Harper and Obama eye sweeping change in border security

[harvey007]

Source: The Globe and Mail

Stephen Harper and Barack Obama will meet on Friday to set in motion the most sweeping changes to the Canada-U.S. border since the 1988 free-trade agreement.

According to information obtained by The Globe and Mail, the Prime Minister and the U.S. President will order a working group of senior bureaucrats to finalize within a few months agreements that would transform the 49th parallel through co-operative arrangements on trade, security and management of the boundary line.

Read more: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-and-obama-eye-sweeping-change-in-border-security/article1891143/

[Botany]

1. The old security system worked why change now

[Demeter]

3. Because it worked

Can't have that--wouldn't be prudent. Too many people were able to live normal lives and conduct international relations without government interference.

And besides, the crooks and spies were getting caught....

[peacetalksforall]

2. Under the mask of security it appears the ruling elite are advancing the

Bilderberg plan for one world domination.

This is a step in getting their North American Union.

Think EU for North America. Another union in So America, Central, Caribbean/Bahamas and eventually the Western Hemisphere - one third of the Tri-Lateral one world.

[grasswire]

4. yep -- hemispherism in time for POTUS Jeb Bush

That has been the dream of the Bush clan. One America under Jeb.

[pampango]

5. A little NAU conspiracy from the left (the right has been beating this horse for decades).

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

"...its true aim was to expand NAFTA into a North American Union analogous to the European Union (EU), with open borders and a common currency among other features, was being made by the fall of 2006, when conservative commentators Phyllis Schlafly, Jerome Corsi and Howard Phillips started a website dedicated to quashing what they perceived as the coming North American "Socialist mega-state."<9>

The belief that a North American Union was being planned and implemented in secret became widespread, so much so that the NAU was a topic of debate during the 2008 American presidential campaigns and the subject of various U.S. Congressional resolutions<21><22> designed to thwart its implementation. Prominent critics such as CNN’s Lou Dobbs<23> and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul<24> denounced the concept, joined by left-wing groups in Canada,<25> Internet blogs, and widely viewed videos and films such as "Zeitgeist". Corsi’s 2007 book "The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada" also helped bring the NAU discussion into the mainstream. Others who dismiss these beliefs maintain they are the latest example of a long line of erroneous conspiracy theories which suggest that the United States’ sovereignty is being eroded by a secret cabal of foreign and domestic players.<5><9>"

Wasn't the John Birch Society the first to come up with opposition to the NAU as main principle? Long before NAFTA or any other trade agreement.

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

"The society is against "one world government", and has an immigration reduction view on immigration reform. It opposes the United Nations, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and other free trade agreements. The society argues that there is a devaluing of the U.S. Constitution in favor of political and economic globalization, and that this trend is not an accident. It cites the existence of the Security and Prosperity Partnership as evidence of a push towards a North American Union.<13> Stuart A. Wright has said, their political racism however was no different from both Republicans and Democrat politicians of the time.<14>"

I always wonder about the fear that North America would become like Europe with its EU. As far as I can tell the EU does a pretty good job of promoting social democracies with progressive governments.

[greiner3]

6. I still say;

54' 50" or fight.

That would give us control of about 90% of Canada's population. Then we would not need no stinking trade, security or management of the boundary line.


U.S.A., U.S.A., we're no. 1.