North American Union & Canada
74Not too many people in Canada, the US or Mexico know very much about the North American Union simply because it seems like it is being kept out of the media. But the implications for our three countries are dreadful. It threatens the sovereignty of our countries. To me as a Canadian the North American Union seems like a continuation of American Manifest Destiny which led to the war of 1812.
Here in this video Lou Dobbs speaks about the Orwellian brave new world of the North American Union.
In this video you will see that on November 20, 2007 the speaker of the Manitoba legislature said that Manitoba is taking a major role in the developement of a mid continent trade corridor called the North American SuperCoridor Coalition (NASCO). You will also see both Harper and Bush deny the existence of the North American SuperCoridor Coalition (NASCO) at the Security and Prosperity Partnership Summit on Aug. 21, 2007 at Montebello, Quebec. The province of Manitoba, the city of Winnipeg and the Winnipeg Airport Authority are members of the North American SuperCoridor Coalition (NASCO).
Canada: "The Nation's Deathbed"
Police accused of attempting to incite violence amongst the protestors at the Security and Prosperity Partnership Summit on Aug. 21, 2007 at Montebello, Quebec, Canada.
 | Amazon Price: $15.18 List Price: $35.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $15.01 List Price: $29.95 |
 | Living with Uncle: Canada-US Relations in an Age of Empire (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives) Amazon Price: $24.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $1.95 List Price: $2.00 |
Snap Election
On Sunday, September 7, 2008 Stephen Harper the Conservative Prime Minister of Canada, with a minority government, called a snap election to be held on Oct 14, 2008. Earlier in 2008 Harper had a bill pass, with the approval of the opposition that prevented a political party from calling a snap election before the four year term is up (with wiggle room). Harper presented this bill to the House of Commons himself. So for Harper to be calling a snap election now he must think it is either now or never. Harper would not be able to force the North American Union on Canada without a majority government.
Implications of the North American Union
If the North American Union is forced upon us it will threaten the sovergty of our three countries. The US administration will have more access to Canadian natural resources. Mexicans will be streaming over the Rio Grand, legally. Both McCain and Palin made threats towards both Iran and Russia during their acceptance speaches. If they are elected in November and make war on Iran and Russia they will need to empose a military draft. If the North American Union is forced on us both Mexicans and Canadians will be subject to a US military draft. But in this forum thread while talking about the North American Union AWCheney says "The sad fact is that both the Republican AND Democratic leadership of our country (meaning, of course, that I am in the U.S.) have been complicit in this." http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/7640
A solution to prevent the North American Union
Seeing "both the Republican AND Democratic leadership", as AWCheney says, have been complicit in the North American Union, a way to avoid the North American Union is to prevent a Canadian majority government on October 14, 2008. Canada does not need an American puppet with a majority government in Ottawa.
The New Democratic Party of Canada is concerned about Canadian sovereignty http://www.ndp.ca/platform/otherpriorities/thenorth
The Green Party of Canada does not endorse the Security and Prosperity Partnership or the North American Union. http://www.greenparty.ca/en/policy/documents/deeper_look_spp
The Green Party of Canada also has a petition for Canadians to sign opposing both the Security and Prosperity Partnership and the North American Union that will be sent to Harper, Bush and Calderon. https://secure.greenparty.ca/spp.php
For the last 3 weeks I have been trying to find out what the Liberal Party of Canada's stance is regarding the North American Union. They keep telling me they will get back to me. I will edit this if and when I receive an answer.
So if you are voting in the Canadian election on October 14th you may want to take on Danny William's ABC policy, Anything But Conservative. Vote strategically so the Conservatives don't take the riding you vote in.
Edit Oct. 12 2008 - For over a month I have been trying to find out what the Liberal Party of Canada's stance is regarding the North American Union, without a definate answer. So today I visited the Liberal riding office but was told they'd have to contact the Liberal head office. I'd said I'd wait while he phoned the head office but again I was told that someone would get back to me by tonight. I will post again tomorrow whether or not I get an answer tonight.
I have no doubt that a Harper majority government would force the North American Union on Canadians after watching this video with Harper's talk at the Council of Foreign Relations http://www.cfr.org/publication/14255/conversation_with_stephen_harper_video.html
But even with a minority Harper governament the North American Union may still be forced on Canadians if some Liberals vote to pass it. I say this because John Manley, who held several senior portfolios in the Canadian Liberal government was a member of the Council of Foreign Relations Task Force that released the report "Building a North American Community".
Quotes from this web site http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2008/apr08/08-04-16.html "The Council on Foreign Relations published a major report on May 17, 2005, only two months after the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) was announced by President Bush, Mexico's Vicente Fox, and Canada's Paul Martin in Waco on March 23, 2005." and "The CFR report explains that the three SPP amigos at Waco "committed their governments" to "Building a North American Community" by 2010 with a common "outer security perimeter," "the extension of full labor mobility to Mexico," allowing Mexican trucks "unlimited access," "totalization" of illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, and "a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution."
So it seems like the former Liberals Paul Martin and John Manley both endorse the North American Union. And from these two recent new releases both "Liberal continentalist Anne McLellan" and Raymond Chrétien also endorse the NAU.
October 1, 2008 - Our Sovereignty Secretly at Risk Biggest voter issue off media's radar? Canada's stealthy 'integration' with US. Quote "Author Silver Donald Cameron says of the "Security and Prosperity Partnership": "The SPP is the new name for the old American project of Manifest Destiny -- absolute control over the whole continent."
October 04, 2008 - Canada will be Lost if you Vote for the Tories: Prime Minister Harper officially endorses North American Union. Quote - "A terrorist is broadly defined by the architects of the North American Union, as any individual or group which opposes the New World Order agenda."
So if the Liberals also endorse the North American Union then that just leaves the New Democratic Party of Canada and the Green Party of Canada that are Canadian national parties that are concerned about Canadian sovereignty. I will edit this tomorrow whether I get a reply from the Liberals or not.
Edit Oct. 13 2008 - Last night while I was at a family Thanksgiving dinner I received a phone call from the Liberal Party. I think the girl's name was Vickie Martinez that left this message, "There is no plan in the Liberal Party to implement the NAU. And there is no intention in Mr. Dion endorsing the North American Union. There is a commitment to ensure Canadian integrity, autonomy and Canadian interests are protected. So there's no plan to amalgamate currencies, borders, security or any economic integration. Canada will remain independent and autonomous 100 percent. So that is the position of the Liberal Party. Mr. Dion will not implement the NAU."
That is good news and something to be thankful for. It looks like the only way the North American Union will be forced on Canada is with a Harper Conservative majority government. So tomorrow on election day an ABC policy, Anything But Conservative is still the best way to go if you are concerned with Canadian sovereignty.
Edit Oct. 15 2008 - Well Harper's Conservatives got another minority government yesterday. So that should stop the North American Union for another term.
Edit June 2011 - Harper's Conservatives got their majority government as of May 4, 2011 which I am not looking forward to. You might want to follow what Harper's government does in the next four year from http://www.vivelecanada.ca/
Feel free to comment below or at my forum.
 | Amazon Price: $0.14 List Price: $15.00 |
 | Amazon Price: $2.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $4.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $17.92 List Price: $25.00 |
CommentsLoading...
Sorry Mike - Duplicate.
Hi Sufidreamer. Yeah I think there would be a lot of not very happy people if Harper had have won a majority and sprung it on us. We'll have to keep an eye on this in the future.
Mike
CWB just published an article about NWO, or whatever else it is called. This does very much suck. I always continually "worry" about too much power going to one place, soo...
How do you get so much information? You are like a sponge. :)
You got that right Sandra. The North American Union would "suck" for people in all 3 countries, the US, Canada and Mexico. We need to prevent it.
