NEW border and security deal with US

[Topaz]

The Tories are going to be announcing a new deal with the US for the border and security. Its to allow goods and people to flow more freely within the two countries. The US did sign the same deal with Mexico. I'm just wondering if this the SPP revisited only under another name. Is their plan to start with the border and slowly expand to others things and start to harmonize more things with the US until we are living within the NAU? http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Tories+announce+deal+forming+North+America+perimeter/3947584/story.html

[GostHacked]

So what is going to replace the SPP?? And when does our sovereignty get sold to the US? Not like we really have that much sovereignty anymore.

This part I don't like.

The New Border Vision is being billed as a 21st century border management system that will include new common consumer product regulations, a pre-clearance agreement for goods crossing the border to expedite waiting times and the use of advanced technology to utilize biometric data for travelers at airports and land crossings, according to people familiar with the plan.

Biometrics are used to control us, not terrorists.

[charter.rights]

So what is going to replace the SPP?? And when does our sovereignty get sold to the US? Not like we really have that much sovereignty anymore.

We're already economically dependent on the US. They own most of our resource based companies and are behind more of the retail and wholesale companies. Allowing us to be self-governing is just a ruse to keep people believing that we are sovereign.

[M.Dancer]

They own most of our resource based companies ....

They don't, actually.

There are about 1600 resource companies listed on the TSX and TSXV, over 90% are headquarted in Canada and owned by Canadians

[charter.rights]

They don't, actually.

There are about 1600 resource companies listed on the TSX and TSXV, over 90% are headquarted in Canada and owned by Canadians

Look a little deeper. While the headquarters are here, the parents are foreign.

Edited December 9, 2010 by charter.rights

[GostHacked]

Look a little deeper. While the headquarters are here, the parents are foreign.

As an example, Walmart is an American company, international headquarters in China.

[Keepitsimple]

We're already economically dependent on the US. They own most of our resource based companies and are behind more of the retail and wholesale companies. Allowing us to be self-governing is just a ruse to keep people believing that we are sovereign.

Behind Canada's accommodating smile is a very big stick. We are the largest trading partner of the US with an evenly balanced portfolio of exports and imports that total almost a half trillion dollars. We are also their lifeline to a secure supply of resources and energy - especially important if push comes to shove and the US decides to wean itself off of other imported oil (i.e. the Middle East).....or world events dictate such a move.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_the_United_States

[bush_cheney2004]

....especially important if push comes to shove and the US decides to wean itself off of other imported oil (i.e. the Middle East).....or world events dictate such a move.

United States' trade is far more diversified in this respect than is Canada's. If push comes to shove, it won't matter how accommodating a smile or big stick will be.

Edited December 9, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[Alta4ever]

I think the tin foil hats are getting tighter.

[M.Dancer]

Look a little deeper. While the headquarters are here, the parents are foreign.

Companies listed on the TSX do not have parent companies. They are the parent company.

Edited December 9, 2010 by M.Dancer

[M.Dancer]

As an example, Walmart is an American company, international headquarters in China.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Alliance Atlantis used to have its international headquarters in Ireland....

[M.Dancer]

I think the tin foil hats are getting tighter.

No kidding. If Sugar attracts flies, NAU attracts wingnuts.

[Smallc]

No kidding. If Sugar attracts flies, NAU attracts wingnuts.

I think they layered the tinfoil with a very snug layer of saran wrap...and I think they've left it on a bit too long.

[William Ashley]

The Tories are going to be announcing a new deal with the US for the border and security. Its to allow goods and people to flow more freely within the two countries. The US did sign the same deal with Mexico. I'm just wondering if this the SPP revisited only under another name. Is their plan to start with the border and slowly expand to others things and start to harmonize more things with the US until we are living within the NAU? http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Tories+announce+deal+forming+North+America+perimeter/3947584/story.html

It would be great if parliament actually visited issues like major security treaties that change the sovereignty of canada.

Actually everyone I have talked to about US border security policy has stated it isn't good. SO I don't see how expanding this to Canada actually makes it better for people. Also I fail to see how trade with the US will be altered in any way through this... this just means more information to digest which actually means more problems, not less.. it also means more resources are needed , and that means more costs.. it is pretty clear cut.

In a multistate union such as the EU this might make a little sense but Canada and the US I doubt are about to just remove the border.. actually what this is is trying to get more personnel and more information shared... and this isn't reducing overhead of operations it as stated above is actually increasing overhead.. and also increasing the potential for errors .. since personally I know US border security is notorious for paranoia and false reporting, overall it just balloons the restrictions.. not improves border security.. it will infringe more peoples rights.. especially canadians charter right to enter and leave canada. We have Canadians that are having their rights removed by the US.. and increased border security will only give a greater oppourtunity for legalization of infringement by dual sovereignty of policing... currently the police powers stop at the border.. otherwise this is just hyper politicisizing the issues.. Canada interests are not synonymous with US interests.. while they may be common they are not the same.. and US wars are not a Canadians priority if Canadians don't agree with the war or action.

LIkewise although Canada isn't like to do the same as the US.. the fact is that the US seems to have way more plans than Canada for asserting itself on a global scale.. and I don't think it is fair for Canada to have to be subset to US policy especially on issues such as sovereignty.. cooperation is one thing but SPP and otherwise is a major problem because the US is irresponsible and doesn't respect Canada or Canadians on a basis of their law.

McCallum is very on point when he states the privacy act as well as other acts (potentially slated for revisions such as the pardons laws) .. actually penalize Canadians and remove their rights... while this may already occur to a certain extent.. with more NSA or us national security taking precendence over Canadian law.. well that is a satalite state... and when you don't have the same benefits and rights of the other state.. it is a limitation of ones rights... and it only fuels the US to make poor global choices.. especially when they contradict freedom and democracy. Canada should support the US to support non democratic and the removal of citizens rights that are in the canadian constitution or that would infringe equal rights that would have existed in the US for Americans... it is even more a potential violation of US citizens rights.. because it will limit their rights in Canada.. and information sharing does not necisarily equal LEGAL status.. but supposed status.. of people notorious for making horrible intelligence errors.. on an ongoing basis. Look to a plethora of things including US iraq UK intelligence sharing... or a number of Canadian US intelligence sharing that latter prooved to be issued (wether or not the real story is being told.... for of war)

end of the story.. the more intelligence shares hearsay the less intelligent it is.. humanint at source is only slight more viable than sharing hearsay and political police on an extralegal extrajudicial basis.. it is highly unfortate if the US and Canada de factor support this.

Edited December 10, 2010 by William Ashley

[bush_cheney2004]

.. since personally I know US border security is notorious for paranoia and false reporting, overall it just balloons the restrictions.. not improves border security.. it will infringe more peoples rights.. especially canadians charter right to enter and leave canada.

Such "charter rights" are very subordinate to the USA's decision to control access to their country. Buy a boat....

LIkewise although Canada isn't like to do the same as the US.. the fact is that the US seems to have way more plans than Canada for asserting itself on a global scale.. and I don't think it is fair for Canada to have to be subset to US policy especially on issues such as sovereignty.. cooperation is one thing but SPP and otherwise is a major problem because the US is irresponsible and doesn't respect Canada or Canadians on a basis of their law.

Iraqis, Serbs, Haitians, and Afghans may disagree with your assessment.

end of the story.. the more intelligence shares hearsay the less intelligent it is.. humanint at source is only slight more viable than sharing hearsay and political police on an extralegal extrajudicial basis.. it is highly unfortate if the US and Canada de factor support this.

Nope....HUMINT is an essential element for primary and corroborating sources.

[William Ashley]

Such "charter rights" are very subordinate to the USA's decision to control access to their country. Buy a boat....

I did the US didnt let me in to get it.

Read the Canadian charter and explain how US border security respects those canadian charter rights.

Likewise read the US constitution and ammendments and say how US border security respects those.. US border is a martial zone to the US... and I know the US doesnt respect international laws regarding treatment of persons , so it is once again clear cut that the main reason that this is bad is because the US doesnt respect individuals rights or privacy and doesnt perform on a standards basis as to uphold what is expected of an administration or administrative personnel in Canada - they have a much worse standard of care, and so it is a detraction from Canadian services to have them involved in the process. There are already mechanisms for intelligence sharing, there is no need to have US personnel stationed in Canada.. since even the ones there have yet to help with things like preclearance or security and entrance clarification for instance pearson international. You cant even talk to the US border gaurds there unless you are already travelling to the US rather than trying to clarify entry to the US.

