September 22, 2006

Announcing a Day of Mass Resistance + Secret North American Union Meeting

Hello everyone

This is a VERY special compilation which needs your immediate attention. No matter what other important things you have to do, taking a couple minutes to review at least the first part below could help make a HUGE difference.

Thank YOU for heeding this very urgent request...


Announcing a Day of Mass Resistance: OCTOBER 5, 2006


The following ad appeared in the September 20 issue of USA Today

Let us all empower this magnificent initiative through all possible means and let us make October 5 the turning point in the fight to rid the world of the worst threat to all Life it has ever faced...

The World Can’t Wait - Drive Out The Bush Regime

YOUR GOVERNMENT, on the basis of outrageous lies, is waging a murderous and utterly illegitimate war in Iraq, with other countries in their sights.

YOUR GOVERNMENT is openly torturing people, and justifying it.

YOUR GOVERNMENT puts people in jail on the merest suspicion, refusing them lawyers, and either holding them indefinitely or deporting them in the dead of night.

YOUR GOVERNMENT is moving each day closer to a theocracy, where a narrow and hateful brand of Christian fundamentalism will rule.

YOUR GOVERNMENT suppresses the science that doesn’t fit its religious, political and economic agenda, forcing present and future generations to pay a terrible price.

YOUR GOVERNMENT is moving to deny women here, and all over the world, the right to birth control and abortion.

YOUR GOVERNMENT enforces a culture of greed, bigotry, intolerance and ignorance.

People look at all this and think of Hitler–and rightly so. The Bush regime is setting out to radically remake society very quickly, in a fascist way, and for generations to come.

We must act now; the future of the world is in our hands.

Millions and millions are deeply disturbed and outraged by this. They recognize the need for a vehicle to express this outrage, yet they cannot find it;politics as usual cannot meet the enormity of the challenge. There is not going to be some magical “pendulum swing.” People who steal elections and believe they’re on a “mission from God” will not go without a fight. There is not going to be some savior from the Democratic Party. This whole idea of putting our hopes and energies into “leaders” who tell us to seek common ground with fascists and religious fanatics is proving every day to be a disaster, and actually serves to demobilize people.

But silence and paralysis are NOT acceptable. That which you will not resist and mobilize to stop, you will learn–or be forced–to accept. There is no escaping it: the whole disastrous course of this Bush regime must be STOPPED. And we must take the responsibility to do it. And there is a way. We are talking about something on a scale that can really make a huge change in this country and in the world. We need more than fighting Bush’s outrages one at a time, constantly losing ground to the whole onslaught. We must, and can, aim to create a political situation where the Bush regime’s program is repudiated, where Bush himself is driven from office, and where the whole direction he has been taking society is reversed. We, in our millions, must and can take responsibility to change the course of history.

On October 5, people everywhere will walk out of school, take off work, and come to the downtowns and town squares and set out from there, going through the streets and calling on many more to join us–making a powerful statement: “NO! THIS REGIME DOES NOT REPRESENT US! AND WE WILL DRIVE IT OUT!” Acting in this way, we join with and give support and heart to people all over the globe who so urgently need and want this regime to be stopped. This will not be easy. If we speak the truth, they will try to silence us. If we act, they will to try to stop us. But we speak for the majority, here and around the world, and as we get this going we are going to reach out to the people who have been so badly fooled by Bush and we are NOT going to stop. History is full of examples where people who had right on their side fought against tremendous odds and were victorious. And it is also full of examples of people passively hoping to wait it out, only to get swallowed up by a horror beyond what they ever imagined. The future is unwritten. WHICH ONE WE GET IS UP TO US.


Join this partial list of endorsers:

James Abourezk, Edward Asner, Russell Banks, Ed Begley Jr. , Harry Belafonte, St. Clair Bourne, Gabriel Byrne, Margaret Cho, Ward Churchill, US Rep John Conyers Jr. , John Densmore, Jesse Diaz Jr. , Michael Eric Dyson, Steve Earle, Niles Eldredge, Daniel Ellsberg, Eve Ensler, Jane Fonda, Martin Garbus, André Gregory, Sam Hamill, Suheir Hammad, Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Rickie Lee Jones, Sarah Jones, Brig. Gen. (Ret) Janis Karpiniski, Jonathan Kozol, Jessica Lange, Rabbi Michael Lerner, US Rep Cynthia Mc Kinney, Mark Crispin Miller, Tom Morello, Viggo Mortensen, US Rep Major Owens, Grace Paley, Harvey Pekar, Sean Penn, Michelle Phillips, Harold Pinter, Michael Ratner, Mark Ruffalo, US Rep Bobby Rush, Susan Sarandon, Richard Serra, Rev. Al Sharpton, Cindy Sheehan, Martin Sheen, Nancy Spero, Gloria Steinem, Lynne Stewart, Serj Tankian, Sunsara Taylor, Studs Terkel, Gore Vidal, Kurt Vonnegut, Alice Walker, Naomi Wallace, Lt. Ethren Watada, US Rep Maxine Waters, Cornel West, Ann Wright, Howard Zinn, and thousands more who have already joined us. . .




[ ] $2500 [ ] $1000 [ ] $500 [ ] $200 [ ] $100 [ ] $_______

Make checks payable to “World Can’t Wait” or donate on-line. (To make a tax deductible donation of $100 or more in support of WCW’s educational activities, checks should be made out to “The Alliance for Global Justice,” a 501(3)(c) organization, and designate “for WCW” in the check memo line.)

Mail coupon to:

305 W. BROADWAY, #185
NEW YORK, NY 10013



To download this ad as a pdf file go at



October 5: There is a Way! There is a Day!

[Find a protest in your area October 5th] -- [List a protest in your area]

NOTE from Jean: Dozens of U.S. cities are already listed. There will even be a protest in Geneva. This could go on to be a worldwide event if everyone rallies to support this...

Think of all the people who are deeply distressed over the direction in which the Bush regime is dragging the country - and the world... All the people who are outraged over the way in which this regime is arrogantly seeking to bludgeon into submission people in the Middle East, and throughout the world, while trampling on the rights of the people in the U.S. itself... All the people who care about the future of humanity and the planet we live on, and who recognize the many ways in which the Bush regime is increasingly posing a dire threat to this... All the people who are stirred with a profound restlessness by these feelings but are held back by the fear that they are alone and powerless; or who say that they wish something could be  done to stop and reverse this whole disastrous course, but nothing will make a difference; or who hope that somehow the Democrats will do something to change  this, when everyday it becomes more clear that they will not... All these people, who make up a very large part of the population of this country and whose basic sentiments are shared by the majority of people throughout the world...

Imagine if, from out of this huge reservoir of people, a great wave were unleashed, moving together on the same occasion, making, through their firm stand and their massive numbers, a powerful political statement that could not be ignored: refusing that day to work, or walking out from work, taking off from school or walking out of school -- joining together, rallying and marching, drawing forward many more with them, and in many and varied forms of creative and meaningful political protest throughout the day, letting it be known that they are determined to bring this whole disastrous course to a halt by driving out the Bush Regime through the mobilization of massive political opposition.

If that were done, then the possibility of turning things around and onto a much more favorable direction would take on a whole new dimension of reality.

It would go from something only vaguely hoped for, by millions of isolated individuals, and acted on by thousands so far, to something that had undeniable moral force and unprecedented political impact.

There is a way to make this happen. There is a day, coming soon, on which people will be mobilizing to make this a reality. There is a vehicle and a means through which anguish, outrage and frustration can be transformed into truly meaningful, positive and powerful political mobilization.

On October 5, 2006, on the basis of the Call, The World Can't Wait - Drive Out the Bush Regime!, people throughout the country will be stepping forward in a day of  mass resistance. The breadth, the depth, the impact and the power of that day depends not only on those in The World Can't Wait organization, and others, who are already organizing for this day -- it depends on you, on us, on all those who have been hoping and searching for a means to do something that will really make a difference.

If we fail to act to make this a reality, then it will definitely make a difference -- in a decidedly negative way. But if we do take up the challenge to build for this, and then do take history into our hands on that day, through political action on the massive scale that is called for -- it can make all the difference in the world, in a very positive sense and for the possibility of a better future for humanity.


"The point is this: history is full of examples where people who had right on their side fought against tremendous odds and were victorious. And it is also full of examples of people passively hoping to wait it out, only to get swallowed up by a horror beyond what they ever imagined. The future is unwritten. WHICH ONE WE GET IS UP TO US."

Note From Jean: There is so much more to discover about this amazing initiative and the miracles making it all possible. Please go at to find out more and network this massively right now. Thanks!!


Now, there is more. Did you know that the elite is planning in secret to integrate Canada, the United States and Mexico into the North American equivalent of the European Union? They just had a meeting in Banff. The name of the game for them is to create unified blocks of countries in major areas around the world and then to bring them all together under one oligarchic world government. The media are not covering this but there is a very active Canadian group - - striving to bring this to everyone's attention so as to prevent the disintegration of Canada and Mexico's sovereignty under the booth of the despotic U.S. military regime.

These plans MUST be derailed just as the anti-globalization movement succeeded at blocking them at every step in the last seven years starting in Seattle in 1999.

Please help also to make everyone aware of this forced integration attempt

Thank you for you assistance in networking this material.

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

Free subscription to a large weekly Earth Rainbow Network compilation by simply sending a blank email to

This compilation is archived at

STATS for this compilation: Over 15,5000 words and 49 links provided.

"The hegemonistic pretensions of the American empire are placing at risk the very existence of the human species. We appeal to the people of the United States and of the world to halt this threat which is like a sword hanging over our heads." There’s no time to lose. We have to dump Bush NOW and get on with the pressing issues of global warming, peak oil, nuclear proliferation, poverty and AIDS. Chavez is right; the present model for global rule is broken and corrupt. We need a change. "Capitalism is savagery," Chavez boomed. Viva Chavez.

- Taken from Bush Rages: "I am not Beelzebub, Lord of Sulfur" by Mike Whitney


1. Secret North American Union Meeting in Banff 9/12-14
2. Comments on all this
3. North American Forum held in secret at Banff Springs Hotel
4. Harper Not Just Americanizing, But Abolishing Canada
5. How is deep integration linked to security and defence concerns?
6. Harper falls in line behind U.S. interests
7. Timeline of the Progress Toward a North American Union
8. Who is Mel Hurtig?

See also:

What is the North American Union (NAU)?
Creating a new North American Union (NAU) is the end goal of deep integration. A North American Union would hypothetically be similar to the existing European Union (EU). Canada, the US and Mexico would share a common currency called the Amero (similar to the EU's Euro) and give up their sovereignty to the new political and economic entity. All agreements to harmonize and integrate Canada, the US and Mexico, such as the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), are steps towards the creation of this union. Progressives in Canada such as Vive le and the Council of Canadians oppose a North American Union because it would mean the expansion of NAFTA and the loss of Canadian sovereignty and democracy which the believe would harm regular citizens; progressives in the US oppose the North American Union because of similar reasons, ie the loss of democracy and the handing over of power to large corporations; while US conservatives such as Pat Buchanan oppose the idea for not only of the loss of US sovereignty but also for fear of a large influx of Mexican immigrants.

NAFTA Super Highway Map (Sept 20, 2006)
This map is a conceptualization of the Super Highways now underway to connect the United States, Canada, and Mexico to help bring about the creation of a North American Union similar to the European Union The map's travel corridors show the desired routes of the new Super Highways as proposed by the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI) – a group of wealthy industrialists, academics, and politicians whose aim it is to break down barriers to the North American Union. The main actors in NAFI are members of the Council on Foreign Relations or related organizations based in Mexico and Canada. NAFI, whose first objective is to make "the public and decision-makers aware of the challenges of economic and political integration between the three NAFTA countries," is following the country-integration plan of the European Union. That plan used the idea of "free trade" to make steps toward integration sound appealing to the public. Though the North American Union would devastate the American middle class, the Super Highways are being touted as facilitating free trade and bringing about prosperity in the three countries.NAFI's vision is being enacted right now. Eighty separate, but interconnected, "high priority corridors" are being initiated in the United States. To find a complete list of the 80 intended Super Highway projects, go to

Stop Atlantica

Update from Mel Hurtig:

Alison at Creekside - - was doing strong background on this story last week; follow her to a Maclean's article with some choice quotes from some of the appallingly vulgar people who seem to think of themselves as our leaders: "We've decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes," says [Lockheed Martin's] Covais. "Because we won't get anywhere."


Still others complain the approach is too timid. Robert Pastor, director of the Center for North American Studies at American University in Washington, said the leaders should launch broad consultations on major moves, like a common external tariff and a continental transportation network. "None of these big issues are being discussed. Instead we have a CEO council that is looking at the issue one regulation at a time," he said. But the CEOs say they have a strategy. "Let's get some low-hanging fruit to give the thing some momentum," says Hasenfratz. "But let's not lose sight of bigger-ticket items."

Maude Barlow makes the second msm breakthrough in today's Toronto Star with a good summary of the background and the focus of last week's meeting in Banff
(...) The U.S. administration, anxious to keep up with its country's high energy demands, has shown great interest in this "secure" energy source located just north of its border. With corporations like Suncor involved, energy was an important item of discussion at the Banff meeting last week. Given the detrimental impacts of oil sand extraction on our environment and given that Canada currently exports 66 per cent of its oil (primarily to the U.S.) while importing 55 per cent of what we use domestically from countries like Algeria, Venezuela and Norway, it is alarming that Ottawa would discuss a "North American Energy Strategy" with the U.S. and Mexico before establishing a Canadian strategy that would ensure our ability to protect the environment and ensure a secure energy supply for Canadians. Though not as glamorous as the date between Peter and Condi, the media should pay better attention to this marriage between our governments and big corporations.

And Ian Welsh does even deeper historical background at The Agonist:
There is no popular interest in deep integration with the US in Canada as the majorities against both NAFTA and the Free Trade agreement demonstrated (nor with Canada in the US) yet it trundles along, act after act, administrative ruling after administrative ruling. Governments are always made up of people who come out of a specific world. When you want to figure out who runs the government, the question to ask is "where do they come from?"


Venezuela’s Chavez Says World Faces Choice Between US Hegemony and Survival
(...) Yesterday the Devil was here, in this very place. This table from where I speak still smells like sulfur. Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, in this same hall the President of the United States, who I call "The Devil," came here talking as if he owned the world. It would take a psychiatrist to analyze the US president's speech from yesterday. As the spokesperson for Imperialism he came to give us his recipes for maintaining the current scheme of domination, exploitation and pillage of the world's people. It would make a good Alfred Hitchcock movie. I could even suggest a title: "The Devil's Recipe." That is to say, US Imperialism, and here Chomsky says it with profound and crystalline clarity, is making desperate efforts to consolidate its hegemonic system of domination. We cannot allow this to occur, we cannot permit them to install a world dictatorship, to consolidate a world dictatorship. The speech of the tyrannical president of the world was full of cynicism, full of hypocrisy. It is this imperial hypocrisy with which he attempts to control everything. They want to impose upon us the democratic model they devised, the false democracy of elites. And moreover, a very original democratic model imposed with explosions, bombings, invasions, and cannon shot. That's some democracy! One would have to review the thesis of Aristotle and of the first Greeks who spoke of democracy to see what kind of model of democracy is imposed by marines, invasions, aggressions and bombs. CLIP

Bush Rages: "I am not Beelzebub, Lord of Sulfur" by Mike Whitney
(...) Chavez should give lessons in public speaking. His appearance was like a clap of thunder; waving Chomsky with one hand and pummeling Bush with the other. He managed to heap more muck on "Guantanamo Nation" than anyone since Harold Pinter gave his blistering Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech on 12-7-05. That’s when Pinter said: "The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have ever talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised quite a clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It is a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis." Chavez matched Pinter word for word, exposing the hypocrisy, lies and brutality of an administration that never stops lecturing about freedom and liberation even though it grinds out mountains of carnage everywhere it goes. (...) Chavez held-forth like a preacher at a brothel; scattering the bodies and kicking open the windows to let the sunlight in. He delivered one, ferocious roundhouse punch after another…. Boom, boom, boom…until the crowd rose in a thunderous 5 minute ovation. (which was carefully omitted from the TV coverage) "What would the people of the world tell (Bush) if they were given the floor?" Chavez asked. "What would they have to say? I have some inkling of what they would say, what the oppressed people think. They would say, ‘Yankee imperialist, go home." CLIP


Date: 20 Sep 2006
From: "P. Dalton"
Subject: Secret North American Union Meeting in Banff 9/12-14


September 19, 2006

Contributed by: Susan Thompson Vive le Canada

Here's the scandal that should be outraging Canadians across the country. On September 12-14, elite proponents of deep integration from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico met at a secret conference at the Banff Springs Hotel. The Hotel doesn't want to talk about it. No major media reported on the conference--not the Globe and Mail, not the National Post, not the Toronto Star, no one. Yet the topic of the conference, deep integration or the formation of a "North American Community" aka the North American Union, will profoundly affect everything in our lives from our health and security to the currency we use (soon to be the "Amero") to our very national identity. In essence, we will no longer be Canadians, but North Americans only--and worse, North Americans hog-tied in lock-step with the U.S. even as they gain open access to our energy resources.

Our national media stays silent and so Canadians remain unaware that their own CCCE and most powerful politicians are pushing for integration with the U.S. and Mexico completely outside of the usual democratic process. The only newspaper to report anything on this as yet is the Banff Crag & Canyon, which is publishing an article on the conference today thanks to information provided by Mel Hurtig.

See "North American Forum held in secret at Banff Springs Hotel", September 19, 2006, at , or main link

And of course here at Vive we are ready to do our part. Below please find the secret list of participants in the forum AND the agenda for the forum, thanks to Mel Hurtig's sources.

I hope every one of our readers and supporters will take it upon themselves to call their local and national media and demand coverage of the conference and of integration itself. It is a scandal that this process is being conducted in secret. And whether or not the media will listen, we must also all talk to other Canadians and to our politicians and demand that this become an open public debate. We must especially call and write to the usual suspects who were involved in this conference, especially the chairs and co-chairs, and spread the word so that our American and Mexican neighbours do the same. Otherwise, we will all remain in the dark--until it is too late.

(Internal Document, Not for Public Release)

Report dated August 31, 2006

Forum Co-Chairs:
Dr. Pedro Aspe
Hon. Peter Lougheed
Hon. George Shultz

Canadian Participants

Col. Peter Atkinson Special Advisor to Chief of Defence Staff
Hon. Perrin Beatty Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
Mr. Peter M. Boehm Assistant Deputy Minister, North America
Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada
Mr. Thomas d‚Aquino Canadian Council of Chief Executives
Hon. Stockwell Day Minister of Public Safety, Government of Canada
Dr. Wendy Dobson The Institute for International Business
Mr. N. Murray Edwards Edco Financial Holdings Ltd.
Mr. Ward Elcock Deputy Minister of National Defence
Mr. Bill Elliott Associate Deputy Minister, Public Safety
Dr. John English The Cdn Centre for International Governance Innovation
Mr. Brian Felesky Felesky Flynn LLP
Mr. Richard L. George Suncor Energy Inc.
Dr. Roger Gibbins Canada West Foundation
Rear Adm Roger Girouard Commander Joint Task Force Pacific, Cdn Forces
Major Gen Daniel Gosselin Director General, International Security Policy
Mr. James K. Gray Canada West Foundation
Mr. Fred Green Canadian Pacific Railway
Mr. V. Peter Harder Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Paul J. Hill Harvard Developments Inc.
General Rick Hillier Chief of the Defence Staff
Mr. Pierre Marc Johnston Heenan Blaikie
Mr. James Kinnear Pengrowth Corporation
Mr. Harold N. Kvisle TransCanada Corporation
Hon. John P. Manley McCarthy Tetrault LLP
Mr. Ron Mannix Coril Holdings Ltd.
Mr. Ron Mathison Matco Investments
Hon. Anne McLellan Senior Counsel, Bennett Jones
Hon. Greg Melchin Minister of Energy, Government of Alberta
Ms.Sharon Murphy Chevron Canada
Ms. Sheila O‚Brien President, Corporate Director, Belvedere Investments
Hon. Gordon O‚Connor Minister of Defense, Government of Canada
Mr. Berel Rodal International Center on Nonviolent Conflict
Mr. Gordon Smith Chairman, The International Development Research Centre

American Participants

Ms. Deborah Bolton Political Advisor to Commander, US Northcom
Mr. Ron T. Covais, President, The Americas, Lockheed Martin Corporation
Sec. Kenneth W. Dam Max Pam Professor Emeritus of American & Foreign Law and Senior Lecturer, University of Chicago Law School
Mr. Dan Fisk Senior Director, Western Hemisphere, National Security Council
Sec. Ryan Henry Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
Ms. Carla A. Hills Chairman & CEO, Hills & Co.
Ms. Caryn Hollis DASD (Acting) Western Hemisphere Affairs
Mr. Bill Irwin Manager - International Government Affairs; Policy, Government and Public Affairs, Chevron Corporation
Mr. Robert G. James President, Enterprise Asset Management Inc.
Admiral Tim Keating Commander, US Northern Command
Mr. Floyd Kvamme Chair, President‚s Council of Advisors on Science & Technology; Director, Centre for Global Security Res.
Dr. Ronald F. Lehman II Director, Center for Global Security Research, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Mr. William W. McIlhenny Policy Planning Council for Western Hemisphere Affairs
Dr. Peter McPherson President, National Association of State Universities & Land-Grant Colleges
Ms. Doris Meissner Senior Fellow, Migration Policy Institute
Dr. George Miller Director, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Mr. George Nethercutt Chairman, US Section of the Permanent Joint Board on
Defense, US - Canada (Security)
Mary Anastasia O‚Grady Journalist for Wall Street Journal (Area Specialist)
Dr. Robert A. Pastor Director, Center for North American Studies, American
University, Washington, DC
Dr. William Perry Co-Director, Preventive Defense Project
Lt. Gen. Gene Renuart USAF Senior Military Assist. to Sec. Rumsfeld
Mr. Eric Ruff Department of Defense Press Secretary
Sec. Donald R. Rumsfeld Secretary of Defense, US Department of Defense
Dr. James Schlesinger Former Sec. Of Energy & Defense
Mr. William Schneider President, International Planning Services
Sec. Clay Sell Deputy Secretary of Energy, US Dept. of Energy
Dr. Thomas A. Shannon Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere A
Dr. David G. Victor Director, Program on Energy & Sustainable Development, Center for Environmental Science & Policy
Maj. Gen. Mark A Volcheff Director, Plans, Policy & Strategy, NORAD-NORTHCOM
Ms. Jane Wales President & CEO, World Affairs Council of Northern California
Mr. R. James Woolsey Vice President, Booz Allen Hamilton

Mexican Participants:

Emb Andrés Rozental (Mexican Coordinator) - Mexican Council on Foreign Relations
Silvia Hernández Former Senator and Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on North America
Mario Molina 1995 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
Fernando Chico Pardo CEO, Promecap
Juan Gallardo CEO, Grupo GEUSA
Gerónimo Gutiérrez Deputy Foreign Minister for North America
Luis de la Calle Consultant. Former Deputy Minister of Economy
Agustín Barrios Gómez Solutions Abroad
Vinicio Suro PEMEX
Eduardo Medina Mora Secretary of Public Security
Carlos Heredia State Government of Michoacán
Jaime Zabludowsky Consultant. Former trade negotiator
Manuel Arango CEO, Grupo Concord
Jorge Santibañez President, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte
Luis Rubio CIDAC
Mónica Serrano El Colegio de México, Señor Fellow Oxford University
Arturo Sarukhan Coordinator of Intl Affairs, Campaign of Felipe Calderon
Juan Camilo Mouriño General Coordinator of President Elect's transition team
Ernesto Cordero Coordinator for Public Policy Issues

Ambassadors/Consul General:

Mr. Carlos de Icaza, Ambassador of Mexico to the United States
Mr. Gaëtan Lavertu Ambassador of Canada to Mexico
Ms. Maria Teresa Garcia Segovia de Madero, Ambassador of Mexico to Canada
Mr. Thomas Huffaker U.S. Consul General in Calgary (on DOD's list)
Mr. John Dickson Deputy Chief of Mission, US Embassy in Ottawa
(representing Ambassador of US to Canada)
Mr. Colin Robertson Minister & Head, Washington Advocacy Secretariat,
(representing Ambassador of Canada to US)


Draft Detailed September 1, 2006 Agenda

Internal Document

North American Forum

Fairmont Banff Springs Hotel
Banff, Alberta
September 12-14, 2006

Under the Joint Chairmanship of:

The Hon. George Shultz, Former U.S. Secretary of State
The Hon. Pedro Aspe, Former Finance Minister of Mexico
The Hon. Peter Lougheed, Former Premier of Alberta

Continental Prosperity in the New Security Environment

Session I: Opening comments by Messrs. Aspe, Lougheed and Shultz

Session II: A Vision for North America: Issues and Options

Session III: Toward a North American Energy Strategy

Session IV: Opportunities for Security Cooperation in North America (Parts I and II)

Session V: Demographic and Social Dimensions of North American Integration

Session VI: Border Infrastructure and Continental Prosperity

Session VII: Roundtable Conversation with the Co-Chairs

Draft September 1, 2006 Agenda

North American Forum

The Fairmont Banff Springs
Banff, Alberta, Canada
September 12-14, 2006

CLIP - to read this part describing the Agenda, go at


Comments on all this found though

This James Woolsey?

Oh boy, are we in deep shit!


James Woolsey

Defense Policy Board: Member
Center for Security Policy: Honorary co-chair
Booz Allen Hamilton: Vice President, Global Strategic Security Division

Right Web News
last updated: November 22, 2003

Highlights & Quotes

Like many of his cohorts in the hawk/neocon world, James Woolsey, the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, wears many hats--he is an active member of several hardline policy organizations, he is well-connected to administration insiders and serves on an influential Pentagon policy outfit, he has advised a long line of Pentagon contractors, and he is an influential presence in the nation's media.

In a March 2003 report about the potential conflicts of interest of several members of the Defense Policy Board, the Center for Public Integrity highlighted Woolsey as a case in point: "Former CIA director James Woolsey is a principal in the Paladin Capital Group, a venture-capital firm that like Perle's Trireme Partners is soliciting investment for homeland security firms. Woolsey joined consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton as vice president in July 2002. The company had contracts worth more than $680 million in 2002. Woolsey told the Wall Street Journal that he does no lobbying and that none of the companies he has ties to have been discussed during a Defense Policy Board meeting." (17)

Woolsey served on the controversial Donald Rumsfeld-chaired Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat, whose final report, issued in 1998, argued that several "rogue" countries would be able to target the United States with ballistic missiles in a few short years. Other members of the Rumsfeld-chaired commission included William Schneider, Jr., Stephen Cambone, and Paul Wolfowitz. For more on the commission, see "What They Didn't Do" by Lisbeth Gronlund and David Wright in the November/December 1998 issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. (18)

Woolsey also participated in a study group that produced "Rationale and Requirements for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control," a report published by the hawkish National Institute for Public Policy in 2001. According to the World Policy Institute, the NIPP study served as a blueprint for George W. Bush's Nuclear Posture Review. Among the study participants were several current and former Bush administration officials, including Stephen Cambone, Stephen Hadley, Robert Joseph, and Keith Payne (NIPP's director). (19)

Woolsey, along with several other NIPP study participants--including Keith Payne (NIPP's director)--moved directly from the NIPP study into the Pentagon's Deterrence Concepts Advisory Panel, which was tasked with implementing George W. Bush's Nuclear Posture Review.

Woolsey was a fervent supporter of U.S. intervention in Iraq, arguing during the run up to the war, "We really don't need the Europeans. Anyways, they will be the first in line patting us on the back following our success and saying they were with us all along." He also said, "Only fear will re-establish [Arab] respect for us. ... We need a little bit of Machiavelli." (Quoted in the Glasgow Sunday Herald, April 13, 2003)

Parroting his neocon buddy and fellow Defense Policy Board member Eliot Cohen, Woolsey argued in an April 2003 speech that "the Iraq war was part of "World War IV. ... This is going to be a long war, very long indeed. I hope not as long as the Cold War, 40 plus years, but certainly longer than either World War I or World War II. I rather imagine it's going to be measured, I'm afraid, in decades." (5)


And also from:

A comment on "Deep Integration Planned at Secret Conference Ignored by the Media"

by: mjclarke on Tuesday, September 19 2006

The apathy among the citizens concerning this de facto annexation clearly demonstrates that our "democracy" has failed to educate its people on the important issues. Without informed voters it is impossible to have a valid election outcome. Without a valid election outcome a democracy becomes nothing more than a pseudo-democratic shill for rule by policy-making elites, which means we live in a plutocracy. It looks like the Canadian Action Party is the only clear voice in the wilderness in this country. The problem is that they are only a tiny voice in the wilderness, and, as the article points out, the elites' covert action to annex Canada is happening right now. I find this extremely disheartening, because one of the (less important but still very good) reasons I became a Canadian was that I wouldn't have to be an "American" anymore. Think about how mad I am now! The Harperites/Coniberals are traitors for allowing the NAU. It would be one thing if the U.S. was a moral country, but it is instead the biggest terrorist on the planet. It is unbelievable that most Canadians don't care about the NAU integration. I work in an office of about 45 people and have been warning them about Deep Integration for several years. Along with my concerns for social justice and environmental responsibility, I am seen as a "fringe" thinker. Only my exceptional job performance has kept me from being fired. That said, about a year ago my boss called me in and gave me some shit just for good measure. The upshot was that "I was upsetting some fellow workers." I am now banned from talking politics at work, even though my fellow workers consider themselves "leading edge professionals". When nobody wants to hear anything "controversial", it tells me that I am living in a corrupt culture that only likes comfort, not truth. Is this not a characteristic of a degenerate society? Another indication of the strength of the corporatists is the toppling of the Swedish government this week. From what I observed, the party just voted into power is dominated by neo-liberal economic philosophy. Yes, conservative forces are spreading everywhere, not just Canada. These elites believe that people around the world must be subjugated by their de facto "international union of transnational corporatist states" before the global financial tsunami that so many think is unavoidable hits everybody and the dystopia results in anarchy.

- Michael


Here is another telling comment:

Authored by: boflaade on Tuesday, September 19 2006

And somehow we are to believe that the Softwood "agreement" wasn't agreed prior to Harper announcing it was. I am also wondering if this meeting would be of interest to the public. The average Canadian will slurp their coffee's over the morning paper and at most shrug their shoulders and continue on to the sports section. It's not just apathy, it's the constant bombardment of their world being screwed again. No one expects to have the government(s)doing anything for their benefit and obviously can sleep with it. If Thompson could make more then those of us on VIVELECANADA more aware, how many will react? "Secret meetings held by three governments in Banff " don't make headlines anymore. People expect it and assume they will be briefed when it's over. When it is over, few will remember to ask. Members of this vast meeting are very well aware that if the media aren't aware of the discussions, the media has nothing to report. No one can protest if they too are unaware of what's being said. A very well planned party. This is not a meeting to see if the North American Union is feasible. It's a meeting to discuss the details of an already made plan. There is no turning back and doubtfully no head of state will stop the ball from rolling at this stage. No one person can. We will all be briefed eventually.


Another comment:

Authored by: Ed Deak on Wednesday, September 20 2006

The capitalist media is, in many ways, far more controlled and censored than the fascist, nazi and communists medias I have grown up with and known. The same for the educational systems, especially at the university levels.Ed Deak.



North American Forum held in secret at Banff Springs Hotel

• U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld listed as keynote speaker; critics say presence of “war criminal” should have been announced

By Aaron Paton

September 19, 2006

Banff Crag & Canyon  — A handful of Banff residents are outraged the Fairmont Banff Springs Hotel hosted American political leaders in a series of secret meetings with political and business leaders from Canada, Mexico and the United States.

And they’re suggesting the conference included a man some consider to be the most powerful man in America: U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

An internal document obtained by the Banff Crag & Canyon shows that Rumsfeld was scheduled to be a keynote speaker on Wednesday, Sept. 13, although no one at the hotel would confirm or deny that he was in Banff.

Reported sightings of Rumsfeld couldn’t be confirmed by the Crag, but his speech was supposed to have been entitled: Opportunities for Security Co-operation in North America -- Military-to-military Co-operation. It was scheduled for 1:30 p.m.

Sgt. Wayne Wiebe of the Banff RCMP said he had heard that internationally protected persons (IPPs) like Rumsfeld may have been coming to Banff last week but increased police security was not requested by the Banff Springs.

The 2006 North American Forum, entitled Continental Prosperity in the New Security Environment, was hosted by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives with help from the Canada West Foundation at the Springs from Sept. 12 to 14. The first North American Forum that happened in October, 2005 in Sonoma, Calif. was also kept secret.

Banff taxi driver Chris Foote said he heard rumblings of Rumsfeld’s alleged visit soon after he noticed that a Mexican Flag had been placed atop the Banff Springs.

“People should know if these people are getting together and talking,” Foote said. “(Canada, Mexico and America) have three conservative governments now and all of the sudden this is happening.”

Foote, a former Green Party candidate in Wild Rose, added that whether or not Rumsfeld was in town, many people in Banff would be appalled that the Springs was supposedly hosting a man he termed a “war criminal,” and will protest at the Banff Springs on Monday, Sept. 25 at 3 p.m.

Former Alberta premier Peter Lougheed co-chaired the event alongside former U.S. secretary of state George Shultz and former Mexican finance minister Pedro Aspe. Canadians scheduled to attend included Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day, Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier and Alberta Energy Minister Greg Melchin.

American invitees included Rumsfeld, his assistant, Lt. Gen. Gene Renuart and former secretary of energy and defence James Schlesinger.

The list also includes businessmen such as Roger Gibbins, president and CEO of Canada West Foundation, and Ron T. Covais, president of the Lockheed Martin Corporation, which is the largest weapons manufacturer in the United States.

Topics included “A Vision for North America,” “A North American Energy Strategy,” “Demographic and Social Dimensions of North American Integration,” and “Opportunities for Security Co-operation.”

John Larsen, spokesman for the North American Forum, said that the public was not notified of the closed and private meeting and would not confirm or deny that Rumsfeld or anyone else was in attendance. He said he did not know who paid for the forum.

“There are all kinds of conferences going on at the Banff Springs that draw Illuminatis and if those conferences are private in nature then I think we also have to respect that these people, by nature of the offices that they hold, still have a right to a certain degree of privacy,” Larsen said.

He added that the meetings are not meant to be secret and that individuals are allowed to say if they attended the forum.

“People that are relatively senior in business… if they’re going to come to these things and put their open and frank discussions on the table in order for those conversations to be as fruitful as possible they want to think that there’s some (confidentiality).

“You can imagine that if this was all televised or open to public scrutiny, the nature of the conversations and ultimately what you would be able to do with those conversations and how far you might be able to advance the solutions around it would be different.”

The only media member invited to the event was the Wall Street Journal’s Mary Anastasia O’Grady, according to the list of participants provided to the Crag.

Banff resident Aaron Doncaster heard that Rumsfeld may have been coming last week and handed out pamphlets to customers and hotel workers at the Banff Springs soon after the event had ended.

“It disturbs me because he’s got a lawsuit against him from the American Civil Liberties Association for the torture and abuse of prisoners of war in U.S. military custody,” Doncaster said.

He added that the public should have been notified of the forum regardless of Rumsfeld’s presence in Banff.

“Protesters have a right to be heard,” Doncaster said. “That’s the most democratic way we can show our disapproval of our elected officials.”

A peaceful protest will be held outside the Banff Springs Hotel next Monday, Sept.25 at 3 p.m. on the sidewalk of Spray Avenue. The pamphlet advertising says “We are protesting the Banff Springs Hotel’s involvement in this crime of treason against Canadian, American and Mexican Citizens.”

Banff Springs spokesperson Lori Grant said it’s against the hotel’s policy to talk about any meetings or guests at the hotel.

“In Canada we have the right to protest, so they can,” Grant said.

All documents obtained by the Crag were obtained from Canadian publisher and politician Mel Hurtig.

He’s the author of political writings such as The Betrayal of Canada, The Vanishing Country and Rushing to Armageddon.

“It’s astonishing that there could be such an important meeting of so many high-level people from government and other organizations where apparently the desire was to not let the public know about these meetings,” Hurtig said. “All Canadians had best be concerned about the purpose of this conference and what went on at the conference.

“The fact that they’re having these meetings in secret is of even greater concern.”

Stockwell Day and Peter Lougheed did not immediately return phone calls but the office of Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Harper was not in Banff last week.

Rumours circulating in Banff said the hotel’s fourth floor was taken up by the conference and that many of its attendees showed up in the middle of the night in buses.



August 31 2006

Harper Not Just Americanizing, But Abolishing Canada

By Susan Thompson

For all the continuing concern among Canada’s progressives that Harper is Americanizing this country, it’s unfortunate that there has been silence about the fact that if he has his way, this country as we know it will soon no longer exist.

Plans are on track to establish a North American Union (NAU), a new political and economic entity that would take over governance from the existing countries of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. This is the actual end goal of “deep integration”, also known as the “Big Idea” or “Grand Bargain”, as has been made clear in publications from Robert Pastor’s book Toward a North American Community to the Council on Foreign Relations’ trilateral task force report “Building a North American Community”. It doesn’t seem to matter that the Canadian public remains largely unaware of the plan and its consequences. Nor has it been approved by the U.S. Congress; as Republican Congressman Ron Paul has written, “Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has had no role at all in a ‘dialogue’ that many see as a plan for a North American union”. But political elites in all three countries, in partnership with representatives of giant corporations such as Lockheed Martin, have been working hard to keep making headway despite what the public may think.

In fact, unfortunately, most of the battles have already been won. The steps that have led us down the road towards complete integration with the U.S. have been sometimes slow but still steady since U.S. President Ronald Reagan first spoke about a common North American market back in the early 80s. A series of trade agreements, starting with the first FTA and progressing through NAFTA into the new NAFTA-plus (aka the Security and Prosperity Partnership Initiative) have established the framework for union. (Note that according to the U.S. government website dedicated to the project, the SPP is neither a treaty nor a formal agreement; it is a "dialogue", a dubious distinction which simply seems meant to prevent official debate and discussion of the SPP among the rest of the elected representatives of the three countries.) The leaders are to meet again in Canada in 2007 to discuss progress in this “dialogue”, at Harper’s invitation.

Harper, of course, is not solely to blame. He was the merely the last Canadian Prime Minister to sign on to the plan, issuing a Leaders’ Joint Statement with the U.S. and Mexico in Cancun in March, but every successive Prime Minister since Mulroney has played his part regardless of party affiliation. The sad fact is it hasn’t seemed to matter if we’ve had a Liberal or Conservative PM—all have been just as willing as Mulroney to sing the praises of the U.S. administration, and just as willing to sign away Canadian sovereignty on the latest in a long series of dotted lines. Mulroney kicked things off by signing the original FTA, although he was acting on the advice of a Royal Commission chaired by former Liberal Minister of Finance Donald S. Macdonald. Chretien signed NAFTA without changes despite his Red Book promise to renegotiate the agreement. And Martin fulfilled his role as an “amigo” to the U.S. at the Waco Summit in 2005, signing the Security and Prosperity Partnership Initiative, the foundation for NAFTA-plus and a future North American Union. Harper has only had to pick up where they left off, although there is little doubt he has been more than willing to do so. Nor has it been any different in the U.S., where it hasn’t mattered whether it was Republicans or Democrats in power—every President since Reagan has been on board.

It’s seems it’s no longer just the black cats and white cats of health care we have to worry about, it’s the black cats and white cats of deep integration. Mice in all three countries should take notice. Although our leaders deny that the deep integration “dialogue” or agreements will affect the sovereignty of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, it seems obvious that as they create new supra-national organizations to "coordinate" everything from border security to health policy it is sovereignty and democracy that will suffer. What we are seeing is the creation of an unelected mega-government that answers to no one—except perhaps the giant multinational corporations who have been pushing for this for all these years. It is their CEOs who have been on the task forces and overseen the signing of the documents that have made their dreams a reality. It is these same corporations who will be able to not only influence but practically decide public policy, when everything comes down to whether North America is “competitive” enough and whether goods and services are being allowed to “flow freely” across the old borders. Ironically, the very politicians signing away their sovereignty will be the ones made pretty much redundant once they are overruled by the new North American Union (NAU).

In Canada we should also remember that while the EU was more or less a joining of equals, Mexico and Canada are not roughly equal in size and power to the U.S. but are rather dwarfed by the world’s only imperial power. In practical terms this means the U.S. will most certainly be setting policy for all three countries, especially since most multinational corporations involved in this process are U.S.-owned. Considering the unpopularity of the Bush administration and its policies in the U.S. itself, not to mention Canada, and around the world, erasing the borders between our countries and adopting U.S. policies at this time will likely create economic, political and military insecurity in this country rather than the security the “dialogue” promises. In the end it would also mean the loss of any unique policies and therefore identity that Canada has had, including everything from our past emphasis on multilateralism in foreign affairs to our public health care system. We will finally become America Lite, even as the U.S. itself also concedes its sovereignty and the democratic rights of its own citizens.

Consider also the differing economic fortunes of Canada and the U.S. at the moment. Deep integration and union would almost certainly mean saddling ourselves with a U.S. debt that is rapidly spinning out of control thanks to factors such as the expensive war in Iraq. With Canada continuing to experience surpluses the clear loser in this case is Canada, while conversely it is obvious why the U.S. may want to hitch its wagon to ours at this point in time.

Yet there is hope. The final nails have not been hammered into the coffin just yet. In Canada, progressive critics of our “free trade” agreements who have long argued that these agreements would lead to an eventual merging of North America into a border-free area and the increase of corporate power, such as the Council of Canadians, continue to raise these issues. In the U.S., even American conservatives such as Pat Buchanan are loudly denouncing the plan, largely due to xenophobic fears about merging with Mexico, but also for some of the same reasons as Canadian progressives, namely that establishing a North American Union means conceding sovereignty. The more voices that are raised against the plan, the more likely there can be real debate and a chance to stop it. Elected officials in all three countries must take it on themselves to ask questions and make these issues news, and if they won’t do it, citizens must pressure them.

There is a Canadian federal election coming up after all and this would make an excellent election issue. Free trade has been an issue in at least one past election and with the rapid progress being made towards union, it should be again. In the last federal election, the NDP promised to renegotiate NAFTA, and this year new Green Party leader Elizabeth May has already promised the same thing. Perhaps they and other politicians would do better to not only commit to renegotiating NAFTA, but to refuse to sign on to any further agreements (or “dialogues”) that will herald or speed the creation of NAFTA-plus and a North American Union (NAU).

Even according to the SPP website, "the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America represents a broad and ambitious agenda." It will be up to regular citizens to understand and oppose this agenda and hold their politicians to account--before it’s too late.


For more information on progress toward a North American Union (NAU), see

Susan Thompson worked for U.S. advocacy organization before founding Vive le, an alternative media and activist website with the goal of protecting and improving Canadian sovereignty and democracy, in 2003. She was a candidate for the NDP in the last two federal elections and has also worked as a freelance journalist for several years.



How is deep integration linked to security and defence concerns?

After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the U.S., it became apparent that the U.S. government was willing to slow trade to a crawl by upping security at the border to prevent what it perceived as potential further terrorist threats. This has worried Canadian elites and corporations because big business-friendly policies have made Canada heavily dependent on exports to the U.S. and cross border traffic.

For more explanation of this, see The Canada We Want.

Additionally, when the Canadian government has opposed U.S. foreign policy, such as by opting out of the war in Iraq and U.S. missile defence, U.S. representatives such as former U.S. Ambassador to Canada have tied such decisions to economic implications.

For example, from a CTV News story:

"Cellucci had added that Canada's close ties to the U.S. have been called into question recently due to the war. For economic reasons, 'it's important we keep working together.'

When asked whether the U.S. would punish Canada through trade agreements, Cellucci replied: 'It's not in our economic interests to do that,' but added, 'we'll have to wait and see if there are any ramifications.' "

And from another article at the time:

"Vancouver, B.C. ( - When U.S. Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci publicly criticized Canada's Liberal government recently for refusing to join the war on Iraq, he also alluded to concerns in the Canadian business community that the government's decision could end up harming trade with the U.S. Agricultural, steel and lumber trade could all be hurt, according to analysts.

In a widely reported speech to the Economic Club of Canada in Toronto, Cellucci accused the Jean Chretien government of abandoning America at a time of need. His wording suggested that Canada was behaving dishonorably...

...Cellucci, in his speech, alluded to Canada's massive dependence on U.S. trade and its relative lack of interest in border security and military spending. 'For Canada, the priority is trade; for us, the priority is security,' he said. 'Security trumps trade.' Cellucci went on to say that while the U.S. would not retaliate against Canada, in the long run, Canada's position could affect diplomatic and economic relations."

Thus, several plans and ideas and proposals for deep integration have incorporated security and defence harmonization as part of the deep integration package, along with regulatory and trade harmonization.

The CCCE proposed a North American Defence Alliance in the North American Security and Prosperity Initiative, for example; and Wendy Dobson's "Big Idea" includes a "strategic bargain" with the U.S. on border security, immigration, and defence policy.

Strong calls for linking security and trade have also come from the U.S. itself of course. See for example comments by U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez in June 2005:

Speaking to a group of business and government officials in this wealthy, northern town, Gutierrez said NAFTA, groundbreaking when it began in 1994, doesn't address issues raised by recent terrorism concerns and the emergence of economic powerhouses like China.

Canada, the United States and Mexico are already discussing ways to expand and modernize NAFTA with a still-developing agreement dubbed NAFTA-plus.

Gutierrez called on the three nations to change regulations and tear down remaining barriers to trade.

"Our mission is to ensure North America remains the most open, the most vibrant, competitive market in the world," he said.

He said a top regional challenge was balancing security along the border with the free flow of trade.

"Our borders must be sealed shut to terrorists," he said. "But they must remain open to trade." He warned that the European Union and China were trying to replace North America as the world's leading economic block, and said the only way the region can compete is by getting rid of outdated rules that make it difficult for companies to move their products within the three countries.

To find out MUCH much more on this issue, explore



Harper falls in line behind U.S. interests (Frances Russell)

September 6, 2006 - Winnipeg Free Press

PRIME Minister Stephen Harper is moving at warp speed to integrate Canada’s security, defence and foreign policies with the U.S. and shred our competitive advantage over the U.S. in lumber and wheat.

Days before Ottawa bludgeoned Canada’s lumber industry into the deeply flawed softwood lumber agreement, The Vancouver Sun published the details of a “leaked” letter from the Bush administration to the U.S. lumber lobby. In it, the American administration confirmed that its objective was to hobble the Canadian industry for seven years. Nor does it end there.

Fully $450 million of the $1.3 billion in illegal duties the Americans will get to keep will grease re-election wheels for protectionist Republicans facing tough fights in upcoming midterm congressional elections. Canada’s timber industry will thus be forced to subsidize an ongoing, illicit, attack on itself. All with the explicit consent of the Canadian government.

There is more. When the industry balked, the Harper government used intimidation — a now-familiar tactic of our new prime minister. On Aug. 4, The Globe and Mail quoted a senior government official warning that opponents “… should prepare themselves for the consequences of rejecting it and might want to start contemplating a world where Ottawa is no longer in the business of subsidizing softwood disputes.”

The softwood deal is trade managed of, by and for the American lumber lobby. A supposedly sovereign nation signed on to an unprecedented clause requiring provinces to first vet any changes in forestry policy with Washington.

Ignored in all the hype about “how thankful we should be that Conservatives get along so well with Americans” is this reality. Canada tossed away a significant victory, won, not before the useless North American Free Trade Agreement panels, but from the U.S. Court of International Trade. On April 7, it ruled U.S. duties on Canadian softwood were illegal. This is the second time a Conservative government has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory on the lumber file. In 1986, the GATT, the World Trade Organization’s predecessor, issued a preliminary finding on the legality of U.S. lumber duties against Canada. Brian Mulroney’s government, bent on negotiating a free trade agreement with the U.S., abruptly aborted it, with the eager acquiescence of the Americans. The finding was never published. It doesn’t take a suspicious mind to assume that GATT had ruled for Canada. Mulroney foreclosed on the GATT ruling because it would have wiped out his entire argument about the “necessity” of a bilateral free trade deal.

Free trade is like a computer virus, coursing through Canada’s social, economic and political systems, eradicating everything unique.

The first agricultural casualty was the prairie wheat pools. They corporatized, hoping to surf on the private American market. Instead, they surfed on losses and put the Canadian Wheat Board on a timeline. The Americans began gunning for it before the ink was even dry on their signature to the initial FTA in 1989.

Since then, the wheat board has been subjected to 11 separate U.S. trade attacks. The cry, as with lumber, has been unfair subsidies. The U.S. doesn’t just want to eliminate a formidable competitor on the world wheat market for its multinational agribusiness. It wants that agribusiness to capture the price advantage enjoyed by superior Canadian wheat.

Despite polls showing 73 per cent of western wheat farmers support the board, the Harper government is, as in lumber, preparing to do the Americans’ dirty work. It has begun the process to abolish the board’s monopoly. All that is stopping it is the fact it lacks a majority and couldn’t amend the current CWB Act. It requires a farmer plebiscite for any changes to the board’s status.

Terry Pugh, spokesman for the National Farmers’ Union, says a dual market kills the CWB because its monopoly seller position is precisely what earns farmers premium prices in global markets. The CWB’s demise wouldn’t just affect farmers but also have a ripple effect across the Canadian economy, closing the Port of Churchill, seriously impacting Thunder Bay and even the ports of Vancouver and Prince Rupert, he continues. Canadian grain would go south, be mixed with American grain and shipped through American ports. Canadian wheat, as a distinct commodity, would disappear.

John Morriss, editor and publisher of the Farmers’ Independent Weekly, says a dual market is a chimera. He asks farmers to recall the voluntary Central Selling Agency run by the pools in the 1920s and the voluntary CWB which began in 1935. Both had spectacular bankruptcies, likely the two biggest business failures in Canadian history. The voluntary CWB lost $62 million in 1938-39 — an enormous sum at that time.

The reason a dual market won’t work is obvious, Morriss continues. “If the open market is higher than the initial payment, the board gets few deliveries. If the initial payment is higher than the market, it gets the deliveries but has to sell at a loss.” It’s said the beaver bites off its testicles when threatened. If true, the beaver is certainly an apt symbol, if not for Canada, certainly for a succession of governments which, when faced with ceaseless bullying, react by carving off pieces of the nation.



August 30 2006

Timeline of the Progress Toward a North American Union

Contributed by: sthompson

Inspired by a similar U.S. timeline I posted a little while ago, I've created an official Vive le timeline of the progress to create a North American Union (NAU). Please spread the timeline far and wide--it is a tool for creating awareness and you are free to copy it, print it, email it, etc. Use it as a resource when encountering people who don't know about deep integration or don't believe that we are headed toward a North American Union (NAU). Use it as a call to action to stop this madness before it is too late--remember, the six actions mandated this spring by Canada, the U.S. and Mexico to create a North American Union (NAU) could be done in part or even in full by 2007.

The timeline will be a permanent page at Timeline of the Progress Toward a North American Union. That will be the version that is updated as events progress or corrections/additions are called to my attention. I will make sure to link it from various places on Vive.

I am also copying and pasting it below (however the link provided will be the most up-to-date version):

Timeline of the Progress Toward a North American Union

Canadian, U.S., and Mexican elites, including CEOS and politicians, have a plan to create common North American policies and further integrate our economies. This plan goes by various names and euphemisms, such as "deep integration", "NAFTA-plus", "harmonization", the "Big Idea", the "Grand Bargain", and the "North American Security and Prosperity Initiative". Regardless of which name your prefer, the end goal of all of these plans is to create a new political and economic entity named the North American Union (NAU) that would supercede the existing countries. Theoretically, it would be similar to and competetive with the European Union (EU). The individual currencies of each country would be replaced by a common currency called the "Amero" and everything from environmental regulations to security would be brought in line with a common standard.

Vive le offers the following timeline as a resource to educate the general public about the progress of the three countries toward a new North American Union (NAU).

Vive le opposes the creation of the North American Union (NAU) because we believe it will mean the loss of Canadian sovereignty and democracy and hand over more power to giant, unelected corporations. We also believe that unlike the EU, the countries joining the NAU are not roughly equal in size and power and that this means the U.S. will most certainly be setting policy for all three countries. Considering the unpopularity of the Bush administration and its policies in the U.S., Canada, and around the world we believe that erasing the borders between our countries and adopting U.S. policies at this time is a bad idea and will create economic, political and military insecurity in this country. We hope that raising awareness about the plan to create a North American Union (NAU) will create opposition and encourage debate in all three countries, but especially in Canada.

Note: This timeline is a work in progress and will also be updated as events progress. If you notice a correction that needs to be made or an event that should be included, please email


• November 13, 1979: While officially declaring his candidacy for U.S. President, Ronald Reagan proposes a “North American Agreement” which will produce “a North American continent in which the goods and people of the three countries will cross boundaries more freely.”

• January 1981: U.S. President Ronald Reagan proposes a North American common market.

• September 4, 1984: Conservative Brian Mulroney is elected Prime Minister of Canada after opposing free trade during the campaign.

• September 25, 1984: Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney meets President Reagan in Washington and promises closer relations with the US.

• October 9, 1984: The US Congress adopts the Trade and Tariff Act, an omnibus trade act that notably extends the powers of the president to concede trade benefits and enter into bilateral free trade agreements. The Act would be passed on October 30, 1984.

• 1985: A Canadian Royal Commission on the economy chaired by former Liberal Minister of Finance Donald S. Macdonald issues a report to the Government of Canada recommending free trade with the United States.

• St. Patrick's Day, 1985: Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and President Ronald Reagan sing "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" together to cap off the "Shamrock Summit", a 24-hour meeting in Quebec City that opened the door to future free trade talks between the countries. Commentator Eric Kierans observed that "The general impression you get, is that our prime minister invited his boss home for dinner." Canadian historian Jack Granatstein said that this "public display of sucking up to Reagan may have been the single most demeaning moment in the entire political history of Canada's relations with the United States."

• September 26, 1985: Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney announces that Canada will try to reach a free trade agreement with the US.

• December 10, 1985: U.S. President Reagan officially informs Congress about his intention to negotiate a free trade agreement with Canada under the authority of trade promotion. Referred to as fast track, trade promotion authority is an accelerated legislative procedure which obliges the House of Representatives and the Senate to decide within 90 days whether or not to establish a trade trade unit. No amendments are permitted.

• May 1986: Canadian and American negotiators begin to work out a free trade deal. The Canadian team is led by former deputy Minister of Finance Simon Reisman and the American side by Peter O. Murphy, the former deputy United States trade representative in Geneva.

• October 3, 1987: The 20-chapter Canada–United States Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA or FTA) is finalized.

• November 6, 1987: Signing of a framework agreement between the US and Mexico.

• January 2, 1988: Prime Minister Mulroney and President Reagan sign the FTA.

• January 1, 1989: The Canada US Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA or FTA) goes into effect.

• June 10, 1990: Presidents Bush (U.S.) and Salinas (Mexico) announce that they will begin discussions aimed at liberalizing trade between their countries.

• August 21, 1990: Mexican President Salinas officially proposes to the US president the negotiation of a free trade agreement between Mexico and the US.

• February 5, 1991: Negotiations between the US and Mexico aimed at liberalizing trade between the two countries officially become trilateral at the request of the Canadian government under Brian Mulroney.

• April 7 to 10, 1991: Cooperation agreements are signed between Mexico and Canada covering taxation, cultural production and exports.

• May 24, 1991: The American Senate endorses the extension of fast track authority in order to facilitate the negotiation of free trade with Mexico.

• June 12, 1991: Start of trade negotiations between Canada, the US and Mexico.

• April 4, 1992 Signing in Mexico by Canada and Mexico of a protocol agreement on cooperation projects regarding labour.

• August 12, 1992: Signing of an agreement in principle on NAFTA.

• September 17, 1992: Creation of a trilateral commission responsible for examining cooperation in the area of the environment.

• October 7, 1992: Official signing of NAFTA by Michael Wilson of Canada (minister), American ambassador Carla Hills and Mexican secretary Jaime Serra Puche, in San Antonio (Texas).

• December 17, 1992: Official signing of NAFTA by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, US president George Bush, and Mexican president Carlos Salinas de Gortari, subject to its final approval by the federal Parliaments of the three countries.

• March 17 and 18, 1993: Start of tripartite discussions in Washington aimed at reaching subsidiary agreements covering labor and the environment.

• September 14, 1993: Official signing of parallel agreements covering labor and the environment in the capitals of the three countries.

• 1993: The Liberal Party under Jean Chretien promises to renegotiate NAFTA in its campaign platform, titled "Creating Opportunity: the Liberal Plan for Canada" and also known as The Red Book.

• December 1993: Newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien signs NAFTA without changes, breaking his promise to renegotiate NAFTA. U.S. President Bill Clinton signs NAFTA for the U.S.

• January 1, 1994: NAFTA and the two agreements on labour and the environment go into effect, replacing CUSFTA.

• November 16, 1994: Canada and Mexico sign a cooperation agreement regarding the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

• December 1994: The Summit of the Americas is held in Miami. The three signatories of NAFTA officially invite Chile to become a contractual party of the agreement. The Free Trade Area of the Americas or FTAA is initiated. According to the offical FTAA website, "the Heads of State and Government of the 34 democracies in the region agreed to construct a Free Trade Area of the Americas, or FTAA, in which barriers to trade and investment will be progressively eliminated. They agreed to complete negotiations towards this agreement by the year 2005 and to achieve substantial progress toward building the FTAA by 2000." See: FTAA at

• December 22, 1994: Mexican monetary authorities decide to let the Peso float. The US and Canada open a US$6 billion line of credit for Mexico.

• January 3, 1995: Mexican president Ernesto Zedillo presents an emergency plan.

• January 1995: President Clinton announces an aid plan for Mexico.

• February 9, 1995: Mickey Kantor, the US Foreign Trade representative, announces Washington’s intention to include the provisions of NAFTA regarding labor and the environment in negotiations with Chile.

• February 21, 1995: Signing in Washington of an agreement regarding the financial assistance given to Mexico. Mexico in turn promises to pay Mexican oil export revenue as a guarantee into an account at the Federal Reserve in New York.

• February 28, 1995: Mexico announces the increase of its customs duties on a number of imports from countries with which it does not have a free trade agreement.

• March 9, 1995: President Zedillo presents austerity measures. The plan envisages a 50% increase in value added taxes, a 10% reduction of government expenditure, a 35% increase in gas prices, a 20% increase in electricity prices and a 100% increase in transportation prices. The minimum wage is increased by 10%. The private sector can benefit from government assistance. The inter-bank rate that is reduced to 74% will be increased to 109% on March 15.

• March 29, 1995: Statistical data on US foreign trade confirms the sharp increase in Mexican exports to the US.

• April 10, 1995: The US dollar reaches its lowest level in history on the international market. It depreciated by 50% relative to the Japanese yen in only four years.

• June 7, 1995: First meeting of the ministers of Foreign Trade of Canada (Roy MacLaren), the US (Mickey Kantor), Mexico (Herminio Blanco) and Chile (Eduardo Aninat) to start negotiations.

• December 29, 1995: Chile and Canada commit to negotiate a bilateral free trade agreement.

• June 3, 1996: Chile and Canada start negotiating the reciprocal opening of markets in Santiago.

• November 18, 1996: Signing in Ottawa of the Canada-Chile free trade agreement by Jean Chrétien, Prime Minister of Canada and Eduardo Frei, President of Chile. The agreement frees 80% of trade between the two countries. It is the first free trade agreement signed between Chile and a member of the G 7.

• July 4, 1997: The Canada-Chile free trade agreement comes into effect.

• 1997: The US presidency proposes applying NAFTA parity to Caribbean countries.

• April 17, 1998: Signing in Santiago, Chile of the free trade agreement between Chile and Mexico by President Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León of Mexico, and President Eduardo Frei of Chile.

• August 1, 1999: The Chile-Mexico free trade agreement comes into effect.

• September, 1999: The Canadian right-wing think tank the Fraser Institute publishes a paper by Herbert G. Grubel titled "The Case for the Amero: The Economics and Politics of a North American Monetary Union". In the paper Grubel argues that a common currency is not inevitable but it is desirable. See: The Case for the Amero at

• July 2, 2000: Vicente Fox Quesada of the National Action Party (PAN), is elected president of Mexico, thus ending the reign of the Revolutionary Institutional Party (RIP) that had held power for 71 years. Mr. Fox is sworn in on 1 December 2000.

• July 4, 2000: Mexican president Vicente Fox proposes a 20 to 30 year timeline for the creation of a common North American market. President Fox’s “20/20 vision” as it is commonly called, includes the following: a customs union, a common external tariff, greater coordination of policies, common monetary policies, free flow of labor, and fiscal transfers for the development of poor Mexican regions. With the model of the European Fund in mind, President Fox suggests that US$10 to 30 billion be invested in NAFTA to support underdeveloped regions. The fund could be administered by an international financial institution such as the Inter-American Development Bank.

• November 27, 2000: Trade negotiations resume between the US and Chile for Chile’s possible entry into NAFTA.

• 2001: Robert Pastor's 2001 book "Toward a North American Community" is published. The book calls for the creation of a North American Union (NAU).

• April 2001: Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and US President George W. Bush sign the Declaration of Quebec City at the third Summit of the Americas: “This is a ‘commitment to hemispheric integration". See: Declaration of Quebec City at

• September 11, 2001: A series of coordinated suicide terrorist attacks upon the United States, predominantly targeting civilians, are carried out on Tuesday, September 11, 2001. Two planes (United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 11) crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City, one plane into each tower (One and Two). Both towers collapsed within two hours. The pilot of the third team crashed a plane into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia. Passengers and members of the flight crew on the fourth aircraft attempted to retake control of their plane from the hijackers; that plane crashed into a field near the town of Shanksville in rural Somerset County, Pennsylvania. Excluding the 19 hijackers, a confirmed 2,973 people died and another 24 remain listed as missing as a result of these attacks. In response, the Bush administration launches the "war on terror" and becomes very concerned with security.

• December 2001: New U.S. Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci publicly advocates "NAFTA-plus". See: The Emergence of a North American Community? (not accessible)

• December 2001: U.S. Governor Tom Ridge and Canadian Deputy Prime Minister John Manley sign the Smart Border Declaration and Associated 30-Point Action Plan to Enhance the Security of Our Shared Border While Facilitating the Legitimate Flow of People and Goods. The Action Plan has four pillars: the secure flow of people, the secure flow of goods, secure infrastructure, and information. It includes shared customs data, a safe third-country agreement, harmonized commercial processing, etc.

• April 2002: The Canadian right-wing think tank the C.D. Howe Institute publishes the first paper in the "Border Papers" series, which they have described as "a project on Canada's choices regarding North American integration." The Border Papers were published with the financial backing of the Donner Canadian Foundation. Generally the border papers advocate deep integration between Canada and the U.S., and the first border paper "Shaping the Future of the North American Economic Space: A Framework for Action" by Wendy Dobson popularized the term "the Big Idea" as one euphemism for deep integration. To read the border papers, you can visit the C.D. Howe Institute website at Use the publication search form (1996 to current, PDF) and choose "border papers" from the "Serie contains" drop down menu.

• September 9, 2002: President Bush and Prime Minister Chrétien meet to discuss progress on the Smart Border Action Plan and ask that they be updated regularly on the work being done to harmonize our common border.

