Showing posts with label GREAT RESET. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GREAT RESET. Show all posts

March 28, 2025

Europe Cultivates a Climate of Crisis

Europe Cultivates a Climate of Crisis

By Richard Palmer • March 27, 2025

All European Union residents should stock three days’ worth of emergency supplies, the EU urged its citizens yesterday. Have at least six liters of water per person, tinned food, a flashlight, a radio with batteries and a printed emergency plan, it advised.

The warning comes a week after French media reported the government was planning to mail a 20-page survival booklet to every home before the summer. It will give emergency phone numbers and radio channels, advice on dealing with a nuclear attack, and details on how to sign up for reserve units or local firefighting groups. It will also advise citizens to put together a similar three-day survival pack.

Why the sudden interest in disaster response in Europe?

It is tied to Europe’s efforts to rearm.

Europe wants to embark on a massive military spending spree. But only Germany with its low debt can do so easily. Everyone else is close to maxing out their credit cards.

The only way to substantially boost that spending is to make painful cutbacks, such as fewer unemployment benefits, higher pension ages or less health-care spending.

In France in particular, this debate is toxic. The public likes the sound of a more muscular European military. But it doesn’t want to suffer to pay for it.

European leaders need to cultivate a climate of crisis. This new push toward survivalism helps spread the message that nuclear war is a real danger.

Pointing this out is not saying there is no danger. But without the nudge, Europe’s citizens don’t feel they are in enough danger to make large sacrifices for a military.

Eastern Europe does. It is closer to Russia. Lithuania sent out survival manuals in 2016. Latvia published one five years ago and updated it a year ago. Poland published one in 2022. Denmark sent one out digitally last summer. Finland and Sweden sent them out last November. All of these countries have dramatically increased their defense spending; Poland’s has roughly doubled since 2022.

But the French don’t really fear Russian troops marching down the streets of Paris. If the Russians failed to take Kyiv, Ukraine, in three years, they are not going 1,000 miles further west anytime soon.

Europe genuinely fears Russia and fears facing the world without the United States defending it. But there is clearly something more going on: EU leaders want to encourage a sense of crisis to get the military they want. European remilitarization isn’t driven only by fear. Some are creating an opportunity to do what they’ve wanted to do for years.

In 1978, Herbert W. Armstrong wrote: “Europeans want their own united military power! They know that a political union of Europe would produce a third major world power, as strong as either the United States or the ussrpossibly stronger!”

In that same article, he discussed Europe’s fear of Russia, but he warned, “The United States is not loved in Europe.” Europe wants this military power so it no longer has to play second fiddle to the U.S.

Mr. Armstrong forecast this decades ago because it is prophesied in your Bible. Now Europe is making it happen and the U.S. is cheering it on. Europe has benefited from decades of U.S. taxpayers footing its defense bill. But those in Europe pushing for rearmament aren’t doing it because they want to be good U.S. allies. They resent America.

You need to understand the biblical warning. This European power will catch far too many people unawares.

This rearmament has hit some major obstacles already: Some say it has run out of steam as indebted nations struggle to raise cash for more arms. But Bible prophecy also shows that the rise of a new Holy Roman Empire will not be an easy process. It will happen quickly and suddenly. But what emerges is a 10-nation superpower led by a strongman—not a 27-nation economic union led by three different presidencies and a few committees.

Now is the time to watch the rise of this power and understand those prophecies. Our latest Trumpet issue, “Up in Arms,” has articles explaining Europe’s sudden military rise, how Germany is about to get a strongman, and why it already dominates the Mediterranean Sea. 


You can read it online here


source:

thetrumpet.com/31237-europe-c







BECAUSE WE LIKE THE TRUTH

You can find us on Twitter


March 13, 2025

February 25, 2025

Disney and the Fight for Our Children They are teaching your child his LGBTs. We must protect them if they are to have a future.


Disney and the Fight for Our Children. 
They are teaching your child his lgbts. We must protect them if they are to have a future.

 

FROM THE JULY 2022

Philadelphia Trumpet

By Joel Hilliker and Andrew Miiller

Disney is 99 years old. It has carefully curated a reputation as the main seller of family entertainment to American parents and children.

This megaconglomerate owns abcespn, Marvel, Pixar, Lucasfilm, Fox Entertainment, National Geographic, Touchstone Pictures and dozens of other companies. It is worth $67 billion to its shareholders for the core reason that it can reliably use music and images to attract and influence children and their parents.

Disney is the mainstream of American entertainment. It has shaped generations’ ideas and feelings about childhood, fatherhood, motherhood, family, romance, fear, rebellion, deceit, magic, politics, race, killing and more. Disney has been teaching you—and it wants to teach your children much more.

Most of us don’t realize how much we have already absorbed what you could call “Disney attitudes” about love, romance and even sex. And our children will not realize what they have absorbed as their minds were fed and educated by their entertainment. It will all just seem normal and right.

Executives at Disney are well aware of this. They and their cohorts at other media corporations are exercising this power to contribute to a single trend that can, all by itself, destroy our society.

Here is how.

Behind the Scenes

Disney is “adding queerness” to children’s programming wherever it can, as one executive producer in the company put it. The producer said she was delighted by how welcoming other Disney leaders were as she implemented her “not-at-all-secret gay agenda.”

That producer is currently working on an animated show about a family. This show is scheduled to include at least 17 celebrity sexual deviants voicing characters, including two homosexuals of different races who have adopted a 14-year-old activist daughter.

Her comments came from a conference call that included a Disney corporate president who described herself as the mother of “one transgender child and one pansexual child.” This woman celebrated the fact that Disney has “many, many, many lgbtqia characters in our stories,” but then fretted, “yet we don’t have enough leads.” She then tearfully pushed for half of Disney characters to be either sexually deviant or racial minorities.

What was the purpose of the conference call? To organize Disney executives into a political push: Make it legal for teachers to give lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and other sex instruction in the classroom—to third graders, second graders, first graders and kindergartners.

Disney’s chief executive officer sent a memo to the company’s tens of thousands of employees, stating, “I believe the best way for our company to bring about lasting change is through the inspiring content we produce, the welcoming culture we create, and the diverse community organizations we support.”

Disney’s sexual perversion is coming out into the open. But this campaign to lower children’s inhibitions toward romance, sexuality, and ultimately toward sex acts, homosexuality, cross-dressing, genital mutilation, pedophilia and more didn’t start just this year. It started subtly, decades ago—when many of us were children.

For years, children have been absorbing attitudes about love, romance and sexuality that were invented, enhanced and distributed by corporate executives in Southern California. There is a reason why the tens of thousands of “family friendly” movies and television series released in your lifetime nearly always feature children—and no involved, admirable father. There is a reason why they nearly always portray romance and “obligatory sex scenes” featuring increasingly young actors.

But these “family friendly” corporations didn’t stop there.

Out of the Closet

Even in the 1980s and 1990s, Disney employed many openly homosexual animators, composers, lyricists, casting managers, producers and other staff members at all levels, and contracted homosexual actors and voice actors. Some of these people produced characters with effeminate and other homosexual and bisexual traits, often as villains or comedic characters, and always subtle, understated and coded.

You can see a steady blurring of the lines just as you progress through the catalog of Disney content from The Little Mermaid in 1989 to The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, Mulan, w.i.t.c.h., Gravity Falls, Star vs. the Forces of Evil, Doc McStuffins, Marvel Rising, Star Wars Resistance, Onward, Good Luck Charlie, Duck Tales, Out, Finding Dory, Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure, The Avengers, The Owl House, The Proud Family, Luca, High School Musical, Frozen, The Ghost and Molly McGee, Amphibia, Andi Mack, Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker, Cruella, Eternals, Rise Up Sing Out, Jungle Cruise, Lightyear … to be continued.

Disney purchased abc in 1995. At that time, abc already had a history of pro-homosexual programming. Then ceo Michael Eisner had already agreed to extend health insurance benefits to the partners of homosexual Disney employees. The homosexual messaging from abc began seeping into Disney’s television and theatrical productions.

Eisner stated in 1998 that about 40 percent of Disney employees were queer. That’s according to a former executive director of the Human Rights Campaign, an activist group that lobbies for homosexual and other deviant practices to become legal, accepted, celebrated—and introduced to children.

Disney is famous for its unique, memorable characters, but there is a reason why some of its characters appear and act the way they do. For example, homosexual lyricist Howard Ashman convinced animators to pattern the Ursula villain from The Little Mermaid after a cross-dressing performer called Divine. Homosexual artist Andreas Deja drew comedic sidekick LeFou from Beauty and the Beast, villain Jafar from Aladdin, and villain Scar from The Lion King with effeminate characteristics, without making them overtly homosexual. This animation strategy is called “queer coding,” and it is used to desensitize the viewer to homosexuality and transgenderism.

The strategy these lyricists and animators used was spelled out clearly in a November 1987 article in Guide, a homosexual magazine, titled “The Overhauling of Straight America,” published two years before The Little Mermaid hit theaters.

“The first order of business is desensitization of the American public concerning gays and gay rights,” wrote Marshall K. Kirk and Hunter Madsen. “To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of with keen emotion. Ideally, we would have straights register differences in sexual preference the way they register different tastes for ice cream or sports games: She likes strawberry, and I like vanilla; he follows baseball, and I follow football. No big deal.

“At least in the beginning, we are seeking public desensitization and nothing more. We do not need and cannot expect a full ‘appreciation’ or ‘understanding’ of homosexuality from the average American. You can forget about trying to persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing. But if only you can get them to think that it is just another thing, with a shrug of their shoulders, then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won. And to get to that shoulder-shrug stage, gays as a class must cease to appear mysterious, alien, loathsome and contrary. A large-scale media campaign will be required in order to change the image of gays in America.”

Anyone who has ever hummed along to Howard Ashman’s song “Poor, Unfortunate Souls” while laughing at a sea-witch dressed up like a drag queen has already started to view homosexuality as “just another thing.” And that is just what animators wanted when they started drawing “queer coded” villains during the 1990s Disney renaissance.

But the era of the campy drag queens and effeminate sorcerers was just part of a decades-long media campaign. Now Disney has introduced an openly homosexual couple to its new telling of DuckTales. Having made homosexuality “just another thing,” sexual deviants are now pushing to “persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing.”

Some conservatives who laughed at “queer coded” villains are now outraged at openly homosexual couples like the one in this summer’s film Lightyear, a spin-off of Toy Story.

But companies like Disney are not backing down. The controversy over its support for teaching elementary kids homosexuality is not the start of the war. It has been waging a cover war since the ’80s. Now it’s just more overt and savage.

Tipping Point

Disney is not only “adding queerness” to its programing more aggressively, it is also using its immense wealth and political influence off-screen.

The state of Florida, where the Walt Disney World Resort and a number of other Disney interests are located, has passed the Parental Rights in Education Act. This forbids teachers from instructing children about sex and “gender identity” prior to fourth grade. Disney worked to defeat the bill before it was passed and, afterward, condemned the law, called for it to be repealed, and vowed to do what it could to make sure children in the third grade and younger will be exposed to homosexuality, transgenderism and more.

“Florida’s HB 1557, also known as the ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill, should never have passed and should never have been signed into law,” Disney said in an official March 28 statement. “Our goal as a company is for this law to be repealed by the legislature or struck down in the courts, and we remain committed to supporting the national and state organizations working to achieve that. We are dedicated to standing up for the rights and safety of lgbtq+ members of the Disney family, as well as the lgbtq+ community in Florida and across the country.”

Disney executives then organized the “Reimagine Tomorrow Conversation Series,” where the company’s homosexual and transsexual employees suggested ways Disney could push a woke agenda. This is where the featured presenter, executive producer Latoya Raveneau, told her audience that her team was implementing a “not-at-all-secret gay agenda” by regularly “adding queerness” to Disney programming. It was corporate president Karey Burke who pledged to make at least 50 percent of Disney on-screen characters sexual deviants or racial minorities by the end of the year.

That’s right: The company that distributed Davy Crockett, Old Yeller, Pollyanna and films you or maybe your parents grew up on now wants your children to grow up on favorable depictions of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders and queers illustrated in vivid colors with happy music playing in the background. These won’t be the campy villains of the Howard Ashman era. They will be designed as role models.

Disney no longer just wants people to view homosexuality as “just another thing.” They want to convert your children to their way of life.

1997 was a typical year for Disney: It released 18 feature films that year, including Hercules, drawn by openly homosexual animator Andreas Deja in a way that was reportedly influenced by his homosexuality. According to one Gallup poll, 21 percent of American adults born after that year now identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender—compared to only 5.6 percent of American adults overall. Despite the now-fading claims that sexual perversions are genetic, the evidence shows that homosexuality and transgenderism are more common among those raised on Disney’s “not-at-all-secret gay agenda.” Disney wants to teach children about queerness before they hit puberty—because sexual indoctrination at this age gets results.

Normalizing Pedophilia

Conservative media outlets have compared Disney’s behavior to “child grooming.” This is a grossly insufficient term for a despicable practice: when an adult builds trust and an emotional connection with a child for the purpose of then manipulating, exploiting, abusing and finally raping him or her.

Influencing, desensitizing, grooming, programming, removing the inhibitions of, and destroying the purity and innocence of children is a horrendous crime. Nothing about it is for children’s benefit—it is all for the sick satisfaction of the adults doing it. The Parental Rights in Education Act is a sincere attempt to protect elementary school students from such abuse. But truthfully, a law stating that teachers cannot sexually indoctrinate preteens is hardly a landmark victory for conservatives.

Still—in today’s America, even trying to protect children 8 years old and under from grooming in the classroom is contested, opposed and savagely attacked.

Children and teenagers need to be protected from this type of propaganda throughout elementary school, middle school, high school and college if they are to establish successful, happy families of their own.

Just as homosexuality and transgenderism have been mainstreamed and normalized, so now is pedophilia. Some “experts” insist attraction to children is genetic and immutable. There are apologists arguing that sexual relationships between adults and children can be healthy. To avoid stigma, terms like “adult-child relationships” and “minor attracted persons” are coming into use.

What these people are trying to legitimize is child molestation and rape.

Children who are thus victimized suffer consequences for life. Many are never able to build healthy relationships with the opposite sex.

Lax attitudes toward this evil result in criminal abuse and even literal sexual enslavement. It will lead to a world of broken families, drug addiction, violence, coldness, guilt, shame, confusion. It will produce broken children who grow up to perpetrate similar evils on the next generation of children.

Powerful entertainment executives are trying to make it easier and easier for child perversion and rape to become more familiar and easy. Pedophiles are choosing to create a demand for child pornography. They are choosing to indulge monstrous urges that destroy minds and shatter lives, including their own.

If this is not evil, nothing is evil! It is a deadly mistake to sympathize with or to try to understand it, let alone to tolerate it or encourage it. It must be stopped.

This Is Big

Many people consider morality a side issue, nowhere as important as the economy or national security or education. They think that how sex is used, even how it is introduced to children, is a squabble worth perhaps a few minutes of attention on the news before moving on to other things.

They are dead wrong.

If you think that the massive, coordinated, monstrous evil of sexually destroying children currently being perpetrated is just a weird quirk of current events or an unavoidable tragedy or a lamentable misfortune or all of the above, you need to be freed of such anemic thinking.

This single issue can destroy our society. In fact, it has almost finished destroying it.

Commentator Glenn Beck released a program called “Project Groomer” that includes a clip from Yuval Noah Harari, an Israeli intellectual and futurist who has spoken several times at the influential World Economic Forum conference in Davos, Switzerland, where globalists work together to reshape the world to their vision. He predicted that, as humanity reengineers bodies, brains and minds, there will be no gender in 50 years.

If elites at Disney and elsewhere have their way, he is exactly right. We are raising a generation of children who will actually not understand male, female, husband, wife, marriage or family. They will have no idea about right use of sex, about virtue, chastity or commitment. They will have no sense of morality, responsibility, duty or purpose. They will have no idea how to relate to others or how to rightly live!

Nothing could be more pleasing to the devil, who hates children, hates family, and hates mankind.

The Apostle Paul cautions us not be ignorant of Satan’s devices lest he get an advantage over us (2 Corinthians 2:11). The Apostle Peter warned, “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour” (1 Peter 5:8). Lions advance toward their prey carefully by hiding in the grass—until it is too late. That is why Peter has to warn us to be vigilant. You have to see the lion while it is still hiding in the grass to have any chance of escaping.

It is easy for Christians and conservatives to look at the filth in society today and think they are doing just fine by comparison. Polls shows 70 percent of Americans say they are less likely to support Disney for embracing an lgbtq+ agenda.

Satan is fine with that. He can retreat a step or two, return to the grass and lay low for a while, and make conservatives feel they have won a great victory.

But look at the big picture. This world is rapidly embracing this perversion. Society has changed utterly just in the last decade or so—not even one lifetime.

People simply do not understand the true nature of evil. They think we can coexist with it. That is exactly why society is being overwhelmed by evil. That is why, when Florida’s governor made it illegal to teach perverted sex to 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds, he was branded an extremist, and other states boycotted Florida. That is why America’s assistant secretary for health is a transgender and was made a four-star admiral in the U.S. Navy. That is why the numbers of people identifying as lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender is skyrocketing. And that is why the media celebrate this trend as a heartwarming success.

Conservatives, meanwhile, are steadily retreating. A decade ago, the culture war was over homosexual “marriage.” Now most conservatives have accepted such “marriage” as the law of the land so they can focus on battling transgenderism. Next they will surrender that to focus on “adult-child relationships.”

Society is changing so fast it is nearly impossible to maintain the appropriate level of godly indignation and anger over the depravity. That takes real effort, and that becomes more difficult to sustain over time.

We tend to get tired of fighting, but Satan never does.

And the way the radical left fights these battles shows you how the devil thinks. You don’t agree with transgenderism? Too bad—they will teach it to your kindergartner and not even tell you! Push back, and they will insult you, shout at you, bully you online, threaten you.

Satan forces people to obey his will.

And he is pushing this toxic brew of iniquity because he wants to destroy human beings.

This is why God tells us to hate evil as He does (e.g. Psalm 97:10; Proverb 8:13).

Parents, take seriously your God-given responsibility to be your child’s educator. Know what he or she is being taught in school and what he or she is watching and reading. Take every step necessary to defend them. Train him in the way you know he should go (Proverbs 22:6). Your child is worth fighting for!




source:

https://www.thetrumpet.com/25679-disney-and-the-fight-for-our-children.







BECAUSE WE LIKE THE TRUTH

You can find us on Twitter



January 27, 2025

Canada’s Sovereignty in Jeopardy: “51st State”, Déjà Vu

Canada’s Sovereignty in Jeopardy: “51st State”, Déjà Vu


Canada’s Sovereignty in Jeopardy: “51st State”, Déjà Vu

The Militarization of North America under President Donald Trump


 Last December at  Trump’s luxury Mar a – Lago residence, President Elect Donald Trump intimated that Prime Minister Trudeau should become Governor of the 51st state of the United States of America.

This was no joking matter. Canada described as the 51st State of the USA signifies the outright Annexation of Canada.

In his  Inauguration speech on January 20, President Trump, referred to the deportation of illegal immigrants on the USA’s southern border with Mexico. Not a word was mentioned regarding America’s northern border with Canada. 

Jean Chrétien’s Letter to Donald. “From One Old Guy to Another”


A few days prior to Trump’s inauguration, former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien sent an open letter to Trump pointing to “The totally unacceptable insults and unprecedented threats to our very sovereignty from U.S. president-elect Donald Trump”. 

“I have two very clear and simple messages. To Donald Trump, from one old guy to another: Give your head a shake! What could make you think that Canadians would ever give up the best country in the world … to join the United States?

I can tell you Canadians prize our independence. We love our country.

We also had the guts to say no to your country when it tried to drag us into a completely unjustified and destabilizing war in Iraq. [March 2003]

But you don’t win a hockey game by only playing defence.

 All leaders across our country have united in resolve to defend Canadian interests.

Now there is another existential threat. And we once again need to reduce our vulnerability. That is the challenge for this generation of political leaders.

And you won’t accomplish it by using the same old approaches. Just like we did 30 years ago, we need a Plan B for 2025.

Yes, telling the Americans we are their best friends and closest trading partner is good.

But we also have to play offence. Let’s tell Mr. Trump that we too have border issues with the United States. 

We also want to protect the Arctic. But the United States refuses to recognize the Northwest Passage, insisting that it is an international waterway, even though it flows through the Canadian Arctic as Canadian waters. We need the United States to recognize the Northwest Passage as being Canadian waters.

click to enlarge

Jean Chretien’s above statement regarding Canada’s Northwest Passage is but the tip of the Iceberg.

The Creation of the 51st State is “Déjà Vu“. It Was Announced by Donald Rumsfeld in 2002

Following the creation of US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) in April 2002, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced unilaterally (without consulting the government of Canada) that NORTHCOM’s territorial jurisdiction (land, sea, air) extended from the Caribbean basin to the Canadian arctic territories and the North Pole. What this means is that the U.S. gave itself the right to deploy its military by air, land and sea throughout Canada, including it internal waterways.  (see maps below)

“The new command was given responsibility for the continental United States, Canada, Mexico, portions of the Caribbean and the contiguous waters in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans up to 500 miles off the North American coastline.

NorthCom’s mandate is to “provide a necessary focus for [continental] aerospace, land and sea defenses, and critical support for [the] nation’s civil authorities in times of national need.”

(Canada-US Relations – Defense Partnership – July 2003, Canadian American Strategic Review (CASR),

Announced by Donald Rumsfeld, Northern Command US sovereignty  regarding the deployment of  the US military (land, waterways, air) encompasses Mexico, the U.S. and Canada, from the Caribbean up to North Pole.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld boasted that:

“the NORTHCOM – with all of North America as its geographic command – ‘is part of the greatest transformation of the Unified Command Plan [UCP] since its inception in 1947.’” (See Journal Canada Defense Forces)

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

U.S Regional Commands in Six Regions of the World,

USNORTHCOM, USSOUTHCOM, USAFRICOM, USEUCOM, USPACOM, USCENTCOM

NORTHCOM’s stated mandate was to:

“provide a necessary focus for [continental] aerospace, land and sea defenses, and critical support for [the] nation’s [US] civil authorities in times of national need.” (Canada-US Relations – Defense Partnership – July 2003, Canadian American Strategic Review (CASR),

Canada and US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM)

In December 2002, following the refusal of (former) Prime Minister Jean Chrétien to join US Northern Command (NORTHCOM) –which was announced unilaterally by the Bush Administration,  –, an interim bi-national military authority entitled the Binational Planning Group (BPG) was established.

Canadian membership in NORTHCOM would have implied the integration of Canada’s military command structures with those of the US. That option had been temporarily deferred by the Chrétien government, through the creation of the Binational Planning Group (BPG).

The BPG’s formal mandate in 2002 was to extend the jurisdiction of the US-Canada North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) to cover sea, land and “civil forces”,  

“to improve current Canada–United States arrangements to defend against primarily maritime threats to the continent and respond to land-based attacks, should they occur.”

Although never acknowledged in official documents, the BPG was in fact established to prepare for the merger of NORAD and NORTHCOM,  thereby creating de facto conditions for Canada to join US Northern Command.

The “Group” described as an “independent” military authority was integrated from the outset in December 2002 into the command structures of  NORAD and NORTHCOM, both operating out the same headquarters at the Peterson Air Force base in Colorado. In practice, the “Group” functioned under the jurisdiction of US Northern Command, which is controlled by the US Department of Defense.

Jean Chrétien abruptly resigned in December 2003. Paul Martin, –who painted Jean Chrétien with  disdain– took over the position of Prime Minister, with a firm commitment to the Bush Administration’s’ USNORTHCOM project.

In December 2004, in the context of President George W. Bush’s visit to Ottawa, it was agreed that the mandate of the BPG would be extended to May 2006. It was understood that this extension was intended to set the stage for Canada’s “subordinate membership” in USNORTHCOM.

In March 2006, two months before the end of its mandate, the BPG published a task force document on North American security issues:

“‘A continental approach’ to defense and security could facilitate binational maritime domain awareness and a combined response to potential threats, ‘which transcends Canadian and U.S. borders, domains, defense and security departments and agencies,’  (quoted in Homeland Defense watch, 20 July 2006)

The BPG task force report called for the establishment of a “maritime mission” for NORAD including a maritime warning system. The report acted as a blueprint for the renegotiation of NORAD, which was implemented immediately following the release of the report.

On April 28, 2006, an agreement negotiated behind closed doors was signed between the US and Canada. 

The renewed NORAD agreement was signed in Ottawa by the US ambassador and the Canadian Minister of Defense Gordon O’Connor, without prior debate in the Canadian ParliamentThe House of Commons was allowed to rubberstamp a fait accompli, an agreement which had already been signed by the two governments. 

“‘A continental approach  to defense and security could facilitate binational maritime domain awareness and a combined response to potential threats, “which transcends Canadian and U.S. borders, domains, defense and security departments and agencies,’ the report says.” (Homeland Defense Watch, May 8, 2006)

While NORAD still exists in name, its organizational structure coincides with that of NORTHCOM. Following the April 28, 2006 agreement, in practical terms, NORAD has been merged into USNORTHCOM.

\With the  exception of a token Canadian General, who occupied the position of  Deputy Commander of NORAD, the leadership of NORAD coincided with that of NORTHCOM. 
These two military authorities are identical in structure, they occupy the same facilities at the Peterson Air Force base in Colorado.

There was no official announcement of the renewed NORAD agreement, which hands over control of Canada’s territorial waters to the US, nor was there media coverage of this far-reaching decision. 

The Deployment of US Troops on Canadian Soil

At the outset of US Northern Command in April 2002, Canada accepted the right of the US to deploy US troops on Canadian soil.

“U.S. troops could be deployed to Canada and Canadian troops could cross the border into the United States if the continent was attacked by terrorists who do not respect borders, according to an agreement announced by U.S. and Canadian officials.” (Edmunton Sun, 11 September 2002)

With the creation of the BPG in December 2002, a binational  “Civil Assistance Plan” was established. The latter described the precise “conditions for deploying U.S. troops in Canada, or vice versa, in the aftermath of a terrorist attack or natural disaster.” (quoted in Inside the Army, 5 September 2005).

The Demise of Canadian Sovereignty 

In August 2006, the US State Department confirmed that a new NORAD Agreement had entered into force, while emphasizing that “the maritime domain awareness component was of ‘indefinite duration,’ albeit subject to periodic review.” (US Federal News, 1 August 2006).

In March 2007, the US Senate Armed Services Committee confirmed that the NORAD Agreement had been formally renewed, to include a maritime warning system. In Canada, in contrast, there has been a deafening silence.

In Canada, the renewed NORAD agreement went virtually unnoticed. There was no official pronouncement by the Canadian government of Stephen Harper. There was no analysis or commentary of its significance and implications for Canadian territorial sovereignty. The agreement was barely reported by the Canadian media.

Operating under a “North American” emblem (i.e. a North American Command), the US military would have jurisdiction over Canadian territory from coast to coast; extending from the St Laurence Valley to the Queen Elizabeth archipelago in the Canadian Arctic.

The agreement would allow for the establishment of “North American” military bases on Canadian territory. From an economic standpoint, it would also integrate the Canadian North, with its vast resources in energy and raw materials, with Alaska. 

Nanasivik Naval Facility at Resolute Bay

Ottawa’s July 2007 decision to establish a military facility at Resolute Bay in the Northwest Passage was not intended to reassert “Canadian sovereignty”. Quite the opposite. It was established in consultation with Washington and Northern Command.

A deep-water port at Nanisivik  on the northern tip of Baffin Island was completed in mid-2024. It is expected to open up in early 2025 (see map below). 

The US administration was firmly behind the Canadian government’s decision. The latter does not “reassert Canadian sovereignty”. Quite the opposite. It is a means to establishing US territorial control over Canada’s entire Arctic region,  its internal waterways including the strategic North West Passage, which de facto under the jurisdiction of  US Northern Command (NORTHCOM).

There is an unspoken U.S. strategic and geopolitical objective behind the deep water port at Nanisivik, It’s the threat of Russia and China, largely in the sphere of “commercial traffic”:

With the signing of a memorandum of understanding [in November 2024], the United States, Canada and Finland are moving ahead on what military analysts see as a belated but much-needed answer to a mounting Russian and Chinese threat in the Arctic Ocean.

