Security vs safety
Date: Thursday, April 07 2005
Topic: Eye on Uncle Sam
Security vs safety
New "security perimeter" will not protect Canada from US domination, depredations.
Dateline: Monday, March 28, 2005
by John McMurtry
The North American Summit has come and gone, but the deep questions remain unasked. The relentlessly pushed "big idea" of continental integration of economies, defence, and borders under effective US control has been dutifully excluded even in international press conferences with heads of state from the US, Canada and Mexico. Repeated reports and demands for the "big idea" have been rising to crescendo for a year, but who makes the historical connections?
Remember the last time a "security perimeter" was big news? It was the name of the wall built around central Quebec City in 2001 for the transnational corporate trade negotiations of the "Summit of the Americas." The cause was to "protect security" of national sovereignties, including Canada's. Not much has changed except the size and permanence of the fence being planned -- this time around North America.
The pretext for this grandiose paranoia of a continental "security perimeter" is the same as we have heard for years now: "The whole world has changed since 9/11." Before you go along with this story, you might read David Ray Griffin's The New Pearl Harbour and Nafeez Ahmed's Behind the War on Terror for rich documentation of the Bush Jr. Administration's many steps in ensuring that America was not secure against the 9/11 attack -- that conveniently saved the stolen-election presidency from the lowest polls in post-election history.
Beware the false assumption that Canada's security and economic well-being will be served, rather than threatened, by integrating with the US.
The Project for a New American Century (PNAC), written by the top members and advisors of the Bush Jr. administration a year before 9/11, explains the ruling group-mind at work. It presciently called for "full spectrum US dominance" across the world by "some catastrophic and catalysing event -- like a new Pearl Harbour."
The devil is in the false assumption that Canada's security and economic well-being will be served, rather than threatened, by integrating with the US as it becomes more internationally lawless. This administration has already opposed or sabotaged laws to protect individuals and peoples from nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, landmines, small arms, international ballistic missiles, torture, racism, sexism, child abuse, arbitrary seizure and imprisonment, crimes against humanity and war crimes, military weather distortions, biodiversity loss, and international climate destabilisation.
It has also perpetrated (for the first time since 1945) the "supreme crime" under international law of belligerent armed invasion and occupation of other countries. So how can Canada be made more secure by continued collaboration with this regime's stated project -- to control our country as well as the rest of the world for its "full-spectrum dominance"?
The same reason has been offered for decades: there is only one interest group that counts; and that transnational corporations must have free access to US, Canadian and Mexican markets, resources, and assets with no interference by public policies, laws or national borders. Such a situation was necessary for the US-Canada coalition, which brought us the FTA and NAFTA against the majority of citizens' votes, and most recently advocated in complicity with the US's illegal weaponization of space.
There is no other interest determining results, but always other sales lines and promises: once upon a time it was "jobs, jobs, jobs," and now it is "our common security against terrorism." The promises never pan out, but the escalated foreign corporate takeover of domestic economies always does. And this pervading occupation threatens what gives Canadians their real security -- their social programs and their independence -- which the US-Canada coalition perpetually demands they sacrifice for the sake of integration. Don't take my word for it. Watch what they always do.
When former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister John Manley (who authored the latest report for the "think big" sellout), says things like "we are in a common North American community" and that North America is "indivisible," you would have to be asleep not to see the program. "Deep integration" handcuffs Canada just as the country begins to take an independent stand against the greatest threat to world security in half a century.
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on April 7, 2005]