On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Doc Holliday <[email protected]>wrote:
> > OpEdNews > > Original Content at > http://www.opednews.com/articles/Updating-the-Militarizatio-by-Stephen-Lendman-090313-946.html > > March 13, 2009 > > Updating the Militarization and Annexation of North America > > By Stephen Lendman > > Updating the Militarization and Annexation of North America - by > Stephen Lendman > > The title refers to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North > America (SPP), also known as the North American Union - formerly > launched at a March 23, 2005 Waco, Texas meeting attended by George > Bush, Mexico's President Vincente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister > Paul Martin. It's for a tri-national agreement, below the radar, for > greater economic, political, and security integration with secret > business and government working groups devising binding policies with > no public knowledge or legislative debate. > > In short, it's a military-backed corporate coup d'etat against the > sovereignty of three nations, their populations and legislative > bodies. It's a dagger through the heart of democratic freedom in all > three, yet the public is largely unaware of what's happening. > > Last April, New Orleans hosted the last SPP summit. Ever since, > progress may have stalled given the gravity of the global economic > crisis and top priority need to address it. Nonetheless, what's known > to date is updated below plus some related information. > > Last September, the Army Times reported that the 3rd Infantry's 1st > Brigade Combat Team in Iraq would be re-deployed at home (October 1) > as "an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade > emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks." > > "This marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated > assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide > command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and > coordinate defense support of civil authorities." > > Then on December 1, the Washington Post reported that the Pentagon > will deploy 20,000 troops nationwide by 2011 "to help state and local > officials respond to a nuclear attack or other domestic catastrophe." > Three "rapid-reaction" combat units are planned. Two or more others > may follow. They'll be supplemented by 80 smaller National Guard units > trained to respond to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, > high-yield explosive, and other domestic "terror" attacks or > disturbances. In other words, homeland militarization and occupation > are planned using troops trained to kill. > > The pretext is national security. In fact, they'll be on-call against > another major terrorist attack, real or contrived, as well as civil > unrest given the gravity of the economic crisis, its affect on > millions, and likelihood that sooner or later they'll react. Armed > combat troops will supplement militarized local police in case > security crackdowns are ordered or martial law declared. > > "Catastrophic Emergency" procedures are in place to react to > situations, "natural or manmade," according to DHS/FEMA's March 2008 > "Preparedness for the Next Catastrophic Disaster" policy paper. Should > conditions warrant, initiatives to suspend the Constitution and > declare martial law are in place, but militarizing America for > business is also at issue. > > Last October 1, the Canadian Action Party posted a "COUP IN USA ALERT" > after the Bush administration announced the homeland deployment of > troops with "$100 billion (bailout) dollars" to do it. > > What's Likely in Prospect > > SPP efforts paused during the Bush to Obama transition, but "deep > integration" plans remain. On January 19, Ottawa's Carleton > University's Centre for Trade Policy and Law outlined an agenda for > America and Canada going forward. It called for "early and sustained > cooperation" at a time of continuing global crisis, to include > security, defense, trade and competitiveness. > > It said the "most pressing issue is the need to re-think the > architecture for managing North America's common economic space > (including) trade liberalization." It used language like "re-imagining > (and) modernizing the border" that reads like erasing it and doing the > same with Mexico. In a similar vein, it recommends "integrating > national regulatory regimes into one that applies on both sides of the > border." It called the arrival of a new Washington administration "a > golden opportunity" to forge a "mutually beneficial agenda (that) will > define global and North American governance for years to come." > > It mentioned the specter of protectionism and need to avoid it given > the current economic climate. It advocates a "more ambitious Canada-US > Partnership" beyond NAFTA," in co-partnership with Mexico. > > Titled "North America Next," a recent Arizona State University North > American Center for Transborder Studies report called for "sustainable > and security competitiveness" and deeper US-Canada-Mexico integration > through "sustainable security and effective trade and transportation > (to) make (the three nation) North America(n partnership) safer, more > economically viable, and more prosperous." > > Both Carleton and Arizona State University project participants want > SPP initiatives invigorated under a new Washington administration, > especially in a climate of global economic crisis when addressing it > takes precedence. > > Other Issues in Play > > "The Canadian's" Mike Finch "North American Union (NAU) watch" reports > that US and Canadian organizations want to end free flow Internet > information. He cites an "net-neutrality activist group" discovery of > "plans for the demise of the free Internet by 2010 in Canada," and by > 2012 globally. > > Canada's two largest ISPs, Bell Canada and TELUS, are behind a scheme > to limit browsing, block out sites, and charge fees on most others as > part of a 2012 "planned full (NAU) launching." Web host I Power's > Reese Leysen called it "beyond censorship: it is killing the biggest > (ever) 'ecosystem' of free expression and freedom of speech." He cited > big company inside sources providing information on "exclusivity deals > between ISPs and big content providers (like TV studios and video game > publishers) "to decide which sites will be in the standard package > offered customers, leaving the rest of the Internet unreachable except > for fees." > > Leysen called his source "100% reliable" and cited similar information > from a Dylan Pattyn Time magazine article, based on Bell Canada and > TELUS sources. Plans are for "only the top 100 - 200 sites making the > cut in the initial subscription package," likely to include major news > outlets at the expense of smaller, alternative ones. "The Internet > would become a playground for billion-dollar content providers," like > cable TV providers, unless efforts are made to stop it. > > Leysen thinks US and global ISPs have similar plans that include free > speech restrictions and privacy invasions. The stakes are high if he's > right. Yet the profit potential is huge and friendly governments may > oblige. Also involved are "deceptive marketing and fear tactics" (like > citing child pornography threats) to gain public approval for > subscription services masquerading as online safety. The time to stop > it is now. > > Earlier Plans to Rename SPP/NAU > > Last March, Canada's Fraser Institute proposed it in an article > titled: "Saving the North American Security and Prosperity > Partnership" at a time of mounting criticism. It recommended > discarding NAU in favor of the "North American Standards and > Regulatory Area (NASRA)" to disguise its real purpose. It called the > "SPP brand" tarnished so changing it was essential to continue where > NAFTA left off by combining security with quality of life issues like > food safety, global warming, climate change, and pandemic diseases. It > also wants better communications to sell it to the public. Their idea > is to fool most people until it's too late to matter. > > Rumblings in America at the State Level > > Running counter to "deep integration," News with Views (NWV) writer > Jim Kouri headlined on February 23: "Individual States Declaring > Sovereignty." He cites political strategist Mike Baker saying > "Americans are becoming disenchanted with the federal government's > lack of perspective on" matters like: "illegal aliens, crime, (and) > economic turmoil - while intruding into the private lives of citizens > with gun-control laws and other intrusions," issues our Founding > Fathers "relegated to the individual states." Bothersome also are > unfunded mandates that states can't handle given their over-stretched > budgets and need to cut back. In addition, Washington's intrusion into > local law enforcement is a big issue. > > So far, nine states have declared sovereignty and another dozen or > more are considering it. Enacted or proposed legislation varies from > all states' rights to selective ones like gun control and abortion. > > As of January 30, Washington State is one of the former under House > and Senate bill HJM-4009 stating: > > "The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States > specifically provides that, 'The powers not delegated to the United > States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are > reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;' and The Tenth > Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being those > powers specifically granted to it by the Constitution of the United > States and no more." > > Earlier in January, New Hampshire enacted similar legislation (HCR-6) > "affirming States' rights based on Jeffersonian principles." Other > states doing it totally or in part include California, Arizona, > Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Georgia. In addition, the > following states are considering similar measures: Colorado, > Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Arkansas, Idaho, Alabama, > Maine, Nevada, Hawaii and Alaska, and reportedly, Wyoming and > Mississippi may as well. > > Besides states rights issues, driving the current movement are: > > -- the grave and deteriorating economy; > > -- Wall Street's harmful control over policy; > > -- its effects on checks and balances; > > -- excessive bailouts for an insolvent and corrupted banking system at > the expense of local state budgets and rights; and > > -- reckless and unsustainable spending and national debt levels > driving the nation to bankruptcy and placing untenable burdens on > states. > > Overall, concern is that Washington is complicit in driving the nation > to ruin, and they want out or at least lean that way. If this movement > gains strength, at the least it will slow "deep integration," stall it > for a considerable time, but won't likely halt it. Corporate America > wants it, and most often what it wants, it gets. > > It may just take longer than planned, much longer given the gravity of > the global crisis, how hard it will be to resolve, and how long doing > it will take. Some experts predict another Great Depression as bad or > worse than the first one and far worse than Japan's "lost decades" - > from 1990 to the present. > > Top priority in world capitals and corporate boardrooms is preventing > it if possible. Except for "national security," other initiatives are > secondary. > > Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on > Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at > [email protected]. > > Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The > Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday through > Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with > distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are > archived for easy listening. > > > Author's Bio: I am a 72 year old, retired, progressive small > businessman concerned about all the major national and world issues, > committed to speak out and write about them.>end > > Peace, > Doc > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
<<inline: CrackPot.jpg>>
