North American Unionization: U.S. and Canadian law enforcement interoperability

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
Here is U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder announcing a plan on September 14, 2011, to have U.S. law enforcement officials operate in Canada, and Canadian law enforcement officials to operate in the U.S. by next year.
Watch how he justifies it in the name of so-called “21st-century threats,” and claims to be protecting your liberties (commentary added).
This is an exciting step forward [for whom?] – and precisely the type of bold, collaborative approach that’s necessary to address 21st-century threats [like the average citizenry upset with your policies?]. In conjunction with the other provisions included in the Beyond the Border Initiative [yes, an initiative, and not a treaty, since you couldn't get the required two-thirds support in the U.S. senate], such a move would enhance our cross-border efforts and advance our information-sharing [without your consent] abilities – while still vigorously protecting [infringing upon] civil liberties and privacy rights [for the elites only] under the laws [statutes purporting to be lawful] of both the United States and Canada.
Note, however, he said civil liberties, and not liberties. He’s referring to government granted privileges, and not unalienable rights. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution specifically requires a warrant for searching persons, places and effects, but not so with the Canadian Constitution. Which Constitution will American and Canadian officials abide by when they are operating across their border?
Since 9/11, warrantless wiretapping became the norm, so they’ve already stopped adhering to it when they deem it necessary for “security.”
This plan is against both the U.S. Constitution and Canadian law, since U.S. government officials are prohibited from holding any office from a foreign power, without the consent of Congress, and Canadian government officials are required to swear an oath to the Queen in order to faithfully execute her laws.
For more information on North American unionization, see my article, De-facto North American Unionization: How the U.S. no-fly list became the Canadian no-fly list.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Here is U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder announcing a plan on September 14, 2011, to have U.S. law enforcement officials operate in Canada, and Canadian law enforcement officials to operate in the U.S. by next year.
Watch how he justifies it in the name of so-called “21st-century threats,” and claims to be protecting your liberties (commentary added).
This is an exciting step forward [for whom?] – and precisely the type of bold, collaborative approach that’s necessary to address 21st-century threats [like the average citizenry upset with your policies?]. In conjunction with the other provisions included in the Beyond the Border Initiative [yes, an initiative, and not a treaty, since you couldn't get the required two-thirds support in the U.S. senate], such a move would enhance our cross-border efforts and advance our information-sharing [without your consent] abilities – while still vigorously protecting [infringing upon] civil liberties and privacy rights [for the elites only] under the laws [statutes purporting to be lawful] of both the United States and Canada.
I'm not sure how this differs from present convention.

Note, however, he said civil liberties, and not liberties. He’s referring to government granted privileges, and not unalienable rights. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution specifically requires a warrant for searching persons, places and effects, but not so with the Canadian Constitution. Which Constitution will American and Canadian officials abide by when they are operating across their border?
Did you miss section 8 of the Charter?

I can also provide case law if you're still confused after looking that up.
This plan is against both the U.S. Constitution and Canadian law, since U.S. government officials are prohibited from holding any office from a foreign power, without the consent of Congress, and Canadian government officials are required to swear an oath to the Queen in order to faithfully execute her laws.
Since by the optics here, our Law Enforcement would be in the US trying to apprehend persons of interest, or investigating crimes that cross the borders, how is that a breach of the OAQ?

And how do you think American Law Enforcement would be breaking American laws, if that operated here? Your link to the Constitution is incorrect. They wouldn't be holding Office here. If that were the case, Canada and the US would never embed Troops in each others Armed Forces. BTW: They do that, all the time. They also embed Law Enforcement Officers in each others Police branches, all the time.

Ooooh, I see. Your first mistake was believing the spin on it, from that nutter group...

Now I see how this differs, they'd like to be able to cross the border, without all the red tape, that sometimes enables criminals to avoid/evade Law Enforcement.

How is inter-jurisdictional crime fighting abhorrent?
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Actually, they're trying to not work like that.

Oh..



 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.


If the guy with the gun is supposed to be one of Holder's boys, then the guy on the receiving end should be wearing the uniform of the US Border Patrol.

Holder, like Obama, is scum.

Will Fast And Furious Cost Obama's Attorney General His Job? - Business Insider

to quote US Congressional representative joe Walsh::

"Your Department has made an enormous error in judgment. It instructed federally-licensed firearms dealers to illegally sell at least 2,000 guns that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) intended to be trafficked to drug cartels in Mexico. The results of this error in judgment have implicated the United States in well over one hundred deadly crimes and the deaths of two federal agents.
This not only raises serious questions about your ability to serve as the head of the Justice Department, but also begs the question of why an anti-gun Administration would knowingly force licensed firearms dealers to sell guns to violent criminals. I raise this because Operation Fast and Furious — if the facts of this case had not come to light — would have been used by this Administration as another false argument to attack law-abiding American gun owners.
The American people deserve to know if your Department had any intent to link the legal purchase of firearms here in the U.S. to crimes committed near our southern border. Operation Fast and Furious funneled firearms legally purchased at gun shops in the U.S. to known criminal syndicates to prove these syndicates have access to legal purchased weapons. This is a deliberate attempt to vilify and attack the millions of gun owners in America who value our Second Amendment and have never broken the law."


Rep. Joe Walsh to Eric Holder: You better resign immediately, buddy « Hot Air

Holder: Resign

Obama: get kicked out next year.

Then we'll talk.
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
Will Fast And Furious Cost Obama's Attorney General His Job? - Business Insider

to quote US Congressional representative joe Walsh::
"Your Department has made an enormous error in judgment. It instructed federally-licensed firearms dealers to illegally sell at least 2,000 guns that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) intended to be trafficked to drug cartels in Mexico. The results of this error in judgment have implicated the United States in well over one hundred deadly crimes and the deaths of two federal agents.
This not only raises serious questions about your ability to serve as the head of the Justice Department, but also begs the question of why an anti-gun Administration would knowingly force licensed firearms dealers to sell guns to violent criminals. I raise this because Operation Fast and Furious — if the facts of this case had not come to light — would have been used by this Administration as another false argument to attack law-abiding American gun owners.
The American people deserve to know if your Department had any intent to link the legal purchase of firearms here in the U.S. to crimes committed near our southern border. Operation Fast and Furious funneled firearms legally purchased at gun shops in the U.S. to known criminal syndicates to prove these syndicates have access to legal purchased weapons. This is a deliberate attempt to vilify and attack the millions of gun owners in America who value our Second Amendment and have never broken the law."


Rep. Joe Walsh to Eric Holder: You better resign immediately, buddy « Hot Air

Holder: Resign

Obama: get kicked out next year.

Then we'll talk.


I'd hate to see the USA give out free gun's to our Bear gang's xDDD
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Attorney General Eric Holder’s tenure in the Obama administration may be coming to an end. At least eight members of Congress have now called on Holder to resign over the growing Operation Fast and Furious scandal.
Republican Reps. Vicky Hartzler of Missouri, John Mica of Florida, Quico Canseco of Texas and Gus Bilirakis of Florida each told The Daily Caller on Thursday that they believe Holder should step down now. The number of members of Congress calling for Holder to end his career in government because of Fast and Furious is now eight, a number which has doubled in one day.

Holder
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Abuse of power is there main worry.
So to voice concern about abuse of power, they make false claims of illegaity? Or was that all your doing?

I'd hate to see the USA give out free gun's to our Bear gang's xDDD
People have been banned for trolling from behind the iggy button.

It's cowardly.

But I guess when your OP gets torn apart by the first post, you really have nowhere else to go.
 
Last edited:

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Why is it always the lefties that cry out about abuse of power, could it be that they are the ones causing trouble and not the right after all.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
118,008
14,444
113
Low Earth Orbit
Both "right" and "left" have been pumping guns into Mexico and bringing out drugs for decades.

If you want to blame someone, blame yourself for not paying closer attention.
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
So to voice concern about abuse of power, they make false claims of illegaity? Or was that all your doing?

People have been banned for trolling from behind the iggy button.

It's cowardly.

But I guess when your OP gets torn apart by the first post, you really have nowhere else to go.


Wow Get over yourself lol
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Wow Get over yourself lol
lol is right... I'm not the one that hasn't formulated a reasoned rebuttal.

You have this funny habit of chastising people for not participating in discussions.

Then when people initiate attempt discussion with you. You resort to this usual tactic.

Are you sure you know what a discussion is?

Here's a hint. Maybe you could address the contents of my post.
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
lol is right... I'm not the one that hasn't formulated a reasoned rebuttal.

You have this funny habit of chastising people for not participating in discussions.

Then when people initiate attempt discussion with you. You resort to this usual tactic.

Are you sure you know what a discussion is?

Here's a hint. Maybe you could address the contents of my post.
'


All I wanted to do is inform people that both goverment have agreed to allowing police investigation into each others territory by next year. I copy and pasted where I found the information.

I made no coment or opinion on the news. I posted it in the news section of the forrum did I not?
I never said I was for or against it. I just thought everyone should know.

Everything has to be a fight with you. It reminds me of my school yard years.
 
Last edited:

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
All I wanted to do is inform people that both goverment have agreed to allowing police investigation into each others territory by next year. I copy and pasted where I found the information.

I made no coment or opinion on the news. I posted it in the news section of the forrum did I not?
I never said I was for or against it. I just thought everyone should know.
Nice cowardly cop out.

Everything has to be a fight with you. It reminds me of my school yard years.
Say the guy that threw the first punch.

You really should work on your discussion skills.
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
Nice cowardly cop out.

That was childish. I'm not trying to fight you. I know now that you'll hold a grudge on it for the rest of your life.

Say the guy that threw the first punch..

Did I really?(I don't remember it that way but your always right so) let me be the first to apologize.
I'm sorry.

You really should work on your discussion skills.

Its like kindergarten all over again. That's from a post 6 months ago.
I'm sorry I said that. I apologize. I hope you'll get over it one day.

Is there anything more I need to apologize for? Just let me know.
I never wanted to cause you this much grief.

The way you seek me out on the forums feels like border line harassment.
I'm sorry I pissed you off, now can you ease up a bit mang?