Did Canadians Vote for ‘Global Governance?’
By Stephen J. Gray
“We need some semblance of global governance” Stephen Harper [1]
When did Canadians agree to ‘global governance?’ Was it on the ballot in the last election? Is Stephen Harper, who was running around electioneering during the last election - sometimes wearing a jacket with Canada emblazoned all over it – really hiding his true intentions and globalist leanings? Was he just seeking votes? Does he have a hidden agenda to give away Canada’s national sovereignty? Is he being influenced by powerful people or by people in other countries who are also undermining their own countries sovereignty? (Europe is one example where puppet politicians have signed away national sovereignty and unelected “technocrats” have taken over) Surely, if Mr. Harper cared about Canada and Canadians he would not have said the words below?
“I know some people don’t like it, it’s a loss of national sovereignty” Stephen Harper [1]
How do the people in his party feel about the ‘loss of national sovereignty?’ Do they care? Or do they follow Mr. Harper blindly? Are the speech writers and political flacks who surround Mr. Harper are they okay with the ‘loss of national sovereignty?’ Does the perks of the job mean more than loyalty to ones country? Do the MPs who serve under Mr. Harper and the opposition MPs have any thoughts on Canada’s ‘loss of national sovereignty?’ Do these MPs care about Canada’s ‘loss of national sovereignty?’ Have any of them spoken out in defence of Canada?
What about the Canadian media? Have any of them raised the alarm on the ‘loss of national sovereignty?’ Has it been front page news in any of the corporate owned newspapers? Have any of the corporate owned TV stations who are always boasting that they bring the news to the people: Have any of them done an in depth investigation of the ‘loss of national sovereignty?’ What about the big business elites, do they care about the ‘loss of national sovereignty?’ Does money and profits count more than allegiance to Canada? I guess that question could be easily answered, when we see corporate chief executives investing in China, a country where slave labour has been used and dissidents are tortured and a one child policy and forced abortion are rampant. Still, never mind all that, PM Stephen Harper is forming a “strategic partnership” with the Chinese dictatorship. I wonder could that be called a ‘loss of national sovereignty?’
“Harper also vowed joint efforts with China to address global and regional issues, to safeguard world peace and to boost new progress of global economic governance.” [2]
And of course globalist inclined, Mr. Harper, is hell bent on a “free trade” agreement with the European Union (EU). National sovereignty in the E.U., as I mentioned earlier has been handed over to unelected “Technocrats” and some countries were taken into the E.U. without the consent of their people. I guess one could also call this a ‘loss of national sovereignty.’ What is really going on? Are we being treated as tax paying slaves, expected to conform to whatever Mr. Harper dictates? Are we expected to sit back and accept the dictum of Mr. Harper: “I know some people don’t like it, it’s a loss of national sovereignty” Or are we going to demand that our country is not for sale by any politician with ‘global governance’ on their agenda?
Stephen J. Gray
June 13, 2012.
Endnotes:
Definitions of global and governance:
Global: “covering, influencing, or relating to the whole world”[3]
Governance: “government, control, or authority” [4]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some articles of interest at links below:
