Skip to content

Foreign Agents Creep into U.S. & Canada Under Integration Scheme

June 3, 2012
Alex Newman, The New American
5/26/2012

As the so-called trilateral North American “integration” process marches onward toward an ever-closer union between the governments of Canada, the United States, and Mexico, national law enforcement agents are slowly creeping across borders through a variety of shadowy schemes. Going forward, that trend is set to accelerate, according to officials, who say government functionaries may soon be able to chase and arrest suspects outside of their own nations. But critics of the controversial plan are fighting back with increasing urgency.

U.S. and Canadian authorities have already spent millions of dollars on “pilot projects” seeking to blur national borders in the field of policing. Almost 150 so-called “cross-border” officers have been trained so far, according to a report published this month by Embassy magazine. Meanwhile, the Shiprider program — officially known as “Integrated Cross-border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations” — has been active since 2009, when high-ranking bureaucrats from the United States and Canada signed the agreement without even obtaining legislative approval.

“Shiprider removes the international maritime boundary as a barrier to law enforcement by enabling seamless continuity of enforcement and security operations across the border, facilitating cross-border surveillance and interdiction, and serving as both a force multiplier and, potentially, as a model for other U.S./Canadian cross-border (integrated) enforcement and security initiatives,” the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) says about the scheme on its website.

Under the highly controversial but little-known program, boats staffed by law-enforcement agents from both governments can scurry back and forth as if there was no border between the two nations. And in March, top Obama administration officials met with their Canadian counterparts to super-charge the unconstitutional process by signing even more “agreements” — again without consulting Congress, let alone ratifying a treaty.

“We will continue to work with Canada to further enhance information sharing and integrate our cross-border law enforcement operations, strengthening the national and economic security of both our nations,” claimed Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano after signing a deal to advance the process with Canadian officials. Her counterparts across the border issued similar statements following the meeting.

And now… the rest of the story. …..

About these ads
2 Comments leave one →
  1. June 3, 2012 10:51 pm

    I did research on those regional unions long ago at the University. My Phd dissertation outlines the requirement for a successful Union based on common interest common culture and traditions. For the continent I found that Canada and the USA have a high compatibility ration and sufficient economic complementarity and a common border. But Mexico belongs with a Central Region it should promote. South America is getting there eventually. To look as Mexico as a source of labor is not the right view for a just Union.

  2. Rwolf permalink
    June 3, 2012 12:35 pm

    U.S. Expanding Cross-border Police Integration With Canada & Asset Forfeiture Sharing

    Concurrent with Obama’s proposed law legalizing and expanding cross-border police integration in North America, Canadians recently discovered introduced (Commons Bill C-30 touted to protect children on the Internet—would also give any Canadian police officer—without a warrant—the power to request Internet service providers turn over customers’ information (see section 17 of C-30); allow Canadian police to seek into Canadians’ private computers. C-30 was strongly opposed by Canadians in April 2012. Canadians furthered discovered Canada had signed with the United States an array of (Asset Forfeiture Sharing Agreements) for Canada to share Canadian and Americans assets civilly or criminally confiscated using Asset Forfeiture laws that resulted from U.S. and Canada sharing information gleaned from electronic surveillance of Canadian and American Citizens’ communications, e.g., emails, faxes, Internet actively, phone records.

    The Obama Government (now) wants the power (without a warrant) to introduce as evidence in Civil; Criminal and Administrative prosecutions any phone call record, email or Internet activity. Police can take out of context any innocent—hastily written email, fax or phone call record to allege a crime or violation was committed to cause a person’s arrest, fines and or civil asset forfeiture of their property. There are more than 350 laws/violations that can subject property to Government forfeiture that require only a civil preponderance of evidence.

    The U.S. “Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000” (effectively eliminated) the “five year statue of limitations” for Government Civil Asset Forfeiture: the statute now runs five years (from the date) government or a police agency allege they “learned” an asset became subject to forfeiture. It is foreseeable should (no warrant) government electronic surveillance be allowed; police will relentlessly sift through business and Citizen’s (government retained Internet data), emails and phone communications to discover possible criminal or civil violations. History Repeats: A corrupt despot U.S. Government/Agency can too easily use no-warrant—(seized emails, Internet data and phone call information) to blackmail Americans, corporations and others in the same manner Hitler used his police state no warrant passed laws to extort support for the Nazi fascist government, including getting members of German parliament to pass Hitler’s 1933 Discriminatory Decrees that suspended the Constitutional Freedoms of German Citizens. A Nazi Government threat of Asset Forfeiture of an individual or corporation’s assets was usually sufficient to ensure Nazi support.

    Under U.S. federal civil asset forfeiture laws, a person or business need not be charged with a crime for government to forfeit their property. Most U.S. Citizens, property and business owners that defend their assets against Government Civil Asset Forfeiture claim an “innocent owner defense.” This defense can become a criminal prosecution trap for both guilty and innocent property owners. Any fresh denial of guilt made to government when questioned about committing a crime “even when you did not do the crime” may (involuntarily waive) a defendant’s right to assert in their defense—the “Criminal Statute of Limitations” past for prosecution; any fresh denial of guilt even 30 years after a crime was committed may allow U.S. Government prosecutors to use old and new evidence, including information discovered during Civil Asset Forfeiture Proceedings to launch a criminal prosecution. For that reason: many innocent Americans, property and business owners are reluctant to defend their property and businesses against Government Civil Asset Forfeiture. Annually U.S. Government seizes Billions in assets without filing criminal charges. Increasingly local police are turning their criminal investigations over to Federal Agencies to receive an 80% rebate of forfeited assets. Federal Government is not required to charge anyone with a crime to forfeit property.

    Re: waiving Criminal Statute of Limitations: see USC18, Sec.1001, James Brogan V. United States. N0.96-1579. U.S. See paragraph (6) at:
    http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZC1.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 485 other followers

%d bloggers like this: