The US military is on Canadian soil ... forbidding dissent

The US military is on Canadian soil ... forbidding dissent

Postby Oscar » Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:11 am

The US military is on Canadian soil ... forbidding dissent on our land

July 13, 2007

Connie Fogal, Leader of the Canadian Action Party, says, "So much for conspiracy theories! Now we have the ugly truth fully exposed. The US military really does now run Canada. "

The US military is on Canadian soil forbidding the Municipality of Papineauville from renting a hall to the Council of Canadians who planned a public meeting to be held the day before the Three Amigos meet in Montebello, Quebec, Canada August 20, 21 2007 to plan their next moves in the dismantling of their respective countries of Canada, USA and Mexico.

CAP's leader said,"Bad enough that our RCMP and the Quebec provincial police force would apply offensive Canadian law to prevent a legitimate meeting of dissenting citizens. Totally untenable that a foreign army assumes jurisdiction on our land. But this we knew from the Binational Planning Agreement begun in 2002 that saw Canada crawl on its belly and permit the USA military to enter our land whenever it deems necessary. "

"Does anyone still believe that our federal leaders have not thrown away our sovereignty? That from Chretien (Liberal) to Martin (Liberal) to Harper (Conservative), the Prime Ministers of this our land have not been committing treason behind closed doors?

How otherwise would it be possible that a proud, sovereign, and free nation would see a foreign army on its soil interfering with the right of Canadians to assemble and to speak?"

"And , Canada's silent loyal opposition has meanwhile been neither loyal nor an opposition ! US military on Canadian soil ordering Canadians did not happen overnight!"

Connie Fogal, leader of the Canadian Action Party, urges all Canadians to say NO to the criminalization of dissent on our land.

She pointed out,"So they put up a fence! So they impose a 25 kilometer no go zone! So they halt vehicles with five or more people in them! So we be on the edge propelling the power of our inner energy to stare at them through their barriers! We can just stand and stare!There is something very ludicrous about three leaders of alleged free countries hiding from their citizens."

Connie Fogal , leader of the Canadian Action Party, encourages all liberty loving Americans, and Mexicans, as well as Canadians to protest this third annual meeting of national leaders who are bent on destroying our constitutional and civil rights. She urges, "Let us join hands in peaceful right of protest, standing firm and tall, determined and strong in acknowledgement that our nations belong to us the people, and that no shadow government, no military, no treacherous politicians or officials are going to take them away from us. "

Contact Connie Fogal at 604 708 3372 or cell 778 891 4919[/b]
Last edited by Oscar on Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Site Admin
Posts: 8492
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm

Armed U.S. agents a blow to sovereignty

Postby Oscar » Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:55 am

Armed U.S. agents a blow to sovereignty

July 13, 2007

Thomas Walkom, in the argument below from the Toronto Star (28 June) argues convincingly, I think, that the federal government should not follow through on its proposal to allow members of the U.S. police (and army?--think Montebello) to carry firearms carte blanche in Canada. The existing regulations, while time-consuming to fulfill, are not only effective but they serve the useful purpose of making it impossible for the U.S. police and army to carry out their duties in Canada on the assumption that they in fact have an (inalienable) right to bear arms in this country.

If you wish to protest the government's proposal, there is still time to do so (though I don't recall the exact deadline). The extended rationale for the government's position is outlined in the Canada Gazette (available online), Vol. 141, No. 25--23rd June 2007. See Part I, Proposed Regulatory Text, Proposal to make an Exemption Regulations (Persons) to the Export and Import Permits Act.

You can make your views known by writing to Mr Blair Hynes;
(His regular mailing address and fax number are provided in the Canada Gazette.)

You can of course ask Mr Hynes to acknowledge the receipt of your email / letter / fax; but he might not respond. (I have heard nothing about the email outlining my objections to the proposed rationale that I sent earlier this week.)

--Denis Salter.
Armed U.S. agents a blow to sovereignty - News -

June 28, 2007 Thomas Walkom

The federal government plans to give an unspecified number of American police agents carte blanche to carry guns in Canada. It insists that in the post-9/11 world it is just being sensible. It is not.

Few things are more crucial to a nation's sovereignty than its control over legalized violence. It is quite often lawful for the police to shoot you. It is almost never lawful for you to shoot the police. We accept that arrangement only because those who have been given this remarkable life and death authority are in some sense "ours" – they are responsible to governments that we elect.

Ottawa's plan would dramatically change this relationship. It would introduce a whole new array of armed peace officers into this country that are answerable to a foreign power.

Stephen Harper's government, which quietly published these proposed regulatory changes in its Canada Gazette last weekend, suggests the move is designed primarily to accommodate armed air marshals who routinely fly back and forth across the border. But it also says the arrangement would apply to other situations, including "various cross-border enforcement initiatives between Canada and the United States."

This is bureaucratese for open-ended. It means the new law could apply to just about any U.S. agency – from the FBI to Homeland Security to Buffalo police.

Presumably, foreign agents would be allowed not just to carry weapons but to use them. Otherwise what would be the point?

And if, under this new regime, a U.S. agent killed someone on Canadian soil, to whom would he be responsible? Who would investigate? If the shooting were deemed improper, who would lay charges or impose discipline?


Read the full article at:

Denis Salter
Professor of Theatre
McGill University
Site Admin
Posts: 8492
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests