Post news events of freedoms lost
Site Admin
Posts: 7781


Post#1 » Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:59 pm


By Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
March 11, 2008

While Americans are being bombarded with large doses of presidential primary
news coverage, the US entered into an agreement with its northern neighbor
that may have an impact on future internal military action.

In a political move that received little if any attention by the American
news media, the United States and Canada entered into a military agreement
on February 14, 2008, allowing the armed forces from one nation to support
the armed forces of the other nation during a domestic civil emergency, even
one that does not involve a cross-border crisis, according to a police
commander involved in homeland security planning and implementation.

It is an initiative of the Bi-National Planning Group whose final report,
issued in June 2006, called for the creation of a "Comprehensive Defense and
Security Agreement," or a "continental approach" to Canada-US defense and

The law enforcement executive told that the agreement --
defined as a Civil Assistance Plan -- was not submitted to Congress for
debate and approval, nor did Congress pass any law or treaty specifically
authorizing this military agreement to combine the operations of the armed
forces of the United States and Canada in the event of domestic civil
disturbances ranging from violent storms, to health epidemics, to civil
riots or terrorist attacks.

"This is a military plan that's designed to bypass the Posse Comitatus Act
that traditionally prohibited the US military from operating within the
borders of the United States. Not only will American soldiers be deployed at
the discretion of whomever is sitting in the Oval Office, but foreign
soldiers will also be deployed in American cities," warns Lt. Steven
Rodgers, commander of the Nutley, NJ Police Department's detective bureau.

In Canada the agreement paving the way for the militaries of the US and
Canada to cross each other's borders to fight domestic emergencies was not
announced either by Prime Minister Harper's administration or the Canadian
military. The agreement met with protests and demonstrations by Canadians
opposed to such treaties with the US.

"It's kind of a trend when it comes to issues of Canada-US relations and
contentious issues like military integration," claims Stuart Trew, a
researcher with the Council of Canadians.

"We see that this government is reluctant to disclose information to
Canadians that is readily available on American and Mexican websites," he
said in a press statement.

The military Civil Assistance Plan is seen by critics as a further
incremental step toward creating a North American armed forces available to
be deployed in domestic North American emergency situations. According to
the NORTHCOM press release, the plan "allows the military from one nation to
support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency."

The agreement was signed at US Army North headquarters, Fort Sam Houston,
Texas, by US Air Force General Gene Renuart, commander of NORAD and US
Northern Command, or USNORTHCOM, and by Canadian Air Force Lt. General Marc
Dumais, commander of Canada Command.

"This document is a unique, bilateral military plan to align our respective
national military plans to respond quickly to the other nation's requests
for military support of civil authorities," Renuart said in a statement
published on the USNORTHCOM website.

Lt. Gen. Dumais seconded Renuart's sentiments, stating, "The signing of this
plan is an important symbol of the already strong working relationship
between Canada Command and U.S. Northern Command."

"Our commands were created by our respective governments to respond to the
defense and security challenges of the twenty-first century," he stressed,
"and we both realize that these and other challenges are best met through
cooperation between friends."

"It's hard to believe that Americans and Canadians will go along with this
agreement," opines conservative strategist Michael Baker.

"That's why [there's] all this secrecy. Has anyone heard Clinton, Obama or
McCain complain about this significant policy shift? All three of these
presidential hopefuls are in the US Senate, yet not a peep from them about a
foreign army being called to 'police' US neighborhoods under the guise of an
'emergency,'" he said.

The statement on the USNORTHCOM website emphasized that the plan recognizes
the role of each nation's lead federal agency for emergency preparedness,
which in the United States is the Department of Homeland Security and in
Canada is Public Safety Canada.

The US Northern Command was established on October 1, 2002, as a military
command tasked with anticipating and conducting homeland defense and civil
support operations where US armed forces are used in domestic emergencies.

Meanwhile, the Canada Command was established on February 1, 2006, to focus
on domestic operations and offer a single point of contact for all domestic
and continental defense and securities partners.

In May 2007, President Bush took it upon himself to sign the National
Security Presidential Directive 51 which is also known as Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 20, authorizing the president to declare a national
emergency and take over all functions of federal, state, local, territorial
and tribal governments, without necessarily obtaining the approval of
Congress to do so.

While Americans are being kept in the dark about this treaty, Canadian
citizens are being totally ignored by their government. The extent of
military integration called for by the BNP is unprecedented and has received
absolutely no public debate in the House of Commons. If they wish to read
about the details of this military agreement, Canadians must go to the
Northern Command website to see any evidence of the new agreement.

"Once the Canadian people discover they can be [legally invaded] by US
troops, they will take to the streets and protest and use the very effective
weapon of civil disobedience. Canadians will not stand for occupation by a
foreign army same as Americans won't," said conservative columnist and
commentator Rachel Marsden.

"I'm surprised that the Canadian people haven't already displayed their
opposition to such a treaty. Economics is one thing, but military use of
force is quite another. We have our own police, security and military
forces, thank you. We don't been Americans coming into Canada with weapons,"
she said. "And Americans don't need Canadian soldiers.

© 2008 NWV - All Rights Reserved

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests