Stephen Harper to Prorouge YET AGAIN

[William Ashley]

I found it devilish that Stephen Harper plans on putting into place the plan to let the US decide canadian immigration and national security issues before parliament resumes.. and effect perhaps irrevesable prorouge on SOVEREIGNTY just when previous christmas gift prorouges wern't enough.. now he has gone from parliament to canadian sovereignty itself...

here is one version of the report

http://media.thestar.topscms.com/acrobat/95/e7/631bb42f4aff8d3c8ec59dabdbbf.pdf

Here are the points I felt relevant to highlight as "issued"

Integrated Law Enforcement

"integrated cross-border law enforcement operations"

"intend to seek further opportunities to pursue ... trans-national crime investigations ... to tackle the serious security threats"

Critical Infrastructure and Cyber Security

We intend to ... strengthen the resilience of our critical and cyber infrastructure with strong cross-border engagement.

Canada and the United States benefit from .shared critical and cyber-infrastructure

"For Canada, interdepartmental

coordination, will be'the responsibility of the Privy Council Office"

(and as far as I am aware the PCO has been largely demured by the PMO)

We intend for the BBWG to'report to their respective Leaders

Who is the leader of the PCO? The queen? The GG? The chancellor of the privy seal? It sure as hell ain't the PM.

" we intend to ... establish and verify the identities of travelers and conduct screening at the earliest

possible opportunity,"

"biometrics, the sharing of information on travelers in real time, more precisely tailored

screening, and improved methods of threat notification."

"screening at the

earliest opportunity" .. "through use of biometrics" (drones for instance..)

"exchanging entry information on foreign nationals"

"By working ... on research, sharing best practices, and

emphasizing community-based and community-driven efforts

(what community?)

to develop "joint facilities" and programs - within and "beyond" the United States and Canada

"we intend to enhance our risk management practices"

"We intend to work together to defend and protect the land, maritime, air, and cyberspace domains of both the. United States and Canada"

We intend to improve the sharing of relevant law enforcement information to identify'

known

"and suspected "

serious offenders and violent criminals on both sides of the border.

Stephen Harper Democracy Strikes Again.

source of comment on preresumption throat shoving by Mr. Kinsella

---

This plays in my mind as the FBI operating in Canada investigating people and Canadians getting a whole lot of FBI files..

I already have an A#... probably an FBI file too because I am active in political activism... but basically anyone under investigation.. will likely be "blocked from entering the US" or manipulated.. before charges or a conviction is filed...

Even a simple "tip" could prevent a lawful business person from conducting business or having their employment disrupted or worse - things like being detained... or scruitnized and monitored.

And confidnetial information has been used economically by the US before and this basically says the US can investigated and operate their police forces in canada and investigate and store data on Canadians.

Likewise -- the Canadian internet becomes "american policable"

This really is the SPP reborn.

I was at the time actually somewhat in favour of SPP measures at the time of their origin... however my dealings with the US and further research on use of confidential information of the US (even if the NSA/CIA would spy on Canadians anyway) this is legalizing the abuse of Canadians Privacy rights.

It makes "illegal" monitoring possible without a surviellance warrant much more invasively I would suppose.

And it could potentially invalidate criminal cases and information (as the information would be inadmisable in court).... meaning it would impare domestic policing. Likewise it allows a lot of "personal" information to be legally gained and the CIA has performed operation on people to disrupt or damage people against US intersts before.

The sidelong would be this intends to give US police forces the ability to perform search warrants in Canada.

Edited December 19, 2010 by William Ashley

[Shady]

Prorouge? Is that a new shade of red or something? Anyways, your pseudo-outrage is entertaining.

[William Ashley]

Prorouge? Is that a new shade of red or something? Anyways, your pseudo-outrage is entertaining.

I'm not outragged actually. I am concerned for Canadians.

I'm pretty certain they've been doing this type of thing on me for a few years now anyway so it likely doesn't effect my own rights all that much -- since I'm banned from the US for about 5 years to life already. And I'm periodically disrupted.

You have to see "the mistakes" on my dealings with government to understand that there is a certain threshold where casual mistakes arn't mistakes anymore they are intention. Such as periodic bank errors etc... there are so many events that it honestly becomes more difficult to see everything as "accidents" by the other party.

None the less I realize, what I went through is made much more "legal" by an agreement like this.

You could say but law abiding citizens have nothing to worry about..

WRONG, this is anyone under investigation.. or "the community" deems a threat. (this has nothing to do with breaking laws but being under suspicion of being against the community agenda --- totalitarianism)

It also includes biometrics on everyone. And the US has hunter killer and surviellance drones some used by DHS for border enforcement that use this biometric data.. basically they can monitor anyone at any time. Without a search warrant.. this would be "legally"

This database would be usable by any department in government... not just for border security.. since some of this involves "trade" and other example the US treasury.

to·tal·i·tar·i·an·ism   /toʊˌtælɪˈtɛəriəˌnɪzəm/ Show Spelled

[toh-tal-i-tair-ee-uh-niz-uhm] Show IPA

–noun

1. the practices and principles of a totalitarian regime.

2. absolute control by the state or a governing branch of a highly centralized institution.

3. the character or quality of an autocratic or authoritarian individual, group, or government: the totalitarianism of the father.

-------

How many public leaks have we had this month?

How many private leaks that wern't uncovered you think occured.. or potential conflicts of interest on leaked information.. or damage to reputations on leaked information.

There is a margin of corruption in canada and the US that needs to be taken into account on this arrangement.

Or even look at wikileaks for how secure confidential US information is.... do you want your personal life available to anyone?

It makes people dangerously exposed to social engineering attacks, as well as identity theft. The problem in totalitarian regimes is in "state agenda" overriding personal choices. I didn't invision canadians as that socialist - corporatism has a margine of private choices. The political power of state comes into serious questioning in overriding personal liberties if consitutional rights to liberty and security are removed by state apparatuses that side step legal rights - and remove "the court" and present a political police apparatus acting outside the law under the guise of things like "national security"

why must national security exist beyond the law? Wouldn't that by definition make the nation criminal?

Edited December 19, 2010 by William Ashley

[scribblet]

Prorouge? Is that a new shade of red or something? Anyways, your pseudo-outrage is entertaining.

Ain't he cute, he must work with Kinsella

Beware of spin-doctors who think they know everything lol:

Edited December 19, 2010 by scribblet

[Jack Weber]

Pro rouge...

Professional Red???

Perhaps Harper missed a Field Goal?

Edited December 19, 2010 by Jack Weber

[scribblet]

Maybe he's turning commie after all - whoda thunk it

[jbg]

Prorouge? Is that a new shade of red or something? Anyways, your pseudo-outrage is entertaining.

Incoherent would be a better description than "pseudo-outrage".

[Saipan]

I'm not outragged actually. I am concerned for Canadians.

Any actual evidence for all the fear mongering?

[PIK]

So william , do you check under the bed every nite to see if the evil one is under there.

[jbg]

So william , do you check under the bed every nite to see if the evil one is under there.

No. He checks for a professional rogue, shortened to prorogue. Or he eats prorogies for breakfast.

[William Ashley]

No. He checks for a professional rogue, shortened to prorogue. Or he eats prorogies for breakfast.

I can't beleive you guys are joking about such a tremendously serious issues as investigations, and policing of Canadians is intended to be legalized for a foreign country to do on Canada.

It is a massive giving away of Canadians rights and a massive risk to their security.

Oddly though this is coming from two people for whom are located in the United States.

And this without democratic oversight of parliament - instead a unilateral act by a single political party.

Edited December 21, 2010 by William Ashley

[Moonbox]

I'm pretty certain they've been doing this type of thing on me for a few years now anyway so it likely doesn't effect my own rights all that much -- since I'm banned from the US for about 5 years to life already. And I'm periodically disrupted.

Did nobody else see this? Pure gold!

Who wants to take bets on what he was banned for?

[GostHacked]

Did nobody else see this? Pure gold!

Who wants to take bets on what he was banned for?

I've had a friend who was banned from the US for a few years. His crime? Him and his band were slated to play at a festival in the southern us which they were invited to. Explanation was that he was taking jobs away from Americans. No joke.

[guyser]

His crime?

His crime I suspect is more than that.

Bands travel back and forth all day every day with nary a hassle.

Two things happened....1) he was an asshole,or worse 2 )they found an agent who was pissed off more than normal and your friend stepped on his last nerve

IME, there is a number 3.

[dre]

I can't beleive you guys are joking about such a tremendously serious issues as investigations, and policing of Canadians is intended to be legalized for a foreign country to do on Canada.

It is a massive giving away of Canadians rights and a massive risk to their security.

Oddly though this is coming from two people for whom are located in the United States.

And this without democratic oversight of parliament - instead a unilateral act by a single political party.

I agree, those things shouldnt happen without a whole lot of debate and oversight. The rest of these retards are just playing their usual games, and dont seem real interested for whatever reason.

[GostHacked]

His crime I suspect is more than that.

Bands travel back and forth all day every day with nary a hassle.

Two things happened....1) he was an asshole,or worse 2 )they found an agent who was pissed off more than normal and your friend stepped on his last nerve

IME, there is a number 3.

No, his crime was just that, he was to play in the US. It's not just him but the whole band were turned at the border. If it was 1, I can see him being turned away, if it's 2, then the border agent need to be fired.

But anyways I guess this is a little off topic.

Edited December 21, 2010 by GostHacked

[William Ashley]

Did nobody else see this? Pure gold!

Who wants to take bets on what he was banned for?

Even if I wasn't given proper information - the reason is because the guy checked off that I intended to live and work in the US

As I previously explained

My baring was economic class based from their "rationality" - because they stated a requirement for $150 per day up to the maximum possible stay in cash on hand (bills with me - my credit card and bank account were not sufficient). 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 not for employment or to live but to survey a boat and take care of the technicalities regarding its future. Yet I was accused of trying to live in the US and collect welfare and that I wouldn't return to Canada - as I had no ties to Canada - even with things such as my birth certificate, bank accounts, lease, university enrollment, etc... I was initially told to return with my lease, when I did, it wasn't sufficient even though being a more than 6 month lease.

The next time I was intended to travel through the US and do one promotional activity on a basis of self contracting - from Canada. I wasn't sure if the company I was doing was doing so from Canada as it was through another company that operated in both Canada and the US - Western Pacific Paper Ltd

, Westpac Paper 155 Glacier St Unit 104 Coquitlam, BC V3K 5Z1, Canada is a Canadian company with the name--- also for instance

or Georgia Pacific

http://www.profilecanada.com/companydetail.cfm?company=129609_Georgia_Pacific_Canada_Inc_ON

both companies I beleive operated both in Canada and the United States, and had subsidaries set up in both apparently... so I honestly didn't know the B1/b2 status on a basis of doing promotions for a company that was incorporated in both countries.

-- part of the issue is is that the relationship was that I hired myself, and I was contracted by a company operating in Canada and the US, and this company was acting in some capacity for another company I didn't know much about.

I wasn't even legally allowed to give out that information - but was required to by law to breach my contract. None the less I also intended to travel to southern ontario from northern ontario - part of the reason for taking the contract to do the promotions - it was on my way.

They wouldn't provide the b1/b2 status because they didn't see it as legitimate promotions because they stated the promotions was promoting a US company - and it didn't matter if it also operated in Canada, or the company contracting also operated in Canada.. since an american company was involved I couldn't promote for a dual operating company in the US but Americans could do so in Canada. (that doesn't sound like free trade)

But I was told at the end.. I would have no issue travelling through the US in the future.

None the less because of "previously being denied entry. When I arrived in atlanta from a flight from mexico to catch a connecting flight to toronto I was taken off the plane - held for a number of hours and explained I needed a special visa to enter the US because of previously being denied entry to the US.

At the end I was told to contact CIS and the consulate in Canada - and that preclerance was one option but rarely given.

When I contacted the consulate in Toronto I was explained that Canadians are VISA exempt and that they didn't give out travel visas such as the B1/B2 visa, they said it was customs and I should contact them at pearson.

I faxed and phoned customs from the numbers I was given, but didn't receive a response.

I also contacted CIS by email.

Likewise when I went to pearson I was explained I couldn't go into preclerance unless I already had a boardingpass/ticket.

Yet there may have been a restriction on me even being allowed to attempt to travel to the US as later occured without breaching federal law.

On another trip in Mexico after getting out of medical sitution (and previously being told that leave for entry may be granted for medical reasons although the medical situation was not for that purpose and it being overall more cost effective to travel from the US rather than flying back to DF(mexico city) from tijuana I crossed into San Diego - and was accused of illegal entry because of not having a visa and intending to live and work in the US.

Although I was hopeful before crossing I would be able to request leave for entry or an allowance to catch a flight in san diego or los angeles - but my plan was to bus back to canada via a greyhound disovery pass that I planned on using in Canada also - as it would save me a few hundred dollars.

Instead I was held for a over a month in a federal prison on "expedited removal" and refused voluntary departure, leave for entry or any other means that would allow me to leave from the US voluntarily. Instead they had to wait for the Canadian consulate to approve my travel documents - while the canadian consulate said it was all the US - likewise the US stated they needed approval from washington to let me go.

And that is why I am banned because I tried to clarify the issue. It just appeared as a money grab to me, and this after I spent money in the US.

The time before the first refusal though I actually ran the stop sign at the ambassador bridge but only because I took a left on the Canadian side instead of the right - they search my car on both sides of the border and had me wait a bit of time before letting me go. I woke the guard up and set the sensors off. But the reason I drove is because the sign said "wait for the car ahead of you to move before approaching or being signaled etc.. but there were no cars there.. so I didn't think I needed to stop since I wasn't waiting for anyone to finish being cleared.

None the less I've been really pissed off, so I think it is just an accumulation of being seriously offended by CBP arising from waking up the customs guy and setting off the sensors.

None the less I've asked to see an immigration judge on a few occasions but have been denied or threatened with being held for weeks if I do. When I was held for a month I was told I would be held for a month longer or longer.. and I was already late for returning to Canada and missing appointments.

This is part of what i've already had to deal with.. and it isn't going into detail with how I've seen them treat others - at times they "look for reasons" that don't exist and expect you to proove how you arn't going to do something in the future you or anyone else could do, it is absurd. At other times they accuse you of trying to do things that are impossible to do or require seriously organized crime such as identity theft, and this while I'm already tagged in their system.

Also most likely complaining.. power freaks don't like complainers and snitches. While I don't like having my money lost and my property withheld - all while lies about me and my intentions are entered into my files.

This is part of my concern - they lie and report false information. The more lies and false information shared between agencies the more harm will be done to innocent people.

Edited December 21, 2010 by William Ashley

[jbg]

How in G-d's name does a prorogue relate to a perimeter-oriented security approach?

[William Ashley]

How in G-d's name does a prorogue relate to a perimeter-oriented security approach?

The absence of parliament in deciding.

You know democracy instead of Hitlarper.

http://canadianobserver.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/stephen_harper_victory.jpg

Hitler is more than a leader, he is a dictator.

I prefer not leader over leader plus. Leaderpluses tend to lead to ruin not triumph. An absence of leadership insures democracy.

Before you respond, really think about it.

Edited December 22, 2010 by William Ashley

[M.Dancer]

this is one of the stupidest threads in quite awhile...

