge into a North American Union (NAU), having one currency, the Amero. The Union will be overseen by 10 non-elected corporate CEOs from each country.
Accelerating privatisation of health care and other public services.
We need to consider diverse implications of the SPP-NAU agenda, and their effects for future generations.
If this is new to you, you might consider educating yourself — and your friends and family. Canadians have a right to know what has been is planned for them.
About the writer:
Allison Wells is a writer with downtown Toronto’s The Bulletin.
The Bulletin is an independent community newspaper to inform residents, visitors and businesses in Downtown Toronto. LINK.
Make a Donation. Support more articles like this one.
Make a Donation. Support more articles like this one.
by Derek Skinner
The path to a full understanding of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) is guarded by gatekeepers.
“What is a Gatekeeper?” you ask.
Think of it in a physical sense ? someone who stops you going through a gate. If the gate is in a field of knowledge it is someone who stops you learning what is at the next level of understanding and when you are dealing with progress it is someone who prevents you from taking the next step.
“How is that done?” you say.
It is done by — giving you false information — denying you access to the information you need to be able to understand what is going on, – diverting your attention — making you think you have taken the necessary step while actually standing still.
“Who are the gatekeepers?”
They are those who — lie to you — pretend there is nothing happening, – and lead you off down diversionary paths of inconsequential endeavours so that you never get around to dealing with the real problem.
The first two strategies were amply demonstrated by Messrs. Harper and Bush at Montebello, making out that the harmonizing of regulations for jellybeans would not threaten Canadian sovereignty and denying the existence of the NAFTA superhighway corridors that will join Mexico to Canada. The strategy would be a fair description of the Liberal and Conservative governments we have had for the last 30 years together with their corporate controlled national print, radio and TV media cartels.
The third strategy alone refers to the media emphasis on blood and sex, and that is ably supported by the American film industry which has a stranglehold on cinema outlets and movie distribution.
It is assumed that if you have read this far you know that there is a substantial part of civil society that is aware of the deceitful way that both Liberal and Conservative governments have been working for some thirty years to bring about the integration of Canada, the USA and Mexico into a North American Union (the NAU).
The dismantling of Canadian sovereignty, began with Canada’s acceptance of, and membership in, the globalization agenda of the then G7 in the mid 1970s. The first item on the agenda was to transfer control of Canadian Government’s money supply to the private banks. Canada is one of the few countries left in the world with a publicly owned central bank, which can provide for the infrastructure and social programme needs of Canadians at near zero interest, which it did from 1938 to 1974. The result of this transfer is that the Federal debt of $18 billion (since Confederation to 1974) has exploded into a debt of $500 + billion, most of which is compound interest. Each year we pay in excess of $30 billion in compound interest to the private money lenders for a debt that will never be repaid. Add in provincial and municipal debt and that amount is doubled! All of this we pay through various levels of taxation.
As Prime Minister Mackenzie King said in 1935 prior to nationalization of the Bank of Canada:
“Once a nation parts with control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes the nation’s laws. Usury, once in control, will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred responsibility, all talk of the sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile”
The NAU has been developed through the Free Trade agenda of the FTA (1988) and then NAFTA (1993), followed by the secretive agreement of the SPP (2005) and a host of other side agreements including unification of armed forces in NORTHCOM (2002), that have never been discussed outside of a cabal of senior government officials and military and corporate leaders; and not in Parliament. The secrecy has been facilitated by a fog of denial, distortion and deception in the corporate controlled media intended to keep most of the public in ignorance.
The NAU will be a corporate controlled body, ruled by an elite elected from the corporations, that will direct policy through tribunals that are mandated to protect corporate interests and profits. Civil society will be the ant colony in a fake Hollywood-style democracy, controlled through fear of an unending supply of contrived/phoney external enemies. The NAU plan is due for completion in 2010.
The last category of gatekeepers, is reserved for those who articulate the problem but stop short of taking that next vital step.
These are some of the lesser political parties and civil society NGOs.
Why on earth would a supposedly progressive party or NGO lead its supporters through the morass of ethical, legal, political elements of the “Stop the SPP” campaign, and then stop short of implementing the one action that will produce the stoppage results?
Several possibilities are listed below, in no particular order. Maybe you can think of some better alternatives. For brevity let’s call the co-operating party or NGO the “entity”. 1. The entity believes that, if the negative aspects of the SPP are understood by enough people, a groundswell of public opinion will induce the government to peacefully change its policies.
(The entity does not understand that political policy driven by ideology can only be changed through political action at the ballot box. The other alternative is revolution.)
2. The entity enjoys the ego boost of being treated as an “insider” and is not interested in seeing a solution.
3. The entity sees no hope of change, and is simply warning the people as to what is coming. 4. The entity has been sidetracked, or bought, or threatened, by an inner group that aims to sabotage any attempt to derail the in place corporate plan.
With this in mind consider the 4 possibilities listed above for the NGOs.
1. No experienced observer could be that naïve. There is no way the Liberals or Conservatives will peacefully give up a corporate plan that they have been implementing for years. If we rule out persuasion and revolution you would hope that the entity leaders are not so dimwitted that they cannot see that political action is the only viable option at this time — but yes, maybe some of them cannot see it.
2. This is an ugly thought. I prefer to give all entities the benefit of the doubt.
3. This is an unfortunate possibility. It means that the entity is weak and has given up the fight for what generations of patriots have fought for, and have devoted their lives to handing down to future generations. Nationalism is not a dirty word unless it is used to promote aggression. Canada has a tradition of moderation. Our political system is derived from the old Family Compacts and we are not perfect by a long way, but “Peace, Order and Good Government” is a fine motto to try and live up to, in a democratic rather than fascist manner.
4. This has a number of aspects, on which is pivotally that the entity was established by the corporate planners of the NAU in order to provide a vent for public dissatisfaction so that people of good intent will be lulled into thinking that something concrete is being achieved on their behalf.
This latter proposition is not farfetched, given the resources of the corporate sector and the skill of the long term planning that has gone into bringing the NAU, and the sell-out of Canada’s sovereignty to near fruition. The accumulation of all forms of the media (except the internet) into the hands of 3 or 4 families; the adoption and promotion of the policies of unfettered capitalism; and the subversion of our Bank of Canada into the control of international banking syndicates all speak to a very well thought out plan. It is not likely that such planners will have omitted the provision of a safety valve.
Hence it was never intended that such entities which are vocalizing resistance would effect political action.
This was forcibly brought to my attention when one senior official of an NGO told me that the one political party (Canadian Action Party) that has fought for 10 years to cancel FTA and NAFTA, to halt the progression of the SPP, and to regain control of our monetary sovereignty through the Bank of Canada and has many thousands of members across the country, “was too insignificant to be included” in the group that was appearing to protesting the SPP.
As a subset of the above, it is possible that some entities while being sincere in their objectives, have been infiltrated by subgroups, such as financial supporters or by persons that have attained some measure of internal control, and which wound ensure that actions are watered down or diverted.
The subgroups, would have their own support network either internal or external in the form of partisan supporters of NAFTA and the SPP, or maybe supporters of the Liberal or Conservative parties. A very real case comes to mind, wherein some union supporters of the NDP will support the SPP in order to protect their jobs in the auto industry — which they will allegedly lose if the SPP is defeated; and the American owned auto makers shut down Canadian plants in retaliation.
This reveals a sad case of protecting personal gain before defending national integrity. Maybe that is the rationale that Prime Minister Vidkun Quisling had sold out Norway to Hitler’s Nazi Germany
Reluctantly, unless someone can provide a better analysis or reason for inaction, I am forced to conclude that the reason for civil society gatekeeper inaction lies somewhere in Option 4.
If you are willing to help protect Canadian sovereignty, spread the word about the SPP as far and wide as you can and stand as a candidate and/or vote for the Canadian Action Party that will petition for a referendum on the SPP and make “STOP THE NAU” its central policy plank in the coming general election. Unless we regain control of our money supply and maintain control of our identity and policies, all else will remain out of reach.
Make a Donation. Support more articles like this one.
Edited by Peter Tremblay
Neither Canada’s elected Members of Parliament nor unelected Senators who are mandated to specifically protect Canada’s Parliamentary traditions, have sought to speak out against the continued efforts by an elite clique to assimilate Canada into a “New American Union”. It is apparent that Canada’s Parliament is comprised of traitors, without any integrity, commitment to upholding their Parliamentary Oaths as loyal representatives of the diverse people of Canada. or substantive love for Canada. Apparently gone are the days of passionate champions of Canada like Sir John A. Macdonald, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Tommy Douglas and Pierre Elliot Trudeau.
Deep integration between Canada and the United States is not a theory or a fear – it is a reality. For several years now, government task forces and working groups have been quietly harmonizing Canada-U.S. programs and procedures, without any input from the Canadian public.
The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), agreed to by the leaders of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico in 2005, is moving Canada quickly toward a continental resource pact, a North American security perimeter, and harmonized military and security policies. Working groups composed of bureaucrats and corporate leaders are quietly putting this “partnership” into action, and to date only industry “stakeholders” have been consulted. SPP is designed to create the… [CONTINUED.. see comment below]
[BECOME A MEMBER, and get the rest of this article emailed to you. E-mail email@example.com to find out how you can become a member of The Canadian.]
NAFTA threatens the resources rights of Canadians to their own water
by Peter Tremblay
Canada’s independence from the United States will be totally destroyed, unless it immediately abandons so-called “Free Trade” with the United States. These are the apparent sentiments of the Council of Canadians, and other activists like Connie Fogal, who is the leader of the Canadian Action Party (CAP).
“One of our criticisms of NAFTA was that it would place Canada in a very vulnerable position to have almost all of our exports—I think it’s close to 87% now—going to the United States so that we would then be helpless, or in a very difficult position, if ever there was a reason to close that border, and sure enough this border has been closed. And as my colleagues here have said, this was even starting before 9/11,” says Canadian economic nationalist activist Maude Barlow during a Parliamentary Standing Committee on International Trade that was held on Tuesday, May 1, 2007.
“I would posit that with all we have offered and already given up under the SPP and other processes, it has not helped change that border situation; it’s tighter than it even was. As you know, the line-ups for passports are so long and there are unmanned drones, American planes, war planes, between the Montana and Canadian borders, for instance. The border security is tightening and everything we seem to do does not seem to change that. So that it is a very serious problem,” further stipulates Ms. Barlow.
“On your concern about harmonization, our concern around the regulatory convergence is not a more efficient way for my colleagues here to have a good trading system. That’s not our concern. Of course that makes sense. What our concern is, is that they have set up cross border committees that are going to make decisions around regulations from seeds to food to health care to social programs to environmental standards that will then be not decided in the Canadian or Quebec parliaments, but rather by these cross border committees, and it’s a anti-democratic process.”
“Further, if you look at the regime of George Bush, since he came to power he has deregulated massively in everything from energy to automobile standards to environment. One of the conservation groups said that he has cut 400 environmental programs, for instance. We are harmonizing to a superpower that has massively deregulated in many areas, and, of course, then there’s the problem of having Mexico in the mix as well. So we’re not talking here about sensible harmonization, nobody could be opposed to that, but we are talking about setting up a process of moving into a race to the bottom.”
“On the current status of water, here’s the situation. Under NAFTA we are not forced to export our water. However, once we do start exporting, once any province starts to exports its water, the terms of NAFTA come into being. NAFTA defines water as a good and you’re not allowed, under the terms of a trade agreement, to stop the import or export of a good for any reason, even environmental or conservation. So if any province decides to start exporting commercial exports of our water to the United States , the terms of NAFTA say that the Canadian government can’t then come in and say no, you can’t do that,” Maude Barlow further elaborated in front of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on International trade.
“Mr. Baird, had said that Canada had a ban on the export of water. He probably thinks we do, but we don’t. What we have is a voluntary agreement with the provinces, which are a mishmash, not all of them have signed it, any one of them could break it, and if anyone breaks it then that water is open from all the provinces to whatever corporation has got into that one province.”
“Moreover, they only banned the transfer of transboundary waters from the Canadian side. But the Americans aren’t interested in transboundary water; they’re taking what they need from the Great Lakes through the new annex. What they really want is that water in those rivers going north and that’s not touched by this. We need a national water act in this country. We need water taken out of NAFTA as an investment, as a good. We need to protect this most previous resource politically, ecologically, and for future generations.”
by Stephen Lendman, Information ClearingHouse
Besides the U.S. George W. Bush administration’s imperial aims and permanent war on the world, add the one at home below the radar. Its weapons include the WTO, NAFTA, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), FBI, CIA, NSA, NORTHCOM, militarized state and local police, National Guard forces, paramilitary mercenaries like Blackwater USA, and all other repressive instruments of state power and control. They target the people of three nations slowly becoming one headquartered in Washington. That’s the apparent aim of those in power here wanting one continent, “indivisible” minus old-fashioned ideas like “liberty and justice for all” we used to believe in when, as kids, we recited our “Pledge of Allegiance.” They now have a whole new meaning. They’re just words drummed into young minds hoping they’ll still believe them when they’re old enough to know better.
There may be a greater scheme for the planet ahead, but this article only focuses on what we know about and how it’s unfolding so far. It has a name, in fact, several, but they all aim for the same thing – one nation, indivisible, where three sovereign ones once stood, headquartered in Washington.
The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) or “Deep Integration” North American Union
SPP was formerly launched at a March 23, 2005 meeting in Waco, Texas attended by George Bush, Mexico’s President Vincente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin. It’s a tri-national agreement hatched below the radar in Washington containing the recommendations of the Independent Task Force of North America. That’s a group organized by the powerful U.S. Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE), and Mexican Council on Foreign Relations. It advocates greater US, Canadian and Mexican economic, political, social, and security integration with secretive working groups formed to devise non-debatable agreements that, when completed, will be binding beyond the power of legislatures to change. It’s also taking shape without public knowledge or consideration.
From what’s already known, SPP unmasked isn’t pretty. It’s a corporate-led coup d’état against the sovereignty of three nations enforced by a common hard line security strategy already in play separately in each country. It’s a scheme to create a borderless North American Union under U.S. control without barriers to trade and capital flows for corporate giants, mainly US ones. It’s also to insure America gets free and unlimited access to Canadian and Mexican resources, mainly oil, and in the case of Canada water as well. It’s to assure U.S. energy security as a top priority while denying Canada and Mexico preferential access to their own resources henceforth earmarked for US markets.
It’s also to create a fortress-North American security zone encompassing the whole continent under U.S. control in the name of “national (and continental) security” with U.S. borders effectively extended to the far reaches of the continent. The scheme, in short, is NAFTA on steroids combined with Pax Americana homeland security enforcement. It’s the worst of all possible worlds headed for an unmasked police state, and it’s the Bush administration’s notion of “deep integration” or the “Big Idea” meaning we’re boss, what we say goes, no outliers will be tolerated, public interest is off the table, and the people of three nations be damned.
It’s also the next step in what GHW Bush had in mind when he delivered his “Toward a New World Order” speech to a joint session of Congress on another September 11 in 1990. At the onset of the “crisis in the Persian Gulf,” he said “We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment (offering) a rare opportunity to move toward….a new world order” free from “the threat of terror….and more secure….” He spoke of a “new world….struggling to be born….quite different from the one we’ve known.” He masked his intentions in language of peace and the pursuit of justice while preparing for war on Iraq and the region that’s gone on for over 16 years with no end in sight. A new Bush administration is bringing that “New World Order” to the North American continent. Unless it can be stopped, the streets of Boston, Baltimore and Buffalo may one day look like occupied Baghdad or Bogota when drug barons clash and Colombia’s US-financed military and paramilitaries step in.
Establishing hard line security initiatives is key to making SPP’s “deep integration” trade agenda work. It’s being planned at a time of Washington’s cooked up “war on terrorism” scheme unleashing imperial dreams not possible without the public traumatized enough to go along. Intended is a ramped up militarized police state of enhanced border and homeland security. It’s based on the phoney notion that doing business and protecting the national interest and public welfare require tough measures in place to secure them at a time of threatening global terrorism.
As outlandish as it sounds, the scheme is moving ahead toward implementation. It threatens Canadian, Mexican and U.S. national sovereignty and priorities, and their people and ours are none the wiser about it. NAFTA is a glimpse of what’s ahead. It’s record in 12.5 years has been disastrous with huge numbers of job losses and growing insecurity in three countries. SPP guarantees more of the same on steroids with small businesses hurt as well. They continue being trampled by corporate giants they’re no match for. Many go under or are bought out if they survive. They and working people aren’t part of the SPP process, and their concerns aren’t being addressed and are guaranteed to worsen as this initiative advances. Its doing it at secret meetings like the one from September 12 – 14, 2006 in Banff, Alberta, Canada. It was co-chaired by three former high officials of the participating nations including a leading U.S. cold warrior as Reagan Secretary of State, George Shultz. He has all the credentials SPP needs as a former Bechtel president and current board member also holding memberships at the hard right Hoover Institution and American Enterprise Institute, the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, and the Committee on the Present Danger military lobbying group.
They were part of a high-powered group of present and former government officials; top military-industrial complex representatives: Big Oil and other corporate executives; leading policy analysts; high-ranking military brass; and a single Wall Street Journal self-styled Latin American expert editorialist known never to let facts conflict with the state and corporate interests she represents. She’s a frequent target of this writer, and by now likely knows it – Mary Anastasia O’Grady.
Except for O’Grady, no journalists attended, and no press releases followed the meeting with its carefully scripted agenda and controlled media blackout. Yet veteran Canadian publisher, author, activist and former political candidate Mel Hurtig managed to get hold of the attendee list and published it online. He also posted topics discussed including: “A Vision for North America” (but not a people-friendly one), “A North American Energy Strategy” (for US energy security at the expense of Canada and Mexico), “Demographic and Social Dimensions of North American Integration,” and “Opportunities for Security Cooperation” (aka Pax Americana). Washington dominates the planning at all meetings with its interests getting primary attention. Along with what’s mentioned above, efforts are to create uniform business practices and standards, ease the flow of U.S. products into Canada and Mexico, remove labour constraints, and eliminate unwelcome environmental standards or restrictions interfering with the primary consideration of profits.
