American Union

The secret death of America, Canada, and Mexico at the hands of Government and Corporate insiders.

This is what YOUR REPRESENTITIVES are deciding behind YOUR back in explicit secrecy, don't worry, they'll tell you what you want later.

Excerpt: North America confab 'undermines' democracy
Attendee of high-level meeting says officials wanted to hide it from public

Jerome R. Corsi / World Net Daily | September 21 2006

A closed-door meeting of high-level government and business leaders that discussed the merger of North America was designed to subvert the democratic process, charged an attendee of the confab in Banff, Canada.

Mel Hurtig, a noted Canadian author and publisher who was the elected leader of the National Party of Canada, provided WND the agenda and attendee list of the North American Forum at the Fairmont Banff Springs Hotel in Banff, Alberta, Sept. 12-14.

Hurtig said the "secret meeting was designed to undermine the democratic process."

"What is sinister about this meeting is that it involved high level government officials and some of the top and most powerful business leaders of the three countries and the North American Forum in organizing the meeting intentionally did not inform the press in any of the three countries," he said. "It was clear that the intention was to keep this important meeting about integrating the three countries out of the public eye."

As WND reported yesterday, the meeting was closed to the press, and the documents obtained by WND were marked "Internal Document, Not for Public Release."

The motive for U.S. participation, according to Hurtig, was "to gain access and control Canada's extensive natural resources, including oil and water."

As for Canada, he said, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives "wants to make sure that the 150 Canadian top companies who are their members who gain access to the American market and to American capital."

The office of Thomas d'Aquino, president and CEO of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, confirmed d'Aquino attend the Banff meeting.


The North American Forum consists of the three individuals who co-chaired the Banff meeting: George Schultz, former secretary of state under President Reagan; Canadian Peter Lougheed, the former Alberta premier and former leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta; and Mexico's Pedro Aspe, the former secretary of the Treasury of Mexico.
The North American Forum has no business office and no business address. Attendees at the Banff meeting contributed funds to cover the organizational expenses. Attendees, including government officials, were responsible for their own travel, lodging and per diem expenses.

A spokesman for the Canadian Council of Chief Executives said the Council of Canadians, which he characterized as a "far left group," was the first to obtain and begin circulating the meeting's agenda and attendee list.

Meera Karunananthan, spokeswoman for the Council of Canadians confirmed to WND the group was responsible for obtaining and releasing the meeting agenda and attendee list. She took exception with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, preferring to characterize her organization as "a citizens' advocacy group."

Karunananthan said the Council of Canadians released the North American Forum information because it questions the "privacy of a meeting that involves senior ministers of our government meeting with senior government officials in the United States and Mexico."

"The Canadian public has not been adequately informed about the on-going North American integration process, and we believe it is wrong for a meeting that involves top North American business executives and government officials to be held in secret behind closed doors," she said.

Jean-Yzes LeFort, also a spokesman for the Council of Canadians, told WND the group opposes the effort to create a North American Union because "the NAU represents an elite corporate agenda and to us what is being planned would be an unacceptable loss of sovereignty."

Attending the Banff meeting was Robert Pastor, the director of the Center for North American Studies at American University. Pastor is widely known for his extensive writings arguing for the creation of a North American Union, a new super-regional North American government based on the model of the European Union, with the intent of subrogating the sovereignty of the United States.

Pastor was co-chair of the Council of Foreign Relations task force that in May 2005 released a report entitled "Building a North American Community."

About one-third of the listed members of CFR task force attended the Banff conference. One prominent participant in both was Carla A. Hills, who served as U.S. trade representative from 1989 to 1993 and was the primary U.S. negotiator for NAFTA.

On the second day of the conference, a session entitled "A Vision for North America: Issues & Options" was moderated by Thomas A. Shannon, the U.S. assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs.

Perrin Beatty, president and CEO of Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, Canada's largest trade and industry association, also confirmed to WND he attended the Banff North American Forum meeting. Beatty described the meeting as "an opportunity for a small group of people from our three North American countries to get together informally and discuss issues of common interest."

When asked why the meeting was closed to the press, Beatty responded the meeting was not a "decision forum" but a "discussion forum."

Beatty claimed Pastor's views were not universally shared by all attendees.

"My interest in attending the meeting was economic," he told WND. "How do we insure we keep pace with the explosion in competition in the North American industry? It's absolutely critical to the economic growth of our three countries that we stay competitive and successful."

Among the U.S. government participants listed was Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, though WND was told he did not attend. Also listed were U.S. Department of Defense Lt. General Gene Renuart, USAF Senior Military Assistant to Secretary Rumsfeld, and Major Gen. Mark A. Volcheff, director of Plans, Policy, and Strategy for NORAD-NORTHCAM.

In what is apparently intended to be an annual event, the first North American Forum meeting was held last September in Sonoma, Calif., and a meeting for next September is to be held in Mexico.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52074

America is alive and well.

You see Jim, it may help us to understand what then you define to be America.

As even you often remind us, this is not the same America anymore, this is post 9/11.

Its a time of giving up freedom in cries for safety from the people who not only weren't able to protect you in the first place, but are also going to shock you when you come to the realization of who was actually behind that tragedy.

I'm sure you scoff and think such things as "foolishness", "treachery", "naivety". Perhaps you would even like me jailed, exiled, tortured maybe?

How would it happen, men in black uniforms with guns bursting into my house, charging me with thought crimes and dissent. For asking questions and repeating to others what insiders, experts, whistle blowers, dissenters have said but had censored or spun with blatant biased negativity and even lies?

Including members of the very same Presidential administration whose words you are placing trust in to form your belief in, and basing your opinion on, in terms of America's livelihood which you so deftly debated.

And since THEIR words express that America is dying, and given it is their job to know it and even to inform the president of it, their words are to be rebuked by you saying...

quote:

---

America is alive and well.

---

Invading countries is unconstitutional, torturing is unconstitutional, spying on INNOCENT Americans is unconstitutional, punishing and censoring dissent and free speach is unconstitutional, etc.

And I do believe taking sovereignty from the people in secrecy is unconstitutional as well.

The constitution, the people, the borders, and the acts of the nation, are what define America. America is dying.

You can find many quotes of current policy makers stating clearly that not only can we expect more change post 9/11, we can expect more terrorism as well, and we can expect this for the rest of our lives at least, if not permanently.

Ok, nevermind, you win, my panties are all exposed and I got nothin. Maybe America is not dying, it is just on indefinite suspension untill the world is rid of evil.

P.S. Explain to me why it is that if we are at war against an undefineable enemy, unseen but everywhere, capable of dealing more damage to the US then the mighty mother Russia ever could through an entire cold war, and after increased spending and vigilance post 93 WTC bombing, 95 Oklahoma city, and during a hightened domestic surveylance, why we would ever leave our borders wide open while actually underminding border enforcement?

Do you know about the border violence and giant drug wars? Did you know more americans have been kidnapped in Texas by Mexican militants (including some trained in Georgia) and drug cartels than in Iraq?

Did you know that during the peaceful Mexian illegal immagrant marches that Government buildings were stormed in California and a person was stabbed in the chest with a Mexican flag?

Did you?

Did you realize that the borders are open because there is no real terrorist threat that hasn't already taken seat in posistions of power and that there is no need to close a border planned to be disolved by a merger.

Did you know that Laredo Texas is where most of the violence on the border is centralized, that it is a main drug and human smuggling corridor.

Did you know that there is a giant Trans National Superhighway being built or is planned for Laredo, its already being built somewhere in Texas, but as part of the American Union plan, have you heard of it? Eminent domain is to claim many a lands for it, very American.

But I obviously am just rambling in utter defeat. But I choose to have faith that you will help me see my wrongs and teach this poor soul so led astray.

Or if by some off chance that maybe I'm right on this one, if even by sheer dumb luck, maybe just maybe, you'll stop and think about it.

Excerpt:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Documents disclose
'shadow government'
Indicate U.S. far advanced in constructing
bureaucracy united with Mexico, Canada

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Posted: September 26, 2006
1:00 p.m. Eastern



© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com



Government documents released by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal the Bush administration is running a "shadow government" with Mexico and Canada in which the U.S. is crafting a broad range of policy in conjunction with its neighbors to the north and south, asserts WND columnist and author Jerome R. Corsi.

The documents, a total of about 1,000 pages, are among the first to be released to Corsi through his FOIA request to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP, which describes itself as an initiative "to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation."

"The documents clearly reveal that SPP, working within the U.S. Department of Commerce, is far advanced in putting together a new regional infrastructure, creating a 'shadow' trilateral bureaucracy with Mexico and Canada that is aggressively rewriting a wide range of U.S. administrative law, all without congressional oversight or public disclosure," Corsi said.

(Story continues below)


Among the initial discoveries, said Corsi, is the existence of an internal Intranet website that never has been revealed to Congress or the public.

"This private internal website," he claims, "undoubtedly contains a wealth of documentation that the FOIA request has so far intentionally excluded."

Corsi told WND the documents reveal hundreds of internal meetings, memoranda of understanding and other referenced agreements that have not been disclosed.

"We have here the beginnings of a whitewash," he said, "in which SPP evidently thinks the public will be hoodwinked by a 'Myths vs. Facts' document posted for public relations purposes on their public website."

Among the documents is an organizational chart accompanied by a listing of trilateral Mexican, Canadian and U.S. administrative officers who report on multiple cabinet level "working groups."

The government watchdog Judicial Watch announced today it has received some of the same documents, including the organizational chart, which can be seen in this pdf file, on page seven.

"There is no specific authorization for this massive administrative-branch integration with Mexico and Canada other than what amounts to a press conference jointly issued by President Bush, Mexico's President Vicente Fox, and Canada's then-Prime Minister Paul Martin on March 23, 2005, at the end of their summit in Waco, Texas," Corsi said.

Corsi added that even the "Myth vs. Facts" blurb on the SPP.gov website admits the SPP is neither a treaty nor a law.

"The Bush administration is trying to create the infrastructure of a new regional North American government in stealth fashion, under the radar and out of public view," Corsi claims. "Where is Congress, asleep at the wheel?"

The SPP organizational chart Corsi obtained shows 13 working groups covering a wide range of public policy issues, including Manufactured Goods; Energy, Food & Agriculture; Rules of Origin' Health; E-Commerce; Transportation; Environment; Financial Services; Business Facilitation; External Threats to North America; Streamlined & Secured Shared Borders; and Prevention/Response within North America.

U.S. administrative-branch officers participating in these working groups are drawn from the U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

The released documents affirm that counterparts from official governmental agencies in Mexico and Canada are combined with the U.S. administrative branch to form new trilateral "working groups" that actively rewrite U.S. administrative law to "harmonize" or "integrate" with administrative law in Mexico and Canada.

"What we have here amounts to an administrative coup d'etat," Corsi told WND. "Where does the Bush administration get the congressional authorization to invite two foreign nations to the table to rewrite U.S. law?"



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------

Excerpt: North American Union threat gets attention of congressmen
Resolution aimed at blocking merger, funding of 'NAFTA superhighways'

World Net Daily | October 2 2006

WASHINGTON – While several members of Congress have denied any knowledge of efforts to build "NAFTA superhighways" or move America closer to a union with Mexico and Canada, four members of the House have stepped up to sponsor a resolution opposing both initiatives.

Rep. Virgil Goode Jr., R-Va., has introduced a resolution – H.R. 487 – designed to express "the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union (NAU) with Mexico and Canada."

"Now that Congress is preparing to take up the issues of the North American Union and NAFTA superhighways, we are moving out of the realm where critics can attempt to disparage the discussion as 'Internet conspiracy theory,'" explained Jerome Corsi, author and WND columnist who has written extensively on the Security and Prosperity Partnership – the semisecret plan many suspect is behind the efforts to create a European Union-style North American confederation and link Mexico and Canada with more transcontinental highways and rail lines. "This bill represents a good first step."

Corsi explained to WND that the Bush administration is trying to create the North American Union incrementally, under the radar scope of public attention.

"Even today," said Corsi, SPP.gov has a 'Myths vs. Facts' section that denies the administration is changing laws or working to create a new regional government. Unfortunately, the many references on SPP.gov to Cabinet-level working groups creating new trilateral memoranda of understanding and other trilateral agreements makes these denials sound hollow."

The resolution introduced by Goode had three co-sponsors: Reps. Thomas Tancredo, R-Colo., Ron Paul, R-Texas, and Walter Jones, R-N.C.

The "whereas" clauses of the resolution lay out the case against the North American Union and NAFTA Superhighways as follows:


Whereas, according to the Department of Commerce, United States trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have significantly widened since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA);

Whereas the economic and physical security of the United States is impaired by the potential loss of control of its borders attendant to the full operation of NAFTA;

Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union;

Whereas it would be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would increase the insurance rates for American drivers;

Whereas future unrestricted foreign trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection, and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities;

Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System would be funded by foreign consortiums and controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States.
The resolution calls for the House of Representatives to agree on three issues of determination:


The United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System;

The United States should not enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and

The President should indicate strong opposition to these or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States.
"As important as this resolution is," Corsi said, "we need still more congressional attention. Where is congressional oversight of SPP? We need congressional hearings, not just congressional resolutions."

H.Con.Res.487 has been referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and to the Committee on Internal Relations for consideration prior to any debate that may be scheduled on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Excerpt: Rep. Tancredo: Bush Wants To Merge U.S. With Mexico and Canada

Think Progress
Sunday, November 26, 2006

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), one of the leading voices on immigration for the right, claims President George W. Bush is plotting to merge the U.S. with Mexico and Canada. An excerpt from WorldNetDaily:

Tancredo lashed out at the White House's lack of action in securing U.S. borders, and said efforts to merge the U.S. with both Mexico and Canada is not a fantasy.

'I know this is dramatic - or maybe somebody would say overly dramatic - but I'm telling you, that everything I see leads me to believe that this whole idea of the North American Union, it's not something that just is written about by right-wing fringe kooks. It is something in the head of the president of the United States, the president of Mexico, I think the prime minister of Canada buys into it. ...

You might think the right would immediately repudiate this kind of conspiracy theory. You'd be wrong. The National Review's Andy McCarthy came to Tancredo's defense:

This is not a fringe. It's a wave. It's fine to disagree with Rep. Trancredo; it's wrong to treat him like a lunatic when he is anything but.

More McCarthy:

[I]t's not unreasonable for people to look at Bush's immigration policies and worry that he is insufficiently alert to the internationalist pressures (what John Fonte calls 'transnational progressivism') vigorously challenging the traditional understanding of sovereignty on many fronts.

Fox's Neil Cavuto recently said Tancredo 'owns' the issue of immigration predicted that 'if he were to run for president, he just might well be president.'

Excerpt: THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
London stock trader urges move to 'amero'
Says many unaware of plan to replace dollar with N. American currency

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Posted: November 28, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com




In an interview with CNBC, a vice president for a prominent London investment firm yesterday urged a move away from the dollar to the "amero," a coming North American currency, he said, that "will have a big impact on everybody's life, in Canada, the U.S. and Mexico."
Steve Previs, a vice president at Jefferies International Ltd., explained the Amero "is the proposed new currency for the North American Community which is being developed right now between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico."

The aim, he said, according to a transcript provided by CNBC to WND, is to make a "borderless community, much like the European Union, with the U.S. dollar, the Canadian dollar and the Mexican peso being replaced by the amero."

Previs told the television audience many Canadians are "upset" about the amero. Most Americans outside of Texas largely are unaware of the amero or the plans to integrate North America, Previs observed, claiming many are just "putting their head in the sand" over the plans.

(Story continues below)


CNBC asked Previs whether he thought NAFTA was "working and doing enough."

He replied: "Until it created a lot of illegal immigrants coming across the border. I don't know. You get the pros and cons on NAFTA. For some people it is a good thing, and for other people it has been a disaster."

The speculation on the future of a new North American currency came amid a major U.S. dollar sell-off worldwide that began last week.

Yesterday, the dollar also reached new multi-month low against the euro, breaking through the $1.30 per euro technical high that had held since April 2005.

At the same time, the Chinese central bank set the yuan at 7.0402 per dollar, the highest level since Beijing established a new currency exchange system in 2005 that severed China's previous policy of tying the value of the yuan to the U.S. dollar.

Many analysts worldwide attributed the dramatic fall in the value of the U.S. dollar at least partially to China's announcement last week that it would seek to diversify its foreign exchange currency holdings away from the U.S. dollar. China recently has crossed the threshold of holding $1 trillion in U.S. dollar foreign-exchange reserves, surpassing Japan as the largest holder in the world.

Barry Ritholtz, chief market strategist for Ritholtz Research & Analytics in New York City, in a phone interview with WND, characterized today's downward move of the dollar as "wackage," a new word he coined to convey that the dollar is being "whacked" in this current market movement.

Ritholtz told WND that yesterday's downward move "was a major market correction that points to the risk of subsequent downside to the dollar."

Asked whether he would characterize the dollar's downside move as signaling a possible collapse, Mr Ritholtz told WND, "Not yet."

Ritholtz pointed out market professionals had long looked at a dollar collapse as a "low probability event," but the recent fall suggests "the probabilities have increased of a major dollar correction, or even of a collapse."

U.S. trade imbalances with China have hit a record $228 billion this year, largely reflecting a surging flow of containers from China with retail goods headed for the U.S. mass market.

Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez is in Bejing leading a trade delegation of more than two dozen U.S. business executives.

"The future should be focused on exporting to China," Guiterrez told reporters in Bejing, noting that this year, U.S. exports to China are up 34 percent on a year-to-year basis, surpassing last year's gain of 20 percent.

One way to improve the U.S. trade imbalance may be to ease up on restrictions of exporting high-tech products and allowing technology transfers to China, a move likely to be politically charged in the U.S.

The decline in value of the dollar will also make U.S. exports more attractive and Chinese exports to the U.S. more expensive.

In February 2007, a virtually unprecedented top-level U.S. economic mission is scheduled to travel to China. Included in the mission are Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Jr., Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.

Previs declined to be interviewed for this article, telling WND in an e-mail he did not want to be quoted directly in any article that may express a political point of view.

Obviously unecessary precautions for a non issue, eh Jim?

Excerpt: NAU Resolutions Introduced in Georgia, Illinois, and South Dakota

Mary Benoit
JBS.org
Friday, March 2, 2007

ARTICLE SYNOPSIS:
Three more states have introduced anti-North American Union resolutions which now are present in over 1/5 of the state legislatures.

Follow this link to the source article: "House Joint Resolution 29"

COMMENTARY:
As far as we know, a total of 11 states have now introduced resolutions in their state legislatures that oppose the implementation of the North American Union, U.S. participation in the Bush-backed Security and Prosperity of North America and the construction of the NAFTA Superhighway.
The most recent states to introduce these resolutions are Illinois (H.J.R. 29), Georgia (S.R. 124), and South Dakota (S.C.R. 7). Also, the Missouri House has introduced their own resolution (H.C.R. 33) which is very similar to the Senate-sponsored NAU resolution that was introduced by Senator Barnitz.

To date, the only resolution that has made it past committee was Utah's H.J.R. 7 which was sponsored by Rep. Sandstrom. The legislation passed the House by a vote of 47-24 but was killed in the Senate when the congressional session ended on Wednesday without bringing the resolution to a vote.

Below is an updated list of the NAU resolutions that have been introduced in Congress and state legislatures. Also included are the phone numbers of either the congressional switchboard or the office of the resolution's sponsor. With enough support, members of Congress may be encouraged to bring these resolutions up for a floor vote on the congressional floor.

