                 
 
|
Dana's Blog
|
|
Bill C-51, Codex and the SPP By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
On April 8, 2008, Canada’s Health Minister introduced Bill C-51 which proposed sweeping changes to the Food and Drugs Act. The Canadian government has since been forced to make amendments because of intense grassroots pressure. There are fears that this Bill could lead to some vitamins, herbs, minerals, and dietary supplements no longer being available in the country. Through the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), Canada, the U.S., and Mexico are already busy harmonizing food and drug regulations into a North American Union structure. Some have suggested that this Bill would also bring Canadian law into compliance with the Codex Alimentarius Commission. Bill C-51 has the potential to take away the rights of people to freely choose natural medicine as an alternative to expensive drug-based products and treatments.
|
| |
Bill C-51 will further encroach on civil liberties and increase police state measures. There is reason for concern because of the Bills ambiguous language in regards to raids and seizures. It has been referred to as a police state bill masquerading as a health bill. It will make it easier for Canadian officials to seize natural health products and remove them from store shelves. It grants inspectors the power to raid homes and businesses without a warrant and the power to seize bank accounts and property. Some might recall that in the early 90’s, the FDA engaged in paramilitary raids on American health food stores, holistic treatment centers, and other nutritional supplement businesses. This behavior created such a public outcry and backlash, leading Congress to pass the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) to protect the right of American consumers to purchase and use nutritional supplements.
|
| |
If the Harper Conservative government thought that they were going to quietly pass Bill C-51, were they ever wrong. When word hit the Internet and blogoshere that up to 60% of natural health products currently sold in Canada could be outlawed, it sparked a swift and strong public reaction. In Bill C-51, the word drug has been replaced with “therapeutic products” and gives the government broad reaching powers to further regulate their sale. Health Minister Tony Clement has vowed to change the parts that lumped natural medicines in with pharmaceutical drugs. This includes a clearer definition of natural health products into the Food and Drugs Act. There has been other amendments made, but there are still many concerns surrounding Bill C-51. It might be safer to do away with it in its entirety and start from scratch.
|
| |
It is the SPP working groups that are harmonizing regulations and laws, writing out policy initiatives and recommendations. They are the real power, laying the foundation for a North American Union. Part of the SPP calls for the “Identification and appropriate adoption of best practices in maintaining the safety, efficacy and quality of pharmaceutical products.” NDP MP Peter Julian said in the House of Commons that, “Bill C-51 would limit access to many health products and allow the fast-tracking of new drugs that have not been proven safe. Bill C-51 blends in with the SPP agenda, which is about harmonizing regulations across the board with the United States, resulting in lower standards.” There are fears that Bill C-51 will bring about a more U.S. style approach to food, drugs, and consumer product safety. This includes turning more power over to the drug companies with increased reliance on their testing and research. These same drug manufacturers would themselves be more responsible in fast-tracking the drug approval process and further looking after any safety concerns once the drug has hit the market. Under the Trilateral Cooperation Charter, the FDA is also working with Canada and Mexico in further harmonizing regulations between the three countries.
|
| |
It is not just through the SPP and the Trilateral Cooperation Charter that the harmonizing of food and drugs is being achieved. The Codex Alimentarius Commission which is part of the United Nations is setting international guidelines for food products including dietary supplements. They are using muscle provided by the World Trade Organization to undermine and bypass domestic laws. Section Six of CAFTA talks about using the Codex codes as the regulatory standard for all signing nations. It is through the Codex guidelines that vitamins, minerals, and other natural supplements could become limited and even banned. Some fear that Bill C-51 is an attempt to place Canada under Codex control.
|
| |
Many argue that Bill C-51 is unnecessary, and that there are already laws in place to protect consumers from natural health products. It’s not about keeping Canadians safe, it’s about further harmonizing our health and safety regulations into a North American Union. How can fast-tracking potentially dangerous new drugs and at the same time outlawing some beneficial natural medicines be good for anyone? One must understand that it is also about ensuring huge profits for Big Pharma. Bill C-51 should be rejected on the grounds that it threatens the ability of Canadians to choose alternative health products and treatments.
|
|
President Obama Won’t Change NAFTA By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
Barack Obama has all but wrapped up the Democratic nomination, with only the formalities of the convention remaining. There is a good chance that he will become the next president of the United States. For all his talk of change, it appears that in areas of trade, economics, foreign and monetary policy, things for the most part will remain status quo. During the grueling nomination battle, both the Obama and Clinton camps were highly critical of NAFTA and accused the other of changing their position on the trade agreement. What is really worrisome is that you don’t hear Obama, or McCain for that matter, talking about preserving the constitution or protecting American sovereignty. The reality is that NAFTA will remain intact, and the push towards a North American Union and global governance will continue.
|
| |
Obama has promised that one of his first orders of business as president will be to call upon the leaders of Canada and Mexico to renegotiate stronger labor and environmental provisions into NAFTA. Both he and Clinton were specific about using the six-month opt-out clause in order to put pressure for changes to be made. It appears as if Obama has backed himself into a corner. With all this talk about renegotiating NAFTA, the U.S. ambassador to Canada , David Wilkins, has said that NAFTA is too important to do away with or make any drastic changes to. He pointed to the fact that regardless who wins the American presidential election, NAFTA will stand.
|
| |
With the sharp tone of language directed towards NAFTA, some Canadian government officials became concerned. It was reported that the Obama campaign contacted Canadian officials to set the record straight and told them not to take the criticism seriously. They also received warnings that Obama would be further speaking out against the agreement. Does this mean that all this tough talk regarding NAFTA was nothing more than political positioning and rhetoric? It’s not just Obama as Clinton tried to court working-class voters in the industrial Midwest, where NAFTA has hit the hardest by also telling the people what they wanted to hear.
|
| |
For years, both the Democrats and Republicans have been double teaming the American people. One gets in power and further advances the New World Order agenda, and then falls out of favor and passes the baton to the other. In Canada , it was the Liberal party who spearheaded the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) initiative, and with the Conservatives now in power, deeper integration has continued. It will be the same with the Democrats, who will further push for a North American Union, and this will not include dismantling NAFTA. Just like the Republicans, the Democrats are run by special interest groups and corporate powers that are pushing globalization and world government. With Obama in office, I am afraid that many on the left will go to sleep because their man and party will be in power. He doesn’t have the political baggage of a McCain or Clinton, and this makes him an even more useful tool of the elite.
|
| |
In a recent article from washingtonpost.com, there are suggestions on what Obama should do as president. It included using the European Union as an example for economic and political integration. It talked about, “A functioning American Union that pools sovereignty.” It went on to say that this would not be possible by tearing down NAFTA. Much of the economic integration has already been achieved through NAFTA, and the SPP is continuing this process, further laying the foundation for a North American Union.
|
| |
It is doubtful that the Democrats and President Obama will follow through on promises to fix NAFTA. It is so badly flawed, and a trade agreement that puts the interests of the people ahead of those of multinational corporations is what is needed. With all his talk on NAFTA, Obama has been silent on the SPP and the North American Union agenda. If there are no intentions of abandoning NAFTA, then it appears as if Obama’s change will be more of what we’ve come to expect from our politicians. With the next phase of the presidential campaign underway, I hope that this is not the last we’ve seen of NAFTA as an election issue.
|
|
The SPP and Merging Military Command Structures By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
Portions of the Civil Assistance Plan (CAP) signed by the U.S.-Canadian military in mid-February were just recently posted on the U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) and Canada Command websites. The plan would allow for military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency, including one that does not involve a cross-border crisis. Some fear that this agreement could lead to foreign troops being used for gun confiscation and marital law. CAP, along with the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), are further advancing the merging of U.S.-Canadian military command structures and represent steps towards a North American Union.
|
| |
In 2002, then U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, announced the creation of NORTHCOM, and boasted that it would have jurisdiction over all of North America. In an article by Michel Chossudovsky, he states the, “redesign of Canada’s defense system is being discussed behind closed doors, not in Canada, but at the Peterson Air Force base in Colorado, at the headquarters of US Northern Command (NORTHCOM).” He went on to say, “Under an integrated North American Command, a North American national security doctrine would be formulated.” In addition, this is taking place through the SPP and poses a serious threat to Canadian sovereignty and any resemblance of an independent foreign policy.
|
| |
Canada Command and NORTHCOM have established close bilateral ties, meeting regularly and planning as well as participating in joint military exercises. American, Canadian, and even Mexican troops have held military training exercises in advent of a possible natural disaster or terrorist attack during the 2010 winter Olympics in Vancouver. It is unclear whether American troops will be providing any type of security at the Olympics. On top of merging command structures, binational integration is also taking place in areas of intelligence and law enforcement.
|
| |
In advance of the SPP Leader Summit in Montebello, Quebec back in 2007, it was reported that the RCMP, along with the U.S. Army, blocked the Council of Canadians from renting a municipal community center to hold a forum in. The reason cited was that it was located inside the reported 25 km security perimeter. There is little doubt that the SPP is also further advancing the police state.
|
| |
The majority of Canadians reject the SPP, and deeper integration with the United States. It is not surprising that the Harper Conservative government and the Canadian military failed to announce the signing of CAP. This agreement was not signed by the governments of both countries, but by military commanding officers with no public debate or Parliamentary and Congressional oversight. There was no Canadian Forces press release, and the government refused to answer questions on the agreement in the House of Commons. It is hard to imagine that an agreement of such magnitude, which would allow U.S.-Canadian troops on each other’s soil and threaten the sovereignty of each nation was not debated or voted on. Just like the SPP, CAP is shrouded in secrecy, with many missing annexes that remain classified. This agreement goes hand in hand with parts of the North American Plan for Avian and Pandemic Influenza, which was announced at the SPP Summit in Montebello.
|
| |
Canadian military command structures are further merging with the U.S., and it is becoming more aggressive in its operations. The Canadian government’s tone and language directed towards other nations is becoming more hostile. There has been a shift from its more traditional role as a peacekeeping nation, which has garnered praise and respect from around the world. Canada might play a more active role in the war on terror, including posible participation in future U.S. military operations. The SPP is further advancing Canadian security and military assimilation into the U.S. and a North American Union.
|
|
Plan Mexico Tied to SPP By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
The Merida Initiative is a security aid package to Mexico and parts of Central America that was recently approved. It has been dubbed Plan Mexico and is a three year $1.4 billion “Regional Security Cooperation Initiative.” Some have described it as more of a partnership as oppose to a foreign aid package. Plan Mexico is tied to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and the continued integration of the U.S., Canada and Mexico into a North American Union.