Also on the agenda is getting Canada and Mexico to allow more privatization of state-run enterprises like Mexico’s nationalized oil company, PEMEX, and eventually open up Canada’s medicare health care system to private investment. The U.S. can’t negotiate this way with its western European, Chinese or Japanese trading partners but can easily pressure most developing nations to go along with policies harming their own people, and neighbouring accommodating ones like Canada, so long as their elite leading players share the benefits.
In February, 2007, a set of SPP private sector priorities were laid out by the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) that serves as an official tri-national SPP working group. It was created at the March, 2006 second annual SPP summit in Cancun, Mexico. The group is composed of representatives of 30 giant North American companies, with powerful U.S. ones like GE, Ford, GM, Wal-Mart, Lockheed Martin, Merck and Chevron running things the way Orwell described in “Animal Farm” where “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
NACC’s recommendations centered on “private sector involvement” being “a key step to enhancing North America’s competitive position in global markets and is the driving force behind innovation and growth.” It mentioned “border-crossing facilitation, standards and regulatory cooperation, and energy integration (with a top priority of) improving the secure flow of goods and people within North America.” These issues and others were discussed above explaining what they’re really all about, not the usual code language hiding their real purpose.
Without using the word, NACC stressed the importance establishing policies for maximum profits. Its report said “Every measure that adds to the cost or time to cross borders within North America is in effect a tax on enterprise, a tax on investment (fair taxes in both cases), or a tax on jobs (a slap at high wages) across the region, which ultimately results in incremental costs for the consumers in all three countries (untrue as cost savings accrue to bottom lines, not consumer pockets).” Also mentioned was the need to make the North American economy “work better (and strengthen) the security and well-being of citizens” without mentioning the “citizens” NACC has in mind are dominant corporate ones and the privileged only and doing it means hard line restraint on the public.
SPP wants “to cut red tape and give consumers better access to safe, less expensive, and innovative products” that only “red tape” can help assure. Regulations, it says “impede the efficiency and competitiveness of businesses in all three countries” except ones giving them a competitive advantage and even though regulations, in fact, serve (or should serve) to protect consumers, not harm them. Recommendations in the report call for specific action in these sectors in the order the report listed them. It placed last the one of greatest importance, energy, but here’s the order priority given: food and agriculture, financial services, transportation, protection of intellectual property rights and lastly energy integration specifically emphasizing Canada’s vast oil sands that make its overall reserves second only to Saudi Arabia.
Canada aims to triple its oil sands production by 2015 to three million barrels daily to feed America’s insatiable energy appetite these resources are earmarked for. Mexico’s oil is also targeted, but the report hides NACC’s aim for state oil company PEMEX to be opened to private investment saying only while the country is “blessed with abundant reserves, (it) faces major challenges in attracting capital” needed to realize their potential. NACC wants Mexico to “increase the competitiveness in (its) energy sector” without saying it wants it privatized so foreign investors can plunder them for profit. It also wants governments and the private sector to “work together effectively in strengthening the competitive position of enterprises” in all three countries saying, in effect, end all restrictions on how we do business even if it harms your nations, people and environment. It made 50 total recommendations it wants mostly accomplished before the end of 2008 with some longer range ones targeting 2010. They cover the range of issues discussed above and specific ones listed below:
— developing “national critical infrastructure protection strategies” with rules providing for legal protection;
— enhancing emergency management and disaster planning;
— implementing planned land clearance projects, meaning less for the people and more for corporate predators;
— putting in place more business-friendly border security practices, meaning militarizing the border;
— further simplifying NAFTA rules-of-origin requirements, meaning no restrictions on regional trade even for unsafe products;
— simplifying the NAFTA certification process and requirements aiming at their total elimination;
— ending the consumer-protective US Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS);
— removing regulatory standards and practices that impede trade even if doing it harms consumers;
— working toward a goal of uniform global regulatory standards and practices regardless of the consequences or concern about national sovereignty;
— easing cross-border tax burdens forcing consumers to pick up the difference;
— cooperating in identifying common financial regulatory concerns, then work to eliminate them;
— agreeing to unrestricted air cargo transport services between the US and Mexico;
— completing a coordinated Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Strategy aimed at protecting them and keeping their prices high;
— developing an initiative against counterfeiting and piracy; and
— collaborating on expanding the supply of highly skilled people in the energy sector throughout North America and building a model to be applied to other knowledge-intensive sectors such as financial services.
NACC denies what’s pretty clear about its aims. Saying its recommendations aren’t meant to “threaten the sovereign power of any of the three countries,” there’s no doubt that’s the central objective. It wants a North American Union headquartered in Washington with policies in place benefiting corporate giants at the expense of working people. They’ll be hammered by greater job losses, fewer social services, and a loss of personal security under militarized police state conditions in the name of “national (continental) security” in the age of concocted global terror threats.
North American Future 2025 Project
This is another secretive effort with the same objective run by the U.S.-based conservative Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). It held closed-door meeting roundtables of Canadian business leaders in Calgary as part of a project by this name. CSIS former American political heavyweights are involved including Sam Nunn, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen, Henry Kissinger and others. The agenda involves preparing a final report to the US, Canadian and Mexican governments by September 30 expected to recommend the benefits of integrating the three nations into a single political, economic and security bloc.
What’s known has activist groups upset including the Council of Canadians and Coalition for Water Aid. They’re protesting what they say amounts to a sub rosa effort for corporate interests to control Canada’s huge fresh water supply, estimated at one-fifth of the world’s total. They want Canadian energy and other resources, too. LIke NACC, CSIS carefully states its aims in what it’s made public so far, showing the goals of both efforts are the same. CSIS’s North America Future 2025 Project is its research effort to help policymakers “make sound, strategic, long-range policy decisions about North America, with emphasis on regional integration.” It cites “six areas of critical importance to the trilateral relationship: labor mobility, energy, the environment, security, competitiveness and border infrastructure and logistics.” This is all familiar terminology to be discussed in “seven closed-door roundtable sessions (with) 21 (to) 45 individuals – with an equal number from each nation.” They kicked off in Roundtable I discussing “Methodology of Global and North American Projections” followed by each of the above listed six “critical” areas. Protesters are planning to be at the third trilateral SPP summit Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper will host August 20 and 21 in Montebello, Quebec. They’ll target SPP overall as well as the Harper government’s efforts to advance the corporate-friendly “Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement” (TILMA) as one more nail in the coffin of Canadian national sovereignty. The agreement between Alberta and British Columbia took effect April 1, 2007 and mandates harmonizing regulations and standards between the two provinces, removing barriers to economic development. Saskatchewan is now being targeted to sign on as efforts advance overall for a borderless North America with schemes like TILMA being used as stepping stones along the way to achieve it. TILMA for all Canada will allow Canadian companies the right to challenge any provincial laws conflicting the NAFTA provisions.
SPP North American integration will go much further, of course, and Joseph Watson reported “Globalists to Formally Propose Merger of U.S., Canada (and) Mexico” in his July 5 Prison Planet web site article. In it, he says CSIS “political heavyweights” will formally propose a North American union to Congress at summer’s end after the conclusion of their seven secret roundtable meetings to devise it. It will contain provisions explained above that spell doom for the sovereignty of the three participating nations. Their leaders want them to become one in service to corporate giants’ strategy for greater profits at the public’s expense. A further aim is to harmonize regulatory standards with the European Union (EU) in a new transatlantic economic partnership that moves things closer to corporate America’s dream of a militarized borderless world run by them.
The North American Super Corridor Coalition (NASCO)
This is another organization set up to facilitate the designs of NACC and the North American Future 2025 Project for continental integration. It’s a trilateral provincial, state and local government coalition aligned with the goals of corporate giants in three countries. As its name suggests, it aims to develop an international, integrated, secure superhighway running the length of the continent. If built, it would extend from Winnipeg, Manitoba; Edmonton, Alberta; and Windsor, Ontario, Canada through Kansas City, San Antonio and Laredo, Texas into Neuvo Laredo, Guadalajara, and the ports of Manzanillo, Colima and Lazaro Cardenas, Mexico.
It’s planned to be a comprehensive energy and commerce-related jugular vein-sized artery for transportation, trade and strategic resources like energy. According to NASCO documents, DHS will be in charge of monitoring the entire system through high-tech sensors and trackers as a further step to securing the continent for business at taxpayers expense. This is part of the massive infrastructure planned for North American integration. If completed, it’ll be a boon to business at the expense of the environment and working people throughout the continent, always the ones to lose from grandiose schemes like this one.
Plan Puebla-Panama (PPP)
Mexican President Felipe Calderon wishes to revive former President Vincente Fox’s PPP that flopped but didn’t die. It’s a multi-billion dollar development scheme to turn Southern Mexico and Central America, all the way to Panama, into a colossal so-called “Free Trade” paradise displacing indigenous people, destroying their culture and sacred corn, and harming the environment for profit. Fox earlier and Calderon now want to induce private investment by shamelessly handing over to them the region’s natural resources, including its oil, water, minerals, timber and ecological biodiversity.
The idea is to rip into the area with new ports, airports, bullet trains, bridges, superhighways, 25 hydroelectric dams, new telecommunication facilities, electrical grids, and a new Panama Canal – for starters, with more development to follow. Also envisioned is opening the country’s wildlife reserves for bioprospecting with a huge giveaway to giant seed, chemical and drug companies and connect everything with new highways linking Mexico to Central America and no doubt would connect to the proposed NASCO superhighway. The idea is to develop and facilitate business throughout the region – meaning indigenous people have to leave to make way for it, like it or not, which they don’t and will fight it. The area planned for development is enormous and so far stalled. It covers 102 million hectares with 64 million inhabitants in eight countries, few of whom will benefit from a naked scheme to exploit. It masquerades as infrastructure, private development and more without consent of the people the way it’s always done. It’s the reason the plan went nowhere so far. It’s irrelevant to the poor, rural South who’ll lose everything so corporate predators can take their land and livelihoods for private gain. They then want to sell back to the people what’s already theirs like Chiapas’ fresh water. It’s 40% of Mexico’s total and the reason Coca-Cola is dying to get hold of it. It would also destroy the last significant tropical rain forest in Chiapas’ Montes Azules Integral Biosphere in the Lacandon jungle where the government wants to remove native Mayans from lands belonging to them.
Enter Felipe Calderon. On April 9, he held a one-day conference in Campeche, Mexico attended by the presidents of all Central American countries except Belize and Nicaragua, who sent their prime minister and vice-president respectively. Washington no doubt is pushing this scheme as it would be a development bonanza for U.S. corporations if implemented and a huge opportunity for many others if ever completed.
Militarizing a Continent as a First Step
No nation is more militarized today than America. It spends more on national defence and homeland security than all other nations combined. Add to those budgets all others related to defence, still others for intelligence and covert actions, plus the net interest cost attributable to past debt-financed defence outlays and it totals over $1 trillion for FY 2007 according to one analyst’s estimate and heading way above that in FY 2008 if current budget proposals pass and become law which is almost certain.
Canada and Mexico are expected to share the load as part of Washington’s “war on terrorism” and are doing it. Supporting Washington is central for Canada’s Stephen Harper conservative administration. It includes adhering to the 2002 Binational Planning Agreement allowing U.S. military forces to enter Canada on its own discretion, set up shop, and exercise authority over Canadians in their own country. Harper’s more hard line than his predecessors. He believes Canadian political and business interests depend on it, and he’s committed to serving them no matter how ordinary Canadians feel about it. He’s submissive to Washington and has been massively ramping up military spending with plans to increase it over 50% above 2005 levels to $21.5 billion annually by 2010.
New American Union agenda pushing Canada towards Militarism and corresponding Military spending which undermines vital social spending
That’s chump change by U.S. standards but a major commitment for a nation traditionally spending at far lower levels. Canada faces no outside threat so currents trends toward spending hugely on its military, defies tradition and public consensus favouring social spending that’s being cut to pay for it. It’s also contrary to Canada’s traditionally eschewing militarism and foreign wars unlike its southern neighbour’s thriving on them since the nation’s founding. Business interests, not national security or the public welfare, drive Harper’s agenda. America accounts for 87% of Canada’s exports, and Canadian businesses are closely allied with U.S. ones. In many instances, it’s as subsidiaries with U.S. corporations owning 20% of Canada’s non-financial sector, 33% of its oil and gas industry, and many Canadian defence companies linked to U.S. ones as subsidiaries or in a sub-contracting capacity. Canada’s influential Department of National Defence (DND), its new Chief of Defence Staff, General Rick Hillier and defence minister Gordon O’Connor are on board with Harper as well. They’re committed to ramping up the nation’s military spending and linking with America’s “war on terrorism.” It gives them more power to lock in even more as SPP advances and outlines a plan for it across the continent.
Mexico has its part to play as well. With threats and fear-mongering, it’s using drug-related violence as a pretext for cracking down on simmering unrest wherever it surfaces with plenty of U.S. military aid to do it. The scheme is to quiet and cow millions in the country opposing democracy, Mexican-style. It made National Action Party (PAN) Felipe Calderon president in a process decided before people ever voted last July 2 the way it’s always worked in Mexican politics. It’s got parts of the country, like Oaxaca, in open rebellion against its state governor, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (known as URO).
It also made the country a tinderbox of discontent with growing numbers in it fed up with sham elections, decades of repression, deepening poverty and an entrenched system of privilege for the rich and powerful. Mega-billionaire Carlos Slim just passed Bill Gates by $8.6 billion to become the world’s richest man in a country with the second largest number of billionaires in Latin America after Brazil and among the top ten in the world with the greatest number of them. The U.S. tops all nations by a wide margin with far more in New York and Los Angeles alone than anywhere else.
Calderon to their rescue to make his own richer. He’s got 30,000 troops stomping on the people and fighting Washington’s wars on Mexico’s streets and along its near-2000 mile northern border. He also has to protect state oil company Pemex after a series of July explosions attacked the company’s gas pipelines in the central Mexican state of Guanajuato. It affected 800 companies incurring losses of $5 – 10 million a day and caused 5000 people to be evacuated from 20 surrounding communities.
A group called the Popular or People’s Revolutionary Army (EPR) claimed responsibility saying it demands release of two men detained unjustly in Oaxaca in May and held as political prisoners. The group’s communiqué also said the attacks were part of a “national campaign against the interests of the oligarchy and of this illegitimate government (in power from the stolen 2006 election) that has been put in motion.” It’s another sign how polarized Mexican society is with those losing out in it striking back.
In the U.S., poverty is growing and the wealth disparity is unprecedented. However, things are much worse in Mexico. It has the world’s fourth largest number of millionaires, but poverty’s been rising since the 1970s, and since the mid-1980s the nation’s poor have been reeling under the affects of IMF-imposed structural adjustment policies mandating large-scale privatizations and wage restraints. Then came NAFTA in 1994. It devastated millions of Mexicans, forced many north to survive, and may by one estimate eventually displace 10 million small farmers from their land (plus their families) into poverty assuring they’ll head north in desperation. Today nearly one-third of Mexicans live on $2 or less a day, and millions can’t afford basic needs like enough food, decent shelter and medical care when sick. It didn’t help that Felipe Calderon allowed staple corn prices to skyrocket causing tortilla prices to spike by 50% in most regions devastating impoverished consumers. They can’t afford the staple they rely on, and small Mexican corn producers are even less able to compete with subsidized imports that wasn’t possible post-NAFTA.
These are the issues generating mass civil unrest and disobedience that simmer beneath the surface when they’re not visible on the streets like in Oaxaca since last May, 2006. It’s gone on in spite of harsh efforts to crush it violently with Federal Preventative Police (PFP) and military forces launched against it on the pretext of fighting drugs traffickers and terrorism.
Calderon’s 30,000 Mexican troops are also in a third or more of the nation’s states, civil rights are suspended and widespread abuses are reported because the military got a mandate to “use all necessary force to resolve disturbances and return peace to society.” That’s just a hint of what’s coming across Mexico and the continent under full implementation of SPP that won’t tolerate opposition and will crack down hard against it. Mexican law now allows it after passage of the draconian “International Terrorism Law” criminalizing dissent, calling it terrorism, and imposing harsh sentences for using “violence against persons, things, or public services that spread (enough) alarm or fear in the population….to threaten national security or pressure authorities to take certain determinations.” The press is also targeted with prohibitions against “publish(ing) or distribut(ing)….photos or images without the express consent of those featured,” a condition impossible to meet. Social protests may be criminalized as well with resistance movements like the Zapatistas and Oaxacan Popular Peoples’ Assembly (APPO) labeled terrorist organizations and their leaders subject to 40 year mandated prison terms if charged and convicted. And President Calderon wants Mexico’s Congress to pass an amendment giving him constitutional powers to tap phones and search private residences without first obtaining court-ordered approval under any conditions he claims is “urgent.” Mexico’s hard right Supreme Court of Nacional Justice (SCJN) is supportive. Last year it declared Mexico’s military can aid police in cases of public security that can be anything the state says it is. The Court also ruled law enforcement officials need no court-ordered warrants to search and seize in “flagrant situations” that can also mean anything and that violates the American Convention of Human Rights adopted as Mexican law.
Then there’s Calderon’s war on drugs and the cartels that’s, in fact, a war no different than Colombia’s war on dissident resistance groups like the FARC and ELN. Like Plan Colombia, Washington has a similar one for Mexico, so call it what it is – Plan Mexico with tens of millions in funding, equipment and technology to back it up. Also call it US-supported and funded state terrorism in a grand scheme to militarize the country and crack down on dissent and resistance to authoritarian rule at the federal, state and local levels. It’s partnered with Washington in its phoney “war on terrorism” to maintain order, crush opposition and incarcerate anyone interfering or in the way. US military elements already operate inside Mexico freely and covertly, and a 1994 Pentagon briefing paper, declassified under FOIA, hinted at a US invasion if the country became destabilized or the government faced the threat of being overthrown because of “widespread economic and social chaos” that would jeopardize US investments, access to oil, overall trade, and would create great numbers of immigrants heading north.
Plans are in place and are playing out to snuff out trouble before it spirals out of control, and the proposed U.S. immigration bill was to provide funding for it through stepped up militarization. But even with the bill defeated, the money’s coming and U.S. forces will follow if needed. Congressional budgeting calls for millions in Mexican military aid and massive new border detention centers for up to 30,000 detainees for starters with two notorious ones discussed below already operating. What’s planned on the border will also likely show up anywhere in all three SPP countries to defuse social discontent by disappearing a large new political prisoner population into black holes of repressive incarceration. That’s SPP’s promise and scheme to create police state North America making the continent safe for corporate interests by revoking ours.
Raymondville and Hutto Texas Immigrant Prison Detention Centers The Willacy immigrant detention center at Raymondville, Texas, is oppressive enough to be called “Ritmo.” It’s run by the private for-profit MTC Corporation and is currently the largest immigrant prison in the country in the remote southern tip of the state. It cost $65 million to build, is a “tent city,” and is ringed by barbed wire and 14-foot high chain-link fences. It currently holds over 2000 immigrant detainees under repressive conditions including 23 hour a day lockdowns in 10 windowless hothouses. Entire families are incarcerated there, fed poor or insufficient food, given inadequate and delayed medical care, and treated inhumanely in unsafe conditions for extended periods lasting months.
Conditions overall are abusive, disciplinary punishment harsh, with detainees having to put up with no partitions or doors separating five toilets, five sinks, five shower heads and eating areas where some days detainees lack utensils and eat with their hands. Lights are kept on round the clock, clothing is inadequate, and on cold days detainees are kept outside for an allowed daily hour in short-sleeved uniforms with no warm protective clothing like blankets, sweat shirts or jackets.
The Hutto Residential Center is another immigrant detention center in Taylor, Texas currently holding around 400 prisoners including 200 children and infants. Few detainees here or at other immigrant prisons committed crimes or were charged with any, yet they’re treated like criminals because they were forced here to survive NAFTA and DR-CAFTA inflicted job losses. They’re victims of U.S. repressive trade policies but are treated like criminals made to suffer retribution for exploitative state practices committed against them. Post 9/11, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 was passed establishing the repressive Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and in March, 2003 its largest investigative and enforcement arm – the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). It’s charged with protecting public safety by identifying and targeting “criminal” and “terrorist” threats to the country that include Latino and other desperate for work undocumented immigrants forced to come here to survive. ICE was established to apprehend them at the border or hunt them down relentlessly once here. It has four integrated divisions, one of which is policing our southern border and conducting terror-raid undocumented immigrant worker roundups with those apprehended headed for abusive detention at facilities like Raymondville and Hutto. There and at other facilities like them, ICE-detained immigrants number around 28,000 on an average day with totals heading for 30,000 or more by year end.
Hutto is run by Corrections Corporation of American, the largest for-profit private prison operator in the country. It has 64 facilities in 19 states and the District of Columbia with a capacity for incarcerating over 69,000 inmates. It’s reputation is unsavoury based on former prisoner accounts of severe abuse, inadequate medical and educational services, poor or noxious food and overall inhumane conditions including rat and roach-infested cramped centres, inadequate basic hygiene, rapes, beatings and deaths at their facilities. The Hutto facility in Taylor, Texas houses immigrant detainees. It’s particularly notorious for treating young children no differently than adults, including some too young to know where they are or why and older ones with no idea why they’re detained at all. Conditions are made worse by abusive guards and uncaring officials.
The daily routine is stultifying and cruel. Families are awakened at 5:30AM and allowed 30 minutes to bathe and dress. They then get 20 minutes to eat food that’s often poor quality, inedible, and/or inadequate. If children haven’t finished in time, their food is thrown out and they’re left to go hungry.
Following meals, prisoners are returned to their cells, aren’t allowed out, denied sleep during the day, and forced to sit and endure boredom to pass the time. No books are allowed, and frequent head counts are taken throughout the day to assure no one escaped. Educational facilities for children are pathetically inadequate at one hour a day in which practically nothing is taught, and conditions and treatment overall are so bad the ACLU sued DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff on March 6 on behalf of 10 abused children at Hutto. The US District Court judge hearing the case, Sam Sparks, set an expedited trial date for August, agreeing with the plaintiff that detainee treatment at Hutto fails to meet federal standards.
Homeland Security Police State Justice for Everyone
Post-9/11, Muslims and Latino immigrants have been targeted by the Bush administration, falsely charged with terrorism and other crimes, and subjected to abusive harassment and persecution. They’ve been victimized by mass roundups, detentions, prosecutions and deportations the result of baseless claims they threaten national security. If full-blown SPP security measures are implemented, anyone challenging, or seen threatening, state authority may henceforth be subjected to similar harsh treatment. It’s practically that way now, but expect lots worse ahead. The rule of law will be weakened or ignored, civil liberties and essential human needs further eroded, and state and corporate power tightened enough to be in full control. Dissent no longer will be tolerated, and anyone seen as a threat in an age of a “war on terrorism” will be targeted, just as Muslims and immigrants are today. Preparations are in progress for mass detentions with Halliburton the beneficiary of a DHS contingency contract worth up to $385 million to build U.S.-based detention centers. Their stated purpose is for “detention and processing” in case of an “emergency influx of immigrants….or to support the rapid development of new programs (for planned) expansion facilities (able to hold 5000 or more persons).”
This language provides cover for planned concentration camps targeting anyone for indefinite detention as a perceived enemy of the state or threat to national security any time henceforth. The idea is to have facilities ready in case martial law is declared for any reason. It might include the kind of major “terrorist” attack DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff practically signalled is coming later this summer to a Chicago Tribune editorial board July 10. ABC News also hyped the story citing a new FBI analysis of Al-Queda messages warning of “continued messages that convey their strategic intent to strike the U.S. homeland and U.S. interests worldwide (that) should not be discounted as merely deceptive noise.” The rest of the corporate media jumped on the story as well to prepare the public for full militarization of the country if what Chertoff and a number of intelligence analysts believe is virtually certain ahead.
The Pentagon is ready if it comes with an action plan prepared in a DOD document called “Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support.” It envisions an “active, layered defence” both within and outside the U.S. pledging to “transform U.S. military forces to execute homeland defence missions in the….U.S. homeland.” It lays out a strategy for increased reconnaissance and surveillance to “defeat potential challengers before they threaten the United States.” It also “maximizes threat awareness and seizes the initiative from those who would harm us.”
