cj#772> update: anti-MAI rebellion


Richard Moore

Dear cj,

There are now two Canadian provinces and one territory who have issued
anti-MAI resolutions.  Below are the texts of the three resolutions, along
with the latest bulletins from "Canadian ACT!ON Coalition News", aka the
MAI-SUX list.

I urge you to forward this to lists or organizations which might be
inclined to support this initiative, or who have an interest in
corporatism, globalization, activism, etc.

I'll write to some of the people mentioned in the forwarding headers and
try to establish some kind of contact with the movement.  Ideally they
would serve as local hosts for the initial leadership conference and give a
presentation on their organization and goals - we'll see what kind of
interest they show.

There have been loads of responses to the "shift of focus" thread, which
I'll be posting shortly.  But first will come a piece on Iraq and the
Clinton angle, hopefully to reach you before Washington launches its next
illegal terrorist aggression against the Iraqi people.  Just as the US "war
on drugs" has the actual purpose of dismantling the Bill of Rights, so the
"war on dictators" has the actual purpose of dismantling the principle of
national sovereignty.  In both cases propaganda attention is focused on
"evil perps" and a particular recipe ("draconian enforcement") is presented
as the only possible course of action.  More tomorrow.


Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998
From: CAP *Erie-Lincoln* <•••@••.•••>
Reply-To: •••@••.•••
Organization: Canadian ACT!ON Coalition News
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Prov. Govts of CANADA that Oppose the MAI !!!

"All truth goes through three stages.  First it is ridiculed.  Then it
is violently opposed.  Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." 


Well, it appears that our fight in Canada to stop the Multilateral
Agreement on Investments (MAI) is bearing some fruit.  We now have 2
Provincial Governments opposed, (Prince Edward Island and British
Columbia) as well as the Yukon Territory.

To effect the same sort of momentum in the US of A we are working hard
to try and get the average Americans,  small business people, laborers,
teachers, doctors, policemen, even Congressmen/women and the press to at
least "ask" questions as to just what the MAI is and how it will affect
American Sovereignty.

Below is the list of Canadian Provinces and their respective resolutions
and viewpoints regarding REAL reservations they have towards the MAI.
Only 8 more Provinces and 1 Territory to go, and hopefully, at least as
far as Canada's participation in this CORPORATE RULE TREATY, the MAI
will be dead in the water.

In the United States, it may take a bit longer.  Americans seem to be
somewhat slower to find out about the ramifications of this treaty.
Perhaps their media is even more controlled than ours.

The MAI  is NAFTA on STEROIDS.  It won't be good for the citizens of
Canada or the United States, but it sure will be good for TransNational
Corporations and their Bankers, who could care less about borders,
culture, or your rights... PROFIT ABOVE ALL.  CONTROL is the name of the
GAME, and your country is the prize!

I hope this doesn't take too much of your time to read, and I appologize
for any cross posting or duplicates.   But I feel that information must
get out and I can pretty well guarantee that anyone that takes the time
to read this missive and investigate the links attached will find their
time well spent, especially if you care about what is happening to your
country, what our politicians on both sides of the border, the OECD and
the TransNational Corporations are trying to shove down our throats.
Read it and weep, or discard at your pleasure, it's your country and
your future, and after all, ignorance is bliss.

CAP *Erie-Lincoln*

For a synopsis of the MAI and the expected reprecussions to Canada,
Australia, New Zealand, the U.K.,  U.S.of A., et al, go here:


People-Centered Development Forum
Very Interesting site including excerpts from:
   *When Corporations Rule The World*
by: David C. Korten

They were against the MAI from the beginning.  They were the ONLY
Canadian Party to postulate (through hard copy and electronic materials)
their MAI reservations during the the last Canadian Federal Election

Position on MAI by the Canadian Labour Congress can be found at:
and then click on HOT ISSUES

To help give you a little compartive  "perspective" of just what we mean
when we compare the financial power of Trans National Corporations (the
background orchestrators of the MAI ostensibly under the auspices of the
OECD) to Sovereign Nations, go here:

FAX THE FEDS - for FREE right from the internet.
Want to tell your MP or all the MP's or The Prime Minister or Sergio
Marchi, just what you think of the MAI, go here:

Congressional Email "SHOTGUN LIST"
Why write to just YOUR congressman, when you can write to ALL
congressmen at once? For a free list (email ready) of 300
Representatives and Senators, email Ira Madsen <•••@••.•••>
with the word "SHOTGUN" in the heading. Ira will send the list to you
along with instructions of how to make your opinion on the MAI really
heard in Washington.


To (un)subscribe to the MAI-SUX email list, send an email to

subscribe or unsubscribe
(as the case may be) in the Subject line.


