Going Along to Get Along : Canada's American Controlled Air Travel

21 posts / 0 new

Tue, 2012-04-03 04:42

NDPP

Planning A Trip to Canada or the Caribbean? US Immigration May Have Other Ideas

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/planning-a-trip-to-c...

"...Now the US is demanding passengers' full names, dates of birth and gender from airlines, at least 72 hours before departure from the UK to Canada. The initial requirement is for flights to Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, and the Nova Scotia capital, Halifax - 150 miles from the nearest US territory. A similar stipulation is expected soon for the main airports in western Canada, Vancouver and Calgary..."

this too we'll just suck up right?

Tue, 2012-04-03 06:44

Michelle

They've got to be kidding. And Canada is just going along with this crap? Unbelievable!

Tue, 2012-04-03 08:15

Fidel

It's all about 9/11. Never forget.

Tue, 2012-04-03 08:34

Slumberjack

It certainly sped up the processes, which I think were inevitable anyway. And we think Heydrich took things to excessive extremes with the index cards and colour coding system he maintained in order to keep track of enemies and the general population at large.

Tue, 2012-04-03 08:48

Fidel

<a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/02/04/remarks-president-obama-and-prime-minister-stephen-harper-canada-joint-p">Stephen Harper</a> wrote:
"And I say "us" because as I have said before, a threat to the United States is a threat to Canada -- to our trade, to our interests, to our values, to our common civilization. Canada has no friends among America's enemies, and America has no better friend than Canada." - our chief colonial administrator speaking at the White House

Tue, 2012-04-03 09:05

Slumberjack

With Harper we could simply chalk it up to the 'birds of a feather' rationale, but on the whole, why wouldn't Canadians want to be on the best possible terms with the American empire and their current and prospective leaders, like Obama, Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich et al, or at least enough to keep them humoured. They're dangerous liars and psychopaths after all.

Tue, 2012-04-03 09:38

Fidel

Slumberjack wrote:

With Harper we could simply chalk it up to the 'birds of a feather' rationale, but on the whole, why wouldn't Canadians want to be on the best possible terms with the American empire and their current and prospective leaders, like Obama, Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich et al, or at least enough to keep them humoured. They're dangerous liars and psychopaths after all.

Dangerous psychopaths for sure. But other countries standup to Uncle Sam regularly. And there are plenty of examples.

I'm afraid our obedient lapdogs in Ottawa have a long history of toadying to Uncle Sam on a wide range of issues. This is but one example among many. It's ridiculous.

The wisdom for cow-towing to Uncle Sam used to be that we would share in great riches of American economic fortunes. NAFTA is an example. We were supposed to gain greater access to US markets. Our own billionaire oligarchs will tell us that this has not been the case and that the reverse has been true. 14000+ takeovers of Canadian corporations and valuable crown assets since just 1985. More than three dozen key sectors of Canadian economy are now majority foreign-owned and controlled and mostly by rich Americans. Meanwhile not a single sector of U.S. economy is majority foreign-controlled by anyone. We've been had on "free" trade with America. Canada was supposed to have become a 51st state of sorts and benefit greatly by it. Instead we've become a sort of Northern Puerto Rico as Canadian author Mel Hurtig describes the situation. The benefits of cow-towing have not been realized.

It's time to try strong central government in Ottawa. It's time for the NDP. International bullies only understand one thing, and that is to fight back. Bullies want a little bullying themselves.

Tue, 2012-04-03 10:12

Slumberjack

If you didn't have a mind like a sieve, you'd be able to recall that the little bully NDP signed on with the big international bullies not so long ago.

Tue, 2012-04-03 10:33

Fidel

Slumberjack wrote:

If you didn't have a mind like a sieve, you'd be able to recall that the little bully NDP signed on with the big international bullies not so long ago.

Do you mean when the NDP demanded the troops be repatriated from "the mission" for cow-towing to Uncle Sam in Afghanistan?

Or do you mean that the NDP is still the only party in Ottawa that opposed the signing of Mulroney's NAFTA "as is" in 1994?

If my mind is like a sieve, then your's must be a toll booth sans coin collector.

Tue, 2012-04-03 10:35

#10

Slumberjack

Perhaps and arguably it was a slightly different party in 1994. Nowadays as our friend up thread accurately observes, there's no difference either at the federal or provincial level, as my posts in the regional NS politics thread will verify.

ETA: And if you believe a NDP government would roll back any of these intrusions upon personal dignities and body cavities; not only is it the case that they can't, but they won't. To believe otherwise should necessitate further examination and diagnosis of ones faculties in my estimation.

Tue, 2012-04-03 10:47

#11

Slumberjack

With naked scanners and rubber glove inspections, people don't seem to be bothered all that much by the 'what else' if it means getting to their destinations, to the extent that for some, there's apparently no confusion whatsoever as to what the term 'open society' implies. Governments go along with everything because they can with no risk of repercussions. It's the 'I've got nothing to hide' segments of society that enable their own subjugation, until there's literally nothing left-to-hide. The nudist colonies were way ahead of their time.

Tue, 2012-04-03 10:49

#12

Fidel

Slumberjack wrote:

I understand you, which puts me well on the road toward understanding neoliberalism, and the way it often represents as being in opposition to itself.

We need strong central government in Ottawa working on behalf of all provinces and territories, and the NDP is yet to be elected to that role. The neoliberal ideology isn't working with three recessions in three decades. Canadians are slowly beginning to realize it.

Tue, 2012-04-03 10:52

#13

Slumberjack

I understand you, which puts me well on the road toward understanding neoliberalism, and the phony way it often represents as being in opposition to itself.

Tue, 2012-04-03 12:45

#14

Fidel

Slumberjack wrote:

Perhaps and arguably it was a slightly different party in 1994. Nowadays as our friend up thread accurately observes, there's no difference either at the federal or provincial level, as my posts in the regional NS politics thread will verify.

I've read your notes, and I don't think you understand neoliberal ideology. But that's okay.

Tue, 2012-04-03 18:49

#15

Michelle

So basically, there is probably some blackmail implicit in these new "regulations" that the US is trying to impose on airlines around the rest of the world. If Air Canada and British Airways don't go along with giving the US all this information about flights that don't go near the US or their airspace, then probably the next step by the US is to refuse to allow them to fly over US airspace or land in the US for their other flights.

The proper response, of course, if that were to happen, would be for Canada and the UK to refuse to allow any US airlines to land in their countries or fly over their airspace.

But no, that's not going to happen, because our government is too busy sticking their tongue so far up the US government's ass that they can taste their tonsils.

Tue, 2012-04-03 19:56

#16

NDPP

If Canada and the UK had truly representative democratic governments instead of filthy complicit collaborators, something would be done. They do not so this will stand. And it will be yet another thread in the never ending series of indications of just how much power, control and surveillance our masters are accummulating towards their ultimate goal of 'full spectrum dominance'. More prisons, more surveillance, more militarism, more corporate control, more fascism. The appropriate response is obvious and is as stated above.

here's the problem:

The Chain of Obedience

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NcLNoxiPBk&feature=player

Wed, 2012-04-04 02:19

#17

Fidel

Michelle wrote:

So basically, there is probably some blackmail implicit in these new "regulations" that the US is trying to impose on airlines around the rest of the world. If Air Canada and British Airways don't go along with giving the US all this information about flights that don't go near the US or their airspace, then probably the next step by the US is to refuse to allow them to fly over US airspace or land in the US for their other flights.

The proper response, of course, if that were to happen, would be for Canada and the UK to refuse to allow any US airlines to land in their countries or fly over their airspace.

But no, that's not going to happen, because our government is too busy sticking their tongue so far up the US government's ass that they can taste their tonsils.

That's good. It's gross and I'm off my food for a while as a result, but it's very good at the same time, Michelle.

Wed, 2012-04-04 06:47

#18

Michelle

No tossed salad for you, Fidel! :D

Sorry, I guess that was pretty crude, but I was furious when I wrote it. I asked rr if I should edit it out, and between fits of laughter, he said, "No way, leave it!" So I did.

Wed, 2012-04-04 07:24

#19

abnormal

Michelle wrote:

They've got to be kidding. And Canada is just going along with this crap? Unbelievable!

Unless the [b]UK government[/b] says "NO!" Air Canada (and any other affected airline) doesn't have a choice.

Wed, 2012-04-04 08:03

#20

Slumberjack

Michelle wrote:
No tossed salad for you, Fidel! :D Sorry, I guess that was pretty crude, but I was furious when I wrote it. I asked rr if I should edit it out, and between fits of laughter, he said, "No way, leave it!" So I did.

I thought it was tasteful all things considered. If the analogy were left up to me I certainly wouldn't have made it as far as the tonsils.

Wed, 2012-04-04 10:41

#21

Hoodeet

This certainly is also meant to intimidate radicals (or anyone who could be lumped with them, such as environmental activists --and who knows, perhaps eventually even donors to Greenpeace, Development & Peace, & others), pro-Palestinian fundraisers, BDS organizers, and who knows who else from travelling. This goes hand in hand with tightening the screws on internet communication.

But it will probably only reach a really critical point around the time Gaia has been forced to lash back at us big time and the damage we've done to Earth is so advanced that politics becomes moot and the best we could do is cocoon with our local communities to face THE End. Then all those lap dogs (running dogs? or is Mao totally out of fashion?) with their heads up their Masters' rectal region will be decapitated and drop off when the masters start running around looking for shelter. We'll therefore have headless wonders for ersatz national heads of government in places like Canada.

How cheerful I can be! she adds, miserably.