• December 5, 2002: The text of the Safe Third Country Agreement is signed by officials of Canada and the United States as part of the Smart Border Action Plan. See the final text: Final Text of the Safe Third Country Agreement at

Refugee support groups on both sides of the Canadian-U.S. border criticize the new agreement dealing with refugees for stipulating that refugees must seek asylum in whichever of the two countries they reach first. Critics say that preventing individuals who first set foot in the U.S. from making a claim in Canada will increase cases of human smuggling, and that other refugees will be forced to live without any kind of legal status in the U.S. See for example: 10 Reasons Why Safe Third Country is a Bad Deal at

• September 11, 2002: The National Post publishes an article by Alan Gotlieb, the chairman of the Donner Canadian Foundation and Canada's ambassador to the United States from 1981 to 1989, titled "Why not a grand bargain with the U.S.?" In the article, Gotlieb asks "Rather than eschewing further integration with the United States, shouldn't we be building on NAFTA to create new rules, new tribunals, new institutions to secure our trade? Wouldn't this 'legal integration' be superior to ad hoc responses and largely ineffective lobbying to prevent harm from Congressional protectionist sorties? Wouldn't our economic security be enhanced by establishing a single North American competitive market without anti-dumping and countervail rules? Are there not elements of a grand bargain to be struck, combining North American economic, defence and security arrangements within a common perimeter?" See: Why not a grand bargain with the U.S.? at

• December 6, 2002: The White House issues an update on the progress of the Smart Border Action Plan. See: U.S. Canada Smart Border 30 Point Action Plan Update at

• December, 2002: US Secretary Colin Powell signs an agreement between the United States and Canada to establish a new bi-national planning group at the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) headquarters in Colorado Springs. The new bi-national planning group is expected to release a report recommending how the militaries of U.S. and Canada can "work together more effectively to counter land-based and maritime threats." See: U.S. and Canada Sign Bi-National Agreement on Military Planning at

• January 2003: The Canadian Council of Chief Executives headed by Tom D'Aquino (also a member of the trinational Task Force on the Future of North America) launches the North American Security and Prosperity Initiative (NASPI) in January 2003 in response to an alleged "need for a comprehensive North American strategy integrating economic and security issues". NASPI has five main elements, which include: Reinventing borders, Maximizing regulatory efficiencies, Negotiation of a comprehensive resource security pact, Reinvigorating the North American defence alliance, and Creating a new institutional framework.

• January 2004: NAFTA celebrates its tenth anniversary with controversy, as it is both praised and criticized.

• January/February 2004: The Council on Foreign Relations publishes Robert Pastor's paper "North America's Second Decade", which advocates further North American integration. Read it at: North America's Second Decade at

• April 2004: The Canadian Council of Chief Exectuives (CCCE) publishes a major discussion paper titled "New Frontiers: Building a 21st Century Canada-United States Partnership in North America". Some of the paper’s 15 recommendations expand on the NASPI framework in areas such as tariff harmonization, rules of origin, trade remedies, energy strategy, core defence priorities and the need to strengthen Canada-United States institutions, including the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD). Other recommendations focus on the process for developing and executing a comprehensive strategy, including the need for greater coordination across government departments, between federal and provincial governments and between the public and private sectors.

• October 2004: The Canada-Mexico Partnership (CMP) is launched during the visit of President Vicente Fox to Ottawa. See: Canada-Mexico Partnership (CMP) at

• November 1, 2004: The Independent Task Force on the Future of North America is formed. The task force is a trilateral task force charged with developing a "roadmap" to promote North American security and advance the well-being of citizens of all three countries. The task force is chaired by former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister John Manley. It is sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in association with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) and the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales.

• December 29, 2004: The Safe Third Country Agreement comes into force. See: Safe Third Country Agreement Comes Into Force Today at

• March 2005: The Independent Task Force on the Future of North America releases "Creating a North American Community - Chairmen’s Statement". Three former high-ranking government officials from Canada, Mexico, and the United States call for a North American economic and security community by 2010 to address shared security threats, challenges to competitiveness, and interest in broad-based development across the three countries. See: Creating a North American Community Chairmen’s Statement at

• March 23, 2005: The leaders of Canada, the United States and Mexico sign the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America at the trilateral summit in Waco, Texas. Canada is signed on by Prime Minister Paul Martin. See:

• March 24, 2005: The 40 Point Smart Regulation Plan is launched as part of the SPP agreement. It is a far-reaching plan to introduce huge changes to Canada's regulatory system in order to eliminate some regulations and harmonize other regulations with the U.S. Reg Alcock, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board, launches the Government of Canada's implementation plan for Smart Regulation at a Newsmaker Breakfast at the National Press Club. For the original plan and updates see: Smart Regulation: Report on Actions and Plans at

• March 2005: Agreement to build the Texas NAFTA Superhighway: “A ‘Comprehensive Development Agreement’ [is] signed by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) to build the ‘TTC-35 High Priority Corridor’ parallel to Interstate 35. The contracting party involved a limited partnership formed between Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., a publically listed company headquartered in Spain, owned by the Madrid-based Groupo Ferrovial, and a San Antonio-based construction company, Zachry Construction Corp.” Texas Segment of NAFTA Super Highway Nears Construction, Jerome R. Corsi, June 2006, The proposed NAFTA superhighway will be a 10 lane super highway four football fields wide that will travel through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth. Minn. The "Trans-Texas Corridor" or TTC will be the first leg of the NAFTA superhighway.

• April 2005: U.S. Senate Bill 853 is introduced by Senator Richard G. Lugar (IN) and six cosponsors. “The North American Security Cooperative Act (NASCA) is touted as a bill to protect the American public from terrorists by creating the North American Union. The North American Union consists of three countries, U.S., Canada, and Mexico, with open borders, something that is proposed to be in effect by 2010. Thus, it would ensure the fulfillment of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.” NASCA Rips America, April 2005,

• May 2005: The Council on Foreign Relations Press publishes the report of the Independent Task Force on the Future of North America, titled "Building a North American Community" (task force report 53). See: Building a North American Community at

• June 2005: A follow-up SPP meeting is held in Ottawa, Canada.

• June 2005: A U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee policy paper is released: “The CFR did not mention the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), but it is obvious that it is part of the scheme. This was made clear by the Senate Republican Policy Committee policy paper released in June 2005. It argued that Congress should pass CAFTA … The Senate Republican policy paper argued that CAFTA ‘will promote democratic governance.’But there is nothing democratic about CAFTA’s many pages of grants of vague authority to foreign tribunals on which foreign judges can force us to change our domestic laws to be ‘no more burdensome than necessary’on foreign trade.” CFR's Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada, July 2005,

• July 2005: The Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) passes in the U.S. the House of Representatives by a 217-215 vote.

• January 2006: Conservative Stephen Harper is elected Prime Minister of Canada with a minority government.

• March 31, 2006: At the Summit of the Americas in Cancun, Canada (under new Prime Minister Stephen Harper) along with the U.S. and Mexico release the Leaders' Joint Statement. The statement presents six action points to insure that the North American Union be in place by 2007. These action points include: 1) Establishment of a Trilateral Regulatory Cooperative Framework 2) Establishment of the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) 3) Provision for North American Emergency Management 4) Provision for Avian and Human Pandemic Influenza Management 5) Development of North American Energy Security 6) Assure Smart, Secure Borders North American Borders Read the full statement at: Leaders' Joint Statement at

• April 2006: A draft environmental impact statement on the proposed first leg of the NAFT superhighway, the "Trans-Texas Corridor" or TTC, is completed.

• June 2006: Tom Tancredo, R-Colorado. demands superstate accounting from the Bush administration: “Responding to a report, Tom Tancredo is demanding the Bush administration fully disclose the activities of an office implementing a trilateral agreement with Mexico and Canada that apparently could lead to a North American union, despite having no authorization from Congress.” Tancredo Confronts 'Super-State' Effort, June 2006,

• July 2006:
Public hearings on the proposed NAFTA superhighway begin in the U.S.

• COMING IN 2007: Construction is set to begin on the "NAFTA superhighway".

• COMING IN 2007: Another trilateral meeting, to be held in Canada. The six actions towards creating a North American Union (NAU) as set out in the Cancun Leaders' Statement will have been taken in part or in full. re regulations, according to the statement: "We affirm our commitment to strengthen regulatory cooperation in [food safety] and other key sectors and to have our central regulatory agencies complete a trilateral regulatory cooperation framework by 2007."

Main Sources:

Vive le, FAQ, Sovereignty vs Deep Integration at
North American Forum on Integration, NAFTA Timeline
Free Market News Network Corp, N. AM. UNION TIMELINE
Wikipedia, various entries,


Who is Mel Hurtig?
Mel Hurtig founded a bookstore in Edmonton and went on to become a successful publisher, publishing the Canadian Encyclopedia. Founder and past-chairman of the Council of Canadians and former chairman of the Committee for an Independent Canada, Mel Hurtig is an officer of the Order of Canada and has honorary degrees from six universities. His best-selling books include Rushing to Armageddon, The Vanishing Country, The Betrayal of Canada, Pay the Rent or Feed the Kids, and a memoir, At Twilight in the Country. Hurtig is a passionate and vocal advocate against deep integration with the United States.

How can I join/leave Mel Hurtig's email list?
Mel Hurtig, Canada's nationalist crusader, has an e-mail list for those interested in receiving timely, relevant articles and correspondence directly from Mel including his thoughts on and concerns for Canada's future. You can even receive up-to-date schedules of his speaking engagements. To subscribe to Mel's list, just send an email request to and watch your Inbox for messages containing (MH) in the subject line.


If you are not yet a subcriber to the Earth Rainbow Network emailing list and would like to subscribe to its automated listserver and regularly receive similar compilations covering a broad range of subjects, including each new Meditation Focus issued every two week, simply send a blank email at from the email account to which you want to receive the material compiled and networked by the Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator. Subscription is FREE!