Archive

Archive for the ‘Canadian Customs’ Category

Does Stephen Harper Really Care About Canadian Values And Women’s Rights In Canada And Around The World?


Two religions and cultures have more in common then Stephen Harper knows

30, 000 ultra-orthodox Israeli women in Israel cover their whole body and face. According to Wikipedia the sect is called “Haredi burka sect” or “Taliban mothers”. Many of these families dress their young girls of all ages with the same full dress garb, except for the face veil.

What is up Canada? Does Stephen Harper really care about Canadian values and women’s rights in Canada and around the world? I would say no.  Since he said to Canadians in 2006, “You won’t recognize Canada when I’m through with it” he has done everything to take back the rights of all Canadians including the rights regarding freedom of speech and expression, freedom to dissent and freedom to strike for fair treatment in the work place  and done nothing to stop the offensive way ultra-orthodox Jewish males treat their women in Canada; nor has he voiced his disapproval to the Israeli government for allowing the same practices to flourish in their country that he has states cannot be tolerated in Canada by some  Muslims.

Since Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party of Canada won the last federal election and gained a majority status in the House of Commons and then used their win to further give them the majority in the senate, I really understood what the old adage means that says, ‘absolute power corrupts absolutely’.

  • The Harper government could have done such great things for Canada and Canadians with control of the House of Commons and in every sitting committee  in both chambers, because everything they wished to accomplish could not be stopped by virtue of their voting majority status in all places.  Instead what I have seen is arrogance, a refusal to even consider amendments to bills put forward by the opposition parties, independent experts in their fields, scholars, or the oversight agencies like the auditor general’s office, elections Canada, parliamentary budget office, privacy commission and the Supreme Court of Canada, preferring to get rid of the heads of those agencies when they voice objections to their purposed actions where possible, try to intimidate and ruin the reputations and erode the power of those  officers they can not fire.
  • The Harper government feels that its majority status puts them above the law and refuses to follow any law that it feels should not apply to them be it election laws on spending practices, transparency, security, or anything else, preferring instead to do what it wants in creating laws that favor its position and enjoying the temporary power of forcing the bill into law knowing that it will not withstand a court challenge and be struck down in the future by the federal court, or the Supreme court of Canada.  This blatant disregard for the law has seen the party as a whole, it MPs and senators facing scandal after scandal.
  • The worst thing though is that in an effort to raise itself above the law this government has taken wedge politics and fear mongering to the worst level it has ever been in the history of Canada. Stephen Harper has taken a real concern for terrorism and a need to do something about it and turned it into his cash cow.  Failing in all ways as a government Stephen Harper has decided to play the race card and divide this country into and us against them scenario; the us being as he sees it, those who wish to blame Muslims for everything that is going wrong in this country security wise and them as he sees it, those Muslims who refuse to give up their culture and religious rights, especially those females who refuse to stop wearing their offensive religious headwear at official Canadian ceremonial functions.

I find it revealing that Stephen said in response to a comment  made by Justin Trudeau in  the house of commons that covering one’s face with a niqab is, “Rooted in a culture that is anti-women.”  Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party of Canada have decided that challenging the Federal Court of Canada’s ruling overturning his law that sought to limit where and when the head coverings that some devout Muslim women choose to wear as a sign of the respect for their God is so insulting to Canadian values and freedoms that it must be challenged.  I find it interesting that the is trying to say that it is giving the oppressed Muslim women her right and freedom to choose what she wants to wear and when by taking away their freedom to choose what they are permitted to wear while taking the oath of Canadian citizenship. Stephen Harper claims that devout Muslims are not respecting of women’s rights and Canadian values because:

  1. Women are forced to wear a head covering that has only slits for the eyes to be seen.
  2. Females are only educated in the very basics, if allowed to be educated at all.
  3. Women are subordinate to their husbands.
  4. Women are forced to endure prearranged forced marriages.

Yet when it comes to the treatment of the Hasidic female Jew by the males in her community Stephen Harper must think that the things I have listed below on a short list are aligned and in keeping with what are to him and his party’s position concerning women’s rights and freedoms The fact is that there are no laws being made to bring any of the offensive, archaic, non Canadian treatment of Hasidic women listed below to an end. Why does Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada support as a religious right that:

  1. The Hasidic female Jew will never be allowed to wear pants, because that is consider the clothing of men.
  2. The Hasidic female Jew will be forced to hide her hair under a scarf, hat or wig and in some of the worst cases being forced to shave it totally, once she is married.
  3. While Hasidic men, noted for their curled side locks, dress in black suits and formal black hats, and Hasidic women wear black head scarves, black skirts, black stockings and black shawls over white and grey tops, in Israel the women of Lev Tahor are dressed totally in black, including their faces.
  4. When there’s a question about a  married Hasidic women’s menstrual period, the wife is forced to put her blood stained underwear in a zip-lock bag for her husband to take to the synagogue where he pushes it into a special window for the rabbi to look at it. The Rabi after inspecting the blood stained underwear will pronounce it kosher or non kosher?
  5. The Hasidic female Jew will often be forced to work to support the family, take care of the children, do all household chores, without help, because their men are too busy studying religion to work.
  6. The Hasidic female will be considered as unclean for 2 weeks of every month of her life as long as she lives ( that equals approximately 50% of her life); considered not clean enough to pass your husband a glass even if their hands do not touch?
  7. Great emphasis is placed on male education in Hasidism, while women and girls are never expected to move past a basic literacy in daily/holiday prayers.

I wonder if Stephen Harper knows that the practice of covering ones face that he says, is rooted in a culture that is anti-women”  is practiced in Israel by about 30,000 Israeli ultra-orthodox women and as such he is saying that the Jewish religion and it’s practices are rooted in a culture that is anti-women as well. If as he and his MPs keep insisting that Muslims that carry out these types of practices should not be tolerated in Canada, or in any other civilised country in the world then he in my opinion has no choice but to condemn Israel for allowing these practices and do all in his power to force Israel to put an end to such practices within its borders and the practices of the orthodox Jews and in Canada the way that Jewish orthodox and ultra orthodox females are treated should me made against the law.  Not an easy thing to say, or followup do to a country and a people you have publicly sworn to support, ‘Unconditionally’, but something that needs to be done if Prime Minister Harper’s words and concern for what he calls practices rooted in a culture that is anti-women is sincere and not more of his fear mongering, divisive rhetoric.

Personally I think that Stephen Harper does not give a damn about either of the groups and sees them both as a means to a political end that he means to exploit like he does everything else.  Stephen Harper will continue to pit Canadians one against another exploiting their deep-rooted fears, prejudices and even hatreds until it is no longer politically profitable. In my opinion Stephen Harper does not give a damn what anyone wears on his or her head, or where and when they wear it. I believe what he cares about and lusts after is power and the right to rule without interference and the Muslim people of Canada and around the world,  just happen to be  pawns to be sacrificed in his game of chess, as were the First Nations, gays and lesbians, separatists of Quebec, all who he purported to support in the past to win elections with their voting blocks and threw under the bus when their cause became to problematic to support openly, or  the photo opts were not worth the effort and quite simply put, of no further use to him politically.

Are Canadian Politicians Believing Their Own Rhetoric And Spin About Muslims Being Treated With Respect, Dignity And Equality In Canada?


Dressed Inappropriate For Court Room, Racist Judge, Or Judge Incompetence

Dressed Inappropriate For Court Room, Racist Judge, Or Judge Incompetence

What is up Canada? Why are all levels of the Canadian government claiming to have no idea why highly intelligent young Muslim males and females are fleeing this country, willing to give up their families, their education and their citizenship to take up arms and fight for groups like ISIS in ever increasing numbers against Canada and her allies? I personally believe that killing for any reason is wrong and to kill innocent people to prove a point is non defensible, but  in my opinion for Canadian politicians to continually ask the question why young Muslims are easy targets for  recruiters of Jihadi extremists terrorists groups like ISIS proves that they  are beginning to believe their own rhetoric and spin and believe that Canada is actually treating its Muslim community with respect, dignity and equality.  I would suggest that  Stephen Harper and all Canadian politicians take an honest, hard look at the openly hostile anti-Muslim environment they have created all over Canada.

Consider these things:

  •  Every single Muslims who refuses to prove that they have accepted European culture, values, traditions and religion have been labeled a Jihadi terrorists in waiting.
  • Every day women and men who dare to wear their traditional or religious clothing are threatened, harassed and literally told to go back where they come from by other Canadians, because all levels of Canadian government say that if Muslims want to live here they should try to be more inconspicuous and try to blend in.
  • If any female Muslim shows up in court wearing the required religious clothing of her faith, she risks the possibility of a Canadian judge refusing to hear her case even though her face is open for the court to see.

