We have a traitor in our midst - Harper

[mikemac]

On 09/29/91 Brian Mulroney (the character that struck the first blow against Canadian sovereignty with NAFTA) said this below in front of an audience of about 7,000 people in Frost Amphitheater at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. Throughout the years, the amphitheater has been the host to many events including a prominent speech by Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1992. This 09/29/91 Stanford News Release is titled "Mulroney on Canadian, U.S. roles in new world order"

http://news.stanford.edu/pr/91/910929Arc1160.html

"We favor re-thinking the limits of national sovereignty in a world where problems respect no borders," Mulroney, wearing an academic robe, said before about 7,000 people in Frost Amphitheater.

"The burden of building a new world order is too great to be borne by any one country, even a country as powerful and principled as the United States of America; it's a burden that must be shared by all industrialized nations, and I tell you today, Canada will fulfill every single one of its obligations."

At the G20 meetings in Toronto in 2010 talking about their agenda Stephen Harper said "It's a Loss of National Sovereignty" meaning Canadian sovereignty. See it on this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvhEjt9IQec

Harper is working for and in the interest of the United States government. Harper has already committed treason by signing a secretive deal with the US on Feb. 4, 2011 to remove Canada's sovereignty, with a minority government and without the approval of the Canadian public or parliament. Fortress America, the next step to the North American Union.

http://www.canada.com/business/Harper+Obama+agree+integrate+border+creating+security+trade+perimeter/4225641/story.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/dont-deal-away-our-sovereignty/article1901070/

http://hubpages.com/hub/North-American-Union--Canada

If you think for one moment that the Canadian public won't see this as treasonous when they realize it and see Stephen Harper as a traitor then you are mistaken. The traitor Harper has to go.

This is a very important vote if you like being a Canadian. We need every Canadian, especially young Canadians to choose and vote on May 2nd for the MP that has the best chance of beating out the Conservative MP in your riding.

[Sandy MacNab]

You can't be serious

[mikemac]

I've never been more serious in my life.

[wyly]

You can't be serious

you would hope not but the real hard right conservatives I've known all want union with the USA...getting them to admit it publicly is another matter...

[wyly]

double post...

Edited April 16, 2011 by wyly

[scribblet]

Toto - I'm not in Kansas anymore

[Sir Bandelot]

Toto - I'm not in Kansas anymore

That's right, ignore the man behind the curtain, he's not real...

[Michael Hardner]

I think we had an election around this in 1988.

The Canadian federal election of 1988 was held November 21, 1988, to elect members of the Canadian House of Commons of the 34th Parliament of Canada. It was an election largely fought on a single issue: the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement.

Harper is right. This is the reality of our economy, and Canada seems to have done well by it - Canadian resource exports are responsible for a great economic boom in Western Canada.

It's really too late to fight against this, obviously. We have to adapt to it and we have been.

[Sir Bandelot]

I think we had an election around this in 1988.

Harper is right. This is the reality of our economy, and Canada seems to have done well by it - Canadian resource exports are responsible for a great economic boom in Western Canada.

It's really too late to fight against this, obviously. We have to adapt to it and we have been.

I think trade is fine, but there is also such a thing as "throwing out the baby with the bath-water", if you understand what I mean.

[Michael Hardner]

I think trade is fine, but there is also such a thing as "throwing out the baby with the bath-water", if you understand what I mean.

As someone who voted against Mulroney, and has seen my standard of living decline because of Free Trade, I still see why it makes sense. Tariffs generally stop countries from specializing in what they're good at, and make for economic activity that is less efficient.

If there are alternatives to freer trade then they need to be discussed, need to be pushed, implemented and tested - there has to be a benefit to doing them to all sides otherwise.

As with so many other aspects of political economy, the anti- crowd complains and whinges while the pro- side moves forward. This happens with health care too in Canada, where those who are against privatization support the status quo of a crumbling system until there is no alternative left.

[Sir Bandelot]

As with so many other aspects of political economy, the anti- crowd complains and whinges while the pro- side moves forward. This happens with health care too in Canada, where those who are against privatization support the status quo of a crumbling system until there is no alternative left.

There has to be criticism against change when its misguided. Progress is not always good, it should be carefully thought out by people who are wise. If the progressives see a problem, they are right to bring it up. If their solution is not wise, the anti-cowd has to be heard.

And by the way, I think those who are against privatization are not necessrily in support of status quo, that would be foolish. There always has to be maintenance and reform, but it should be useful, not just benefitting one part of society. If it does, the schism appears.

Edited April 16, 2011 by Sir Bandelot

[Michael Hardner]

There has to be criticism against change when its misguided. Progress is not always good, it should be carefully thought out by people who are wise. If the progressives see a problem, they are right to bring it up. If their solution is not wise, the anti-cowd has to be heard.

And by the way, I think those who are against privatization are not necessrily in support of status quo, that would be foolish. There always has to be maintenance and reform, but it should be useful, not just benefitting one part of society. If it does, the schism appears.

This is the thing, though, there doesn't seem to be any viable alternatives in the public sphere. I don't think that is because of a media conspiracy theory. Where is the maintenance and reform ? Where are the graduated fair trade deals that phase in free trade ?

[Wild Bill]

I've never been more serious in my life.

"Shirley, you can't be serious!"

[Scotty]

I've never been more serious in my life.

I'm betting your a truther too...

[Smallc]

I'm betting your a truther too...

What do birthers, truthers, and NAU conspiracy theorists share in common?

[M.Dancer]

On 09/29/91 Brian Mulroney (the character that struck the first blow against Canadian sovereignty with NAFTA)

Umm yeah....

Chretian brougyht in NAFTA....thanks for coming

[fellowtraveller]

Harper is a traitor and should have a Parliamentary trial ASAP. Duceppe could lead the prosecution.

[Michael Hardner]

What do birthers, truthers, and NAU conspiracy theorists share in common?

Bush is trying to "get" all of them.

[Smallc]

Bush is trying to "get" all of them.

I was thinking more along the lines of half a brain...between all of them.

Edited April 19, 2011 by Smallc

[kimmy]

There *is* a loss of sovereignty when you enter into global communities and agree to cooperate with other nations. That loss of sovereignty is the price we pay for the benefits that participating in these communities bring to us. Are those benefits worth the price? That's controversial, but the great prosperity we've enjoyed over the last couple of decades seems like a pretty strong endorsement.

-k

[Michael Hardner]

I was thinking more along the lines of half a brian...between all of them.

I'm sure they all have a full brian.

[Sir Bandelot]

I was thinking more along the lines of half a brian...between all of them.

Meanwhile I prefer to use my whole 'brian'

[Keepitsimple]

Even though the video is edited to remove a lot of the context, you can tell that Harper's replies are the reality of the times. That's what I like about the man - when he's in a comfortable, non-partisan discussion - he's very thoughtful and complete in his responses - he tells it like it is.

Old Mikemac is another one of those very angry Liberals.....

Edited April 16, 2011 by Keepitsimple

[August1991]

There *is* a loss of sovereignty when you enter into global communities and agree to cooperate with other nations. That loss of sovereignty is the price we pay for the benefits that participating in these communities bring to us. Are those benefits worth the price? That's controversial, but the great prosperity we've enjoyed over the last couple of decades seems like a pretty strong endorsement.

-k

Loss of sovereignty? WTF?

If you forbid me from shopping at Walmart, how does that make you or me more "more sovereign"?

[Sir Bandelot]

If you forbid me from shopping at Walmart, how does that make you or me more "more sovereign"?

For more information see 'Outsourcing and its long-term effect on the economy, prosperity and education of the nation".

Or just look... south...