I guess I just don't have anything better to do with my time. :-)
Besides someone has to inform people about these things that are being avoided by our main stream media.
Learn something new everyday. Thanks.
Thanks for all the special links. Very informative!
Hey, any time RKHenrey. We need to share our information in this age of dis-information or the 'party line' information. I'm not saying Republican or Democrat in the U.S. or Conservative or Liberal here in Canada cause I think the main parties are so close they have the same objective. We need to look for alternatives, not the status quo.
David Orchard is my kind of alternative here in Canada. He'd be the Canadian Prime Minister right now if he hadn't gotten double crossed by Peter McKay at the Conservative convention a couple of years ago. Imagine me, voting for a Conservative, I would have if David Orchard had have won the Conservative leadership. His main idea was to repeal NAFTA. Check out what he says on this page, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&
My kind of guy. I'm Canadian first, so Canadian sovereignty is big on my list.
Mike
Sovereignty is already threatened as the big international banks cannot be nationalized. They want their hedge fund bondholders to remain protected and that is that! But this North American union would be one more weakening of Us sovereignty. What a dark hour we are in.
You got that right bgamail, a dark hour. Harper won't be able to force the NAU on us with a minority, unless some of the Liberals accept it. I doubt that will happen. We need to give Harper the boot next time around.
The Canadian banks are fairly strong, I've heard them described as the strongest in the world. They have been well regulated. I don't think they held a lot of hedge funds or derivatives.
We are seeing jobs lost here too though. If it wasn't for NAFTA I think Canada would be doing well. Canadian manufacturing and other sectors took a hit with NAFTA. Globalization sucks.
Mike
another excellent article
Come on Mike, the War of 1812 was between the British and the Americans over who won the Revolutionary War. The Brits said they let us go and we said we won. Now if you want to talk about Manifest Destiny the Mexican-American war would be more apt.
The real fight is not between parties and political affiliation. It's between people who believe that government control is the best way to ensure the good life and those who believe that liberty is a person's natural right. That's what the fight over the North American Union is, tyranny or liberty.
Sorry pal, your wrong. The question of US expansionism was clearly a part of it.
"Manifest Destiny is the historical belief that the United States is destined, even divinely ordained to expand across the North American continent, from the Atlantic seaboard to the Pacific Ocean. Sometimes Manifest Destiny was interpreted so widely as to include the eventual absorption of all North America: Canada, Mexico, Cuba and Central America."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny
I don't know about in the US but the difference between parties in Canada would clearly make a difference regarding the North American Union. Canadians wouldn't want the NAU, most US citizens wouldn't and I doubt if Mexicans would either.
The US and UK were fighting over Canada since Benedict Arnold's failed campaign to take it prior to his victory at Saratoga. The fighting only stopped after the US and UK agreed to divide the Oregon Territory in the 1840's I believe. The Mexican American and Spanish-American wars are much more concrete examples of Manifest Destiny, although they were checked in regards to Cuba by the treaty that gave Cuba independence from Spain and the US both. And yes, it's true that many wanted to absorb all of Mexico as part of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, but that wouldn't have passed muster in Congress either.
I still maintain that Manifest Destiny really didn't get it's start until after the Era of Good Feelings ended after the Missouri Compromise of 1820.
I could also mention that part of the Grand Strategy of Britain was to incite the Indians to attack white settlements and form an Indian Nation to stop the westward migration of the US. So you're hands aren't lily white in all this either.
Don't get me wrong, I'm totally against the NAU. We're losing our traditional rights at a furious clip now, that will only accelerate under the NAU. But that won't stop the collectivists in any of our nations.
Well ledefensetech you kind of contradict yourself when you say "The US and UK were fighting over Canada since Benedict Arnold's failed campaign to take it prior to his victory at Saratoga." Saratoga was in 1777, 35 years prior to the war of 1812. Anyway I'm glad you are totally against the NAU too.
