Hi,
A year or two or so ago, I fell upon information released, I beleive by the council of Canadian's or something of the sort, that led me to information on the last major meeting, either at Bush's ranch or in Mexico I really can't remember.
Anyway, the outline was pretty indepth, with economic, as well as security arangements - including joint security on either side of the border by the countries involved to thwart security risks - such as terrorism, biochem threats etc.. they also stated things for emergency response in times of disasters or something. My memory is foggy.
I did like to see that "low cost goods" would be "duty free", although the under $20 rule already applies to most items.
It sounded very good at the time.
I am very much startled to see the American Military doing permimiter security - shocked actually, as I really don't understand how the American Military has jurisdictional powers in Canada in a civil area. It basically seems like "martial law is being declared in Canada by the US, and without just cause. I am suprised and actually find it humiliating for Canada that it is unable to "secure" diplomatic talks security without resorting to requiring the US military to provide perimiter security.
It seems more appropriate to have JTF or some other military do it that 'highlights' Canadian Military Competence.
I am shocked that a martial force would be deployed for potential civil disobediance in Canada - I actually don't see the legal grounds for it - since American Soilders - imo - barely follow the US consituttion let alone the Canadian Charter of rights in "occupational" places- granted that the police can be known to infringe on civil rights from time to time as well.
While it does appear justifiable to insure security - the declaration of Martial Law and use of foreign soilders to impose it - seems really faux.
If such security is so required, why not hold it on a military base where the Military Normally has grounds to search and otherwise under Canadian government legislation that already exists for people on military bases.
I think that the whole process is disgusting for the chance to be at the worlds largest log cabin for historic reason leaving a legacy of civil rights violations, imposition of illegal martial law, and complete disrespect for local jurisditional policy - essentially support for a police state in contravention of civil liberties and mobility rights which normally exist. I totally do not agree with the identity of this.
Although just using Quebec Provincial Police and RCMP to impose security - renting out a 25 km sq, normally civilian area seems totally unneeded.
If security is a concern use a secure location - but don't limit mobility of people for a photo op, the legacy is the wrong first start and marring what could be a good memory of cooperation - what it plays out as is cooperation in total ignorance of the public.
Although I generally think that movement to the NAU is a good thing - I think alienation of civil rights and disturbance of the public unneededly is a gross negligence on the part of the organizers.
You do not do harm to do good if the harm is not required. And for this a log cabin photo op and nice view isn't worth restricting the civil liberties of 10,000 people.
