Posted on 06/24/2007 1:11:02 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Lawmakers in Canada appear to be paving the way for "deep integration" with the U.S. and Mexico with a proposed measure that advances the controversial Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America promoted by the Bush administration, notes WND columnist Jerome Corsi.
It's an issue Corsi has fully investigated for his newest book, "The Late Great USA."
The conservative minority government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper is pressing for "The Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement", which would enable a Canadian company to challenge laws in provinces that block the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Murray Dobbin, a Vancouver author and journalist critical of SPP, argued in an article titled, "The Plan to Disappear Canada – 'Deep Integration' comes out of the shadows," the secretive trilateral bureaucratic working groups organized under the auspices of SPP are "harmonizing" virtually every important area of public policy with the U.S., including "defense, foreign policy, energy (they get security, we get greenhouse gases), culture, social policy, tax policy, drug testing and safety and much more."
The proposed legislation would allow companies that believe provincial laws and regulations harm their NAFTA rights to demand up to $5 million in compensatory damages for each violation.
When fully implemented, Dobbin argues, "TILMA would allow challenges to the location and size of commercial signs, environmental set-backs for developers, zoning, building height restrictions, pesticide bans, and green space requirements in urban areas. It also would allow challenges to restrictions on private health clinics, halt stricter rules for nursing homes and almost certainly overturn the current ban on junk food in British Columbia schools."
The controversy over SPP broke into the mainstream in Canada last month when Tory Member of Parliament Leon Benoit walked out of a House of Commons International Trade Committee hearing in protest to a leftist professor who wanted to air his objections to "deep integration" with the U.S.
The professor, Gordon Laxer of the University of Alberta, was about to explain to the committee his theory that SPP involves a U.S. grab of Canada's energy resources when Benoit adjourned the meeting and bolted out of the room, preventing the Canadian mainstream press from hearing and reporting the professor's arguments.
Laxer, nevertheless, published his testimony in the nationally read Globe and Mail newspaper.
Laxar has objected to the closed-door meeting roundtables of Canadian business and corporate elite held in Calgary by the Washington-based think tank the Center for Strategic and International Studies, or CSIS, as part of its "North American Future 2025 Project."
WND previously reported two activist groups, the Council of Canadians and the Coalition for Water Aid, are protesting that the CSIS research project involves a massive grab by the U.S. of Canadian fresh water, estimated to be one-fifth of the world's supply.
WND also has reported the CSIS, chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is planning to present its "North American Future 2025" final report to the governments of Mexico, Canada and the U.S. by Sept. 30. The report is expected to recommend the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political economic and security bloc.
Canadian activists are preparing to protest the third summit meeting of the SPP, scheduled for Aug. 20 and 21 in Montebello, Quebec.
So it’s a matter of context? That’s quite a low standard. Here you have an author, a professor of political science, and he expects his work to avoid scrutiny . . . and when it’s scrutinized the argument shifts to matters of context.
Have you heard of incrementalism?
This is what they are doing. They are layering everything, in government. All they are showing you are the pieces, of each layer....oftentimes, you’re not even given that much....then, they are hiding people, their names in these working groups. The don’t want the people, that’s us taxpayers, “disturbing” them. They are writing things in such a way that it sounds “harmless” or in legalese, so you cannot understand the ramifications.
It takes a long time to read through everything, including their smoke and mirrors. That takes time and effort. Most people are unwilling to do that. Most people, like you, will only read articles, or the SPP, and then the government’s propaganda about the SPP. You won’t delve any deeper into it. Why? some are globalists, and this suits them just fine...”if” that’s where it’s headed. Others? they’re too lazy or comfortable. Others? they’d rather mock those who have actually read the documents...for their own personal reasons...I tend to think for personal greed or gain....others out of willful ignorance....to this country’s detriment.
You wanted to know if I’m offering this article as “proof”. An article is not “proof”. But an article can lead you to the PROOF.
You’d rather pontificate.
baaaaaaaaaaa
Again, the SPP has addressed such matters as civil aviation, telecommunications, energy, and other natural resources. And I'm supposed to fear the NAU because the flight I'm on actually lands in Acapulco as promised, and my cell phone works when I get there.
The SPP is ONE document.
That is not ALL the documents.
I’ve told you that before. A chapter out of a book does not MAKE the book, nor does it tell the whole story, nor can you POSSIBLY claim you even UNDERSTAND the book, based upon one page, or one chapter of ANYTHING.
That’s really a display of your intelligence, to my intelligent observations and comment, rudeboy.
Whatever.
Yes, your studious refusal to respond to any of my points, provide any of the information you claim to have, and efforts to change the subject.
And you think you'll be less of a serf, Toddster, because the unelected elites will be divvied up in some other pattern? Think they'll have mercy on you because more of them speak English than Spanish or French? ROFLOL at your foolishness!
Haven’t EVER changed the subject. You’re deflecting...it is YOU who have.
I’ll post ALL the articles, again, but not tonight. It will take more time than I’m in the mood to continue to spend with you tonight.....you’d rather play games. And I find this matter too serious for the triviality with which you afford it.
I believe that's the date the CFR has decided to have the NAU implemented by.
Nope, Corsi’s on record as saying it. The CFR is a think tank, it couldn’t “implement” a speed limit in the parking-lot.
The American elites will have more power than the Mexican elites and the Canadian elites? I'm shocked!
Like I said, cute. Provide nothing, yet accuse your opponent of “deflection.” From what?
I’ve already provided them to you, once before. You REFUSED to read them.
Now, I’ll REPOST them at MY leisure.
Fine. Let the record show that you REFUSED to do so until you are ready. I’ll call you a KOOK until then.
You REFUSED.....over a year ago...but continue mocking everyone in ignorance for yet another 12 months.
The record DOES reflect that.
Once someone REFUSES to read what’s been given to them, they’re even LUCKY if someone is willing to spend EVEN MORE TIME reposting it.
And, you could JUST AS EASILY go back to your OWN POSTS from me to you....by mid-2006, at least...if YOU WERE TRULY INTERESTED....but, then, again, if you were, you would have read them THE FIRST TIME I posted them to you. I say you’ve NO ROOM to talk about anyone.
There is NO SUCH VARMINT as an American, Mexican or Canadian elite. What part of the term GLOBALIST are you unable to comprehend, Toddster?
"Welcome to Amexi-nada" (Spanish pun intended). "Please declare all Ameros in your possession. You can dump any dollars you've brought with you here in this bin, eh? This way to Re-immigration, por favor."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.