[William Ashley]

this is one of the stupidest threads in quite awhile...

http://sites.google.com/site/chezmnm/home/mes-vieux-photomontages/HarperHitlerOld.jpg

ho ho ho.

A point I thought I would raise that maybe some people in the US can address.

why are all these stories ---- Canadian

do americans not care if Canadians are investigating them?

Like this is what the wall street journal reported

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704828104576021752655133840.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

The U.S. and Canada are in the final stages of hammering out a broad pact on border security that could be unveiled within the next several weeks, say people familiar with the situation.

Note the 120 days would coincide with the potential election date... coincidentally...

"If we can find reasonable ways to cooperate with the U.S. that maintain our sovereignty and respect our laws, we're keen to do so."

Mr. Kenney thinks that letting US law enforcement enter Canada to investigate us --- for US laws and security concerns - will help maintain sovreignty for all canadians?

Fact finding missions can have a social engineering effect.. so it'd be nice to know what "investigative methods" intend to be used.. since interogation is a form of investigation used by the US. I'm not talking torture either but confinement and coercion - what exactly are the limits of "investigation" Americans might have mirana rights in the US but not in Canada.....

This would effectively have the US legally and officially "able to eavesdrop" on Canadians - what type of effect would this have on Canadian foreign affairs -- is that not effecting Canadian sovreignty when Canadian secrecy doesn't exist for Canadians anymore...

How is security to be maintained... is everyone to be totally transparent with every scenario, what about civil disorder in the US.. what about leaks.. having that information out there not only compromises Canadian security but American security too.

If all goes well, the pact could be announced at a meeting of President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Harper before the end of January,

Eavesdropping even during elections time for a totalitarian government is a grave threat to Canadians and Canadian democracy.

How is a 120 day timeline suppose to be implemented if parliament is disolved for elections? Without ratification or agreement, or any form of democratic insight?

Trade isn't hindered by the border, it is hindered by intelligent and timely trade.

If people want stuff you just need to order it and move it. 1 hour longer doesn't stop the deal, all you need to do is order 1 hour earlier.. it is a false premise.

and what of the US patriot act in Canada...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

On the face value you might think US law enforcement doesn't perform to the same standard of care as Canadians - I can't vouch for this but looking at it legally...

Canadians having US police the Canadian Internet, and Canada.. is a risk to Canadian Sovreignty because our laws are different. Canada should not be considered US jurisdiction without even a vote from parliament. It is an annexation of sorts. And one without confering rights... canada shouldn't be another phillipines or guam or cuba. Don't be disallusioned this deal is not Canada as the 51st state, it is Canada as US ghetto.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ghetto

Maybe there will be a use for those prisons for unreported crimes afterall...

Also pay very close attention to how the wall street journal uses the term "PACT"

a pact is not the same as a treaty..

a pact is presedential

a treaty is congressional

a pact doesn't actually hold force in the domestic US legally.

pacts are presidential directives of sort.. there is a massive difference legally.

http://www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/faqs/70133.htm

This is made even more problematic when asking who is making the law on the canadian side if Harper isn't using parliament to make law.

Is a reserve power being used?

This is foreign affairs... don't treaties and agreements need to be ratified in parliament legally in Canada...

the perogrative of executive agreements seems to be entirely if anywhere in the domain of the governor general/queen ....... but in this instance

.... the PM definately does not.

There is no doubt in my mind that any type of information sharing would breach privacy laws in Canada.

Edited December 22, 2010 by William Ashley

[scribblet]

Yawn... tin foil hat time

[jbg]

this is one of the stupidest threads in quite awhile...

Ain't it?

[g_bambino]

this is one of the stupidest threads in quite awhile...

You should have a browse of the one he's started elsewhere about Newfoundland still being property of Britain.

[jbg]

You should have a browse of the one he's started elsewhere about Newfoundland still being property of Britain.

Same opening poster?

Maybe he's pulled a "Rip Van Winkle" since 1949.

Edited December 22, 2010 by jbg