These are ominous developments signalled with very dangerous language. It suggests the likelihood of an impending terror attack severe enough to warrant suspension of the Constitution followed by martial law. It means anyone may be considered a threat to national security and detained indefinitely with or without evidence to prove it. It further empowers the state, through the military, to act preventively through mass roundups and detentions. No one will be safe or spared if targeted and will be subject to police state justice granting them none. A full-scale militarization of the country can be implemented any time on what a 1988 Reagan era Executive Order 12656 called any “national security emergency” defined as “Any occurrence, including natural disaster, military attack, technological or other emergency, that seriously degrades or seriously threatens the national security of the United States.”
Other repressive legislation’s already in place as well. Under Patriot and Military Commission Acts justice, constitutional rights are severely weakened, and we’re all “enemy combatants” stripped of our habeas and due process rights, subject to indefinite detentions, denied our right to counsel and at the mercy of military tribunal justice with no right of appeal.
Welcome to North America’s Security and Prosperity Partnership guaranteeing it to elitist interests by denying it to the people of three nations. They’re to be parts of the new “united continent of America,” or North American Union, run by dark forces in Washington that won’t move out when a new president moves in January 20, 2009.
Make comments about this article in The Canadian Blog.
About the author:
Stephen Lendman is an American progressive intellectual and activist who lives in Chicago and can be reached using email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
by Paul Chen
The Highway 407 toll-road, helps provide proof that U.S. Ambassador to Canada, David H. Wilkins, is misleading Canadians on the construction of a North American Free Trade (NAFTA) Superhighway, to enable the creation of a fascistic North American Union.
On 8 December 2004, the Canoe Network that is associated with the Sun Newspaper Chain, in Christina Blizzard’s article “Hwy 407: Que Pasa?”, reported that Cintra, witch is part of a Spanish Consortium, owns the 407 toll-road. It had been a public mystery, why would a company all the way from Spain, spend the time to own and construct a toll-road. Even more of a mystery to me, had been, why would government in Canada award a foreign Spanish bid over a Canadian company?
The Coalition to Block the North American Union revealed that the same Cintra company is behind the Trans-Texas Toll-Road Corridor.
Maps accredited to the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI), which is a non-profit organization based in Montreal, clearly reveals an apparent intention to link Cintra’s Trans-Texas Corridor to the Hwy 407 Toll-Road, which clearly appears to be being built toward Ottawa, within a vast integrated continental toll network.
The 407 Toll-Road in turn was being planned since the late 1980’s, and supports the assertion by the Coalition against the North American Union, that the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), was a part of the agendas of both former Prime Ministers Mulroney and the U.S. President at that time, even before its formal signing in 2005.
The Trans-Texas Corridor is being designed to provide U.S. and certain Canadian Big Business interests, with easier access to the importing of the outsourced manufacturing of goods, from a further exploited Mexican labour pool, as well from a further exploited Chinese labour pool. U.S. and certain Canadian corporations which have also been exploiting Chinese labour, have been planning a NAFTA superhighway linked with enhanced port connections, to further increase the ability of Big Business interests to make exploitative commercial profit.
U.S. Ambassador to Canada, David H. Wilkins wrote in the Ottawa Citizen on Monday, August 20, that “while conspiracy theories abound, you can take it to the bank that no one involved in these discussions is interested in, or has ever proposed a “North American Union”, a “North American super highway,” or a “North American currency”. The first thing to appreciate is that owners of CanWest Global that owns the Ottawa Citizen have been principal financial donors to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada. Mr. Harper who is a principal ally of the Bush administration, is also a signatory of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). Therefore, CanWest Global’s provision of editorial space to Mr. Wilkins can be seen as an attempt to manipulate the masses through political propaganda.
Secondly, there is ample proof that a NAFTA superhighway is currently being constructed. The NAFTA superhighway is being constructed and developed to facilitate the Big Business agenda that indeed seeks to create an anti-democratic “North American Union”. The curiosity of the Hwy 407 toll-road under Spanish corporate ownership is apparent proof of in Canada, of such a SPP-North American Union (NAU) transportation network, that is to be linked with an American toll-road network, with the same ownership.
The “NAFTA superhighway”, is to become a series of very wide toll-roads to stretch all the way into Canada’s north, to rape and pillage Canada’s environmental heritage for elite interests connected to a U.S. political-military-industrial complex. NAFTA superhighway is to facilitate the planned consolidation of Canada as an American colony under the clandestine SPP-NAU agenda.
It was former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned the American people upon his retirement from Office that the political-military-industrial complex constitutes a singular threat to democracy.
Dr. Ron Paul is among the critics of the NAFTA superhighway. The U.S. President Barack Obama administration does not seem to be demonstrating candour on the on-going construction of the NAFTA superhighway.
by John Stokes
Aboriginal peoples have provided vital military and other leadership in defending Canada from previous American conquest ambitions. Such historically provided leadership includes Chief Tecumseh, Shawnee nation, during the War of 1812.
Canada is currently being threatened by apparent traitors across the prevailing “Quisling” leadership of Canada’s major political parties, that have sold out to a Big Business agenda associated with the U.S. political-military-industrial complex. This includes a former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister of Canada who co-authored a pro-North American Union book, and a clique of other Liberals, and confederates in other political parties.
Canadians who oppose the Security and Prosperity Partnership North American Union agenda (SPP-NAU) have no one to turn to among the leadership of Canada’s major political parties. This includes the apparent political hypocrite, New Democratic Party (NDP) Jack Layton, who appears to have quietly endorsed the SPP-NAU supporting Throne Speech of the NDP provincial government under the leadership of Gary Doer.
If Canadians who oppose the SPP-NAU can rally behind the elders and other community organizers of First Nations, who represent progressive values associated with empathy, wisdom, peace, social justice, and environmental protection that are opposed the neo-fascistic values of the SPP-NAU agenda, then there may be hope for our nation. If Canadians can indeed, wake themselves up to the SPP-NAU agenda, and embrace the values of the First Peoples of our nation, that most Canadians in general, appear to also share, Canada may be liberated, once again, from the military conquest ambitions of the American Empire.