Anyone following the secret sovereignty talks

[William Ashley]

So just a reminder about the US military and police forces control of all Canadian international borders and communications systems.

Bob Hamilton was appointed as Canada's representative in those talks I can't find any independent bios on first glance.

However I do notice that letters do him do exist:

http://www.cme-mec.ca/download.php?file=goposltq.pdf

The media is still following this stuff.

http://www.themarknews.com/articles/5894-fortress-around-north-america

Note though that the "public consultation" closed a month ago... anyone hear about that or participate? The media didn't seem to report it existed.

None the less this is still a very important issue. If you were to write Mr. Hamilton what would you say?

I would say "open up trade" but don't effect non US Canadian Borders. One would think all that time in security has to happen at one point.. so why tie up the non us borders? When was the last terror attack in Canada?

Simon Kennedy is another person..

if anyone has comments on who is there to protect Canadian rights as opposed to industry and treasury board representatives would be great to point out who that is.

Lines like this really bother me:

"a security perimeter approach will mean a jointly patrolled outer perimeter under de facto U.S. control. Canada will end up with a U.S.-patrolled external border and a U.S.-controlled internal border."

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ottawa+Washington+border+talks/5063405/story.html#ixzz1RS6h3w3s

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5i4fwzdPdmSZeLQH9oLzM-dh7hhMw?docId=7128557

Clearly months of discussion must have come up with something.

They "have" a majority it is clear they can push through parliament any deal they want (likely).. so is this all about damage control, you think that stalling on this isn't helping businesses.. is it?

So why is this secret? Nothing can move until the fall... so is this two more months of silence... why not gauge public reaction to any measures they have unless it is the deal that was leaked just before it was signed.

? http://www.borderactionplan-plandactionfrontalier.gc.ca/psec-scep/index.aspx

take for instance:

http://www.borderactionplan-plandactionfrontalier.gc.ca/psec-scep/declaration-declaration2.aspx?lang=eng#law

"he mandate of the BBWG will be reviewed after three years."

Still well before the next election, if so.

Things like this "To increase security, counter fraud, and improve efficiency, we intend to work together to establish and verify the identities of travellers and conduct screening at the earliest possible opportunity. We intend to work toward common technical standards for the collection, transmission, and matching of biometrics that enable the sharing of information on travellers in real time. This collaboration should facilitate combined Canadian and United States screening efforts and strengthen methods of threat notification."

Still get me because the US shares information with private companies. They don't have the same privacy laws.

What this would equate is that in order to mandate this they are going to change existing privacy laws. The biometrics sharing also seems to indicate a role out or increase in biometrics standard for identity documents as a standard.

This would mean "data security" something canada doesn't have to prevent identity theft" but you are giving us access to that database. Peoples Identities could be securly switched, and people if using those databases as secure... they will need incredible security levels to prevent abuse. The threshold will be "non duplicable" biometrics.

You are just starting to see this stuff creep up, but you know how it has to play out.

http://www.canadianunderwriter.ca/news/canadian-privacy-lawyer-questions-police-access-to-icbcs-facial-recognition-technology-to-help-ident/1000484803/

These same systems would allow technology to locate anyone.. even if they are law abiding. Us uses this type of technology for assassinations in asia.

As soon as police have those records, under the agreement US police would have those records and be able to deny entry due to 'possible' involvement or presence at the riot. Even though no trial has taken place, US border security could (and might) deny entry for that reason even with the person having no criminal record, simply being present there. Also the police would be able to pass that information back, and be waiting on the other side of the border due to a suspect being found.

This could inconvenience people to say the least if for instance they simply have common appearance (how many asians look alike..)

You may think it strange but this type of "prevention" rather than detection is something that the US already does. Suspicion is enough to deny entry even if it is a completely fabricated context. As soon as you open those up... the gates are open.

Someone looking like you will be enough to deny entry, and potentially have the police waiting when you are released by US customs detention for "looking" like someone.

Technologies like mind reading and biometric replacement exist these days some of the stuff is in out there land but it is all technologically possible and when you talk about Canada's most affluent and powerful people able to be replaced then "seen as secure" because their biometrics match is the wrong way to go. Some biometrics that are most secure need to be kept very safely and NOT shared. Releasing some biometrics for "basic usages" makes sense.. but some biometrics should not be shared, they should be reserved for national security reasons. Likewise not all information the police has should be released, and real time information sharing doesn't insure that certain privileged information isn't shared, it presents much more opportunities for leaks. Like any organization the chance of abuse of information increases with the more people who have access to it. US DHS is huge, bigger than the Canadian military.

I'm not sure if you are familiar with warwick but this stuff is out there.

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2094782_brains_needed_for_mindreading_trial

Edited July 7, 2011 by William Ashley

[Oleg Bach]

We can always kick the Americans out if they get too comfortable...if they refuse to go we can ask their best friend and debt holding trading partner China to invade them on our behalf...China would love that - then they could collect what is owing them AMERICA!

[Topaz]

It is hard to find anything on this topic but if's it secret, both, the US and Canada will try to keep it that way. I did some alittle on the perimeter security and it may help you. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25170

[Oleg Bach]

Heard about this long ago - If there is a supposed disaster or one of then nifty terrorist actions - the USA has long had the right to pour troops over our boarder and assist us with out permit...For God's sake I talked to a former Black Water employee that was working as security for a CITY TV mobile news unit - during the G 20 kafuffle...They are already here..and come and go as they please.

[fellowtraveller]

I don't understand the premise of the OP.

If the talks are secret,how could I follow them? If they are secret, how could you know anything?

Unless..... you are part of the Harper-Obama disinformation conspiracy intending to hide The One World Government Program until the last second.

[William Ashley]

I don't understand the premise of the OP.

If the talks are secret,how could I follow them? If they are secret, how could you know anything?

Unless..... you are part of the Harper-Obama disinformation conspiracy intending to hide The One World Government Program until the last second.

Secrets are only secrets when people don't know about them. Clearly someone must know the secret for it to be secret.

I won't bite. But there are little bits and communications that are either intentional or unintentional leaks or lead ins.

I think you may be going too deep in the discussion to jump right into "The One World Government Program". In order for people not to think it has gone to psychobable you are going to have to explain all the intricate steps, and atleast provide the information so people can not really care about the gradual change.

Going from SPP to JesusIsLife4Me is probably a little much for a discussion on this board.

In part I think it is an important issue but I only check back when I get the feeling to, not on schedule or daily or nothing. Info is out there. I think though that the file is moving REALLY slow, as I'm not sure why the info isn't being worked on or released.

I can only geuss there is a timeline to it. This at the same time there is effectively a media blackout on the middle east right now on CBC. I'm not sure how many other blackouts are going on but SPP is one of them.

It just feels deceitful to get into the water slowly, if it is so bad why do something that would otherwise risk a heart attack. It is just wool put over sheeps eyes.

Edited July 9, 2011 by William Ashley

[fellowtraveller]

Any chance that sheep has blue eyes?