Slashdot Mirror

She hasn't broken any Canadian laws. The very fact that Canada is holding her for extradition when Canadian law clearly states that extradition is only for crimes which are crimes in both countries, is a human right violation.

Except Canada does have trade santions on Iran.

good luck!
check out this provision in the TPP:

http://www.international.gc.ca...

Prevents governments in TPP countries from demanding access to an enterprise’s software source code.

Good luck with that when the government in question invokes the national security card.

good luck!
check out this provision in the TPP:

http://www.international.gc.ca...

Prevents governments in TPP countries from demanding access to an enterprise’s software source code.

LOL. You conservatives crack me up.

We elected President Hope and Change - Obama. He works for *the people*, particularly those who are poor or minority (some exclusions may apply, specifically asians and pacific islanders are, for purposes of this paragraph, not a "minority"), not big corporations or Wall Street fat cats!

Wow, I can't wait to see the look on those corporation people's faces when Obama strikes down this cronyist giveaway! It'll be priceless. He'll send those Republicans back where they came from with nothing to show for it but some spanked bottoms.

Anyway, that's why we elected him. We were tired of big money making laws. See how smart we are?

good luck! check out this provision in the TPP: http://www.international.gc.ca... Prevents governments in TPP countries from demanding access to an enterprise’s software source code.

This is yet another salacious post to garner attention. Here are a few things wrong with the post.
1. It is impossible to sign on to an agreement that is still in negotiation.
2. It is not a secret agreement as it's existence is posted in many places and some governments are asking for public consultation. The final text will be made available a debated when, and if, the countries involved vote on it.
3. No international treaty is ever made public till the the final draft. Negotiators need to be free to negotiate.
4. Many of these agreements never get to final draft as agreement sometimes is never reached,
4. The agreement will not come into effect unless ratified by the duly elected governments of the countries involved. Until then no one has "signed on".

Perhaps the reason behind this post is that WikiLeaks is not trending enough.

This is yet another salacious post to garner attention. Here are a few things wrong with the post.
1. It is impossible to sign on to an agreement that is still in negotiation.
2. It is not a secret agreement as it's existence is posted in many places and some governments are asking for public consultation. The final text will be made available a debated when, and if, the countries involved vote on it.
3. No international treaty is ever made public till the the final draft. Negotiators need to be free to negotiate.
4. Many of these agreements never get to final draft as agreement sometimes is never reached,
4. The agreement will not come into effect unless ratified by the duly elected governments of the countries involved. Until then no one has "signed on".

Perhaps the reason behind this post is that WikiLeaks is not trending enough.

ACTA: http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/assets/pdfs/acta-crc_apr15-2011_eng.pdf.
SOPA: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.3261:.
PIPA: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s112-968.

Also discuss the differences in what they are. ACTA is an international trade agreement, like the Berne Convention, the Paris Convention, the TRIPs treaty, the Patent Cooperation Treaty, NAFTA, etc. It's not legislation, but rather an agreement between signatory countries to pass legislation in their own countries. Accordingly, ACTA sets out minimum standards that each country has to meet. Contrary to what some people think, it doesn't need to be ratified by Congress, because it's a non-enabling treaty... instead, Congress has to write legislation implementing it, at which point they get to weigh in on what it means. Until they pass that legislation, ACTA effectively has no teeth in the US.

SOPA and PIPA are house and senate bills, respectively. They implement many of the provisions of ACTA, but they differ in important ways. Reading them side by side is probably a good thing. Note, however, that even if both were passed, a joint committee would then figure out a compromise position, so neither one is what a final statute would look like.

Further to your comment (and re-posting this as original post from hours ago hasn't shown up!?!), do not forget to add your name & address to the email!

From Mr Geist's blog:

All it takes a single email with your name, address, and comments on the issue. The email can be sent to consultations@international.gc.ca. Alternatively, submissions can be sent by fax (613-944-3489) or mail (Trade Negotiations Consultations (TPP), Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, Trade Policy and Negotiations Division II (TPW), Lester B. Pearson Building, 125 Sussex Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2).

I bet this'll end up being a double-post, but I swear the original isn't visible as I write this.

Just to add to your post, the email *needs* your name & address.

From Mr Geist's blog:

The consultation is open until February 14, 2012. All it takes a single email with your name, address, and comments on the issue. The email can be sent to consultations@international.gc.ca. Alternatively, submissions can be sent by fax (613-944-3489) or mail (Trade Negotiations Consultations (TPP), Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, Trade Policy and Negotiations Division II (TPW), Lester B. Pearson Building, 125 Sussex Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2).

The area in question is VERY unlikely to be explored for petroleum, let alone developed, for decades. And there may be nothing there.

The real issue is the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which allows countries to claim exclusive mineral rights beyond the current 200 nautical mile limit, out to the edge of the continental margin (which the treaty calls the "continental shelf", but it's not the same as the usual definition of that term). In some places this can be a significant chunk of territory. However, to establish the claim you have to define the geological boundary between continental crust and ocean crust, and there is a limited time to do so after ratification of the treaty (10 years). In Canada's case, the treaty was ratified in 2003. Canada therefore has to submit the claim to the responsible UN commission by 2013. In the part of the Arctic Ocean that is close to Canada, there is a large area (e.g., the Alpha Ridge) that is shallow enough that it could be claimed (the white line in the picture in the above link), if it is shown to be continental material. Unfortunately there isn't much known about that area, because the Arctic Ocean is one of the least-understood ocean basins. Hence there is a strong motivation to find out more about it, and sooner than 2013. With sea ice covering most of the area most of the year, it makes sense to use subs to survey it.

It isn't so much a "power struggle" as a 10-year window to define a geological boundary in order to make an exclusive claim in the area, under international law. After that, the 200 nautical mile limit becomes the permanent boundary. Russia, Denmark (Greenland), and Norway have ratified the treaty, so they're in the running with Canada. The U.S. isn't, because it hasn't ratified, but it doesn't have much to gain in the Arctic (the continental margin in Alaska is narrow). As a sign that it isn't really much of a "power struggle", Canada, Russia, and Denmark have all run joint scientific expeditions to the area to study the sea floor geology in the last several years.

Yeah, he won't have his nose in the air when their economy collapses and we see 1USD = 0.073CAD.
When it happens, I am going to head down to Minneapolis, find some hookers and then pay them to fight some other hookers I picked up in Tijuana.

Really? Look at this then.
Over 80% of canadian exports go to the US.
How do you think canadian economy will be if US collapses?

Meanwhile <16% of what is exported from Brazil goes to the US, as you can see here.

I guess it's more likely that brazilians would be paying cheap canadian hookers.

It was hardly done in secret and it has not been signed, this was a kdawson story so you have to take that most thing you read are incorrect.
A quick search of finds lots of articles about it such as one from the Canadian Office of Forgein Affairs done back in 2007.

They even have a page with contact phone numbers and email address were you can tell them what you think; be smart not your standard /. comments.
If this was a secretly done treaty then what do they do for ones done in public?

It was hardly done in secret and it has not been signed, this was a kdawson story so you have to take that most thing you read are incorrect.
A quick search of finds lots of articles about it such as one from the Canadian Office of Forgein Affairs done back in 2007.

They even have a page with contact phone numbers and email address were you can tell them what you think; be smart not your standard /. comments.
If this was a secretly done treaty then what do they do for ones done in public?

• Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement - Fact Sheet
• What is the Proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)?
• "ACTA" - a New Plurilateral Policy Platform

No, if they were popular celebs, they would have gotten clearances before hand and then presented it and been waived on through.

Canada allows exceptions to the rules but you have to apply for them before hand. This is no secrete. What it does is allow you to make a case for being in the country despite being technically barred. I need to do it because I had a conviction for assaulting a police officer that was overturned on appeals about 15 years ago.

Here is a link from the Canadian web site (or it appears that way. maybe a border station at Seattle or something) that tells more about the process. Here is another link to a story from February talking about it.

KFUD strikes again!

The FBI just provides a place to store the criminal record of people and based on agreements between Canada and the US, Canada can view the record.
None of this was made up the two people blocked from Canada are guilty of various crimes. There were treated no differently then anyone else entering Canada.
For more info see http://geo.international.gc.ca/can-am/seattle/visas/inadmissible-en.asp, remeber you are entering a different country not crossing the street in your home town.

However remember who these people are, they are not interested in what happens but how they can raise money from what happened.

From the WTO ruling.
"6.2 We therefore consider that the United States has implemented the recommendations and
rulings of the DSB in US - Softwood Lumber V, to bring its measure into conformity with its
obligations under the AD Agreement.
6.3 Having found that the United States did not act inconsistently with its obligations under the
asserted WTO Agreements, we consider that no recommendation under Article 19.1 of the DSU is
necessary, and we make none."

http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/dispute-en.as p#11

Final settlement documented here:
http://w01.international.gc.ca/MinPub/Publication. aspx?isRedirect=True&Language=E&publication_id=383 935&docnumber=45

The Consulate General Seattle webpage disagrees with you.

Here is some information about Canada and NAFTA:

http://w01.international.gc.ca/minpub/Publication. aspx?isRedirect=True&Language=E&publication_id=380 884

Essentially, Canada has the fastest growing economy in North America, one of the fastest in the world, and has been the biggest winner in NAFTA. Canada also has the highest minimum wage of the three countries.

If you can't understand why jobs move to Canada, it is because your understanding is distorted. Virtually all workers make MORE than minimum wage.

First, even if minimum wages are higher in Canada, that doesn't mean wages for specific skilled jobs are in Canada. An engineer, researcher, technician, cameraman, etc., has slightly lower wages compared to the U.S. (Because of a lower cost of living, difference in currency values, often times a lower tax rate), which makes it highly attractive to move skilled jobs into Canada (and high paying skilled jobs are exactly the ones Canada wants attract). Canada has decided to go the global-trade, high-tech high-skill route, and the United States government is still trying to live like it is the 1950s.

The reason jobs are moving out of the U.S. is because Americans are getting lazier and stupider. Over-regulation, lawsuits, terrorist hysteria, drug hysteria, a crumbling education system, high taxes (Yes, in many cases the taxes and regulation is worse in the United States than Canada).