NAU resolutions currently in Congress and state legislatures:

United States Congress:
- Congressional Switchboard â€' (202) 224-3121
- House Concurrent Resolution 40 â€' introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Virgil Goode of Virginia
Arizona:
- Senate Switchboard - (602) 926-3559
- Senate Concurrent Memorial 1002 â€' introduced by Senator Johnson
Georgia:
- Senate Switchboard: (404) 656-5015
- Senate Resolution 124 â€' introduced by Senators Schaefer, Rogers, Douglas, Hill, and Chapman
Illinois:
- Office of Rep. Black: (217) 782-4811
- House Joint Resolution 29 â€' introduced by Representative Black
Missouri:
- House Switchboard â€' (573) 751-3659
- Senate Concurrent Resolution 15 â€' sponsored by Senator Barnitz
- House Concurrent Resolution 33 â€' sponsored by Representative Guest
Montana:
- House Switchboard â€' (406) 444-4800
- House Joint Resolution 25 â€' introduced by Representative Rice of Montana
Oregon:
- Legislative Switchboard â€' (503) 986-1000
- Senate Joint Memorial 5 â€' sponsored by Senators George, Starr, and Whitsett and Representatives Boquist, Krieger, Nelson and Thatcher
South Carolina:
- House Switchboard â€' (803) 734-2010
- House Concurrent Resolution 3185 â€' introduced by Representative Davenport
South Dakota:
- Office of Senator Kloucek: 605-773-3821
- Senate Concurrent Resolution 7 â€' introduced by Senators Kloucek, Apa, Lintz, and Maher and Representatives Nelson, DeVries, Gassman, Jerke, Kirkeby, Noem, and Betty Olson
Utah:
- Legislative Switchboards â€' (801) 538-1035 (Senate), (801) 538-1029 (House)
- House Joint Resolution 7 â€' introduced by Representative Sandstrom and Senator Fife (Passed in the House by a vote of 47-24 and was killed in the Senate for the remainder of the Congressional year)
Virginia:
- Senate Switchboard â€' (804) 698-7410
- Senate Joint Resolution 442 â€' introduced by Senators Lucas and Hawkins
Washington:
- Legislative Switchboard â€' (800) 562-6000
- Senate Joint Memorial 8004 â€' introduced by Senators Stevens, Swecker and Benton
- House Joint Memorial 4018 â€' introduced by Representatives Roach, Dunn, McCune and Hurst
For more information on the NAU â€' including sample cover letters (for JBS members only) and model state resolutions â€' please visit the John Birch Society's North American Union issues page.

Excerpt: Connie Fogal, the redoubtable leader of the Canadian Action Party, delivers a hard hitting and passionate warning to all who refuse to ... all » believe that our democracy is being usurped by an elite few and is being sold off, brick by brick, to the highest bidder. Our very own elected politicians are in collusion with powerful private corporate interests, working together behind closed doors to bring in the ‘Security and Prosperity Partnership' by “stealth” â€' as one proponent of the agreement put it â€' without public knowledge or consultation. In this presentation, she argues that Canadian sovereignty is very much at stake and she urges us to become informed and to take action before we ignorantly surrender all of our freedoms and public services to foreign corporate rule.

Yes, we are already in such a process, after acquiring the funding for Social Security & withholding these funds were used to fund government bureaucracy & support for corporate (profiteering) growth. Now they are turning people to the stock market as the means of providing for their future.
If nothing else, Bush's War in Iraq should show that the USA has loss any aspect of Democracy [government serving the people] presented by the Constitution.

Excerpt: Quebec police admit they went undercover at Montebello protest

CBC News
Friday Aug 24, 2007

Quebec provincial police admitted Thursday that three of their officers disguised themselves as demonstrators during the protest at the North American leaders summit in Montebello, Que.


However, the police force denied allegations its undercover officers were there on Monday to provoke the crowd and instigate violence.
"At no time did the police of the Sûreté du Québec act as instigators or commit criminal acts," the police force said in French in a news release. "It is not in the police force's policies, nor in its strategies, to act in that manner.

"At all times, they responded within their mandate to keep order and security."

Police said the three undercover officers were only at the protest to locate and identify non-peaceful protesters in order to prevent any incidents.

Police came under fire Tuesday, when a video surfaced on YouTube that appeared to show three plainclothes police officers at the protest with bandanas across their faces. One of the men was carrying a rock.

In the video, protest organizers in suits order the men to put the rock down, call them police instigators and try unsuccessfully to unmask them.

Police-issued boots identified fake protesters
Protest organizers on Wednesday played the video for the media at a news conference in Ottawa. One of the organizers, union leader Dave Coles, explained that one reason protesters knew the men's true identities was because they were wearing the same boots as other police officers.

Coles said on Wednesday that the only thing he didn't know was whether the men were Quebec police, RCMP or hired security officers.

"[Our union] believes that the security force at Montebello were ordered to infiltrate our peaceful assembly and provoke incidents," said Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union.

Police said the three were told to monitor protesters who were not peacefully demonstrating to prevent any violent incidents, but they were called out as undercover agents when they refused to throw objects.

Concern Canada losing control of its energy
The protest at Montebello occurred outside the Fairmont Le Château Montebello hotel, near Ottawa, where Prime Minister Stephen Harper was meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Felipe Calderon. The summit about border security, free trade and other issues began Monday and finished Tuesday.

Protesters said they gathered to voice their concern about Canada losing control of its energy and water resources and borders. Others decried what they called a high level of secrecy at the summit.

The Quebec provincial police will not comment any further on the affair, a spokeswoman in Montreal said.

Quebec Justice Minister Jacques Dupuis was made aware of the news, but a spokesman from his office said he will not comment on the matter either.

Excerpt: NDP calls for inquiry into Montebello security allegations

NDP
Friday, August 24, 2007

OTTAWA – NDP MPs Peter Julian (Burnaby-New Westminster) and Libby Davies (Vancouver East) are calling on the federal government to hold a public inquiry into the allegations that agent provocateurs were used during Monday's protest in Montebello, Quebec.

A letter to the Minister of Public Safety, Stockwell Day was issued earlier today.

Please see attached letter.

Hon. Stockwell Day
Minister of Public Safety
House of Commons
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6



Dear Minister,

As Members of Parliament we are writing you with great concern regarding the allegations of the use of agents provocateurs during the peaceful protests against the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America summit on August 20, 2007 at Montebello, Quebec.

Along with hundreds of other Canadian citizens who participated in the Monday protest, we were both alarmed at the enormous police presence. We are more shocked at the allegations that inside agents, appearing to be working with riot police, attempted to provoke a violent incident during the peaceful demonstration. Video and photograph evidence has led to many unanswered questions.

We are calling on you as Minister to order an immediate inquiry to uncover whether or not agent provocateurs were used at the peaceful protests in Montebello.

If agent provocateurs were present, the public deserves answers to valid questions, including:

Who are the three individuals alleged to be agent provocateurs?
Was the Government of Canada informed that such measures would be used as part of the security detail at the summit?
Were the RCMP or other security forces at the summit, including from the US, privy to the use of such a security tactic?
Who was responsible for providing direction to the agents? , Were the agents directed to use force and/or violent means to disrupt the peaceful protest?
Finally, if agent provocateurs were used, what was the expected outcome in deliberately trying to destabilize a democratic protest in Canada?
We believe these are critical questions that cannot go ignored - questions that concern the relationship between state security forces and the potential infringement of democratic rights to peaceful assembly protest and to freedom of expression. As Dave Coles, President of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union said 'in a free and democratic society, people have the right to peacefully protest something they don't like.'

We trust as the Minister for Public Security you will uphold your responsibility to show accountability and maintain public trust.

Sincerely,


Libby Davies
MP Vancouver East

Peter Julian
MP Burnaby-New Westminster

It is easier for me to believe a union would occur with the USA and Canada without Mexico. Than a union with Mexico. Mexico has numerous government corruption problems, enviroment, security, drug scum, human slavery, and etc. I can not understand how a logical individual (USA and Canada) would support their nation's union with the likes of Mexico. It would like adopting a gang member into your family.

Like a thug into the mob more like it. You underestimate the corruption of the more powerful states.