The US is not above making up stories to prevent people from entering the country. We dont need that type of behaviour involved in Canadian Border Security. It only taints the truthfulness of information and fairness of process.

You just demonstrate how you could care less about Canadian laws by diverting the actual point, on the USs ignorance of Canadian law in enforcement and basis of a mission of Canadian Security as a primary directive rather than US interests, I dont see how US personnel are going to place Canada as number 1. Keep them the hell out of the country, they cant even keep theirs going acording to the law. We dont need the US infringing on Canadian democracy and freedoms. They are the security problem.

They created a paranoid world intent on doing them harm because of having fingers in other countries pots and now they have to turn their borders into war zones... canada doesnt need in on that. It needs to distance itself from hawkish US policies, defence is one thing... global war on people in general is another. Assasination is against international law for instance and the US regularly engages in such behaviour in the name of war on non nations individuals they without judicial process have targetted as enemies of the US state. We dont need that ignorance of rule of law and international boundries in Canada it is ignorant and not beneficient of fair dealings on a global scale.

Iraqis, Serbs, Haitians, and Afghans may disagree with your assessment.

One mistake doesnt equate perpetuating it in the name of making situations worse.

The US may support self destruction and stripping away their own freedoms and the freedoms of other people in the world, Canada need not.

Nope....HUMINT is an essential element for primary and corroborating sources.

Canada isnt stupid why introduce a reducing agent that will make Canadian intelligence worse

Edited December 10, 2010 by William Ashley

[bush_cheney2004]

I did the US didnt let me in to get it.

I am certain there are boats for sale in Canada.

Read the Canadian charter and explain how US border security respects those canadian charter rights.

Why should/would the US respect Charter Rights?

Likewise read the US constitution and ammendments and say how US border security respects those.. US border is a martial zone to the US... and I know the US doesnt respect international laws regarding treatment of persons , so it is once again clear cut that the main reason that this is bad is because the US doesnt respect individuals rights or privacy and doesnt perform on a standards basis as to uphold what is expected of an administration or administrative personnel in Canada

Nope...sure doesn't. Which makes me wonder why so many are itching to go the the evil USA in the first place.

You cant even talk to the US border gaurds there unless you are already travelling to the US rather than trying to clarify entry to the US.

...so hire an attorney or use the damn telephone...sheesh.

The US is not above making up stories to prevent people from entering the country. We dont need that type of behaviour involved in Canadian Border Security. It only taints the truthfulness of information and fairness of process.

OK...then stay home.

You just demonstrate how you could care less about Canadian laws by diverting the actual point, on the USs ignorance of Canadian law in enforcement and basis of a mission of Canadian Security as a primary directive rather than US interests, I dont see how US personnel are going to place Canada as number 1.

Again, why the hell would the United States "place Canada as number 1"?????

One mistake doesnt equate perpetuating it in the name of making situations worse.

The US may support self destruction and stripping away their own freedoms and the freedoms of other people in the world, Canada need not.

Many Canadians travel across the border without incident each day. Just because you have a legal problem caused by your own actions (and adjudication in Canada's system by the way), is no reason to condemn the entire process.

[Topaz]

I'm a bit confused when the government says they want an open border for goods and people to get through but then we have the US and Canada making security a little harder just this past year. As far as I know the US/Canada border at Detroit/Windsor, goods and people are getting though at a good rate of time. When they aren't its because one of the two countries haven't got enough agents on the border or like the past week, the weather could shut them dowm like in Sarnia ON, and backed up Windsor/Detroit. Are they creating a problem that really isn't one, to able them to bring in SPP?

[Saipan]

I did the US didnt let me in to get it.

As Martha would say "....and that's a good thing"

Read the Canadian charter and explain how US border security respects those canadian charter rights.

Read the US Constitution and explain how Canadian border security respects 2nd Amendment.

US border is a martial zone to the US... .

Martial Law was declared only by Peeair Ediot Trudeau. Because just one (1) guy was killed

I know the US doesnt respect international laws regarding treatment of persons

You got that confused with China, Cuba and North Korea.

They created a paranoid world intent on doing them harm because of having fingers in other countries pots

So why are WE in the Balkans?? Was the WTC attacked by Serbians?

The US may support self destruction and stripping away their own freedoms and the freedoms of other people in the world, Canada need not.

The US is not disarming their own citizen like Canada and some other countries because fearing of their own population.

[William Ashley]

Read the US Constitution and explain how Canadian border security respects 2nd Amendment.

It is infringed but US Citizens can apply for an import of firearms for sport purposes, non firearm weapons can be imported as long as they arn't restricted. The right to bear arms tends to be abridged by classes of weapons deemed to be for martial activities such as the long bow, proscribed weapons under given laws requiring weapons to be utilized. The US Supreme court has various ruling colouring how this right is to be applied. Canadian law does not differ much, in that states have the capacity to set laws regarding aquisition and carrying and storage of certain weapons. Canada is not much different than any given US state in how it regulates weapons possession.

You got that confused with China, Cuba and North Korea.

I have no information that I can verify concerning Chna, Cuba or North Korea, my statement very much is valid regarding the United States though from personally verifiable events.

The US is not disarming their own citizen like Canada and some other countries because fearing of their own population.

Canadians arn't disarmed, most Canadian citizens have access to weapons, it is only prohibited weapons that are restricted to about 1 in 10 Canadians, and restricted weapons to 7 in 10. It is only people that the government is penalizing for having a criminal history, mentally unstable or other class distinctions.

While the system does infringe peoples rights it is a far cry from prohibiting weapons - generally only people under court order don't have access to melee weapons. You don't need melee weapons or firearms to kill someone, it just makes it easier.

I'm mostly libertarian but the storage and use of weapons - especially weapons that are debilitating to health ought to be protected from the public for misuse, firearms are loud and some weapons and arms are hugely toxic.

I tend to see things this way - if I have access to something - nearly anyone else can have access to it.

It is your money - you want a gun put down the $500 to $1000 to own and use one.

You want a car put down the 1000 dollar or so for insurance give or take and the licensing and permits.

Do you think everyone should just be able to hop in a car and give it a go?

What about making chemcial weapons and testing them.. the line must exist at some point and firearms involve public safety..

I'm all for ; responsible ; ownership.. with an emphasis on responsible.

The bottom line is that if you are nuts you probably wont go to jail anyway and if you are a criminal that probably wont change in the near future.

It really isn't funny but that is the system, you don't like it all you can do is recognize that and work towards correcting the problem, that is affirmative action.

Just keep your targets on the best use of your resources and set out with careful aim. We can acheive more liberties if we just take in hand our destiny.

Harper isn't trying to give nutters and crooks guns, unless farmers and conservatives fit the bill. Just understand it ain't Stephen Harper pulling the trigger on these things, it is you. It is the other guy, it is people that can organize and get things done.

Edited December 16, 2010 by William Ashley

[William Ashley]

Why should/would the US respect.....

Well it doesn't make runts, it makes runts into grunts.

why so many are itching to go the the evil USA in the first place.

The US ain't a bad territory, also they tend to have good deals from time to time, for instance auctions.

Increasing the buy price of an auction does both the American seller and the person who doesn't have that sale item locally a benefit meaning the only looser is the person who got out bid. But isn't the US based in large part on commercial rights and benefits.

..so hire an attorney or use the damn telephone...sheesh.

I don't want to spend my life litigating I'll wait till I'm dead then I'll take it up with God, when I can have a full view of the rationality and justification for an act in mind of the merits of the act. The courts don't offer justice. If I gain the imperium I'll act, but in non coocoo land the fact is I am on the brink of legislating in process of pre trial of a handful of cases, I hate the court process though, it is more frustrating when I can just steamroll and my nature is changed and the other party looses out in the future if it involves me.

I also actively take things to a political level to whatever neglibile effect, I feel I have had some effects on numerous occassions through political activism.

OK...then stay home.

The US ain't the only destination in the world, it was just a prefered destination at the time of me traveling through it, or carrying out purchases there. That has just shifted to other parts of the world at the total loss of US commerce, the only loose is, the US from restricting my access to them. I was very pro American up until customs in my opinion offended me, I did nothing to the US.

Again, why the hell would the United States "place Canada as number 1"?????

Well if it is Canadian Borders they are protecting look at it this way, you are watching your friends house, and you have a choice, let your brother rob the place cause he owes you some money, or to tell him not to. You are advocating for letting your brother rob the place cause your neighbour is second most important cause you really want that money. There are many circumstances that would be equivolent, because the US does more than police terrorists, it polices the global economy.

Many Canadians travel across the border without incident each day. Just because you have a legal problem caused by your own actions (and adjudication in Canada's system by the way), is no reason to condemn the entire process.

The own actions is the issue here, nothing was done by myself on a legal basis - my baring was economic class based from their "rationality" - because they stated with 150$ per day to the maximum possible stay in cash on hand I would be permited entry. This then became lifestyle based - a mortgage and wife, a normal job etc.. my lease, single life style and full time university student status wasn't sufficient for them. This to me is the problem here, the false information and false grounds in doing this as to not enable me a chance, and this while trying to verify the authenticity of a 36 or so foot sailboat that has already been paid for.

Edited December 16, 2010 by William Ashley

[bush_cheney2004]

.... But isn't the US based in large part on commercial rights and benefits.

No, but even if it was, you live in Canada. See the difference?

The US ain't the only destination in the world, it was just a prefered destination at the time of me traveling through it, or carrying out purchases there. That has just shifted to other parts of the world at the total loss of US commerce, the only loose is, the US from restricting my access to them. I was very pro American up until customs in my opinion offended me, I did nothing to the US.

Then choose a different preference. The US has the right to restrict entry, just like any other nation. Your preferences are quite irrelevant.

Well if it is Canadian Borders they are protecting look at it this way, you are watching your friends house, and you have a choice, let your brother rob the place cause he owes you some money, or to tell him not to. You are advocating for letting your brother rob the place cause your neighbour is second most important cause you really want that money. There are many circumstances that would be equivolent, because the US does more than police terrorists, it polices the global economy.

This makes absolutely zero sense. The US decided you were more trouble than it was worth.

Furthermore, why do you go on and on about it? Take the hint....go to Mexico instead to get some real neighbourly love.

[GostHacked]

I'm a bit confused when the government says they want an open border for goods and people to get through but then we have the US and Canada making security a little harder just this past year. As far as I know the US/Canada border at Detroit/Windsor, goods and people are getting though at a good rate of time. When they aren't its because one of the two countries haven't got enough agents on the border or like the past week, the weather could shut them dowm like in Sarnia ON, and backed up Windsor/Detroit. Are they creating a problem that really isn't one, to able them to bring in SPP?

You should check out the Mexico US border ..... in comparison .

[William Ashley]

No, but even if it was, you live in Canada. See the difference?

Seeing the difference is easy, seeing the point is not. You see, when I attempt to rationlize rationality of US "sanity" I attempt to do so from a US position, not a Canadian one. When my opinion still doesn't make sense from both Canadian and US positions, one must question the rationality of the act. I have yet to determine this. No moral has been learned, the only thing I am left with is that a nuclear armed state is completely batsh!t insane.

Then choose a different preference.

I did, my last 4 of 5 trips out of Canada over the last two years have been to Mexico. Luckily some cheap direct flights have opened up eliminating the general economic benefit of $20 or 30$ on a transfer in the US over a direct flight from Canada to Mexico.

The US has the right

When you don't enforce laws rights become irrevelant.

Your preferences are quite irrelevant.

To the topic perhaps but to my replies to your statements they are very much relevant. sm.

This makes absolutely zero sense.

I agree.

The US decided you were more trouble than it was worth.

I dunno, I don't recall costing the US money before they started paying to house and remove me from the country at their expense as opposed to the flights and transit I arranged before attempting legal entry into the US to complete my travel.

Furthermore, why do you go on and on about it?

Well because it is a reply to your statements requiring more insight. The reason why these things get brought back up when integrated joint border security at Canadian ports of Entry comes into effect because, I think, gosh CBP at Canadian Entry points... the joy without even entering the US, I leave them alone, why are they butting into my life?

go to Mexico instead

I have, I rather enjoyed the past month in Quintana Roo.

Even though there are still searches in the streets and people with guns, Mexican customs has been better than both Canadian and US customs.

I have only been redlighted once in Mexico out of 6 times there - 50% of my time on returning to Canada I get put into secondary or third level screening. And almost always when I have someone waiting to pick me up and the flight is delayed. The second last time no customs issues, this last time returning it was horrible, although it only took 40 minutes to clear customs and the flght was late 20 minutes (putting me an hour behind schedule) Canadian customs can be nearly as bad as US customs, but they are in general better. The US customs you can be stuck waiting to talk to someone for 2 or more hours, you can be held awaiting a decision for over 12 hours, you can be held for a month on an expedited removal (that is no entry just waiting to leave) that is without immigration court even being involved.

I dread to think - the US system would be integrated into Canada - only because I relive some of my own experiences with the US system and how offensive it is.

I'm very firmly no law broken that is it that is all. Political policing is massive grounds for offense to someone restricted on hearsay and political views.

I don't want that attitude remotely involved in Canada, even if just only Canada.

Travel shouldn't suck and being treated like a criminal 50% of the time I try to cross a border is a little bit issued for me, if they havn't charged me for anything after the last 3 times of 2nd or 3rd level screening it feels a lot like harassment to go through it again and the feeling is amplified every time to the point of being harassment.

I don't want american lies and political views of me leading to harassment in Canada especially if I can't even see or hear the comments that would amount to defamation. (and based upon comments like "I always get the weird ones" it has me beleive something in the file indicates something non standard.)

Also bearing that legal defence is limited at border points in terms of supplying private and priveleged information, and it is a constitutional violation on a basis of unreasonable search - no justified grounds - especially if random screening is used - there is nothng to demonstrate just cause for a search and that would amount to a constitutional ingringement on basis of unlawful search, the constitutional infringement adds to the offence.

I don't trust DHS or the state department with my priveleged and private information, I am required to tell Canadian customs, especially those involving economic, business, or personal matters.

They already have a secret file on me, that I have not at my request been given access to. I don't want my travel in and out of Canada not to the US, shared with the US, it is a privacy concern.

As far as I am aware the US hasn't acted for my benefit, as far as I can tell as their actions have caused me both physical and mental damage (and economic), including recurrent pain from a snapped finger while in US custody and a chipped elbow that is a more or less permanent injury. There is a long way before I want them involved in Canadian clearance because they seriously screwed things up between us (there are more things than was mentioned in regard to damages incured by US customs), and I place the culpability on them, as they had the perogative in how to handle the situation and chose to limit rather than liberate.

Edited December 16, 2010 by William Ashley

[bush_cheney2004]

.... I have yet to determine this. No moral has been learned, the only thing I am left with is that a nuclear armed state is completely batsh!t insane.

Even if that were true, you still can't be objective about denied entry. Take the hint....stay out.

I did, my last 4 of 5 trips out of Canada over the last two years have been to Mexico. Luckily some cheap direct flights have opened up eliminating the general economic benefit of $20 or 30$ on a transfer in the US over a direct flight from Canada to Mexico.

Omigod....is that what this is about? Saving 30 measly dollars in airfare? Please tell me that the anxiety expressed by Canadians at the US border is deeper than saving on gas and cigarettes.

When you don't enforce laws rights become irrevelant.

US laws apply at the border....your expectations do not.

I dunno, I don't recall costing the US money before they started paying to house and remove me from the country at their expense as opposed to the flights and transit I arranged before attempting legal entry into the US to complete my travel.

Proper prior planning prevents piss poor performance. Next time get your poop in a group.

Well because it is a reply to your statements requiring more insight. The reason why these things get brought back up when integrated joint border security at Canadian ports of Entry comes into effect because, I think, gosh CBP at Canadian Entry points... the joy without even entering the US, I leave them alone, why are they butting into my life?

Not sure I understand what you mean.....if you are a perp then they will butt into your life.

I don't want that attitude remotely involved in Canada, even if just only Canada.

...but you do seem to desire cheaper goods and travel from/through America...interesting.

I don't want american lies and political views of me leading to harassment in Canada especially if I can't even see or hear the comments that would amount to defamation. (and based upon comments like "I always get the weird ones" it has me beleive something in the file indicates something non standard.)

In our short visit here it is obvious why you get "Premium Screening" at the US border.