Thursday, March 20, 2014

US thinktank ponders- How about annexing Canada?

Curiously? Or, not reallyThe only article mentioning the pondering of US annexation of Canada is from the Guardian. I looked and didn't find this 'debate' reported on at any Canadian news websites. Checked for major American news outlets covering the Woodrow Wilson Centres  musings about annexation  and nothing.
Of course you and I know or should know, that this is the NAU being spoken of, openly, in the UK
Have we had any real discussion or public acknowledgement of the elites moving us towards this long planned union?
The proof  of connivance in moving Canada/US/Mexico towards this amalgamation, is in the pudding,  the sychophants we allow to lead us have been edging us ever closer to the  NAU. Except they always call this  'harmonization' The US and Canada, always singing the same songs- In harmony.

Do you think we will have a referendum in Canada regarding this annexation? We won't.
Will there be a referendum in the US? There won't be.
Because it's being done surreptitiously, bit by bit. A chipping away at Canada's sovereignty.

There was recently a referendum in Crimea . With international observers and paper ballots. And the people of Crimea choose their future. Unsurprisingly, that referendum was widely condemned by the so called democracies of the West. But then, the western democracies are anything but democratic.

Canadians should be unsurprised to see Diane Francis figuring large in this talk of annexation. Americans may not recognize the name? Francis is an alleged journalist. She is also American born with dual citizenship. Personally speaking, I could never stand the writings of this woman.  She was and is clearly a toadie of the multinational banker class
A saleswoman, the likes of Diane Francis,  would always have a sales pitch all ready to go! And she does!  It's contained in her prospectus-
 A printed document that advertises or describes a school, commercial enterprise, forthcoming book, etc., in order to attract or inform clients, members, buyers, or investors.
image here

 A  prospectus, masquerading as a book, titled  "Merger of the Century: Why Canada & America should become one country"  She is selling the North American Union from the Canada/American viewpoint, concerning Canada and the US. I am sure someone else is selling the Mexican point of view.

A reviewer of her book asks why it is Canada doesn't merge with Russia?. Setting out plenty of good reasons why it is Canada should merge with Russia.  
Someone is thinking..........Hurray
  Canada would, in theory, (if it has to merge with some super-power - as Diane nonsensically argues), be far better off merging with Russia. It may seem very outside the box at first and yes, Russia is a bit police-statish, but America lost that shine with the Patriot Act, TSA abuses, torture and concentration-camps, NSA spying, revoking the right of due process, the NDAA and of course all of Obama's lies promising to fix all that - and it just keeps getting worse all the time. Consider the advantages of a Canada-Russia merger: the Russians do not even need Canada's resources, land or cannon fodder (so Canada could negotiate a pretty good entry deal - maybe like Hong Kong's), nor are they trillions and trillions of dollars in debt. On the contrary, Russia has a huge surplus and is also well able to defend against any invasion. Not only that, a merger would create a country covering 30% of the world's land mass and thus be the richest country in human history. There is a language issue but that would create loads of work for Canadian English teachers. Both countries also love hockey and believe the most important games are the Winter Games - a perfect match!
 Advantages? Many!
 One not mentioned is the fact that a Russia/Canada union would control the Arctic almost entirely. Including the abundant  resources- and that the people of both nations could and should benefit immensely in that situation.

But then Diane Francis isn't really concerned with what is best for Canada or Canadians. She is merely selling the agenda of global tyranny/dictatorship and control by big business The very fact that this crackpot suggests Canada has to merge with a superpower sets the parameter for the sales pitch, that has to push the NAU product. This  had to have been the sole reason her book was even published

Rant over. I just had to get it out!!! Now onto the the elite think tank pushing the concept of the US annexing Canada

Woodrow Wilson Center holds ‘thought experiment’ on possible political union of the North American neighbours

Vladimir Putin may have taken Crimea for Russia, ( hello Guardian?? Referendum??) but in Washington on Wednesday the talk was of US annexation of Canada – all 4m square miles of it.
That at least was the “thought experiment” conducted by the Woodrow Wilson Center, a prestigious DC thinktank, which hosted a debate featuring the author of a book advocating political union of the two North American neighbours.

Diane Francis, a conservative Canadian newspaper columnist with dual US citizenship, says her call for the “merger of the century” has been listened to more seriously south of the border where she claims to have received complimentary letters from Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush.
“In Canada, people are horrified,” (Yes, they are and for dam good reason!) admitted Francis, before discussing how its 13 provinces and territories could become US states – but why Quebec might instead choose to become a semi-independent commonwealth, “a bit like Puerto Rico”.
 “I think we are already merging,” she said at Wednesday’s debate. “We should just get on with it and take away the border. My solution to fixing the border problem is just to get rid of it.”
I agree we are merging- As mentioned in a very underhanded, beneath the radar, undemocratic, fascistic method. 
“Canadians would act like a fabric softener for US politics,” claims Francis, allowing reforms like universal healthcare to take root, while also providing a pressure valve for conservative Americans and Quebecois nationalists alike.
Insulting to Americans- they don't need us for 'fabric softener' Implying Americans are rough, scratchy and irritating. What a pompous ass.

In return, goes the argument, American conservatives could find allies in Alberta and the Arctic and help drive North American energy production, both fossil fuel and renewable, in ways that would make current arguments over the Keystone oil pipeline redundant.
 And there is the meat and potatoes- energy politcs and exploiting the Arctic.. An area of the globe the US has no real say. Alaska can't make much of a claim to the area. And Canada, does not need the US to drive energy production and exploit Arctic resources.


  1. There would be an armed insurrection but we don't have very many arms.

    1. Hi gragor, well then we should get more
      except we have all been so massively brainwashed into relying on 'someone else' to keep us safe

  2. Hi Penny
    I think the US will have other considerations re avoiding economic collaps before that happens.
    I came across this today very interesting take from a Russian

    The last two paras, snip
    So what remains of Western global hegemony and of the West's right to play the world's psychiatrist? Make of it what you will, but some lessons seem quite clear. First, it now appears that, from Russia's point of view, having good relations with Washington is quite optional, but that Ukraine is quite a bit more important. All Russia really needs from Washington is that Washington stop its meddling in world affairs. America is dispensable. Washington, on the other hand, needs Russian cooperation if it wants to pull its troops out of Afghanistan in one piece, or if it wants to keep visiting the International Space Station, and even if it just wants to save face after its endless blunders in places like Syria and Iran.

    Second, the EU isn't being asked to choose a new master, but slavish obedience to Washington's dictates has led to mischief and may leave it shivering in the dark come next winter through no fault of Moscow's, so the EU should start acting in accordance with its obvious self-interest rather than against it.
    end snip the whole article is here well worth a read



  3. Hi gain Penny

    Then there is this also



  4. What a nightmare scenario...for Canada.

  5. In the 30's or 40's they actually did draw up very exact plans to invade Canada.


    1. Hi Noor, glad you stopped by and thanks I was going to put something up regarding previous US plans to annex Canada
      Plans I am certain were never taken off the table

  6. US outraged vy Annexation of Krimea...does that mean US willl let Hawaii go?
    learn what annexation really means!

    forget Krimea! a real annexation was carriued out by americans:
    'Flocks of American missionaries began arriving from Boston in 1820 and were welcomed warmly; many decided to stay on the islands rather than return to the frigid Northeast. Their new roots in paradise went deep: The missionaries became powerful sugar planters and politicians, often serving as advisers to the king.

    The monarchy was weakened. The planters' powers were strengthened.

    The United States was the biggest market for Hawaii's sugar. The transplanted planters longed for Hawaii to become part of the United States so they wouldn't have to worry about tariffs. The U.S. minister to Hawaii, John L. Stevens, was anxious to annex the islands as well.

    Sensing this, Queen Liliuokalani was on the verge of imposing a new Constitution shifting power back to the monarchy - but she never got the chance.

    On Jan. 16, 1893, U.S. Marines landed in Honolulu armed with Howitzer cannons and carbines. A group of 18 men - mostly American sugar farmers - staged a coup, proclaiming themselves the "provisional government" of Hawaii. Stevens gave immediate recognition to them as Hawaii's true government.

    Imprisoned in Iolani Palace, Queen Liliuokalani issued a statement: "I yield to the superior force of the United States of America, whose minister, his excellency John L. Stevens, has caused United States troops to be landed at Honolulu. ... Now, to avoid any collision of armed forces and perhaps the loss of life, I do, under this protest, and impelled by said force, yield my authority until such time as the government of the United States shall undo the action of its representative and reinstate me."

    President Grover Cleveland investigated the coup and fired Stevens. He apologized to the queen. And on Dec. 18, 1893, he briefed Congress on his findings:

    "By an act of war, committed with the participation of a diplomatic representative of the United States and without authority of Congress, the government of a feeble but friendly and confiding people has been overthrown," Cleveland said. "A substantial wrong has thus been done, which a due regard for our national character, as well as the rights of the injured people, requires we should endeavor to repair."

    Cleveland refused to approve the annexation of Hawaii. Soon, however, he was out of office, and President William McKinley gave it his blessing.

    Said Sam Monet, a staunch independence proponent: "The Kingdom of Hawaii has never ceased to exist. No peace treaty between the U.S. and the kingdom of Hawaii has been signed. A state of war between the U.S. and the kingdom of Hawaii exists today."

    the parallle here with ukraine is NATO is annexing ukraine

    1. thanks brian
      the hypocrisy is, as always, glaring

    2. Hawaii? There is a bigger elephant in the room: Texas, California, New Mexico, (La Republica del Norte of Charles Truxillo)!


  7. Can Russia annex us instead?

    Buffy just wondering ;)

    1. hehehe
      In Canada we would rather throw our lot in with a ship sinking
      And of course allow the US to exploit resources, resources they have no real claim to

      same old, same old

  8. I know ...

    I was indulging in wishful thinking... lol

    It's all a bloody mess.

  9. You are ABSOLUTELY WRONG about Francis. Begin your path toward TRUTH by reading her text FIGHTING FOR CANADA. KNOW that she got 95% of the available info, and KNOW that the topic of that text really did occur.

    IF... you are interested in truth, and wonder about what it was that she missed, locate a complete tape of the Ruby Ridge Hearings chaired by the ridiculous "Single Bullet Theory" creator Arlin Specter. What you are searching for is the legal team's presentation of stacks of Official Documents describing the presence of 300 TRAINLOADS of weapons suddenly arriving at the US-side of the Canadian Border, and the presence of 25,000 FULLY ARMED UN TROOPS accompanying those trainloads of weapons.

    All things considered, Diane Francis did very well with that quite accurate text.

    1. It is doubtful I am "absolutely wrong" regarding Francis
      Her prospectus on breaking up Canada speaks for itself
      And given here speech to Woodrow Wilson she isn't fighting for canada
      Did you read her quoted words?

      “I think we are already merging,”
      “We should just get on with it and take away the border.
      My solution to fixing the border problem is just to get rid of it.”
      Does that sound at all to you like a woman 'fighting for Canada"?

      Now onto her book,( fighting for Canada) from the description and some of her quotations
      I went to read briefly the intro of fighting for Canada
      She isn't fighting for Canada, she is fixing to get Canada to fight!
      Internally. Between ourselves.
      And whose hand's does that play into? The hand of the separatists!
      She is creating an us vs them and we have to fight
      which will virtually guarantee the break up of Canada
      divide to conquer
      Diance Francis may get some things right, but, I spent years reading her crap in Macleans magazine and she does Canada no favours and is servile to the elite classes
      As for Ruby Ridge? I have only the vaguest familiarity with that state sponsored act of terror