|
| |
Much of Plan Mexico is based on the American war on drugs model, which has been costly and ineffective. This model relies primarily on military and law enforcement measures, leading to more surveillance, domestic spying, and further advancing the police state. Plan Mexico will see the transfer of equipment, technological support, and training in an effort to combat Mexico’s growing drug trade. Some believe that this military approach will further escalate drug related violence and human rights's abuses. There is a push for more military cooperation and the future development of a hemispheric police force that would be able to cross borders. This might not be necessary with creation of a North American Union, as our borders are being systematically erased and our sovereignty sacrificed.
|
| |
Plan Mexico goes well beyond trying to stop the flow of illegal drugs. At a press conference from the third SPP Leader Summit in Montebello, Quebec in August of 2007, President Bush referred to Mexico’s drug trade as a continental problem that demanded continental solutions. Laura Carlsen, the director of the Americas Program at the U.S.-based Center for International Policy, stated that Plan Mexico is intimately linked to the SPP. She said, “It would fundamentally restructure the U.S.-Mexico binational relationship, recast economic and social problems as security issues, and militarize Mexican society. “ She went on to say, “Through the SPP, the Bush administration has sought to push its North American trade partners into a common front that would assume shared responsibility for protecting the United States from terrorist threats, promoting and protecting the free-trade economic model, and bolstering U.S. global control.”
|
| |
As much as half of Plan Mexico funding will go to the military, with later money allocated to law enforcement and judicial agencies. Drug cartels have managed to infiltrate the judicial system and almost every facet of Mexican law enforcement and military. There has been an undeclared border war for some time, with Mexican drug gangs and cartels vying for control. It has been reported by the mainstream media that some Mexican troops who received U.S. training have now switched sides and joined the cartels. There have also been reports of Mexican rogue military incursions across the border. The national media blackout surrounding the border violence has been lifted, as there are fears the violence could further spillover across on to the U.S. side.
|
| |
Some might recall Plan Colombia, which was launched by the Clinton administration back in 2000. Since its inception, it has failed to reduce the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. and has lead to more violence and corruption. New equipment, training, and strategy was later shifted from targeting drug cartels and used against those who oppose the government. Plan Columbia later morphed into the war on terror. There were up to 800 American trainers, including Special Forces, and up to 600 private contractors in Columbia. There are fears that Plan Mexico will result in more U.S. military involvement. The Merida Initiative threatens Mexican sovereignty, will broaden presidential powers, and promote militarization of the country.
|
| |
The Plan Mexico strategy is part of the SPP and further integration into a North American Union. It will help in creating a fortress North America while spreading the SPP to other parts of the region. This is in an effort for the U.S. to further extend its foreign policy. There has been much speculation about possible American troop involvement, which both U.S. and Mexican authorities have adamantly denied. The U.S. is further merging its military and law enforcement with Canada and Mexico. Are we on the verge of a North American Union army? There are still many unanswered questions surrounding the U.S.-Canadian military agreement that was signed several months back.
|
|
Oklahoma Recalls Bill That Would Have Facilitated NAFTA Superhighway By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
The Oklahoma State Senate voted to recall a bill that would have further facilitated plans for the NAFTA Superhighway to run through the state. There were fears that parts of Bill 1507, which dealt with Foreign Trade Zones, were tied to the superhighway which is to extend from Mexico to Canada. There were also concerns that this would lead to private property seizures through eminent domain. This is already taking place in parts of rural Texas with the construction of the Trans Texas Corridor (TTC), which is to be the first leg of this superhighway infrastructure.
|
| |
Some have argued that Bill 1507 would have allowed for the creation of foreign owned smart ports. This would have allowed for imported goods to pass through the U.S./Mexican border without going through customs until Oklahoma. This follows in the same line as other proposed inland ports, such as the one in Kansas City. The NAFTA Superhighway will be a borderless open transportation system that will further facilitate the flow of cheap goods from China. Oklahoma has already passed legislation to stop the TTC from coming through the state.
|
| |
The NAFTA Superhighway is the necessary infrastructure needed for the creation of a North American Union. It will serve as a highway for cheap Chinese goods and cheap labor from Mexico and Latin America. It will untimely benefit multinational corporations, who view borders as barriers to trade and greater profits. Last year, Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., introduced a House resolution that stated congressional opposition to the construction of a superhighway or entry into North American Union.
|
| |
The link from the Mexican border to Oklahoma is to be the highest priority, and has been branded the Trans Texas Corridor (TTC). If completed, it would encompass more than 4,000 miles. It is being financed by the Spanish company Cintra, who will lease and operate it as a toll road. It is set to have 1,200-foot corridors with separate lanes for passenger vehicles and large trucks, and room for future upgrades. Opposition to the TTC is growing, and for the second straight year, ranchers and other opponents marched on the Texas state capital in protest. Some might recall that in a blatant effort to try and stifle opposition, a company with close ties to Cintra purchased many local newspapers from towns that fall in the TTC's path. The TTC is part of the NAFTA Superhighway, and is proof of further integration into a North American Union.
|
| |
In January of this year, Texas Congressman and Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul filed a bill in the House of Representatives to prevent the TTC from receiving federal dollars. He was also very concerned and wanted to prevent the loss of private land through eminent domain. The TTC will see upwards of 584,000 acres of prime farm and ranch land lost, with up to a million people displaced through this practice.
|
| |
The recalling of this bill by the Oklahoma State Senate is another small and maybe even temporary victory in the struggle to stop the NAFTA Superhighway and the North American Union. Nevertheless, it is encouraging that citizens concerns in regards to this issue are being echoed by more and more legislators. Many states have already passed anti-North American Union and anti-NAFTA Superhighway resolutions. The NAFTA Superhighway is a threat to private property, our sovereignty, and security.
|
|
Big Business, BIG Winner at SPP Summit By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
The besieged Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America received a renewed commitment from all three NAFTA leaders at the recent summit in New Orleans. This is a much needed boast for the North American Union agenda that is seen as widely unpopular. There is little doubt that big business is a driving force behind deeper continental integration. The latest SPP Summit reaffirmed that corporate interests will continue to further dominate this process. The corporate agenda is shaping policy, and as their profits increase, they gain more control over our lives.
|
| |
The SPP is the brainchild of business and political elites who wish to advance North American integration. In June of 2006, the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) was launched, and is the only formal advisory board in the SPP. The NACC represents private corporate interests, and through the SPP, transnational corporate rights are being further empowered. In February of 2007, the NACC made 51 proposals to SPP negotiators. They are essentially formulating policy and using the SPP to lay the foundation for a North American Union. The NACC is now actively promoting energy privatization in Mexico. It is the multinational corporations who have the most to gain from the SPP.
|
| |
Bruce Campbell, the executive director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, lays out just how the SPP structure operates. He said, “Business conveys its demand, the politicians respond, consensus is reached, and civil servants implement. This takes the privatization of public policy-making to a new level.” Stuart Trew of the Council of Canadians said, “These corporate recommendations are going directly to the respective bureaucracies, and they are being pushed heavily.”
|
| |
Before the Leader Summit, the NACC released a report where they stated, “Our most critical request to the leaders is for them to ensure that the SPP remains a dynamic and effective path forward for trilateral and bilateral co-operation.” There was some fear that this agenda might be further stalled or replaced with something else. Not to worry, because here is what Bush had to say about the NACC’s recommendations, “I’m looking forward to hearing them, and I’m looking forward to implementing them.” Mexican President Calderon also said, “we need to work within the North American Competitiveness Council, where the three leaders agreed we fully need to support the work of this Competitiveness Council.” It sounds like the SPP is back on track, and the NACC and corporate interests will have even more clout.
|
| |
Recent national polls reflect that the majority of Canadians and Americans wish to retain their sovereignty and reject the secrecy surrounding the SPP. I guess most people think it is a big deal when powerful and influential corporate elites and politicians meet in private, plotting the destruction of the country. Dismantling of the borders will allow for the freer flow of goods and cheap labor, which will increase corporate profits at the expense of our sovereignty and prosperity.
|
| |
The big loser of the SPP summit is transparency in government and the will of the people. The transfer of power from our elected representatives to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats is being further accelerated. We must continue to resist the North American Union and the complete corporate takeover of the continent.
|
|
Colombia FTA Based on Failed NAFTA Model By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
The Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) was signed in November of 2006, and if ratified, would expand NAFTA to the region. In fact, it would be the largest Western Hemisphere pact since NAFTA. Past free trade deals have failed to live up to the promise of prosperity, and have served to further benefit multinational corporations. This one appears to be no different.
|
| |
The Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) was signed in November of 2006, and if ratified, would expand NAFTA to the region. In fact, it would be the largest Western Hemisphere pact since NAFTA. Past free trade deals have failed to live up to the promise of prosperity, and have served to further benefit multinational corporations. This one appears to be no different.
In an effort to pass the Colombia FTA, President Bush used the national security card much like he did with CAFTA. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi flexed a little muscle, passing a motion to exempt the accord from the 90-day legislative deadline. This had many opponents of the agreement prematurely celebrating, and news headlines stating it was dead. In reality, all the vote did was delay matters for the time being. The Democrats are on record as saying that they don’t want to kill the accord, and only wish to postpone and use it as leverage. This delay could affect the approval of pending trade agreements with South Korea and Panama.
|
| |
There have been some question marks surrounding Pelosi’s leadership, and there are accusations that her latest move amounts to nothing more than playing politics. As it stands right now, the accord would have little chance of passing. Some have suggested that in actuality, her actions might insure its future passage. She might succeed in getting a few concessions, and proclaim that the Democrats along with U.S. and Colombian workers have won some major victory. What shouldn’t be overlooked in this power move is the constitutional authority that Congress still has over branches of the federal government, but all too often fails to exercise.
|
| |
The Colombia FTA threatens U.S. sovereignty, and would allow foreign corporations to challenge food safety regulations and environmental protections as barriers to trade. It further promotes privatization and deregulation of key public services. There has been a push for Latin American governments to sell national water resources to private corporations. This trade agreement also provides these corporations with another source of cheap labor and threatens American workers by placing them in competition with Colombia ’s lower wages. This will lead to further depressed wages and the loss of more jobs. Despite assurances to the contrary, it undermines labor and environmental standards.
|
| |
The Colombian government has one of the worst human rights violations records in the region, and has come under fire for its links to paramilitary death squads. It is one of the most dangerous places for trade unionists, as many have been killed. Promoting human rights should be a priority, and corrupt and scandalous regimes should not be rewarded unless there are dramatic changes. Many of President Alvaro Uribe’s closest political associates and members of his family have been sent to prison or are under investigation for ties to paramilitary death squads and drug traffickers. This is a government that does not value human rights, freedom, democracy, and the rule of law. This accord would give the Colombian government international approval and recognition, and it sends the wrong message.
|
| |
The Colombia FTA is part of the destructive cycle of other trade deals that have sacrificed more then they have gained. It would allow for the further domination of U.S. trade policies by multinational corporations, and the surrender of more sovereignty. It is another move for more central economic and political governance. This is also taking place with the continued integration of Canada , the U.S. , and Mexico into a North American Union. The Colombia FTA is essentially taking the Security and Prosperity Partnership structure to Latin America , and will be used as a stepping stone to the FTAA and the creation of a Pan-American Union.
|
|
Saving and Expanding the SPP By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
Those pushing for a North American Union fully realize that the time might have come to pull the plug on the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and replace it with something else. It’s hardly surprising that pro-SPP reports are being released ahead of the Leader Summit in New Orleans. This agenda is on the defensive and the timing of the reports is in an effort to shift public opinion and save the SPP.
|
| |
The Fraser Institute, a Canadian think tank, recently published the report Saving the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership: The Case for a North American Regulatory Area. Not only do they want to save the SPP, but they wish to expand and speed up the process of deeper integration. This could include replacing the SPP with the North American Standards and Regulatory Area (NASRA). As if changing the name would alter its objectives and excuse the treasonous surrender of our sovereignty.
|
| |
Political Scientist and co-author of the report, Alexander Moen, acknowledges that NASRA would include further economic integration beyond free trade, but tries to ease concerns that it would not lead to political integration. The SPP is already merging our health, food safety, energy, and environmental regulations into a North American structure. If the SPP was the next step to NAFTA, why wouldn’t the next logical move be to expand from economic and security to include political integration using the European Union as the model?
|
| |
Proponents of the SPP believe that it is misunderstood, and Moens said, “This confusion around what the SPP stands for has skewed public perception. Governments need to redefine the process and articulate specific goals for partnership.” He went on to say, “Somehow a combination of left-wing economic nationalists in Canada and right-wing protectionists in the US have turned the SPP into a supranationalist conspiracy theory.” The level of desperation to save the SPP has many still clinging to the North American Union as being a fabricated conspiracy. This is a blatant attempt to mislead and deceive the public.
|
| |
The report also calls upon further expanding the role of business inside the SPP process. Stuart Trew of the Council of Canadians said, “These recommendations, put into government practice, would intensify the privatization of public policy envisioned in the SPP.” This would mean putting more power into the hands of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats. First of all, a mandate from the people is required in order to proceed any further, and there should more public involvement and governmental accountability. All those involved need to be honest and open about the true intentions of the SPP.
|
| |
The SPP has been a public relation’s nightmare and is unraveling. It may have outlived its usefulness under its current structure. Still, many wish to save, expand, and continue to use it as a vehicle to further advance a North American Union.
|
|
Majority of Canadians Reject SPP and Deeper Integration By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
On the heels of the Leader Summit in New Orleans, the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) received some bad news as the North American Union agenda appears to be on the ropes especially in Canada. A poll commissioned by the Council of Canadians reveals that the majority of the country wants the Conservative minority government to protect water, energy and public regulations and back off integration with the United States.
|
| |
In the poll, a whopping 86 percent of Canadians agree that the SPP should be debated in the House of Commons and submitted to a parliamentary vote. Maude Barlow, national chairperson of the Council of Canadians, said of the SPP, “while corporations have been given a seat at the negotiating table, the Canadian government has never asked the public, how they feel about it.” The SPP’s fate should be decided by the people in the form of a referendum.
|
| |
Another part of the poll showed that 87 percent agree that Canada should set its own independent environmental, health, and safety standards, while 89 percent want an energy policy guaranteeing Canadian supply and protecting the environment. In addition, 88 percent of Canadians want a comprehensive national water policy that bans bulk exports of fresh water and recognizes water as a basic human right.
|
| |
The SPP’s objectives include removing barriers and securing U.S. access to Canadian natural resources. One half of Alberta’s oil sands production is already U.S. owned. The SPP will lead to the further corporate takeover of Canada’s resources. The U.S. government, along with trinational elites in the private sector, will benefit from a North American resource pact.
|
| |
In April of last year, the North American Future 2025 Project met and discussed transfers, consumption, and artificial diversion of bulk waters. Leaked documents obtained by the Council of Canadians prove that the Canadian government along with some business elites are actively discussing and pursuing bulk water exports. Connie Fogal, the leader of the Canadian Action Party, has said that the SPP will begin, “the accelerated extraction and delivery of Canadian oil and water resources to the U.S. economy.”
|
| |
It is no secret that the U.S. has long since coveted Canada’s fresh water, and once this process starts, it would be next to impossible to turn off the tap. What Canada desperately needs is a national water policy that would ban bulk water exports. Canadians need to be aware of the SPP’s plan to integrate and hand over more control and access of their natural resources to the Americans. A sovereign independent Canada must put their future needs ahead of U.S. corporate interests.
|
|
Repackaging, Renaming, Relaunching the SPP By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
With the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America Leader Summit in New Orleans fast approaching, there are calls to rename and relaunch this whole process. This could be in an effort to try and kickstart the SPP as it is encountering fierce resistance. Beware because any new incarnation could be seen as a victory when in reality nothing would have changed except for the name.
|
| |
There is little doubt that the SPP is in need of a drastic makeover in order to give it a new lease on life. The U.S. think tank Hudson Institute has stated, “it may ultimately be necessary to redesign and relaunch a new process to take up the work of the SPP under a new acronym.” This follows a recent report by the Fraser Institute which called for expanding and fast tracking the SPP. Co-author of the report, Alexander Moens, said of the SPP, “the time has come to rebrand the talks and give them a clear mandate.” The report also called for changing the SPP’s name to the North American Standards and Regulations Area (NASRA).
|
| |
Could there also be a push to squeeze Mexico out of the SPP? The Canadian think tank C.D. Howe has recommended a new bilateral trade initiative between the U.S. and Canada. Former Canadian ambassador to the U.S. Derek Burney also seemed to echo the same sentiments when he said, “Attempts to ‘triangulate’ in recent years, by bringing in Mexico, have little substance and allowed attention to be diverted from more pressing bilateral concerns.”
|
| |
It is unclear if this would mean the end of the SPP as we now know it. This could also be a huge distraction to confuse and shift the debate. The reality is that through NAFTA and the SPP, much integration has already been achieved. The SPP might be doomed, but the push for a North American Union is not dead and obviously Mexico remains an important part of this agenda.
|
| |
Interest in the SPP on the part of all participants appears to have declined, but incremental integration into a North American Union continues. In many ways, their agenda has been stalled, but we cannot be lulled into a false sense of security. The proponents of a North American Union are simply retooling and regrouping. The SPP Leader Summit could be used to plot and launch a different course of action with the same goals and end results.
|
| |
Make no mistake about it - the SPP remains a priority to the global elite. We must put it to rest for good and not have it rear its ugly head again under a new name or entity. The North American Union agenda is in trouble. Let’s make the SPP Leader Summit in New Orleans the last one.
|
|
NAFTA Countries to Introduce Simultaneous Legislation to Stop SPP By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
Elected representatives from Canada, the U.S., and Mexico have agreed to a plan to introduce simultaneous legislation in an effort to stop the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America. This cross border cooperation will go a long way in further exposing the North American Union agenda.
|
| |
In addition, legislators have agreed to launch a Task Force to renegotiate NAFTA that will be chaired by NDP Trade Critic Peter Julian. It also includes U.S. Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), the Honourable Yeidckol Polevnsky (Senator of Mexico State and Vice-president of the Mexican Senate) and the Honourable Victor Quintana (Deputy of the State Chihuahua, Mexico). This is all in an effort to overhaul NAFTA and make it a more fair trade deal. Julian will also be working with Kaptur and Mike Michaud (D-ME) to try and defeat the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.
|
| |
Julian said, “The NDP has been campaigning across Canada to expose and stop the SPP. We’ve held over 20 public forums in more than twenty cities and a dozen more are being planned for the spring of 2008. These forums have been held to speak out on the grave concerns surrounding the SPP and to help ensure that Canadians from coast to coast to coast get informed and have their say. This trinational initiative with colleagues from the U.S. and Mexico takes us to a new stage in our fight to stop the SPP.”
|
| |
Discontent towards NAFTA is festering in Mexico, which has seen huge protests by farmers. Since 1994, one quarter of the rural population of Mexico and two million jobs have left the country. Mexican Senator Polevnsky said, “It is indispensable that legislators from all three North American partner countries work together to design an alternative project that takes into account each nations sovereignty, environmental protection, economic competitiveness, migration, and labor rights.”
|
| |
With all this talk about renegotiating NAFTA, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, David Wilkins recently acknowledged that he believes that it is too important to do away with or make any dramatic changes to. He pointed to the fact that, regardless who wins the American presidential election, NAFTA will stand. The SPP is an expansion of NAFTA, and is essentially the framework for a North American Union. On the heels of the next SPP Leader Summit that will be held in New Orleans on April 21 and 22, opposition towards a North American Union is growing in Canada, the U.S., and Mexico.
|
| |
The citizens of all three NAFTA countries must demand more transparency in regards to the SPP. Some believe that it might be better to scrap NAFTA and just start from scratch. The reality remains the same - in a North American Union, Canada, the U.S., and Mexico would cease to exist as sovereign nations. This is a decision that should not be left up to corporate elites, bureaucrats or politicians, but to the will of the people.
|
|
Leader of CAP Calls for Referendum and General Strike Regarding SPP By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
The battle lines are being drawn and the Canadian Action Party (CAP) is front and center, fighting the North American Union agenda. They are very adamant that Canada’s sovereignty should not be negotiated away. On their websites homepage it states, “A decision regarding the restructuring of Canada into an integrated North American Union with a common currency is a decision for the citizens of Canada – not for a minority government with an ineffective opposition.”
|
| |
CAP is demanding full disclosure of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). In a recent video address, their leader Connie Fogal called for a referendum and general strike in regards to the SPP. A general strike might be hard to organize, but it would be an effective way of protesting and drawing further attention to this whole process of deeper integration.
|
| |
CAP is concerned, and rightfully so, that any parliamentary vote to try and stop the SPP would probably not succeed. After all, it was the Liberal Party under Paul Martin who began the SPP process, and under Stephen Harper’s Conservative Government, this agenda has only accelerated. CAP is absolutely correct that there needs to be a referendum concerning the SPP, as it should be the people who decide its fate and not politicians whose allegiances might lie elsewhere.
|
| |
CAP wants NAFTA replaced with a trade deal that places Canadians best interests ahead of those of multinational corporations. Fogal said that, “NAFTA was the beginning of the institutional, administrative restructuring of the three nations into a North American Union.”
|
| |
Many Canadians and Americans are taking action to further expose and stop the North American Union. Resolutions stating concerns about the SPP have recently been presented in Missouri House and Senate committees. This is all very encouraging, and with every small victory we are that much closer to defeating this agenda.
|
| |
The Canadian Action Party and their leader Connie Fogal need to be commended for their efforts in trying to stop the North American Union. Fogal said, “If Canada is to be restored to an independent, sovereign and democratic nation, if that is what you want, then your political leaders must take back control of our rules and procedures immediately into the hands of a democratic Parliament. They must act immediately to move the control of our government out of the hands of a cabinet apparatus and a bureaucracy that have abandoned their duty to the citizens and to the public good, and they must disembowel the corporate rule.” Integration into a North American Union is already happening, but there is still time to stop it if we act now.
|
|
Obama and Clinton on Judicial Watch Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians List By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
Hillary Clinton’s ethics have been questioned in the past, but for the most part Barack Obama has enjoyed a relatively free ride in the way of scrutiny from the mainstream media. It is true that Obama doesn’t have the baggage of a Clinton or John McCain, but his name did appear on the Judicial Watch, Washington’s Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians list for 2007. Judicial Watch is a non-partisan educational foundation that promotes transparency, accountability, and integrity in government, politics, and the law.
|
| |
Here’s what Judicial Watch had to say about Obama who made the list. “A Dishonorable Mention last year, Senator Obama moves onto the ten most wanted list in 2007. In 2006, it was discovered that Obama was involved in a suspicious real estate deal with an indicted political fundraiser, Antoin Tony Rezko. In 2007, more reports surfaced of deeper and suspicious business and political connections. It was reported that just two months after he joined the Senate, Obama purchased $50,000 worth of stock in speculative companies whose major investors were his biggest campaign contributors. One of the companies was a biotech concern that benefited from legislation Obama pushed just two weeks after the senator purchased $5,000 of the company’s shares. Obama was also nabbed conducting campaign business in his Senate office, a violation of federal law.”
|
| |
Here’s what they had to say about Clinton. “In addition to her long and sordid ethics record, Senator Hillary Clinton took a lot of heat in 2007 – and rightly so – for blocking the release her official White House records. Many suspect these records contain a treasure trove of information related to her role in a number of serious Clinton-era scandals. Moreover, in March 2007, Judicial Watch filed an ethics complaint against Senator Clinton for filing false financial disclosure forms with the U.S. Senate (again). And Hillary’s top campaign contributor, Norman Hsu, was exposed as a felon and a fugitive from justice in 2007. Hsu pleaded guilt to one count of grand theft for defrauding investors as part of a multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme.”
|
| |
The truth is that this is probably just the tip of the iceberg. For those who might think that I am bashing the Democrats and signaling out Obama and Clinton, rest assured that Republicans are not immune to corruption. Former Republican presidential candidates Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee both cracked the top ten list as well. Although McCain did not make the list, there is more than enough dirt on him already. It is not surprising that Ron Paul’s name is no where to be found.
|
| |
Unfortunately, many are able to expose the corruption of the other party, but are complacent, ignorant, or blind to their own party’s corruption. The point is that you probably don’t get to this level in your political career without being severely compromised. There are more than enough skeletons in Obama’s, Clinton’s, and McCain’s closet to bring them down anytime.
|
| |
It is looking more like it will be Clinton or Obama as president. During the presidential campaign it is possible that McCain could self implode. There is also a chance that old and maybe even new scandals could be exposed, thus insuring a Democrat in the White House. Obama claims that he is the candidate for hope and change, but it appears as if little would really change if he is elected. The only thing that could change is there might be someone other than a Bush or a Clinton as president.
|
|
Ron Paul Revolution: Let's Finish What We Started By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
For those Ron Paul supporters who are feeling weary, we need not be discouraged. There is nothing to feel sorry about and all our hard work has not been in vain. In many ways this revolution for change has only just begun. Ron Paul has further passed on the baton to us and what we do with it will ultimately shape our future. We have not been abandoned and he will continue to fight for the Constitution and freedom like he has for the last 30 years.
|
| |
With insurmountable odds we have put a dent in the establishments armor and have changed the rules and the political landscape forever. We are not alone and our voices will be heard. The power is in the people and together there is no limit to what we can accomplish.
|
| |
This movement was always more than about Ron Paul - it is about getting proactive and taking action on our own at a grassroots level. We have him to thank for all the ideas and issues he has injected into the campaign that would have never otherwise seen the light of day.
|
| |
This has been a learning curve and along the way some mistakes have been made, but this will only help us in the long run and make us stronger. Real everlasting change will not come easy, but it is attainable. This is not the end but the beginning, the first stages of this peaceful revolution.
|
| |
This whole election season, I have likened Ron Paul's campaign to the Star Wars movie, A New Hope, and in particular a certain scene. During the lightsaber duel on the Death Star, Obi-Wan Kenobi says to Darth Vader, “You can't win Darth. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.” We have not been defeated as this movement will go forward and continue to grow.
|
| |
We stand on the threshold of change, and by continuing to plant seeds we will win over more hearts and minds. Together we can and will take back this country - one district, one county, one city, one state, and one mind at a time. Thank you Ron Paul and supporters for giving America hope. Now let's finish what we started.
|
|
Local British Columbia Council Passes Motion to Halt SPP By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
The Village of New Denver in southeastern British Columbia, Canada, has recently passed a motion to halt the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America. The motion to stop the SPP is until such time as there is more parliamentary oversight and a democratic mandate from the people of Canada to further pursue this agenda of deeper integration.
|
| |
The motion passed reads as such, “the Council of the Village of New Denver supports the position of Alex Atamanenko, MP, B.C. Southern Interior, in calling on the Federal Government of Canada to stop further implementation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America with the United States and Mexico until there is a democratic mandate from the people of Canada, Parliamentary oversight, and consideration of its profound consequences on Canada's existence as a sovereign nation and its ability to adopt a autonomous and sustainable economic, social, and environmental policies, and urge the Government of Canada to conduct a transparent and accountable public debate of the SPP process, involving meaningful public consultation with civil society and full legislative review, including the work, recommendations and reports of all SPP working groups, and full debate and a vote in Parliament.”
|
| |
Some might view a small town passing such a motion as insignificant, but it could lead to a domino effect. Many U.S. states have already passed anti-North American Union resolutions. It is at a local, municipal, state, and provincial level where we might be most effective in further engaging this agenda.
|
| |
The groundswell of grassroots resentment towards a North American Union is growing in Canada. Demonstrations and protests were recently held all across the country against deeper integration. People are taking action, but despite their best efforts, there is still a lack of knowledge and understanding from the general public in regards to the SPP. Don't look to the Canadian mainstream media for help as they have been just as silent and complacent as their American counterparts on reporting on this agenda.
|
| |
It is up to activists, bloggers, and those in the alternative media to further expose the North American Union and force it into the mainstream. As individuals, we need to educate our co-workers, friends, and families. This also means our elected representatives, and we must hold them more accountable. There is no doubt that an informed public will rise up against this threat to our sovereignty.
|
| |
We must stand up to the globalist traitors and let them know that their efforts to destroy our country will not go unchallenged. In the end, it will take a coming together of concerned and informed citizens on both the left and the right if we are going to truly defeat the North American Union.
|
|
NDP Tables Motion that Would Make SPP Working Groups More Accountable
|
| |
NDP trade Critic Peter Julian tabled a motion on February 12 in the House of Commons that would make the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) working groups more accountable. Some might recall that it was because of Julian's efforts that the Standing Committee on International Trade held hearings on the SPP last year in Canada.
|
| |
In his recent motion Julian said, “the government should ensure that Parliament is informed and consulted on the progress of each of the working groups of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America by mandating that each working group file with Parliament a quarterly report to be reviewed by the appropriate standing committee, which should include information on each working group meeting, specific issues discussed, status report on existing objectives, projects and agendas, including any new additional actions or projects decided on by the working groups, and an account of which stakeholders were consulted.”
|
| |
Upwards of 20 working groups along with over 300 agencies are quietly and with little or no scrutiny harmonizing regulations, writing policy initiative, and recommendations. They are integrating our laws into a North American structure, and by engaging in policy making they must be made more accountable. All to often, their activities go unnoticed without any proper public or governmental oversight.
|
| |
It is in the shadows that a North American Union is being forged by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats working side by side with the business elite. The whole SPP process lacks transparency, and this motion tabled by the NDP will hopefully shed more light on the working groups. The North American Union is being created incrementally, expanding upon NAFTA and using the SPP as its framework.
|
| |
While the NDP should be applauded for their efforts, this is just another step in exposing and defeating this agenda. A North American Union is being created, and it is the working groups that are laying the foundation for deeper integration. The only way to stop this agenda is to walk away from it, disband the working groups, and cancel any harmonization that might have already taken place.
|
| |
This is a greed-driven agenda, and if completed, it will represent the complete corporate takeover of North America, the end of our borders, sovereignty, and another step towards global governance. Ultimately it should be the people of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico who decide on a North American Union.
|
|
The United Nations is Coming For Our Children By Dana Gabriel
|
| |
A global transformation is being manifested through corporations, the media, entertainment, and the educational system. The social engineers and the agents of change wish to purge our children's beliefs, value system, their independence, and their individuality. They are being replaced with more global beliefs, universal values, and interdependence. Their fragile little minds are being molded and shifted into group-think, while parental authority and influence is being undermined. The United Nations, through its numerous agencies and treaties, is undermining national sovereignty, and further dictating family policy. This is not to say that there aren't well meaning people working for the UN, but at its very core, it has been hijacked by some wishing to use it for their own agenda. Under the guise of human rights, these cleverly worded and crafted treaties are anti-family and are about control and fail to honor, respect, or adhere to our own Constitution. It is through the educational system that they wish to correct any perceived errors in home training. As a result, children's love and loyalty to their family and country is being systematically destroyed.
|
| |
Children are being indoctrinated to view everything from a world perspective, and are being conditioned to conform to universal values, environmental standards, and a whole new global management system. This is all part of training children to be good little slaves, I mean good global citizens. In schools, collective thinking is strongly encouraged, and children are taught that there must always be unity and consensus. Group interaction is important, but it doesn't always have to end with everyone agreeing. Children are being made to see themselves as a group, where personal worth depends solely on service to the community and to the state. They are being desensitized to contrary values, and teaching is now more focused on feelings and emotions rather than facts and logic. They are being taught that morals and values are constantly changing, and that they need to establish a system that best suits them. There is no room for those who uphold their morals, including their parents. They are all viewed as intolerant and trying to impose their values on others. In this new system, a strong family unit is a threat, and there is no place for nationalism or individuality.
|
| | |