|
|
Tuesday February 26,
2008
Why does the government insist the SPP
is not a signed document?
It
hardly makes any difference in the long run, yet the government seems
to attach some importance to saying that "no agreement was ever
signed". Is it shame; is it fear; are they mindful that treason
is
indictable?
John Manley - the man Harper described as "independent"
enough to
head up the panel that recommended our soldiers continue indefinitely
to die for
Uncle Sam - was a founding father of the SPP or "deep integration" in
his capacity as Deputy Prime Minister of Canada.
In December 2001 the prototype for the SPP - referred to as the Smart
Border Declaration
- included a 30 point plan of action from which the Security and
Prosperity Partnership (SPP) evolved. That document was indeed
signed, and we have Manley's word for it (you'll see in a bit).
Of particular current interest, with regard to integrating
the US and Canadian military, is item #4 of the Declaration:
*
We
will put the necessary tools and legislative framework in place to
ensure that information and intelligence is shared in a timely and
coherent way within our respective countries as well as between them.
* We will
strengthen coordination between our enforcement agencies for addressing
common threats.
In June 2003, Manley
spoke at the University of Windsor
on the subject of Smart Borders, and here's an excerpt of that speech
in which he states that the original document was signed, and
even reveals the terminology that would later be used to describe the
final
product (underlining
mine):
"When
we signed the Smart Border Declaration and 30-point
plan of action on December 12, 2001, Secretary Ridge and I
recognized that public security and economic security
do not have to be competing objectives.
[ ... ]
"Above all, the Smart Border, to me, represents a vision of a North
America of shared values and common prosperity-a partnership
of sovereign nations, which are both cooperative and competitive in a
world of increasing challenge... The world today is too fast, too
competitive, too unpredictable and, yes, in many ways too dangerous,
for either Canada or the United States to approach our security
or our prosperity with any degree of complacency... The Windsor
Gateway is surely the focal point for our North American partnership."
It hardly makes
any
difference in the long run, yet the government seems to attach some
importance to saying that "no agreement was ever
signed". Is it shame; is it fear; are they mindful
that treason is indictable?
After
Manley came Anne McLellan, who discussed with her US counterpart "how
U.S. Officers at Land Borders might operate in Canada and also Canadian
Officers in the U.S. performing inspection entering their respective
country" - according to the bi-national membership of the Canadian/American
Border Trade Alliance (Can/Am BTA).
These officers are known as "IBET". I bet you
never of them. Just kidding; maybe you have. They're the Integrated Border
Enforcement Teams which the
government says
have been operating since the mid-1990's in British Columbia but really
came into their own as a result of 9/11, especially at the
Detroit/Windsor crossing where they catch bad guys all the time, so
Can/Am BTA reports.
9/11 was so utterly pivotal in bringing to fruition plans that were
already in the works that it could only be considered a tragedy for the
immediate victims. For the aims of the New World Order it was
beneficial beyond their wildest dreams.
Ever heard of the
National
Exercise Program? It isn't what it sounds like. Public
Safety Canada says:
Under
the National Security Policy, the Canada-U.S. Chemical, Biological,
Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Guidelines and the Smart Border
Declaration, Canada has made commitments to organize joint
counter-terrorism exercises with the U.S.
In addition, Canada participates in regular exercises with other
countries. For example, a 2005 exercise called TRIPLEPLAY simulated a
major terrorist attack on Canada, the United States and the United
Kingdom. Officials at all levels of the federal government and senior
officials from the governments of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick were
involved. This multinational, multi-agency exercise tested operation
centres, senior decision makers, coordination of strategic public
communications, and exchange of classified intelligence and operational
information.
This happens four
times
a year! Imagine that. All those countries and all those
government
officials "at all levels" are involved in the "exchange of classified
intelligence and operational information" and presumably can be trusted
to keep it all hush-hush - you know, for the sake of "national
security" - yet a highly respected, secret cleared Canadian
lawyer
cannot have access to the so-called evidence that supposedly backs up
the allegations against his/her Security Certificate client.
Needless to say, under those conditions, CSIS can
pretty much write any old sloppy scenario they wish and get away
with it.
By the
way, it's well
documented
that there were simulations being carried out on 9/11 and in London on
7/06 the very same day as the "terrorist" attacks. And the
coincidences don't end there. For instance, Rudy Giuliani himself
was
on the scene both times!
I'm starting to get a little nervous about the sudden proliferation of
ads for 72
hours on the radio and TV.
UPDATE: February 28/08:
Martin, Bush and Fox signed the SPP in March 2005. Here is Paul
Martin's own statement:
Thus,
on March
23, President Bush, President Fox and I signed the Security and
Prosperity Partnership of North America that establishes the way
forward on our continental agenda for security, prosperity and quality
of life. It is a partnership that respects the past but is devoted to
building for the future, to ensuring that we as North Americans are
able to continue to thrive in a world in which China and India have
emerged as economic giants.
Related:
Rome is burning, folks!
Alberta Tar
Sands - Military Link
Albertans - see notice of March 1 action at
Alberta Legislature in Edmonton.
yayacanada
|
|