While the retreat of the polar icecap is steadily opening the region for commercial traffic and mineral exploration, the ICE Pact is largely driven by concerns over the Arctic capabilities of an increasingly hostile Russia and the rapidly growing presence of China.

Donald Trump’s intent to “buy Greenland”  is related to Nanisivik plan to control strategic water ways, through the Baffin Bay and the North West Passage, which in words of  Prime Minister Jean Chrétien belongs to Canada:

“We also want to protect the Arctic. But the United States refuses to recognize the Northwest Passage, insisting that it is an international waterway”.

“Integration” or  “Annexation” of Canada?

Canada is contiguous to “the center of the empire”. Territorial control over Canada is part of the US geopolitical and military agenda. It is worth recalling in this regard, that throughout history, the “conquering nation” has expanded on its immediate borders, acquiring control over contiguous territories and maritime rights. In regards  to the U.S., this concept of “contiguous territories” relates to Canada, Mexico and part of the Caribbean.(See the USNORTHCOM above which also includes Cuba and the Bahamas)

Military integration is intimately related to the ongoing process of integration in the spheres of trade, finance and investment. Needless to say, a large part of the Canadian economy is already in the hands of US corporate interests. In turn, the interests of Big Business in Canada tend to coincide with those of the US.

Canada is already a de facto economic protectorate of the USA. NAFTA had not only opened up new avenues for US corporate expansion, it had laid the groundwork under the existing North American umbrella for the post 9/11 integration of military command structures, public security, intelligence and law enforcement.

Canada’s entry into US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) was barely covered by Canada’s media.  USNORTHCOM was presented to public opinion as part of Canada-US “cooperation”, as something which was “in the national interest”, which “will create jobs for Canadians”, and “will make Canada more secure” (sounds a bit like “Trump rhetoric”)

Ultimately what is at stake is that beneath the rhetoric, Canada will cease to function as a sovereign Nation:

-Its borders will be controlled by US officials and confidential information on Canadians will be shared with Homeland Security.

-US troops and Special Forces will be able to enter Canada as a result of a binational arrangement.

-Canadian citizens can be arrested by US officials, acting on behalf of their Canadian counterparts and vice versa.

But there is something perhaps even more fundamental in defining and understanding where Canada and Canadians stand as a nation.

By endorsing a Canada-US “integration” in the spheres of defense, homeland security, police and intelligence, Canada –which refused wage war on Iraq in 2003– has also become a full fledged member of what George W. Bush’ called  the “Coalition of the Willing”, namely direct participation, through integrated military command structures, in the US-NATO war agenda in Ukraine, Central Asia, the Middle East and East Asia.

Canada  has no longer an independent foreign policy.

Under an integrated US North American Command,. Canada has been obliged to embrace Washington’s pre-emptive military doctrine, its bogus “global war on terrorism” which has been used as a pretext for waging war in the Middle East, South East Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.Lynne McTaggartBest Price: $8.46Buy New $43.88(as of 02:31 UTC - Details)

————————

Jean Chrétien

This article is dedicated to Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, whom I had the opportunity of meeting in the context of an interview pertaining to the Canadian Economy on behalf of a TV Ontario Educational Programme with the support of the University of Ottawa.

He received our team at his office at the House of Commons, with smiles, hospitality and a wonderful sense of humour.

He is a man of the people, committed to peace and social justice, serving the interests of Canadians from his heart and his mind.

Censorship

An earlier version first published in 2005 under the title: Is the Annexation of Canada part of Bush’s Military Agenda? by Michel Chossudovsky was granted a 2005 Project Censored Award (Sonoma State University California)

A short version of the above article (2005) was submitted to the Toronto StarIt was accepted and confirmed for publication three consecutive times in the Opinion section. It was never published.

The original source of this article is Global Research.

POPULAR POSTS OF ALL TIME

Blog Archive

Το εύδαιμον το ελεύθερον, το δ’ ελεύθερον το εύψυχον. – Ευτυχισμένοι είναι οι ελεύθεροι και ελεύθεροι είναι οι γενναίοι. // // Happy are the free and free are the brave.