Arnold attempted to take Canada after Saratoga. It failed. That was one of the precipitating causes of the War of 1812. Most of the former colonists saw Canada as the 14th colony which could have become a state in the new US had Arnold not failed. In fact his failure at Canada was one of the things that prompted him to turn his coat.
Oh I don't know about that failed attempt by Arnold then. No offense, but I'm glad he failed. :-)
It's a moot point anyway. We're all of us, British, Canadian, American, Australian; cousins. It just goes to show how stupid people can get over the nationalism thing.
We can still be cousins without the North American Union. Call me stupid but I don't want nothing to do with it. I'm sure most Canadians would agree. If they even knew about it. That's part of the problem too, they are trying to keep it a secret.
Make Money -
I have two comments.
First: I'm totally against the NAU. I look at it this way:
Any such "union" would be another step towards a "one world government", which is a sickening thought.
Second: ledefensetech is correct regarding the War of 1812. It wasn't like "Manifest Destiny" in which Western lands were purchased or annexed with the result of Americans settling the Western lands. The War of 1812 had to do with getting British military (and its violence) out of the United States of America.
Here's a music video of Johnny Horton's recording of the Battle of New Orleans (1814) during the War of 1812 (1812-1815), under the leadership of "Old Hickory" (or "Old Hitcreek"), Colonel Andrew Jackson (subsequently 7th US President), a battle in which the British military was driven out of the USA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxB42cjHTGg
When you think about it, Canadians and Americans have a lot more similarities than not, and we have been military allies. Those of us who speak English around the world and as a first language ARE "related" in a sense.
For a couple more music videos on subjects that touch on American history, view the following hub, which is dedicated to another Canadian hubber, his family and to all the other brave souls who live closer to the North Pole:
http://hubpages.com/hub/American-History-in-Music-
Let me know what you think of that hub by way of the comment section.
Yes Tina the people of Canada and the US have a lot more similarities than not. I agree with you that the NAU would not be good for the people of all three countries. It does reek of another step towards a "one world government" doesn't it, which is a sickening thought in my eyes as well.
Yeah I know Johnny Horton's recording of the Battle of New Orleans word for word. But Mr. Horton was wrong. The Battle of New Orleans took place on January 8, 1815 (not in 1814). In fact the battle should not have even been fought because the Treaty of Ghent, ending the War of 1812 had been signed on 24 December 1814, 15 days before the battle. It's said that the US lost 13 men while the British side lost a few hundred with over 2,000 casualties, mostly Scottish Highlanders. Which brings me to a side note.
While the British were fighting the Napoleonic War in Europe the US invaded Canada in 1812, which basically gives credence to the historians that claim the war was an extension of Manifest Destiny. Anyways lets forget that for a bit. While Scottish Highlanders were fighting and winning the Napoleonic War and then shipped to North America to fight the War of 1812 for the British their families were being kicked off their land back in Scotland by the British. It was a period in Scottish history called the Highland Clearances which carried on for quite some time. Historians have drawn a connection between the Highland Clearances and how the natives were treated in North America, as if the Highland Clearances was the first dry run.
Historians have said that the 15 days between the signing of the Treaty of Ghent and the Battle of New Orleans was not enough time to inform the British in North America that the war was over before the battle. But with the Highland Clearances going on back home in Scotland you'd certainly have to question the idiotic assault threw swamps on New Orleans with the disastrous outcome of so many Highlanders. As a person of Highland extraction I have to question the British objective with the assault threw the swamps considering the Highland Clearances were happening back in Scotland.
Yeah each side writes their own history after a war. I have had a person from the US try to tell me that the US invaded Canada because the British burnt down the White House. But Washington wasn't sacked and the White House wasn't burnt by the British until August 24, 1814, two years after the war started. And it was in retaliation of US troops sacking York (now Toronto) and burning the Parliament Buildings of Upper Canada to the ground.
Some say the US invaded Canada because the British were selling guns to the natives that hampered the expansion west. While others say it was US Manifest Destiny. We tend to believe the historians from our own respective countries. It's been over for a long time though. :-)
I will read your Hub Tina. I enjoy reading about history and consider myself a bit of a history buff.
Hi, Mike!
I responded to your reply on both my Johnny Horton hub and on this one:
http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Golden-Light-Guardian-
Now...down to the business at hand! (hee, hee)....
Battle of New Orleans: You're correct that it took place in Jan. 1815 but, however, the troops were with Jackson in 1814 and they did not receive word of the so-called "peace treaty" of Ghent (Jan. 1815) until Feb. 1815. In the meantime, they defeated an INVADING British Army intent on seizing New Orleans and the vast territory America had acquired with the Louisiana Purchase. See, and as you know, they didn't have telephones and the Internet then (hee, hee), so news traveled very slowly. In any case, the point is, the English caused lots of trouble for the Americans and Horton was correct on "in 1814", taking "a little trip" with Jackson because that's when they were under his command prior to and during the Battle of New Orleans. And by the way, we have written documents regarding what took place between late 1814 and Jan. 1815 so, we KNOW what happened.
It's really (sincerely) terrible that the Scots lost so many lives during the Battle of New Orleans but...long, long before 1814-15 they had decided to become members of the Church of England and thus, they gave up Catholicism. Of course, if they hadn't joined the secular "Church" of England, they would have been slaughtered by the English. It's no secret what the English did to the Scots (and to the Welsh (somewhat) and especially to the Irish--in Ireland and for centuries, just because they were Catholics). The English did the same thing to the American Colonists, and to the Hindu in India. The English invaded other lands and other countries and oppressed them.
By the way, the Scots, the Welsh and the Irish (in Ireland) are cousin tribes. It's the English that are the odd tribe out (so to speak).
Now...advancing forward in time, the USA is allied with Great Britain, of course, and English common law (which we "inherited") is the best, hands down. Also, the English language is the best of all languages (I was told this by a Frenchman who spoke 7 European languages; he explained why; and as a result, I'm very glad that English is my first language). And so, there ARE at least a couple of very good points to the US Colonies having been established by the English but, their oppression of others is infamous and it is a huge black mark on their historic reputation.
What's more, aside from my Welsh ancestry (by which I received my last name), I'm mostly of Irish ancestry (from Ireland) and I have no English line. Both grandmothers had been solid Catholic Irish: my paternal grandmother had been from Dublin, and the father of my maternal grandmother had been from Cork. Her mother, et al, was solid Catholic Irish-American going back to Colonial America and before the American Revolution.
Regarding the US invasion of Canada in 1812:
First off, at THAT time Canada was English territory, not "Canadian territory". Canada was under the solid rule of the English monarchy. Therefore, when discussing and debating, we MUST keep in mind the time line and who owned what and when they owned it. For today's Canadians to be upset about a time period when they were solidly dominated by the English monarchy is, well...silly. Also, it must be understood that the English (in England and in Canada) and the Americans were mostly Protestants and therefore, conflicts during particular times had been Protestant-against-Protestant conflicts. So...so much for Protestantism.
Now, Manifest Destiny is considered by Americans--for the most part--as the Westward Movement into lands we acquired or annexed and it has nothing to do with the US fighting the English on THEIR Canadian land (NOT land that was owned by Canadians but instead, land that was owned by the English).
Today, of course, Canada is Canadian and the USA is American. Speaking strictly for myself as an American, I'm very glad that Canadian Canada is our solid northern border. We are having massive problems with our southern border and, if the situation continues getting worse here, I might consider retiring to Canada. Maybe the so-called "global warming" WILL finally happen but, we haven't seen any of it in the Northeastern USA, of sure.
Thanks for your thoughts, Mike, for I feel that sharing them is one of the ways for those of us in the northern parts of the Western Hemisphere to understand and to appreciate one another.
My morning prayers go out for you, your loved ones and all the Catholics around you there in Canada!
Oh Tina I didn't say that I was upset about the war of 1812. I did say "It's been over for a long time though. :-)" And that "We tend to believe the historians from our own respective countries."
You say "long, long before 1814-15 they had decided to become members of the Church of England and thus, they gave up Catholicism." Well that's not entirely true cause most of the Scottish Highlanders were still Catholic when the Highland Clearances started. Also it wasn't the Church of England but John Knox's Presbyterian reformation torch that ravaged Scottish Catholic families. I've read that only one Catholic Church in Scotland survived his torch, St. Mongo's in Glasgow. There was a systematic attempt to clear Scotland of not just Catholicism but also the Gaelic language. That is what led my ancestors to migrate first to the Mohawk Valley and then to Upper Canada by way of Montreal during the American Revolution. Not that my ancestors were loyal to the British Crown but more that it was a safer place to go to try to avoid what basically was a war between two Germanic forces. Upper Canada wasn't settled much at that time so my ancestors went on to build what is known as the first Catholic Church in Upper Canada, St. Raphael's. It's all a fairly big history that couldn't properly be told in a Hub.
We've kind of gotten a little side tracked from the topic of this Hub. Like I say I like history. :-) Canada has mostly been about 45% Catholic so you'd probably feel comfortable if you decide to retire here.
Thank you for your prayers. Believe it or not I mention my new friend Tina in my morning prayers now also. :-)
Hi, Mike....
Thanks for prayers in return. I sure can use as many as are offered. And thanks for the demographic information. I didn't know Canada is 45% Catholic, which is very reassuring should I decide to retire there. My main concern is being able to receive the Eucharist.
It would be great if you decide to write a hub on the history of the establishment of St. Raphael. I'd like to know more about it.
I didn't mean to imply that YOU were/are upset. I apologize for not saying so. Actually, the point I was trying to make is the timeline. When the timeline is kept in mind, historic facts cannot be twisted into fiction. And where history is silent, fabrications cannot serve as "history". Frankly, nationalistic historians can't bend historic facts into fictions either, and their commentary is not history; it's opinion on "whatever" subject.
Yes...the Presbyterians did THAT to the Scots on top of it. Knox was one of many nuts. He had been a wicked rabble-rouser and caused a lot more problems and deaths than would have occurred without his garbage. And let's not forget to give "credit" to Henry VIII, the mass murderer...and the first "head" of HIS "Church" of England, and who set into motion the Protestant mess in England. It was all about "Henry", as far as HE was concerned, and he was as big a nut as Knox, if not bigger because he had been a ruling, murderous dictator. Between Henry VIII and his "successors", 54,000 Catholic English had been executed (mainly decapitated), to include Saint Sir Thomas More, because they refused to join Henry's "church". The 54,000 are Catholic-English martyrs.
Protestant "reform" (revolt) had no resemblance to Christ and as the Venerable John Cardinal Newman (an English convert from Protestantism to Catholicism) said:
"To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."
Thanks for the great reply!
Speaking of Saint Thomas More; there's a township to the west of the city I live in that is fairly Protestant. One of the villages in the township still boasts on a plaque in their town hall that they burnt out the original Catholic settlers of that township. A couple of years ago the Pope said that the Latin Mass should be offered to every Catholic that wants to attend it. Well in another village in that same township there is a little Catholic Church where the Latin Mass is offered on the first Sunday of each month. It's like going back in time when I attend Mass there. There's not many Protestant/Catholic problems around here anymore but I find it kind of ironic that the name of that little Catholic Church is called Saint Thomas More's.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/exposing-world-governm
United We Fall, a documentary by Canadians, Bryan Law and Dan Dicks, breaks down the North American Union and how “free trade” agreements between the United States, Canada, and Mexico are impoverishing people and stripping away national sovereignty.
The North American Union is often dismissed by the corporate media and academics as a baseless conspiracy theory. United We Fall documents in detail its existence and beginnings under the direction of the renowned globalist David Rockefeller in the mid-60s with the establishment of the Council of the Americas.
The documentary covers the establishment of the European Union, the creation of the euro, and the concept of a world monetary system under the control of central bankers. The Federal Reserve system is explored. “This whole New World Order ideation is a bunch of banking and intellectual elites that basically see the same sort of mentality. Control of the economy, control of the issuance of currency, you control the nation,” explains medical doctor and neuroscientist Andrew Moulde in the film.
Law and Dick counterpoint the engineers and apologists for a North American Union — who routinely discount the “conspiracy” of any such union — with informed critics who spell out in chilling detail how the elite are methodically working to foist their dream of world government on the people of the planet. United We Fall also covers the secretive Bilderbergers — consisting of presidents, prime ministers, international bankers — and their ongoing plot to establish world government.
Interviews featured in the film include Robert Pastor (Council on Foreign Relations), Allan Gotlieb (Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg) Herbert Grubel (Creator of the “Amero”) Luke Rudkowski (We Are Change) Dan Dicks (Press For Truth) Vijay Sarma (Political Activist, Independent Journalist) Dr. Andrew Moulden (Canadian Action Party) Richard Syrett (Talk Radio Host)
Thank you very much M. Btok. That is an excellent production. Everyone should watch it. It's not surprising that Rockefeller had something to do with the beginning of it. In my opinion we need less globalization, not more with a North American Union. In what way has the average person in all three countries benefited from NAFTA. In no way. NAFTA has made monopolies in just about all business sectors. A Canadian in this video summed it up pretty good by saying, "I love our neighbours to the south and I'd love for them to remain our neighbours to the south." For those that want to watch this 12 part video series but do not want to subscribe at the link that M. Btok posted you can watch it from the link below or just do a search at Youtube for 'United We Fall Part 1 of 12'.
Actually M. Btok I wouldn't even bother going to the 'Prison Planet' or the 'Info Wars' web sites anymore if I were you. It's all over the internet that Alex Jones is spreading dis-information and is a zionist shill. That goes for the leaders of the 'We Are Change' movement and web sites too. But thanks for directing us to the 'United We Fall' video series though.
There is not a single Canadian that I know who would stand for this. There would be an influx of Canadians starting undergroung para military groups to stand up and fight this evil union which will be the start of the New world Order. We need to spread the word,
Thanks for this insightful post
That's right Thomas. What I fear the most is a Conservative majority cause I think Harper would try to force the North American Union on us like Mulroney force NAFTA on us. Last week (Sept. 26, 2010) I think those NDP that flip flopped on the gun registration played into Harper's hands. Now Harper is saying he will make the gun registration part of his next election campaign. Most Canadians know the gun registration is just a waste of money, it doesn't stop crime at all. Now it's almost guaranteed that those ridings where the NDP flip flopped will go Conservative in the next election. Not good at all.
The North American Union is HERE! Read all about it:
http://www.canada.com/business/Harper+Obama+agree+
...and here's an old quote from wikipedia: "government officials from all three nations say there are no plans to create such a union and no agreement to do so has been signed."
Thanks Randy. Harper has to go. The Canadians that know about the North American Union do not want anything at all to do with it. Why would we want to be saddled with US dept or be part of that gun toting society. No thanks. It's no good for the average citizen of all three countries anyway.
Harper is making the deal that Randy posted without permission from the Canadian public and without approval from Parliament while he has a minority government. Here's a petition that every concerned Canadian should sign.
Sufidreamer Level 1 Commenter 3 years ago
Nice that you all defeated that bill, Mike. The Brits see Canadians as brothers and it would be a shame to see your sovereignty threated! You won the battle, now for the war.