Wednesday, September 21, 2011

North American Security Perimeter Law and Order

A week ago US Attorney General Eric Holder told the Northern Border Summit :
"[T]here are areas in which the U.S. and Canada can enhance cooperation in criminal investigations and prosecutions. And I believe we must consider how extradition, and mutual legal assistance processes could be streamlined to avoid delays; and whether certain sentencing laws – and information sharing policies and practices – should be updated."
He also announced a joint DOJ, DHS, Public Safety Canada and Justice Canada pilot project they hope to launch next year.

Yesterday, despite a continuing 20 year decline in crime in Canada, Dumb-on-Crime Minister Rob Nicholson - flanked by Jason Kenney, cops, and crime victims’ advocates - introduced the 9-bill lawnorder omnibus C-10, which is ... wait for it ... primarily focused on tougher sentencing laws. Noting that "This is only the beginning. We’ll introduce other legislation as well," he explained:
"We're not governing on the basis of the latest statistics."

That's ok, Rob, we never thought you were. We already get the part about spending $3-billion on filling new prisons with pot smokers and First Nations and people with mental health problems while simultaneously diverting money from social programs, education, and health care - a Made in America strategy that ultimately resulted in California emptying its prisons in order to afford its pensions, social programs, and education. 

Also yesterday ... a commenter left a link to a "special ceremony" in Toronto in August at which the Canadian and American Bar Associations signed an agreement "committing them to closer cooperation, information exchanges and other joint efforts."
"Our people are really one people," said ABA President Stephen N. Zack at the ceremony.

The American Bar Association Canada Committee focuses on "programs and policy dealing with international and cross-border aspects of issues affecting Canada" including :
"national security, cross-border litigation, privacy, government procurement, product safety regulation, antitrust, trade remedies, insolvency, customs, immigration, economic sanctions and export controls, financing, M&A, public law, and bilateral and multilateral trade and investment agreements, including NAFTA and the agreements of the World Trade Organization."

Coincidentally, Steve and Barry's February agreement : Beyond the Border: a shared vision for perimeter security and economic competitiveness is also very big on joint law enforcement operations and information sharing.
.

3 comments:

Beijing York said...

More fuel for the sovereignty movement in Quebec.

Anonymous said...

"..."national security, cross-border litigation, privacy, government procurement, product safety regulation, antitrust, trade remedies, insolvency, customs, immigration, economic sanctions and export controls, financing, M&A, public law, and bilateral ..."

Can someone tell me what they mean by "public law"?

Everything else I understand, but my antenna went up with I saw "public law". Does this mean all of our civil laws???

If so, that's typical of the stealth methods of these sneaky monsters, i.e. use an innocuous term as a sort of Trojan Horse containing stuff people never would expect, and be horrified by if they knew.

Anonymous said...

"i.e. use an innocuous term as a sort of Trojan Horse containing stuff people never would expect, and be horrified by if they knew."

Like free trade!

You go down to your local business, and the two of you hammer out a fair deal between yourselves, to the benefit of both parties, a fair trade. You don't come up with a "free deal", whatever that is.

People never expected NAFTA to force Canada to export resources, or to allow the US to put up damaging trade barriers against softwood lumber. Be afraid of the excuse of "harmonizing" laws - it means that the politicians want them pushed through and they're too horrifying to be discussed publicly. Sometimes cooperation is really cooperation, but too often it's nothing but a mask so both sides can claim that the really nasty parts of an agreement are demanded by the other side.

Blog archive