From: "Janet M. Eaton" <•••@••.•••>
To: •••@••.•••
Date:          Thu, 29 Jan 1998
Subject:       Prov. Govts of CANADA that Oppose the MAI !!!
Reply-To: •••@••.•••

This file provides documentation of the position of three Canadian
Provinces opposed to the current MAI negotiations as
complied from postings on the MAI-not flora.org list serve,
by Janet M. Eaton ,  January  28th, 1998


The Resolution:

WHEREAS the Government of Canada has been involved in negotiating,
 through the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development in
 Paris, an international Economic treaty called the Multilateral
 Agreement on Investment (MAI);

 AND WHEREAS these negotiations have been conducted behind
 closed doors, and that most politicians and ordinary citizens know
 little or nothing about the MAI or its implications;

 AND WHEREAS the most recent draft of the MAI indicates the prime
 objective of the agreement is to allow the movement of money across
 international borders by imposing a new set of rules restricting
 countries from using legislation, policies, and programs seen as
 impediments to the free flow of capital;

 AND WHEREAS the most recent draft of the MAI indicates that if
 adopted, transnational corporations would have the status of nation
 states with certain political rights;

 AND WHEREAS the most recent draft of the MAI indicates that if
 adopted, foreign fishing fleets could have full access to our waters;

 AND WHEREAS the most recent draft of the MAI if adopted, laws
 restricting the foreign ownership of land on Prince Edward Island
 could eventually be struck down and challenged under the MAI;

 AND WHEREAS the most recent draft of the MAI indicates that if
 adopted, it would have a major impact on many important areas of
 Island and Canadian life, including environmental protection,
 employment, wage levels, social programs, and culture;

 AND WHEREAS little information on the MAI has been provided by any
 public body, and little public discussion about the treaty has yet
 taken place;

 THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Government of Prince
 Edward Island  insist that the Government of Canada impose a moratorium
 on  ratification of the MAI until full public hearings on the proposed
 treaty are held in Prince Edward Island and across the country, so
 that all Islanders and Canadians may have an opportunity to express
 their opinions about it.

The resolution was passed on December 18, 1997

              Speaker: Honourable members let the member speak.

              Dr. Herb Dickieson (ND): Thank you Mr. Speaker. The
              negotiations to date have been taken place quite quietly
              and behind doors and that sort of thing and a lot of
              Canadians haven't really been aware of what some of the
              issues are and it's more important that the Canadian
              Government become more up front with this. I would point
              out as well that I appreciate the statements coming from
              the Attorney General. Clearly the Attorney General has
              looked at some of these issues, he has read up and he
              understands just how important this agreement is to
              Canadians and to Islanders in particular. And I appreciate

        ..... snip ..........

              So I'm very pleased that members appear to be in agreement
              with the thrust of the resolution and that's to ensure that
              the Federal Government is accountable to Islanders and to
              all Canadians and that accountability takes place in the
              form of open dialogue with Islanders and other Canadians to
              ensure that the interest of all Canadians are best served.
              Thank you Mr. Speaker. (APPLAUSE)

              Speaker: Debate on Resolution No. 47 is now complete. All
              those in favour of the resolution signify by saying aye.

              Honourable Members: Aye.

              Speaker: Contrary nay. Motion carried.



Posted on mai-not list serve January 29th
By:  CONNIE FOGAL <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Yukon motion
[Archive URL not available at time of posting]
Connie Received the following documentation::
From: •••@••.•••
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 09:30:13 -0700
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Yukon motion

As requested, here is a copy of the motion that was passed in the Yukon
I've sent it both in Word 6.0 and as a text file in the hopes that at
least one will work.  Please let me know how it comes through.
(Just so you know, the Hansard transcript left out some words; the
correct version was supplied to me by Mr. Hardy.)
Best regards,
Jim G-O

Yukon (Canada) Legislative Assembly
Motion on the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI)
Passed November 19, 1997
(unofficial transcript)

"That it is the opinion of the House that:

(1) the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, (MAI), sponsored by the
U.S.A., supported by Canada, and currently the subject of secret
negotiation by the 29 industrial nations and the OECD (the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development), represents a major attack on the
autonomy and self determination of governments at all levels; and

(2) the democratic process which Canadians so value is seriously
threatened by the MAI whose aim is to remove control of the economic
process from the people's elected representatives and to consolidate it in
the hands of the transnational corporations; and

(3) that this House calls on the federal government to cease all
negotiations on the MAI and to facilitate full participation of all
Canadians in the major decisions affecting our economic future."

Motion no. 82, standing in the name of Mr. Todd Hardy, New Democratic
Party Member of the Legislative Assembly from Whitehorse Centre, was
debated and agreed to by the Legislature on November 19, 1997.




January 23, 1998


VICTORIA - NDP Caucus Chair Joan Smallwood warned the federal
government not to expect British Columbia to accept the
Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI).  Smallwood issued
the warning at a news conference today with Maude Barlow, the
National Chair of the Council of Canadians.

