Home > Is the Annexation of Canada part of Bush’s Military Agenda?

Is the Annexation of Canada part of Bush’s Military Agenda?

by Open-Publishing - Friday 26 November 2004
39 comments

Edito Canada-Québec


by Michel Chossudovsky

Introduction

For nearly two years now, Ottawa has been quietly negotiating a far-reaching
military cooperation agreement, which allows the US Military to cross the border
and deploy troops anywhere in Canada, in our provinces, as well station American
warships in Canadian territorial waters. This redesign of Canada’s defense system
is being discussed behind closed doors, not in Canada, but at the Peterson Air
Force base in Colorado, at the headquarters of US Northern Command (NORTHCOM).

The creation of NORTHCOM announced in April 2002, constitutes a blatant violation
of both Canadian and Mexican territorial sovereignty. Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld announced unilaterally that US Northern Command would have jurisdiction
over the entire North American region. Canada and Mexico were presented with
a fait accompli. US Northern Command’s jurisdiction as outlined by the US DoD
includes, in addition to the continental US, all of Canada, Mexico, as well as
portions of the Caribbean, contiguous waters in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans
up to 500 miles off the Mexican, US and Canadian coastlines as well as the Canadian Arctic.

NorthCom’s stated mandate is to "provide a necessary focus for [continental] aerospace, land and sea defenses, and critical support for [the] nation’s civil authorities in times of national need."

(Canada-US Relations - Defense Partnership - July 2003, Canadian American Strategic Review (CASR),
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/ft-lagasse1.htm

Rumsfeld is said to have boasted that "the NORTHCOM - with all of North America as its geographic command - ’is part of the greatest transformation of the Unified Command Plan [UCP] since its inception in 1947.’" (Ibid)

Following Prime Minister Jean Chrétien’s refusal to join NORTHCOM, a high-level so-called "consultative" Binational Planning Group (BPG), operating out of the Peterson Airforce base, was set up in late 2002, with a mandate to "prepare contingency plans to respond to [land and sea] threats and attacks, and other major emergencies in Canada or the United States".

The Liberals under Prime Minister Paul Martin as well as Canada’s Defense establishment at DND are fully supportive of this initiative, which essentially consists in integrating the military command structures of the two countries:

"The DND/CF in Canada and the US DoD recognize that a neighborhood watch or collective security arrangement is essential. But, we need to take it slowly and understand all the ramifications... To that end, the BPG allows some Canadians and Americans to work together in Colorado Springs to explore that collective security arrangement."

(statement by L. Gen. Findley
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/community/mapleleaf/... )

No debate in Parliament. In fact, with some exceptions, backbench MPs do not even know about these procedures, which have a direct bearing on Canada’s sovereignty as a nation. An atmosphere of secrecy prevails. The tendency in Ottawa is "hush-hush". No government pronouncements: public opinion has been held in the dark. Moreover, the issue has barely been mentioned in the Canadian press.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Paul Martin has been busy restraining potential anti-Bush sentiment within the Liberal Caucus as well as in the ranks of the opposition parties, in the months leading up to president George W. Bush’s address to Canada’s parliament on December 1st.

The Binational Planning Group (BPG)

Removed from the public eye, the "Group" is more than an ad hoc consultative body. It was set up as an interim military authority in December 2002, following the refusal of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien to join the new regional command: US Northern Command (NORTHCOM). The latter was established in April 2002 to "Defend the Homeland" against presumed terrorist attacks.

Canadian membership in NORTHCOM would have implied the integration of Canada’s military command structures with those of the US. That option was temporarily deferred by the Chrétien government, through the creation of the so-called Binational Planning Group (BPG).

The Binational Planning Group’s (BPG) formal mandate was to:

"improve current Canada-United States arrangements to defend against primarily maritime threats to the continent and respond to land-based attacks, should they occur."

The BPG extends the jurisdiction of the US-Canada North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) to cover land and sea.

The "Group" is described as an "independent" military authority which is "not integrated into either command [NORAD or NORTHCOM] - it simply shares the same headquarters [at the Paterson Air Force base]". Yet this statement blatantly contradicts the original dispatch following the creation of the BPG (9 December 2002):

"The head of the Planning Group will be the Deputy Commander, who will operate under the authority of the Commander of North American Aerospace Defense." ( See US State Department
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2002/15783.htm

NORAD has become and Appendage of NORTHCOM

In practice, the "Group" functions under the jurisdiction of US Northern Command, which is controlled by US DoD. Moreover, the existing bilateral agreement under NORAD is virtually defunct. NORAD has become an appendage of NORTHCOM.

In fact, the command structures of NORAD, NORTHCOM and the BPG are fully integrated: the commanding officer of NORAD, Lt. General Ralph E. "Ed" Eberhardt, is the commander of U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM). In turn, the (Canadian) Commander of NORAD, Lt. General Rick "Eric" Findley, heads the Binational Planning Group (BPG).

And, Lt. General Eberhardt, who is commander of both NORTHCOM and NORAD, has the mandate to ensure "liaison" between the binational "Group" and the US government, including, of course, the DoD and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), headed by Tom Ridge.

In turn, both the "Group" and the DHS are in permanent liaison with Canada’s new Ministry of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, which is a Canadian "copy and paste" version of Tom Ridge’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS). In other words, the integration of Canadian and US military command structures is being achieved in close coordination with the binational integration of civilian police, judicial and intelligence structures. The integration of US, Canadian and Mexican intelligence structures is part of a parallel initiative under the same broad military agenda.

What this integration means in practice is that Canada’s military command structures would in practice be subordinated to those of the Pentagon and the US DoD. Operating under a "North American" emblem (i.e. NORTHCOM), the US military would have jurisdiction over Canadian territory from coast to coast; extending from the St Laurence Valley to the Parry Islands in the Canadian Arctic. It would allow for the establishment of "North American" military bases on Canadian territory. From a military standpoint, it would integrate the Canadian North, with its vast resources in raw materials with Alaska.

Bearing in mind that similar binational negotiations are being conducted between US and with Mexico, the US military would exert strategic control over an area (air space, land mass and contiguous territorial waters) extending from the Yucatan peninsula in southern Mexico to the Canadian Arctic, representing 12 percent of the World’s land mass.

In fact, a "continental" military command structure (based on a 1999 US Army College Blueprint) which has been under discussion for several years, "would use the North American Free Trade Agreement as a basis... link[ing] U.S., Mexican and Canadian forces against terrorism in a way that NAFTA has linked North America’s economies. (See
http://www.fpa.org/newsletter_info2498/newsletter_info.htm )

Needless to say, this initiative is consistent with the broader objective of "integrating" defense structures in The Western Hemisphere under US military dominance, which is being implemented in parallel with the Free Trade Area of the Americas Initiative (FTAA). Although not officially on the FTAA agenda, the militarization of South America under "Plan Colombia" renamed "The Andean Initiative" as well as the signing of a "parallel" military cooperation protocol by 27 countries of the Americas (the so-called Declaration of Manaus) is an integral part of the process of hemispheric integration. In it worth noting that FTAA Trade Negotiator Richard Zoellnick is a member of Bush’s National Security Council.

Washington’s "Military Road Map"

The BPG Agreement has a direct bearing on Canada’s role in the US led war in the Middle East. "The Group" was created barely four months before the invasion of Iraq. While Canada is not officially part of the Anglo-American military axis, its command structures are in the process (under the BPG) of being integrated into those of the US.

While it has no troops in Iraq, Canada has a significant military presence in Afghanistan, where Canadian troops are, in practice, operating under US Command. Canadian warships were sent to the Persian Gulf in October 2001 and have from the outset collaborated with the US led military operation in Afghanistan and Iraq.

(See Michel Chossudovsky, Extending the War to Iraq? Canada sends "Gun Boats" to the Persian Gulf
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO111B.html ).

(See
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews...
See also Heritage Foundation,
http://www.heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm225.cfm )

Canadian military planners were actively "involved in contingency planning for war on Iraq", operating out Central Command in Tampa, Florida. When CENTCOM headquarters were transferred to Qatar in the months prior to the invasion, the senior Canadian military planners (under US Command) joined their US counterparts at the new headquarters. Canada was also involved in a Naval Task Force Command in the Persian Gulf coordinating the entry of coalition war ships into the Persian Gulf.

This "integration of Canada" must be seen as part of Washington’s broader military agenda, in different parts of the World, its so-called "global leadership" in military affairs, as defined by the Project of the New American Century (PNAC). (See
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf )

The Mandate of the "Group"

The BPG’s mandate goes far beyond the jurisdiction of a consultative military body making "recommendations" to government. In practice, it is neither accountable to the US Congress nor to the Canadian House of Commons. According to the defense policy journal Canadian American Strategic Review, the BPG is "more than ’just an informal discussion group’ ... it seems to show some signs of evolving into a formal command in its own right."

(quoted in DND CF at

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/focus/canada-us/pentagon2_e.asp )

The BPG has a staff of fifty US and Canadian "military planners", who have been working diligently for the last two years in laying the groundwork for the integration of Canada-US military command structures. The BPG works in close coordination with the Canada-U.S. Military Cooperation Committee at the Pentagon, a so-called " panel responsible for detailed joint military planning".

Broadly speaking, its activities consist of two main building blocks: the Combined Defense Plan (CDP) and The Civil Assistance Plan (CAP).

The Militarisation of Civilian Institutions

As part of the Civil Assistance Plan (CAP), the BPG is also involved in supporting the ongoing militarisation of civilian law enforcement and judicial functions in both the US and Canada. This process is consistent with the "Big Brother initiatives" already carried out under Homeland Security and the Patriot Acts in the US.

In Canada, similar activities have been launched under the Anti-Terrorist Legislation (Bills C-36, C-22, C-35, C-42 and C-7). The new Ministry of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness was set up in close consultation with the Us Department of Homeland Security.

(See Canada Department of Justice
http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/news/nr/2001/doc_28217.html , See Rocco Galati,
http://www.911review.org/Wget/scienceforpeace.sa.utoronto.ca...

The BPG’s has established "military contingency plans" which would be activated "on both sides of the Canada-US border" in the case of a terror attack or "threat". Under the BPG’s Civil Assistance Plan (CAP), these so-called "threat scenarios" would involve:

"coordinated response to national requests for military assistance [from civil authorities] in the event of a threat, attack, or civil emergency in the US or Canada."

In other words, the Military would "support" and "assist" civilian organizations including government bodies and agencies such as municipalities, etc. This process implies the militarisation of civilian functions.

The BPG does not mince its words: military commanders would:

"provide binational military assistance to civil authorities."

In the case of a Red Code alert, these so-called "requests" (e.g. from a Canadian municipality) could result in the deployment of US troops or Special Forces inside Canadian territory. In fact, with an integrated command structure, Canadian and US servicemen would operate in the same military operations.

Moreover, the BPG has been actively involved in joint exercises with civilian police and intelligence, involving the participation of State and city governments. It has developed a system of "eight threat scenarios, focused on weapons of mass destruction, terrorists and natural disasters that are being used as planning tools"

(See
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/community/mapleleaf/... )

Northrop Grumman Information Technology, a subsidiary of one of America’s largest defense conglomerates, is on contract with the BPG, providing it support services in "strategic and operational planning, research, analysis, information technology and coordination to meet current and evolving mission requirements." (See http://www.tasc.com/ )

Northrop`s mandate is to provide expertise to the BPG in support of

"coordination and implementation of comprehensive enhanced military cooperation and interagency products, including detailed contingency plans, consultation/decision-making protocol recommendations, aerospace, maritime and land defense plans, and Consequence Management guidance."

(See:
https://www.ditco.disa.mil/public/discms/... )

Martial Law

The circumstances under which martial law can be declared in the US are clearly enunciated by the Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA)

(See
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/areyouready/security.pdf ,
See also Michel Chossudovsky,
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO402A.html , on Militarization see Frank Morales, September 2003
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR309A.html ).

In the case of a Red Code Terror Alert, US Northern Command would take over. Several functions of civilian administration would be suspended, others could be transferred to the jurisdiction of the military. More generally, the procedure would disrupt government offices, businesses, schools, public services, transportation, etc.

Under the present BPG arrangement, Canada is a de facto member of NORTHCOM. In other words, some of these martial law procedures could be applied in Canada. Under an integrated North American military command structure —with Canada part of NORTHCOM—, martial law procedures in Canada would conform to those applied in the US.

In May 2003 a major "anti-terrorist exercise" entitled TOPOFF 2 was conducted under the auspices of US Homeland Security. Canada fully participated in this initiative. In fact, the exercise was conducted with the support of NORTHCOM and NORAD, with the BPG playing a key role.

TOPOFF 2 was described as "the largest and most comprehensive terrorism response and homeland security exercise ever conducted in the United States." It was a military style exercise involving federal, State and local level governments including Canadian participants.

TOPOFF 2 was carried out on the same assumptions as military exercises in anticipation of an actual theater war, in this case, to be waged by foreign terrorists, examining various WMD attack scenarios and the institutional response of State and local governments. The simulations of "what was happening in Seattle" were carried out in the Situational Awareness Center (SAC) at Peterson Air force Base in Colorado. (For further details See Aviation Week & Space Technology, June 23, 2003)

Towards a North American Big Brother

In December 2001, in response to the 9/11 attacks, the Canadian government reached an agreement with the Head of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, entitled the "Canada-US Smart Border Declaration." Shrouded in secrecy, this agreement essentially hands over to the Homeland Security Department, confidential information on Canadian citizens and residents. It also provides US authorities with access to tax records of Canadians.

Meanwhile, the Bush Administration established its controversial Total Information Awareness Program (TIAP), headed by former National Security Adviser ret. Admiral John Poindexter, who was indicted on criminal charges in the Iran Contra scandal during the Reagan Administration.

TIAP operated in the offices of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), a division of the Pentagon in Northern Virginia. The Information Awareness Office (IAO), was to oversee a giant Big Brother data bank. (See Washington Post, 11 Nov 2002 at http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A40942-2002Nov11 )

Under pressure, Pointedexter subsequently resigned from TIAP and the program was "officially" discontinued.

(See Pointedexter’s PowerPoint presentation at
http://www.darpa.mil/darpatech2002/presentations/... .

IAO’s stated mission was "to gather as much information as possible about everyone, in a centralized location, for easy perusal by the United States government." This would include medical records, credit card and banking information, educational and employment data, records concerning travel and the use of internet, email, telephone and fax.

While the IAO no longer exists, at least officially, the initiative of creating a giant data bank has by no means been abandoned. At present, several US government bodies including Homeland Security, the CIA, the FBI already operate "Big Brother" data banks. The controversial Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange ( MATRIX), for instance is defined as "a crime-fighting database" used by law enforcement agencies, the US Justice Department and Homeland Security. More recently in the context of The National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 — currently debated in the US Senate, discussion has centered on a so-called ’Information Sharing Network’ to coordinate data from ’all available sources.’" The proposed network would bring together the data banks of various government agencies under a single governmental umbrella. (Deseret Morning News, 29, 2004).

Under the ongoing US-Canada integration in military command structures, "Homeland Security" and intelligence, Canadian data banks would eventually be integrated into those of the US. Canada Customs and Revenue has already assembled confidential information on travelers, which it shares with its US counterparts. In early 2004, Ottawa announced under the pretext of combating terrorism that "U.S. border agents will soon have access to the immigration and tax records of Canadian residents".

This merger of tax and immigration data banks is consistent with the process of binational integration occurring at the level of military command structures. It suggests that the Canadian border is controlled under a binational US-Canada arrangement, where US officials have access to Canadian immigration files on Canadian residents.

Moreover, under Canada’s Bill C-7, the Public Safety Act of 2004, Canadian police, intelligence and immigration authorities are not only authorized to collect personal data, they also have the authority to share it with their US counterparts

(Text of the C-7 Public Safety Act at
http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/3/parlbus/chambus/house/... ,
see also
http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?Parl=37&Ses=3&ls=c7 _ and
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/... )

What these developments suggest is the process of binational integration is not only occurring in the military command structures but also in the areas of immigration, police and intelligence. The question is what will be left over within Canada’s jurisdiction as a sovereign nation, once this ongoing process of binational integration, including the sharing and/or merger of data banks, is completed?

What Next? Canadian Membership of NORTHCOM

The two year mandate of the BPG expires on the 9th of December 2004. Coinciding with president Bush’s November visit to Canada, a decision to renew the BPG arrangement until Spring of 2005 has already been announced, at which time a decision pertaining to the formal integration of Canada into NORTHCOM will be made. This decision would essentially formalize a fait accompli.

In this regard, the BPG has already prepared a comprehensive report,

"recommending how the two countries’ militaries can work together more effectively to counter these [terrorist] threats. In many cases, ... the recommendations will involve formalizing cooperation already taking place on an informal basis." (Statement of BPG spokesman, US Department of Defense Information, November 3, 2004)

Whether this report will be debated in the House of Commons remains to be seen. What is absolutely essential at this critical juncture in our history is that Canadians mobilize from coast to coast against the militarisation of Canada.

The Canadian Prime Minister is anxious to avoid public debate and discussion on what constitutes the most significant encroachment on Canada’s sovereignty since Confederation.

The Canadian Defense and Foreign Affairs Institute among others are pressuring Ottawa to:

"bring all land, sea and air forces devoted to such defense under one new bi-national command system that will operate in tandem with the United States’ NORTHCOM." (http://www.cdfai.org/PDF/CCCE%20Report.pdf )

The Bush administration has its supporters in Canada, in the Liberal government as well as in the ranks of the Conservative party and of course within the Canadian business establishment. Washington is lobbying for a consensus on Canada’s entry into NORTHCOM.

Canadian companies are vying for lucrative multimillion dollar "reconstruction" contracts in war torn Iraq. Canada’s defense contractors, which constitute an appendage of the US-military industrial complex, are of course part of this consensus building. Their lobby group, which favors the integration of military command structures, is the Canadian Defense Industries Association. (http://www.cdia.ca/ ). In the words of General Dynamics (Canada):

"The combination of heavy U.S. spending on the war in Iraq and against terrorism and a new Liberal prime minister apparently ready to spend more on defense equipment is improving business optimism." (See http://www.gdcanada.com/company_info/articles/body_art2004apr22jm2.html

Canadian weapons producers, many of which are affiliates of US defense conglomerates expect to be granted lucrative contracts upon Canada joining NORTHCOM. Among major players in Canada’s defense industry are General Dynamics (Canada), Bell Helicopter Textron (Canada), General Motors Defense, CAE Inc, Bombardier, SNC-Lavalin Group, etc.

For further details see
http://www.cdia.ca/public/index.asp?action=profiles ,
see also Project Loughshares at
http://www.ploughshares.ca/CONTENT/MONITOR/mond02i.html#Table%201

"Integration" or the "Annexation" of Canada?

The World is at the crossroads of the most serious crisis in modern history. The US has launched a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity. It has formulated the contours of an imperial project of World domination. This is not a rhetorical issue. This project is confirmed by official military and national security documents. The military blueprint for global US domination is outlined in the Project of the New American Century (PNAC).

(see PDF :
http://www.newamericancentury.org... )

Canada is contiguous to "the center of the empire". Territorial control over Canada is part of the US geopolitical and military agenda. It is worth recalling in this regard, that throughout history, the "conquering nation" has expanded on its immediate borders, acquiring control over contiguous territories.

Military integration is intimately related to the ongoing process of integration in the spheres of trade, finance and investment. Needless to say, a large part of the Canadian economy is already in the hands of US corporate interests. In turn, the interests of big business in Canada tend to coincide with those of the US.

Canada is already a de facto economic protectorate of the USA. The US-Canada FTA and NAFTA has not only opened up new avenues for US corporate expansion, it has laid the groundwork under the existing North American umbrella for the post 9/11 integration of military command structures, public security, intelligence and law enforcement.

No doubt, Canada’s entry into US Northern Command will be presented to public opinion as part of Canada-US "cooperation", as something which is "in the national interest", which "will create jobs for Canadians", and "will make Canada more secure".

Meanwhile, the important debate on Canada’s participation in the US Ballistic Missile Shield, when viewed out of the broader context, may serve to divert public attention away from the more fundamental issue of North American military integration which implies Canada’s acceptance not only of the Ballistic Missile Shield, but of the entire US war agenda, including significant hikes in defense spending which will be allocated to a North American defense program controlled by the Pentagon.

And ultimately what is at stake is that beneath the rhetoric, Canada will cease to function as a Nation:

Its borders will be controlled by US officials and confidential information on Canadians will be shared with Homeland Security.

US troops and Special Forces will be able to enter Canada as a result of a binational arrangement.

Canadian citizens can be arrested by US officials, acting on behalf of their Canadian counterparts and vice versa.

But there is something perhaps even more fundamental in defining and understanding where Canada and Canadians stand as nation.

The Liberals as well as the opposition Conservative party have embraced the US waragenda. By endorsing a Canada-US"integration" in the spheresof defense, homeland security,police and intelligence, Canada not only becomes a full fledged member of George W. Bush’s "Coalition of the Willing", it will directly participate, through integrated military command structures, in the US war agenda in Central Asia and the Middle East, including the massacre of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, the torture of POWs, the establishmentof concentration camps, etc.

Under an integrated North American Command, a North Americannational security doctrine would be formulated. Canadawould be obliged to embrace Washington’s pre-emptive military doctrine, including the use of nuclear warheads as a means of self defense, which was ratified by the US Senate in December 2003.

(See Michel Chossudovsky, The US Nuclear Option and the "War on Terrorism"
http://globalresearch.ca/... May 2004 )

Moreover, binational integration in the areas of Homeland security, immigration, policing of the US-Canada border, not to mention the anti-terrorist legislation, would imply pari passu acceptance of the US sponsored police State, its racist policies, its "ethnic profiling" directed against Muslims, the arbitrary arrest of anti-war activists.

Note

The purpose of this report is to encourage discussion and debate in Canada and Quebec on the implications of military integration with the US at this critical juncture in our history.

The notion of "sovereignty" presented in this article does not constitute an endorsement of any particular constitutional arrangement or political platform.

"Sovereignty" is meant in the broadest sense, in relation to the aspirations of Canadians, Quebecois and First Nations. It is associated with a broad commitment to peace, justice and social equality. Moreover, it is understood that any meaningful nationalism and sovereignty in Quebec is out of question under the militarisation of North America.

This report is also presented in solidarity with the ongoing efforts by the American people, who are fighting within the US for their own sovereignty, against their government and the US led war agenda.

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO411C.html

Forum posts

  • Yeah, Bush wants to conquer Canada. We really really really want Quebec because the people are so durned pleasant..

    Many Canadians really are very nice, and Canada is fairly well respected here but only the uber liberals would want Canada as part of the US, and that would only be in order to get millions more liberal voters into the mix.

    Not going to happen.

    • As a Canadian, I can think of nothing I would like less than to be annexed by the United States. If that ever happened I would leave my country and move to Europe. Most Canadians really hate George Bush. Not dislike; hate. During your presidental election, surveys here said that at least 80% of Canadians would have voted for John Kerry. We find Bush ignorant, isolationist, oblivious, dangerous, and fanatical. Everything he has done since invading Iraq he has done alone. He doesn’t really have a coalition; he has
      England and some smaller, less significant countries backing him. The rest of the world sees the United States in decline because of George Bush; re-electing him was the worst possible thing Americans could have done if they wanted to regain stature or respect on the world stage. At this point Bush is making America look like a staggering arrogant bully.

      This is not to say that Canadians hate Americans, per se. It’s really Bush and his "advisors," equally dangerous men with their own agendas. Personally, I feel sorry for the American people because Bush and Company have systematically frightened them into believing attacks from a variety of sources are perpetually imminent. His tactics of using terror alerts and colour coded warnings have made Americans feel there is no safe place and the American media have been willing helpers in Bush’s goal of paralyzing Americans with fear. I seriously suggest that Americans look at other news sources world wide --- go to the BBC (the UK) or to the CBC (Canada) for balanced news. In the US, CNN just gives you a continuous loop of propaganda, and even when the truth is finally reported (For example, there were no weapons of mass destruction. Your leaders lied to you.), there is so much information thrown at you that you can’t sift through it.

      But back to the Annexation topic. Most Canadians believe that Americans know absolutely nothing about Canada beyond the typical tourist observations that the people are friendly and the streeets are clean. We all have stories of people coming here and expecting igloos, etc. When we talk to tourists or when we are tourists in your country, we are always told "Americans and Canadians are just the same." How wrong you are. We are not the same. Not even remotely. We think and live so differently than Americans. We don’t have the military as a major industry. It is not part of our culture or our thinking. It is a major part of yours. We don’t have the religious right and the joining of church and state. We believe strongly in the separation of church and state. We couldn’t imagine living with the health care system you have. We have had subsidized health care since the 1930s and it is Canadian to have it. Having a social safety net is one of our beliefs; it is part of the fabric of our society. We don’t have a culture that accepts violence and accepts people having guns. We don’t have people accidentally killing others with guns because we don’t carry guns. You simply don’t hear of that kind of violence here; it is very, very rare.

      Those are just a few of the fundamental differences between our countries. One thing I will tell you though. If America did try to annex Canada, it would have one heck of a fight on its hands. There are very few things we would fight over (We prefer the role of peacekeepers, helping people.) but we would fight to maintain our own sovereignity. I would fight to maintain Canada as a distinct and sovereign nation. America is the scary neighbour who lives next door. You’re always making noise and you fight a lot. I can handle living next to you and staying out of your way, but you are not going to live in my house!

    • Thank you for writing about Canada. When we in US America go to school, we are only educated about the US America. Most of us have little concept of geography or world history. We are taught a lot of rubbish about our constitution none of which is true, our history (all the bad stuff left out) all the good stuff embellished. We have a 50% high school drop out rate probably because the kids see what a bunch of nonsense they are having to learn and the teachers realize they are being used to fill the kid’s heads with nonsense. Our news media then takes up the cause of keeping us ignorant and stupid, and now you know why Americans don’t really know about Canada.

    • More that the United States should become a province of Canada. We are in desperate need of help. We’ll even accept territorial status until we can prove that we’ve become civilized.

      One disagreement though; Kerry’s popularity was largely based on a "Anybody But Bush" mentality. If Kerry had been elected, the U.S. would continue to follow its aggressive long-range strategic policies in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. There really isn’t much difference between our two major parties on these issues.

    • Hear, hear! Canada is VERY different from the US and in many ways superior. The only serious "deficiency" compared with the US is higher taxation; at least in Canada you get more from taxes than the military industrial complex. I, a US citizen, was involved integrally with a BC business from 1990 until 1994 and enjoyed it immensely. As the recent US election has cast us ever more firmly as the Idiot Nation, I am in the process of immigrating north (as a skilled worker/entrepreneur I scored over 80 in the Canadian Immigration "quiz" available on line). Canadian friends, please don’t fall for Prez Sh**head and his arrogance of ignorance!

    • The imperialistic policy of the current American government leaves everything open. The Americans
      have already messed their natural ressorces in a way which might it make necessary.
      Anglo/American shareholder value thinks only in quaterly terms, in order to fake some profit.

      Corporate America is a nusaince for the whole world. Britain runs the world largest money laundry
      machine in London. They also keep money from thirld world dictators in their pockets. Tony Blairs
      announcement to spent some of it - 100 mio - doesn’t make it any better.

      Nazi Germany’s methods were somewhat blunt. Americas and Britains financial institutions like
      f. e. the Carlyle or Swire group act the same.

      We have not forgotten the group of mercenaries caught in Zimbabwe.

    • An excellent summary of government school propaganda, and why "nobody cares". Tyranny does that, you just "want to survive" to get out, not conscientiously. This in turn causes everyone to live individualistically, no care for the common good, since no one feels any power against the corrupt goverment system, and big media the tells us what the news is, what we should think, and even (by polling) what we DO think!

      In another vein, the major news does not speak much about the Organization for American States (OAS)—the first meeting G.W. Bush had after his 2001 inauguration, where the "states" are every country in the "America’s", North, U.S., and South! LIke a giant map puzzle, or Risk game, the Western America’s are being combined into One Hemispheric Government, then to join with Blair’s European Union (EU), and the United States of Africa, and the former USSR to form: "ONE NATION (WORLD GOVERNMENT)....UNDER GOD (CAESAR).....INDIVISIBLE (UNION BY FORCE)", the socialist dream of Plato’s Communistic Republic!

      This plan is laid out in Clarence Streit’s book from 1941, called UNION NOW WITH BRITAIN, to make a global UNITED STATES OF MAN, a PAX AMERICANA! UN or no UN, its all the same.

    • On these issues or on any other issues...the US has a one party system and has had for a long time. They decide who the candidates will be and who will win...leaving the notion of democracy to the ignorant and uneducated masses.

    • Low taxation in the US is a myth. Most people in the US (excluding the mega rich) pay 62% of their wages in tax..Federal Income tax is 25%, Social Security is 15%, State taxes are 10%, and sales taxes, hiden taxes and fees account for another 12%...US citizens spend more on taxes than they spend for food, housing, and other necessities of life. I doubt that Canada has higher tax and the good thing about Canadaian government is that they actually give the people something for their money, unlike the US that only gives its citizens another load of bombs to drop on some skinny people around the world in its quest for world domination. Feel lucky Canadians that you have a government that is somewhat honest, your US neighbors are slaves to imperialism and corruption by the military industrial complex that has taken over the country.

    • "somewhat honest government" in Canada? Well, maybe at one time in the last century the Canadian Gov’t was somewhat more honest than the U.S. gov’t. But now, with the Illuminati controlled puppets Martin in Ottawa, and here in B.C., puppet/lapdog Campbell, things aren’t looking so great.
      Still, it would be far, far worse to live in the U.S.A.

    • Where did you get your info about our taxes, from europeans? It’s all screwy.

      First of all, the federal income tax is not 25%. There are 6 tax brackets ranging from 10% to 35% and you pay depending on your income level. Also it’s a graduated rate not a flat rate.

      http://www.pgaol.msu.edu/html/2004_federal_income_tax_rates.html

      Second of all, Social security taxes are 7.65% for salaried workers. Self-employed is 15% but they are allowed to deduct 1/2 of what they pay.

      http://www.tiaa-cref.org/pubs/html/taxguide/tg11a.html

      State taxes vary, some have none while others range from a low of 1% to as high as 9.5% again depending on level income.

      http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/ind_inc.html

      Sales taxes also vary. Some states have none, some have lower and others have higher. There is no VAT like they have in Canada and Europe. As for hidden taxes and fees, what the hell are you talking about? There is a luxury tax for any item with a price over $25,000.

      Canadians, between your higher income tax and VAT, definitely pay more taxes.

    • So the figures for a self employed person are 25%, 15%, up to 9.5% and the hidden taxes, sales tax in some states on everything and every service rendered. they are on telephone, gasoline, property tax, registration fees for vehicles, business licenses etc., most people in the US pay about 62% of their income on taxes. More than for food and housing and other necessities of life.... not screwy numbers just facts.

    • Your reading comprehension is really awful. You select only the highest rates. Well, go ahead. You must derive some satisfaction from thinking that the US pays 62% of their income when it clearly isn’t true.

  • Why would America want Canada? It’s just one big icebox for most of the year. Nothing ever happens there. It would be a pure waste of effort. I’m not knocking Canadians, they’re nice people, but let the status quo remain in this case.

    • well, canada is the one place in north america with lots of space and lots of natural resources. i think about the true reasons for invading iraq: aquisition of natural resources.

      canada, with its oil, water, uranium, wood etc has lots to offer, especially if mister bush does not have to ask nicely and can simply "spend such capital".

      make no mistake: canadas status as protectorate of the US would certainly not involve adding the popoulation to the US electorate. check out puerto rico for example.

    • An icebox most of the year? Are you kidding? Vancouver hardly gets any snow in the winter, just like Seattle. 90% of the country lives within 100 miles of the US border. We have the same climate as detroit, New York and Boston.

    • This person is very un-informed. Have you ever been to Canada? Have you even seen your northern States? They have identical land and weather as most of Canada Comments like that should not be printed, it just proves to educated people why Americans follow Bush so blindly. Maybe America should educate their people better. Watch one of our TV programs it pokes fun at their ignorance down their....but has so much truth to it is is hilarious (CBC’s Rick Mercer’s talking to Americans).
      America wants Canada for many reasons.
      Military and geographical defense reasons, our natural resources - water, lumber, oil most specifically, etc etc.
      Too bad Americans remain so un-informed and ignorant to truths of today’s societies, maybe if they were to wise up a little they would make better choices at elections or better yet....actually get off the chair and VOTE. Keep living in the dark. We’ll keep laughing at you....not with you.
      A proud educated Canadian that WILL fight for our nation.

    • Didn’t one of the posters say that 90% of Canadians live within 100 miles of the US? Which means that most Canadians live in the southern, warmer part of Canada which is probably 1/4 of the Canadian land mass. If it wasn’t so cold most of the time why aren’t they spread out more towards the north? And someone else said something about Canada having abundant natural resources. That’s probably true, but it has to be difficult because of weather and environmental conditions trying to mine those resources inexpensively.

    • The point is that nobody would really even think to make Canada part of America. It would be pointless.

    • FYI, Canada is not "one big icebox for most of the year" like many ignorant Americans think. Most parts of Canada are actually warmer than many northern states in your country year round. And if you think "nothing ever happens" here, come live here for a month and then say that. Your implying that we’re just a boring country sounds borderline racist to me.

      And for the record, Canadians love Americans...we just hate your president.

    • It sounds racist to you? Thats cause your fucking stupid. Nobody even mentioned race. Canadian isn’t a race you moron, its a state of mind- or rather an absense of a state of mind.

  • As a 100% Canadian, this is very scary.

    To add to the very last part of the second comment. If America tries to take my Canada from me, I’ll take as many Americans I can before they bring me down in a hail of bullets fighting for my Canada

    • I really don’t think you have anything to worry about.

    • With what, your butterknife???? Above messages from Canadians said you don’t have guns and don’t believe in violence. Maybe you could use maple syrup or Labatt’s.

      Don’t worry, we don’t want your country, and to suggest that we do is an insult. Its yours, so enjoy it, and quit living so close to our border. You’ve got a whole huge country just loaded with natural resources and shoddy socialized medicine just waiting for you. Don’t forget your snowshoes!

  • Canada has the second largest oil reserves in the world, second only to Saudi Arabia, and one above Iraq. That’s a good enough reason for the USA to want us. And we have a lot of other minerals and natural resources. Why do you think Bush is giving a talk in Halifax? Could it be because of the drilling that is going to start there in the next few years?

    And as far as the USA taking control of Canada ... well, I hate to tell people but the Americans are already here. Most of the stores in Canada are now American. From capers, to Future Shop, to Winners, to all the major movie theaters ... etc ...

    I personally have stopped buying from all American owned stores and I strongly suggest that all Canadian find out where their money goes. Buy local and check the back of everything you buy. If it’s made in the USA or by an American corporation then look for something else.

    Simply put ... USA is invading Canada and we have to fight ... we are lucky that our battle is not violent but who knows how long that will last

    • I agree. I buy Canadian goods whenever possible, and avoid Made in USA stuff every chance I get. Until the USA gets its collective head outta its ass, I will boycott the U.S. all I can.
      It’s too bad there’s a bloody Starf***s on every bloody corner of this city though.

    • Buy Canadian? Buy Chinese, you mean. You can hardly find goods in Canadian stores any more that aren’t MADE IN CHINA!

      If you have to worry about economic imperialism, worry about China. Those cheap goods won’t be without strings forever. What happens when we start to absolutely rely on them?

  • It is quite obvious that Bush and neo-cons (and i mean that in the sense of new crooks) have kidnapped the American government and brainwashed significant portions of the American people. As a college educated, critical thinking, rational American citizen (no pun intended) I can only sympathize with the plight of the Canadian people who are about to become de facto U.S. citizens minus perks if the Bush administration is allowed to continue on its imperialistic course. I implore the Canadian people, it is too late for us, we have allowed the government too much power over our lives and our wallets, please act now; save yourselves. If you do not pull off a miracle and stop George W before he annexes Canada, the world is doomed. Please let me know if you need any assistance on your side of the border, I am doing everything I can on my side, although you can see the significance of the difference we have made. Good luck world, if you don’t hear from me again... they must have read this letter.

    • Just a question from a Canadian. I’d like an American to explain this to me. Why is it that the US feels it has the right to interfere in the affairs of other countries? This is something that has always baffled me. Not to be rude, but I don’t see the US focussing on its own problems at home, yet they traipse all over the world, spending billions of dollars interfering in the governments of other countries. Here’s an example from today’s news. This is from the CBC: "The U.S. president waded into the Northern Ireland peace process Friday,
      phoning Protestant leader Ian Paisley to urge him to bend a little more when it comes to sharing power with Catholics in the region."

      It would be funny if it weren’t so pathetic. Does George Bush actually think he has any credibility with Northern Ireland? And HE’S telling Ian Paisley to "bend a little"? Am I the only one who’s feeling that everything has gotten SO "1984" that it’s almost surreal? Literally, Bush has told us "War is peace," now I suppose the next is "Freedom is slavery," etc. I am so baffled by the American public that they haven’t registered that they’ve been lied to and continue to be lied to . The information is available. Why do the still believe the lies?

      Back to the original question. Is it the idea of manifest destiny? Still the idea that God has created the US and Americans have a duty to somehow control or change the world? Whatever the reason, it’s ugly.

    • Why did your country fight in World War I and II. What right did Canada have to interfere in the affairs of European politics?

      Oh wait, it was because it was the right, moral thing to do, and because world events have an effect on your country too. Thats what its all abooooot.

    • To the person who seems to believe Canadians say "aboot"; we don’t. That’s Scottish people. More importantly, you can’t compare what the US is doing in Iraq right now to Canada fighting in WWII. First of all, there was a real danger from Nazi Germany, not a manufactured danger such as the WMD arguement.

      Secondly, there was a genuine coalition of allies fighting against Hitler. It wasn’t Canada or Great Britain unilaterally going in and deciding to have a war against unarmed people. In this war, the US has gone into Iraq without the sanction of the UN and without any real world consensus. They got into this war under a pretence and they are fighting it without a real reason.

      Thirdly, if you say that fighting Hitler was the right and moral thing to do, that belief rests on his actions against the Jews. What is right and moral about the United States going into Iraq and killing over 100,000 people, many of whom are civilians? Have you noticed they don’t have helicopters and they don’t have bombs? How right and moral is it to bomb innocent people and then actually make money on the rebuilding of the country you’ve destroyed? I would call Cheney’s connection to the Halliburton contracts (monopoly?) a conflict of interest. There’s nothing particularly moral about making money from decimating a country. Those people don’t have food or clean water and women and children are terrified to leave their homes. Iraq is in complete chaos. How is that moral and right?

      Finally, the initial question had to do with George Bush giving suggestions to Ian Paisley on how to be "more flexible" in Northern Ireland. In what way does the US have any right to suggest how any other nation should act? Having the largest army or the most nuclear weapons does not give a country a moral mandate to tell the rest of the world how they should believe. What does the US have besides power?

    • Hope it isn’t too late to try to explain why the US feels entitled to traipse around the world with out military in tow appointing dictators through our CIA that will do our bidding and allow us to manipulate their countries. The reason is simple, its called imperilistic greed. Anything for a buck. Most of our so called leaders are capitalist pigs that are affiliated with the likes of Carlyle, or IMF, or BCCI, or Haliburton, or Chevron, Shell, G.E., Westinghouse. Just follow the money it is easy to figure out what is going on.

      Now of course to accomplish this, we must wrap our flag around the corruption, and throw in a good measure of moralistic (all pathetically phony) religious God inspired puke. This keeps the US citizens anesthetized, they always fall for this. All the while we have built the biggest most dangerous military by producing 60% of the worlds weaponry and retaining the largest number (40,000) of nuclear weapons (ours are good, theirs are bad) and making sure no other country can oppose us. Of course we have the help of many of the other countries leaders usually as corrupt etc., to enable us. Look at that stooge Blair as a good recent example, now if that guy isn’t obviously shoveling cash into his off shore accounts from the war booty then he has to be a complete moron, why else would he risk being kicked out of office? He does not need his little salary or the grief he is getting from the British citizens, so there can be only one explaination, he is getting rich by going along with this "coalition".

      I hope this helps shed some light on the why the US pretends it has a right while it rapes the world.

  • What ever happened to "NEVER AGAIN!" ?

  • Never after? As in, Hitler could never happen in America?
    Not only would we see it coming, but we would do something
    about it?
    Really?
    http://www.hermes-press.com/germany1930.htm

    • That is incredibly insulting and shows your ignorance of the true evil that Hitler and the Nazis were working to accomplish. Read a little (and I don’t mean crackpot stuff like the site you linked to) and you might learn something.

      What exactly is the US empire? You mean Iraq, a country we can’t wait to get out of? This message string suggesting America covets Canada is absolutely ridiculous. Instead of being paranoid about the US, your closest military ally, you should look closer at your idiotic immigration policies that seem designed to promote fundamentalist Islamic immigrants.

      Don’t like Starbucks? Neither do I, thats why I don’t go there. I don’t get bent out of shape that other people do though.

  • Annexation is happening as we speak. Why is the US dollar so low? So it can get to the point where it will offer Canada to join it’s currency, along with South America to make a new currency to compeat against the Euro...

    Why is Bush coming to Canada? He will lift the ban on Canadian meat and re-start importing Canadian lumber IF we send troops to Afg or Iraq. If we don’t, there will be more economic sanctions...

    • There is no annexation. I find the whole idea laughable. The US dollar is low because there are concerns regarding our trade deficit. As for a joint US-Canadian-Latin American currency, the idea is ludicrous because of the huge trade and economic issues involved to the US disadvantage. No way is annexation or new joint currency going to happen.

  • Remember the war of 1812? That attempt by the good old U.S. of A to appropriate Canadian lands culminated in us burning down the ’whitehouse’. Good always has and shall continue to prevail...