wendy

Layton has called for Canadian troops to leave Afghanistan by next February, slamming the mission there as improperly planned to achieve peace.

The position, strongly endorsed by rank-and-file NDP members at the party's national convention early in September, has put the New Democrats odds with the other three parties in Parliament.
http://www.canada.co...65-9f07ce673740



Military should focus on coastline, not war: Layton

Federal NDP Leader Jack Layton says Canada's military should be focusing on domestic sovereignty issues, including protecting Canada's coastline from illegal fishing boats, instead of fighting the Taliban in southern Afghanistan.
http://www.cbc.ca/ca...tonfishing.html


Just like week from NDP's own website;

Canada must immediately withdraw from Afghanistan: NDP
Thu 19 Apr 2007
http://www.ndp.ca/page/5183


Layton had gone on record dozens of times over he past 2 years being against the Afghan mission/war. Just last week he went on record calling for an immediate withdrawal, never mind in 2 years time. All our leaders are now bought and paid for by the NWO.

Same reason they are silent on the secretive North American Union, WTC 7 and the whole 911 fraud and the fake war on terrorism.

Is the suggestion of an attack in Montreal worse than 9/11 a genuine or fabricated scenario?

Are Quebecers being psychologically "prepared" to blame Muslim immigrant groups, for an even worst attack in Montreal than 9/11, in relation to the World Trade Center in the United States?

The Quebec political Establishment often makes public utterances on their professed interests to "stand-up for Quebec". However, the Quebec Political Establishment has substantively tied itself to the commercially profitable and military expansionist pro-war agenda of Anglo-American based political-military-industrial complex. This is most evident in the backroom support of the elite driven Quebec Political Establishment for the North American Union (NAU) agenda. Ken Hernandez provides the following detailed account of investigative research which he has made concerning matters pertinent. His accompanying conclusions and views do not necessarily reflect the conclusion and views of The Canadian:

We are certain that the on-going anti-immigrant hype being stoked by Quebec’s French-language media should be viewed in the broader geopolitical context. It is no secret that the overwhelming majority of Canada’s media, political parties, as well as leading business and labour figures have accepted the U.S.-driven agenda regarding Afghanistan.

Implicit in the reporting, commentaries, and other media venues is that somehow, Afghanis are responsible for the bombing of New York’s World Trade Centre on September 11th, 2001, and that Osama Bin Laden was the ring leader. This emphasis is all the more so in Quebec. The separatist leadership in Quebec, together with its supporters in the francophone corporate media, have always tended to advance a concept of Quebec nationality, based upon ethno-racial "pure laine" supremacist mythology. At the same time, so-called Quebec interest defending leadership, for the most part, plays a backroom supporting role behind Washington’s designs over Canada.

In the last two years, the media in Quebec have been “predicting” that Montreal will fall victim to a terrorist attack. At the same time, these media agents have been curiously neglecting to mention the basis for such a “prediction”, other than to cite self-styled experts who are directly or indirectly linked to an intelligence gathering organization. If the media fails to mention the basis for an assumption, as to a future terror attack occurring in Montreal, what is the motivation behind such posturing? I would submit that the answer is to be found in Vernon Walters’ famous memo to then CIA Director General, George Bush. As Director of Plans (CIA Division in charge of “black bag” or dirty operations), Walters wrote of the importance of securing the media of targeted countries, in order that the public of such countries can be “softened” or lulled into accepting Washington’s designs

Coincidence?

A blast in Montreal would certainly not be the first of its kind. Apart from the big September 11th 2001 attacks, there is evidence pointing to the July 7th, 2005 explosions in the London transport system, as having been carefully orchestrated by intelligence operatives. In fact, a virtual avowal was broadcast over British airwaves when the head of Visor Consultants (which was supposedly conducting ‘anti-terror’ drills in the London transport system on July 7th, 2005), admitted that the explosions took place at precisely the stations and buses in which the “exercises” were being held, and at the very times during which the “exercises” were to have been held.

Lo and behold, the drill became reality, people died, Britain implemented anti-terrorist measures under which some people of Pakistani origin were detained, though the train they were said to have taken from their hometown to London, did not in fact, run on that day, an 85 year old man was arrested for having heckled Tony Blair, an 11 year old girl was detained for riding her bicycle in a park in Dundee, and a protester was arrested for having protested before parliament.

Creating fear toward wilfully accepting a fascist "New World Order"?

As for Montreal, I would submit that aside from the aforementioned arrangements arrived at so secretively, the public dimension, its execution is of paramount importance. For example, the apparent requirement is that the public MUST be manoeuvred into calling for an end to civil liberties, multiculturalism – perhaps even to the point of internment of “the others” – and war with “rogue states” and terrorist nations”. Against this backdrop, this author submits that the first phase of this operation went into effect in early January.

Preparing Quebecers for the targeting of more Muslim scapegoats?

Since that time, the Quebec based, French-language corporate media has been featuring the seemingly sudden outburst from a village council (of whom virtually no one has ever heard) after it had put forward an “immigrant’s code of conduct” implicit in which is that Muslims mutilate their daughters and torture women with whom they are engaged in relationships. The adoption of this “code” was made to look as though it came from nowhere -- the village council enacted this measure, and miraculously, by some curious twist of fate or happenstance, Quebec’s French-language media decided this to be newsworthy, and has been keeping the story at the forefront of radio and television reporting, and talk shows.

Montreal next 911?

While talk of a North American Union may seem sudden, Canada was duly warned 20 years ago by "political prophet" John Turner.

In 1988, just after Brian Mulroney scribbled his signature on NAFTA, the Right Honourable John Turner declared Mulroney had “sold out” the country to the USA.

In an interview ten years later, Turner expanded on his views of the agreement: “By selling out, I meant, that once you yield the economic levers of sovereignty you eventually lose the political levers,” he explained to Policy Options (June, 1999). “My view of the deal is that it is not, nor was it ever, a free trade agreement… because the United States Congress did not yield its jurisdiction over trade. I’ve always believed that Canada does better negotiating multilaterally than we ever would in negotiating bilaterally with the United States.”

Unfortunately, current Prime Minister Steven Harper recently scribbled away even more of Canada’s freedom to trade multilaterally in light of supposed “Security and Prosperity.” He was backed by Quebec’s own Gilles Duceppe.

In the words of author G.W. F. Hegel, “Little wonder that Harper allied with Duceppe – a effective quasi-Republican and a separatist. Both… prefer a foreign country’s system of government over our Canadian system… The American leadership wants Canada’s natural resources at a cheap price. The road Harper and Duceppe are on will make Canada a third-rate trading partner with the USA.”

When asked to lend his perspective on this issue, Mr. Duceppe refused to comment. Ironically, the Bloc leader has built his entire campaign upon the aspirations of a separate Quebec: Yet when his country’s sovereignty is threatened, he refuses to comment? Does he realize that the smudging – and eventual eradication -- of Canadian and Mexican borders would actually widen the gap between Quebec and its cultural foundations?

Sadly, Mr. Duceppe’s eyes are locked on the same target as Harper and Bush’s: the pockets of large corporations, or the ‘shadow government.’ According to a translation of Duceppe’s El Universal article, he does not object to the idea of the ‘Amero’ – a common North American currency. After all, money is money right? His people’s identity may be up for sale, but perhaps money can ease the pain. Boldness for bucks: It’s a soul-swap. A trade the Big Business elites are stocking all of their assets in.

“This is the giving away of Canada’s command to the U.S. Republican administration and to North America’s largest corporations,” stated Julian. “We are seeing this with the Softwood Lumber Agreement and with the Canadian Wheat Board, as well as in a variety of other sectors. Stephen Harper is following the legacy of Paul Martin and the Liberal Party and is willing to give anything away in pursuit of so-called good Canada-U.S. relations.”

He continues: “What this means for Canada is lower standards and quality of life in many areas, such as food security, air safety, environmental norms, health care and labour rights. It’s a recipe for lowering standards in our country. This is unacceptable to most Canadians.”

time to wake up

Canadian, U.S. and Mexican officials held secretive meeting on integration

Monday » February 12 » 2007

Canadian, U.S. and Mexican officials held secretive meeting on integration

Kelly Patterson
CanWest News Service; Ottawa Citizen

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day refused to reveal the contents of his
talk on integration with Mexico and the U.S.

OTTAWA - Canadian, U.S. and Mexican politicians discussed using "stealth"
to overcome public resistance to the integration of the three countries at
a confidential meeting last year, according to documents just released
under U.S. Freedom of Information laws.

Top military brass, corporate executives and diplomats also attended the
meeting in Banff, Alta., where participants discussed everything from the
harmonization of food and drug standards, to common immigration policies,
and the pooling of energy resources.

The secret guest list of the North American Forum included then-U.S.
secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld, Canadian Chief of Defence Staff Gen.
Rick Hillier, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, Pengrowth Corp. CEO
James Kinnear and Lockheed Martin executive Ron Covais.
Presentation outlines for the forum acknowledge that the concept of North
American integration - which some call a "North American Union" - is
unpopular, and note that it might be tough to sell as a concept.
"While a vision is appealing, working on the infrastructure might yield
more benefit and bring more people on board ('evolution by stealth')," the
notes said.

"Evolution by stealth" means using regulatory changes, such as food- and
drug-safety benchmarks, which don't require parliamentary approval, to lay
the infrastructure for North American integration. This allows for change
with little or no public debate, critics say.

Media were excluded from the September forum, and Day, who gave a speech
at the event, declined to reveal the contents of his talk.

"It was meant as a private meeting," said Melisa Leclerc, a spokeswoman
from Day's office, although she conceded he attended "in his capacity as
minister for public security."

"It is not encouraging to see the phrase 'evolution by stealth' in
reference to important policy debates such as North American integration,"
said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a Washington-based
conservative watchdog group that obtained the documents last week.
But, former finance minister John Manley, who attended the meeting, said
the forum was "not part of a nefarious plan to yield sovereignty to the
U.S. .... It was just some informed private citizens and government
officials having a conversation" on how best to co-operate to ensure their
citizens enjoyed a safe and prosperous future.

In fact, he said, Canada comes out stronger than ever from such meetings,
which force "some senior American officials to think about Canada for a
few days."

However, Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians said the reference to
stealth is "a very telling and important statement."

Many of the politicians who attended the forum have been pursuing
"integration by stealth" for the past two years, she said, pointing to a
little-known but top-priority agreement called the Security and Prosperity
Partnership.

The accord, kickstarted by U.S. President George W. Bush, then-prime
minister Paul Martin and former Mexican president Vicente Fox at a 2005
meeting in Waco, Texas, is designed to streamline everything from food and
drug safety standards to counter-terrorism measures.

Government officials from the three countries are expected to meet in
Ottawa later this month. However, Foreign Affairs spokespeople said they
did not yet know when it would be held or who would attend.
The partnership's stated goal is to protect North America from security
threats such as terrorism and flu pandemics as well as economic threats
from new global-market giants such as China.

Many of the accord's measures are not contentious, such as plans to
improve water quality, reduce sulphur in fuels, and co-ordinate efforts to
fight pandemics and avian flu. But it also covers a host of hot-button
issues such as plans to enhance data-sharing on high-risk travellers,
revamp safety and environmental regulations, centralize the assessment of
new chemicals and rework food safety standards.

Most of the 300 policy recommendations within the accord may not require
legislative changes, the Council of Canadians said.

Ottawa Citizen
© CanWest News Service 2007

http://www.canada.co....2-180a4720e918


The curious tale of the 'other' WTC tower

Kevin Brooker, Calgary Herald

Published: Monday, March 26, 2007

Now that Rosie O'Donnell is trying to table it on The View, I guess we can talk about it here.
First, a news quiz: If, some time after the collapse of World Trade Center towers 1 and 2, a 47-storey office building in a major American city also came crashing to the ground, do you think you'd know about it?
Of course, you would.

But if I were to tell you that such an event actually did happen, could you name that building?
If you are like most North Americans, I'm guessing probably not.
In fact, the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building, which was also known as WTC 7 and stood but two blocks away from ground zero, occurred late in the day on Sept. 11, 2001.
It remains one of the central anomalies in a day filled with anomalies, yet it was treated then, and remains today, at least in official annals, as an insignificant footnote.
Struck by no aircraft, and little debris, WTC 7 nevertheless had small fires mysteriously burning in several of its middle floors. Judging from photographs, one would assume those fires should have been easily contained.
Yet at 5:20 p.m., in a space of 6.5 seconds, or practically at a free-fall rate, WTC 7 collapsed perfectly into its footprint. It should have been big news, if only because it would have been the first steel-frame building in history to collapse due exclusively to fire. But for some reason, reporters gave it a wide berth.
Shortly after 9/11, when Associated Press published a timeline of events called A Stunning 48 Hours of News, WTC 7 was not mentioned at all. Neither was it in the government's official 9/11 report. And to this day, authorities have only issued an inconclusive draft report as to why the building fell.
Not everyone is so incurious, however. A host of researchers have busily gathered everything they could learn about that day, and WTC 7 in particular.
Though you're unlikely to have seen it, video of the collapse does exist (and can be found on the Internet). The footage exhibits the hallmarks of controlled demolition, including bursts of dust from what appear to be many tiny explosions and the curtain-like plummeting of the entire structure.
During the brief aftermath before WTC 7 disappeared into the memory hole, CBS anchor Dan Rather showed the video and said, "For the third time today, it's reminiscent of those pictures we've all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite."
Many have concluded it was just that. Moreover, they discovered that WTC 7 had unusual tenants, including several floors devoted to each of the FBI, the CIA and mayor Rudy Giuliani's emergency headquarters. It was also home to a legal branch of the Security and Exchange Commission, which allegedly harboured evidence relating to a number of ongoing investigations of market malfeasance.
A PBS television documentary later showed the WTC's owner, Larry Silverstein, describing how he reacted that day: " 'We've had such terrible loss of life,' " he recalled saying, " 'maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

You can read into that what you may, just as you can with the fact that Silverstein's group had only acquired WTC six months earlier, for $3.2 billion, and bought insurance that for the first time specifically indemnified acts of terrorism. As of last report, Silverstein had collected $4.6 billion.
Finally, from the department of curiouser and curiouser, came another bombshell this year. Researchers unearthed a BBC television report from 9/11 in which the reporter announced the collapse of WTC 7. Strangely, though, the building is still plainly visible over her right shoulder, and would not fall for another 20 minutes.
Well, if the rest of the world won't get to the bottom of this, maybe Rosie will.

911 smoking gun