"The MAI is addressing many areas that are shared or exclusive
provincial jurisdiction," said Smallwood. "It is the BC
Government's view that our interests would be threatened by
this agreement, so the federal government should not assume
that we will allow the MAI to be applied to BC."

BC and Canada already provide very high standards of
investment protection.  But the MAI will grant special rights
to international investors and place restrictions on
democratically elected governments to act on behalf of
citizens at the local, provincial and federal levels.

An important concern for the province is that the agreement is
unbalanced and could challenge the government's ability to
protect the environment, manage and conserve natural
resources, and leverage economic benefits from corporations
that exploit natural resources. The MAI could also threaten
the integrity of existing health and social services, cultural
industries, and undermine the province's ability to create

"We don't need the MAI, and we want to convey to the federal
government in the strongest terms that the BC Government is
opposed to this agreement," said Smallwood.  "The MAI moves us
way beyond NAFTA and offers no adequate protection for the
environment, workers or consumers."

As closed door negotiations continue on the MAI, the province
will continue its efforts to facilitate a national dialogue on
this important issue facing British Columbians and Canadians.
"Given the impact that the MAI will have on our country, we
demand that the federal government open democratic debate on
this issue in the House of Commons, and in all regions of
Canada," said Smallwood.

"It's obivious the Chretien Liberals are more concerned with
catering to the demands of foreign investors instead of
listening to the citizens they are supposed to represent,"
said Smallwood.  "This is like Brian Mulroney and NAFTA all
over again, only this time the stakes are much higher and the
results will be even worse."

Chris Gainor, Director
NDP Caucus Communications
For MAI-not subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other MAI sites please see http://mai.flora.org/

Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998
From: CAP *Erie-Lincoln* <•••@••.•••>
Reply-To: •••@••.•••
Organization: Canadian ACT!ON Coalition News
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Prince Edward Island vs MAI: the revolution begins!

Last year during the Federal Election Campaign, both the NDP Candidate
and myself were the ONLY candidates (in the riding of Erie-Lincoln) to
bring up the MAI.
        NOT the TORIES
        NOT the REFORM
        NOT the LIBERALS

OF course, just like Hedy Fry,  the Liberal incumbent (John Maloney)
disavowed any knowlegde whatsoever of this agreement, and also went so
far as to say that the first he had heard of it was at the first of
seven All Candidates Debates, when I brought it up.  (Makes you wonder
just what all those MP's do with their time).

None of them knew what I was talking about, and none would even talk
about it, even when I provided each candidate with copies of everything
I had.

Which brings me to the reason for this post.  I have watched as my
reciept of MAI related email has EXPLODED in the last few months... hard
to keep up with it all, especially the MAI-NOT List.  My computer is
stuffed to the brink of crashing.... I am impressed with the collective
and objective nature of this anti-MAI effort by Canadians from coast to

To that I say a very heartfelt thank you, and keep it up.  Even if when
we stop THIS agreement, the orchestrators of the MAI will have another
version with another name, same objective, sitting in the wings, ready
to jamb down our throats, more than likely through the use of an

Now here is a response I recieved to the PEI  NDP Opposition
Resolution.  Excellent.

Be Vigilant

CAP *Erie-Lincoln*


To: activ-l <•••@••.•••>,
        •••@••.••• (world-system network)
From: •••@••.••• (Richard K. Moore)
Subject: Prince Edward Island vs MAI: the revolution begins!
Cc: •••@••.•••, "Dale Wharton" <•••@••.•••>,
        CONNIE FOGAL <•••@••.•••>

Elites act, revolutionaries plan, and events take control in unpredictable
ways.  Marx expected revolution in the most industrialized countries; it
came elsewhere.  Lenin schemed away in Switzerland and almost missed his
main event.  Vietnam came along, and a New Left spontaneously arose.  And
so on.

Would you have expected Prince Edward Island to launch globalism's
counter-revolution - to issue the "shot heard 'round the world"?  There may
be earlier candidates for "first shot", but this one has all the makings of
a strong contender.


The moment must be seized, all opportunities are precious, and the window
for action is closing fast.  But the very possibility of real successes
creates a profound crisis: there must arise quickly a global strategy and
vision, a positive direction for radical change.  A purely defensive
response cannot prevail, and is not a counter-revolution: the globalist
organizing paradigm can only be defeated by a superior organizing paradigm.
Hannibal out-fought the Romans for thirty years, but in defense of a
status quo that could not be restored, and he had to lose in the end.

There is an urgent need for both tactical aggressiveness and strategic vision.

Make the moment.



Posted by Richard K. Moore - •••@••.••• -  PO Box 26, Wexford, Ireland
         www.iol.ie/~rkmoore/cyberjournal                   (USA Citizen)
  * Non-commercial republication encouraged - Please include this sig *