 This is the anti-Muslim environment that Canada’s political leaders of all stripes and at all levels need to understand that they have created with their so called reasonable accommodation limitations speeches that they make, anti-terrorist rhetoric that they spout and the anti-terrorist laws that they enact. If they the politicians would just look at the anti-Muslim environment that they are guilty of creating and sustaining they would  understand the reasons Canadian Muslim youth feel that the only entity offering them real citizenship, fellowship, the freedom to practice their religion without fear of reprisal of any kind and eventually a country to call their own if they are willing to fight for it, are unfortunately those recruiting for ISIS and groups like them.   I would ask the MPs of Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party of Canada the likes of Diane Ablonczy to consider that Canadians and that includes our Muslim population are not stupid and know exactly who is being targeted with the anti-terrorist act 2015 and every other law that this government has passed by the use of its majority status in the House of Commons and in both the senate and parliamentary committees.

Muslim’s in Canada in general are getting the impression by the way they are being treated by every level of government in Canada and the justice system that they are not welcome in Canada and that they are not really worthy to be Canadians by any stretch of the imagination.  I believe the case of  the Canadian Muslim woman, Rania El-Alloul, residing in the province of Quebec speaks volumes as to why  young Canadian Muslims are so easily  radicalised by groups like ISIS .  Rania El-Alloul in my opinion was only saying out loud what the majority of Canadian Muslims feel, but do not dare to say publically for fear of  governmental and societal persecution when she  said,  “I felt that I’m not Canadian anymore.”  after Judge Eliana Marengo told her that, The courtroom is a secular place and that she was not suitably dressed saying that, “Hats and sunglasses for example, are not allowed.  And I don’t see why scarves on the head would be either.”  

I do not believe for one second that had it been a Jewish male appearing before Judge Eliana Marengo wearing a Kiper that she would have objected, or referred to it as an ordinary hat, or a pair of sunglasses; let alone, refused to hear the case. Does a priest, wearing a collar, or another citizen with a cross in open sight have to remove their religious wear to be heard in any court in Canada?  This is not just one isolated case of  discrimination in Canada regarding the wearing of religious head covering; Canada’s past problems with religious head coverings range from wearing turbans on the soccer field to Muslim women being allowed to vote wearing a face covering veil, for example as noted in an article I read on the net posted by CBC titled 5 head-covering controversies in Canada:

  1. Sikh wearing their turbans if they wanted to join the RCMP (Baltej Singh Dhillon fought for his religious rights and was permitted to wear his turban while training, and in 1990, the federal government ended the ban preventing Sikhs in the RCMP from wearing turbans.)
  2. In 2011, then immigration minister Jason Kenney announced new rules banning face coverings for people taking the Canadian citizenship oath. Until then, a citizenship clerk or other official could pull aside a woman wearing a niqab at the ceremony and have the woman lift it for identification. In February 2015, a Federal Court judge ruled that women can wear a niqab while taking the oath.  Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said the federal government will appeal the ruling, a decision critics have questioned.
  3. ​In 2013, the Quebec Soccer Federation announced a ban on players wearing turbans or related religious headwear on the pitch. The ban, which the federation said was a result of safety concerns, came despite a directive from the Canadian Soccer Association that said turbans were OK. Only after hearing from FIFA, the international soccer body, the federation reversed the ban and said it was “deeply sorry” if anyone was offended.
  4. In April 2013, an Ontario judge ruled that a woman had to remove her niqab to testify in a sexual assault case. The decision came after the judge applied a new test set out by the Supreme Court of Canada dealing with witnesses wearing a veil.  In the split decision, the majority ruled that judges have to do a four-part test to determine if a Muslim woman can be allowed to wear a niqab when testifying:- Does she have a sincere belief in her religion?- Does wearing a veil create a serious risk to trial fairness?- Is there any other way to accommodate her?- If no, does what the court called the “salutary” effects of ordering her to remove her niqab outweigh the “deleterious” effects of doing that? The woman had been fighting for six years for the right to wear her niqab during the trial of her uncle and cousin, who were accused of sexually assaulting her when she was a child in the 1980s.
  5. To In 2007, Quebec’s chief returning officer said Muslim women would be able to wear a niqab when receiving a ballot for the provincial election, a position that set off fierce debate. Party leaders urged him to reverse the decision, which he eventually did. A similar controversy arose in Quebec six months later during federal byelections.  On the Elections Canada website, it currently says if an elector wearing a face covering arrives to vote, the deputy returning officer will ask the elector to show their face. >”If the elector agrees to remove their face covering, the election official will follow regular voting procedures,” the website says. > “If the elector does not wish to remove their face covering, the deputy returning officer will advise the elector that they must provide two pieces of authorized identification, one proving their identity and the other proving their identity and address, and then take an oath attesting to their eligibility to vote.”> If that is done, regular voting procedures will follow.

Cases of discrimination against Muslims go largely unheard in Canada, because Canadian Muslim’s fear if they speak out they will labelled terrorists or sympathetic to terrorists and an enemy of Canada and all Canadians. These Muslim children are leaving Canada, because they feel like Canada looks upon all Muslims with suspicion and infers that all Muslims should be treated in all ways and at all times as the enemy within and so these Muslim children no longer feel that they are considered as real Canadians, or accepted, or wanted in Canada; this is what is allowing for the radicalization of Canadian Muslim youth, by groups like ISIS; this is what comes from  Canada’s  highest ranking politicians using fear mongering to get voters to submit to the idea of giving more power to the government, to give up their constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms, to things as important as:

  • Speech and expression.
  • Movement and travel.
  • Practice one’s religion without being discriminated against.
  • Be viewed as equal under the law and treated equally under the law at all times and by all persons responsible for creating the laws and for those in charge of enforcing the law.

Since Stephen Harper was given a majority government Canada has become just another nation with a government that is afraid of  any person residing within its borders that is different then that of  the majority its citizenry. In Stephen Harper’s new Canada I believe that  discriminatory practices and laws that once were acknowledged as shameful that needed to be removed are now being encouraged, justified and made legal by Stephen Harper’s majority government. In Canada this means that anybody that is not White in skin color, who’s heritage cannot be traced back Canada’s European founding fathers and who do not share the same hysterical culture, religious beliefs, languages and values of the majority of Canada’s citizenry find themselves in a new Canada that grows more dangerously intolerant, more judicially unfair and increasingly more inescapable for them every day and with the passing of every new made for real Canadians law that the Stephen Harper led majority Conservative Party of Canada government passes into law.  The Canadian government by restricting travel to Muslims who they feel could be going abroad to commit a terrorist act, may be guilty of blocking the exit/escape of Muslims who have done nothing wrong and who simply feel that they can no longer stand to live under the tyranny, persecution and oppressive laws of Canada as they see them and wish to do as this government has suggested so often and that is that they should immigrate to a country better suited to them and their way of life.

This government has decided to target the Muslim minority population in this country and make them all look like they are the enemy within waiting to strike out at the God fearing decent white, Christian majority, because it is easy to do, because of  the tactics used by groups like ISIS to accomplish their goals, but in reality, in so doing they have become like ISIS and all of those other groups and have instead begun to change what set Canada apart from them.  I love the Canada that knew that it had to change and do better with the way it treated people of this country that were different, I am not so crazy about the Canada that the likes of   Judge Eliana Marengo, Diane Ablonczy, Steven Blaney, Jason Kenney and Stephen Harper are creating and hope that with a federal election being called in 2015 and hopefully a change in government at a federal level that we can return to a Canada where everyone is welcome and where our diversity and differences are considered something to be proud of and not feared. A Canada where children do not fear for their cultural and religious existence so much that they become easy prey for radicalisation by terrorist groups.

Can Journalistic Integrity, Or Journalistic Standards Of Excellence Be Used To Describe Canadian Political News Coverage?


c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003What is up Canada? Can journalistic integrity, or journalistic standards of excellence be used to describe Canadian political news reporting? I ask because it never ceases to amaze me how little it takes to manipulate and thwart the integrity, ethics and the effective functioning of the Canadian press and other news agencies, when it comes to their reporting of politically charged issues and trying to get news agencies to follow a politically charged story to its end.  I do not mean a story’s monetary making end, but seeing a story resolved and all questions that were of interest at its begining being answered. What was once fearless coverage and digging out of the facts and a relentless search for the truth to the bitter end, that has seen journalists willing to go to jail to uphold freedom of speech, expression and the right for Canadians to know what is going on in my opinion seems to have been pushed into the background and replaced by the fight to be the news agency with the best gimmick and providing the most provocative, insulting telling of the news found anywhere. Canadian news agencies do this in my opinion do this in an effort to entertain the most people, gain and keep the largest audience and sell the most ads for the highest possible cost. Unfortunately the side effects are in my opinion:

  • No follow through on important stories.
  • No focussing on stories because of  negative public opinion.
  • No reporting on stories, because of pressure, or threats from advertisers, or a withdrawing of government funding and advertising if applicable.
  •  Reporters giving the audience more of their personal opinion instead of just reporting the facts and allowing the audience the opportunity to make up their own minds on any given story.

Through greed the big news agencies in Canada have reduced the life expectancy of what was at one time considered to be a newsworthy story to a couple of weeks, there is little if any follow-up and sometimes the important dull story is ignored all together.  As Canadians we have gotten used to not knowing what  the ending is to news stories  and do not even feel like we are missing anything anymore. We have stopped asking what happened next and have grown accustomed to supplying our own ending with, using rumors, our assumptions and guesses to replace truth and facts.

How did the story of the refugees aboard the MV Sun Sea end, has it ended and where can you find the answer in Canadian news coverage?

  • 452 refugees (men , women and children) seeking asylum in Canada upon reaching our shores  end up thrown in jail for their efforts and are the cause of Canada’s whole immigration system being altered by the Conservative Party of Canada and soon after they are imprisoned their personal story vanishes from the news. From this point on all Canadians are told in the news is how the laws are being changed to protect the refugees and Canadians from those who would abuse the generous Canadian immigration system with government spin and propaganda. Eventually there was nothing in the Canadian news  about the 492 human beings imprisoned in jail over 4 years ago in a Canadian prison by the Conservative Party of Canada, their, releases, or deportations if any, or whether or not the process has been fair.   The big news agencies to me are no longer informing Canadians about what is going on that is important to Canadians, but rather following a story as long as it can be converted into cash dollars.

Unfortunately news agencies would consider the reporting on the scandals involving politicians personal life more important for Canadians to know about than what laws are being changed, enacted or repealed. Did you know about the story below. If not, ask yourself why not?

  • Bill C-304, introduced by Conservative back bencher Brian Storseth, repeals Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which bans hate speech transmitted over the Internet or by telephone getting passed its 3rd reading in the House of Commons and going to the senate was not considered important enough to even report.  Isn’t the fact that this bill takes away the authority of the country’s human rights commissions to investigate online hate speech and request that violating websites be taken down seem as relevant to Canadians as Rob Ford smoking crack cocaine, no matter what side of the issue they are on?  If the answer is yes than how could this  Conservative private members’ bill  only receive nest to no media attention, and even less commentary, while the Rob Ford story dominated the news and is still being referred to almost every day somewhere in the news?

More and more the news has become just another tool in the tool box of both  politicians and their political parties. No sooner do politicians or political parties say publicly what they would like to see happen with a political hot potato then presto the story disappears from the mainstream news and what happened in the story below becomes a recurring theme. This story was dropped  without a single protest in the news, no screaming for the freedom of the press on this one, no just compliance with the government’s request, as though Canada’s  national security depended on it. All of a sudden no more information from news agencies about allegations of harassment and sexual involving federal MPs from different political parties like:

  • What has happened if anything concerning the allegations of sexual misconduct made by?
  • Who were the 2 female NDP  MPs who refused to be identified but saw no problem giving very graphic detailed   interviews to anyone who would listen, against 2 male Liberal Party of Canada MPs who identities were on the front pages of every newspaper and on the lips of every television news panel and host in Canada and around the world?
  • The government wanted the story to be handled in private, the results hidden from Canadians, but was that the job of the news agencies to ensure?
  • How Canadian news agencies allow for the reporting of only half of an alleged story based on an interview with female accusers refusing to be identified while repeatedly naming the accused males and than just drop the story?

This is what I mean when I say that the Canadian news agencies have  become just another tool in the tool box of our politicians rather than the seekers and providers of current events important to Canadians as they unfold and continuing with that story until everything important in it has been reported and all questions have been answered.

Unfortunately the Canadian news agencies are even worse in their coverage of international politics committing the same mistakes covering international news as they do domestic; for example:

  •   Boko Haram kidnaps 300 little girls from school in Nigeria and the story dies inside of two weeks. The same Boko Haram  burns a town to the ground and is suspected of killing up to 2000 in one day and the story is all but ignored.   All over the Canadian news channels one commentator after another commented on how what was happening in Nigeria was being ignored, because of what had happened in France, to Charlie Hebdo.  Repeatedly there is a news bit saying that  what happened in Nigeria and the story shifts to minute by minute of the story as it unfolds in France and the reporters were not even apologetic.  This showed me that they believed that Canadians would want to know more about the France tragedy then the Nigerian and that there was more to be gained with reporting the story unfolding in France, rather than focussing on both equally.

I no longer have faith in Canadian news when it comes to politics, because it has become the instrument of government spin, rhetoric and propaganda.  With political reporters vying for jobs on television shows as paid political panelists, encouraged to give their personal opinions rather than sticking to the facts of a story, I find that they all try to out do one another slinging mud  on the politician / political party with whom they do not share the same views  and become spokespersons for the  politician/political party with whom they do.  I think responsible news coverage is a simple relaying all of the facts of a story and following it through to its end.  I believe that there is no room in a news story for a reporters personal opinion and innuendo. If the news is going to become like any other television show done for ratings and generated cash potential and news paper news articles are going to become little more than a reporters musing than these reports should be given to Canadians with a disclaimer that reads, “We are calling this news coverage, but be warned some or all of the content you are reading or hearing may or not be just the opinion of the reporter.” “We cannot vouch for the accuracy of the information you are getting, because we are more interested in keeping you entertained than whether or not you are getting the truth, because being entertained is what we think keeps you tuning in every day and you tuning in every day is what generates advertising dollars.”

This Is What Happens When You Give A Fawning Sycophant A Majority Government In Canada


We elected a prime minister who behaves more like the fawning sycophant Chester than like the prime minister of a independent government of a sovereign nation.

We elected a prime minister who behaves more like the fawning sycophant Chester than like the prime minister of an independent government of a sovereign nation.

What is up Canada? Stephen Harper promised Canadians that he would change Canada so much that Canadians would no longer be able to recognise their own country and I think that he unfortunately delivered on it. I think that Stephen Harper is and never was a proud Canadian, had no respect for Canadian law, or Canadian core values. I do not think any Canadian old enough to vote can say that this is the same Canada that Canadians and all nations of the world used to admire, trust and even envy. Written in this post are some of what I believe we used to be and how we were thought of, but  now have lost due to the changes to the very core of what it was to be a Canadian.  Canada used to be one of the only trusted players in the game of international affairs and we blew it, because Canada’s Chester (Stephen Harper), who shortly after being elected with a majority government, began  surrendering our sovereignty to his hero the USA; because the USA was so big and strong.

Thanks to Stephen Harper, Canada can no longer lay claim to being a fair-minded and neutral seeker of peaceful solutions; a supporter of only solutions  that are arrived at via the negotiation table with all stake holders present and participating, because Canada in my opinion is no longer neutral, or fair-minded.

  • Under the absolute rule of Stephen Harper Canadians will no longer going to be allowed to think, or speak any sentiments that are not in keeping with the governments point of view on the internet, especially where those views are contrary to what the government feels about Israel, or Christianity.
  • The new law fails to address the hateful views being espoused about Muslims and their faith, allowing them to be fair game. I believe that the law in spite Harper will protect Muslims if things get too far out of hand, but Stephen Harper has ensured with his laws that they will be forced to  just understand that: (a) It is members of their faith that are the terrorists. (b) That is just too hard to distinguish between the good Muslims and the bad Muslims, since the good Muslims refuse to cast of their religious garb. (c)They will of course be expected to be patient and understanding while the government stops them from traveling. (d) That it is they who the government will be targeting with their online and digital snooping laws. (e)Finally it is Muslims that will be asked to understand and be patient while they are insulted on the street, attacked on public transit and go through all manner of racial denigration., because this government has decided to make every person with or without mental issues, committing a violent acts against private citizens, security force members, or politician a  radicalized Canadian in the service of an either ISIS or another group it considers to be terrorists.
  • Under the governance of Stephen Harper Canada has unfortunately made it clear through his government’s rhetoric, policies, laws and actions that Canada is no longer interested in continuing in its historically respected  role as a peace broker, but has surrendered to the will of it allies to commit itself to the war against terrorism through the taking military actions on the behalf of those countries it supports, or sees as being important to itself and it allies strategically, or economically. Canada has joined its allies who decided long ago that the way to settle international disputes is not at the negotiating table, but instead preferring to use sanctions, embargoes and a show of military force instead. Embargoes and sanctions serve no other purpose then to achieve through a siege, one-sided unfair agreements that cannot be achieved through what used to be normal diplomatic channels.  As a nation through this government, we have chosen to ignore the suffering that is caused to the innocent people of the countries we are helping to put under siege and spout rhetoric to all who will listen about the importance of  saving  innocent lives unable to share in our values, preaching about the importance of bringing our beliefs and values to the non civilised world; in short what we are saying is that we have found some new savages to civilize, through rape and pillage and total assimilation to our way of life. Our government knows that a siege is designed to deprive a nation of their ability to provide for its people the  amenities of life needed for every day survival(food, medicine and other supplies) until the leader of the country under siege surrenders; but Canada does it anyway. I cannot see how anyone  would not see a siege for what it is which is a deliberate attempt to sabotage a country’s economy, undermine its legitimate government and  strip it of its sovereignty, under the guise of negotiations aimed at achieving a fair outcome for both sides of the dispute. How can Canada still lay claim to always seeking peaceful non violent solutions to problems when the first thing we do now under Harper rule is close down embassies in our country and abroad every time a tough dispute arises between a country will value as an ally, or asset with one we feel we do not have a lot or anything in common with?
  • Canada once considered country who had a conscience and a set of values of its own under the rule of Stephen Harper looks more like a cowardly bully, who will only stand up for what it believes in if the enemy is weaker militarily than it is, or if allies suggest it contribute to the struggle. Stephen Harper is quick to send Canadian military advisors, Canadian fighter jets to kill people with missiles and bombs into countries like Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, but like its allies are afraid to act with its military might in situations like: (a)The Ukraine vs. Russia conflict where Russia actually annexed Crimea a part of the sovereign Ukraine and is supporting financially and militarily the dismantling of Ukraine’s sovereignty as a nation by pro-Russian rebels. (b) The Hong Kong vs. China conflict where the free will of the people to vote in fair democratic elections is being denied them by the government of Hong Kong with the support of main land China and has the possibility of escalating into another Tiananmen Square. (c) No military intervention to end once and for all the constant instability in the world that the North Korea vs. South Korea conflict is causing. North Korea has actually threatened the USA and its allies and yet they have not been labeled terrorists as far as I know and the western alliance of which Canada is a member refuses to take action against it militarily.
  • It would seem that the only countries the Western Alliance is interested in fighting is those with a predominantly Muslim population; followers of the Islamic faith and that makes us now not only cowards something we could never be accused of before, but racist in our reasoning as well.
  • As I said earlier when I think of Canada and its relationship with the USA  I am reminded of the relationship between Looney Tune’s  cartoon characters “Spike and Chester”.  In this cartoon  a little dog named Chester would scamper around a big bulldog named Spike saying, “Can we Spike, huh, can we?” Spike would end up back handing little Chester, sending him reeling backwards. getting up visibly shaken Chester would say,” Spike is my hero, because he is so big and strong. “
  • Canada under the leadership of Stephen Harper has become a country only willing to stand up for human rights and freedoms abroad where it can be assured victory with little cost and where there is some economical or strategic benefit and only if instructed to do so by its allies.

Canada used to be the envy of the world for the rights and freedoms that all Canadians used to enjoy, respected for our values and sense of justice and loved for our generosity and compassion,  but I believe that thanks to Stephen Harper, that all of those things  are no longer true when talking of Canada.

  • Under the leadership of Stephen Harper the very fabric of this countries democracy and democratic processes have been made a mockery of and changed, in order to (a) enacting laws that removed any oversight that was put in place as a mechanism to ensure that the government’s executive powers did not overstep their bounds. (b)changing the way one can prove their eligibility to vote in federal elections in a deliberate  move to impede the ability of all Canadians eligible to vote to do so. (c) through what it calls its Fair Elections Act, remove any power the head of Elections Canada had to ensure that the government held fair elections and adhered to the rules, or was punished.
  • Stephen Harper only protects Christians and Jewish people in his laws against hate as is proven in legislation that he and his government draft and the speeches given by  his MP’s and ministers when talking about new legislation to prevent the ability of those on the internet from inciting hatred for Israel, Jews and Christians going as far as to seek arrest and prosecution for those actions, but no mention of penalties for inciting Islamophobia, or the hatred of any other culture, religion or ethnicity, for example. This is not this simply an oversight, this is in my opinion is intentional racism and what would never have happened pre Stephen Harper. When government made laws in the past concerning racism and hate crimes, it did not single out specific groups for special protection we included all groups in the umbrella of the protection.
  • We used to be compassionate as a nation helping those in distress from natural disasters and welcoming of refugees fleeing certain death in their own countries, but of late under the harper government is to discourage refugees from fleeing here and have put in place laws to imprison them should they arrive by sea. (This is a direct attack on fleeing Muslims as it is they in reason times who have been using this mode of transportation and it is they who this law was designed and implemented to deter).  If this is not bad enough Stephen Harper and his government are putting forward a law that would permit the provinces to deny refugees Welfare. How they are supposed to survive while they learn the language and get accustomed to where they now live is beyond me and seems rather mean-spirited at the least and not at all in keeping with our historical compassion and generosity.

It was interesting to see public Safety Minister, Steven Blaney, pretend that we all misunderstood him when he accused the Ottawa shooter of being a terrorist in league with ISIS, telling a reporter asking him why he called the shooter a terrorist, to look up the meaning of terrorist in the dictionary.  This is why I do not trust this government, but more importantly why I believe that this government has betrayed all Canadians and turned away from our core values and turned us into some kind of hateful Nazi like puppets. I know, how dare I say such a thing, but remember very soon in Canada I could be arrested for terrorism, being a terrorist sympathizer, found guilty without my accusers evidence going before a judge, tried in secret and sentenced to jail, by the government and its security agencies for daring to post this on the internet. The Nazis of Germany used the same tactics against the European Jews and look what happened when the people believed in the rhetoric and allowed the fear mongering of politicians make the accomplices in the deaths of over 6 million innocent Jewish men, women and children. Dare we compare us to them?

  • The government has decided to blame everything wrong with this country on radical Islamic thoughts and deeds whether they are born of real radicalization, or of some Canadian so displeased and feeling so trapped with no way out decided to act out violently against the government, or commit suicide in an effort to vent their anger and draw attention to a series of problems that they feel are being ignored and is hurting all Canadians.
  • The government is asking children to spy on their parents and their parents to spy on them as well as asking neighbor to spy on neighbor and then report anything they find to be suspicious activity to security officials.  This all to me sounds more like Nazi Germany, then the Canada that I grew up in.
  • The government is asking that their special police,(CSIS and the RCMP) be able to arrest and detain certain citizens based on suspicion of doing something wrong, or on a hunch that they intend to doing something wrong, without having the required proof to lay charges.
  • The government wants informants of CSIS never to enter a court room, or go before a judge to validate their accusations and so the accused does not get to face their accuser and could possibly end up deported, in jail, only to find out that the person doing the snitching had a grudge against the accused, or was coerced in some manner by the security agencies to give false evidence, was offered a deal by the government to collaborate evidence to get rid of a potentially aggravating, or embarrassing problem that a government would like to go away.
  • The government has decided to turn husband against wife and wife against husband, by forcing them to testify against one another with no regard for the impact this will have on marriages and relationships in Canada.
  • The government has decided to cease passports based on hunches rather than proof that would stand up in a court of law.
  • The government has decided to restrict the travel of Canadian citizens that it deems to be too dangerous to travel, without proof enough to lay charges that would stand up in a court of law.
  • The government has stated that it will punish radicalized Canadians who are going abroad to fight on the behalf of  others, such as what the government considers radical Islamic extremists or terrorists with jail time, possibly loss of citizenship and deportation, but does this apply to Canadian Jews who could be considered radicalized in some cases going abroad to fight for Israel in the Israeli army, or raising money to aid and abet anti Islamic thoughts of hatred, calling for the death of all Muslims, or is this law focussed solely on Muslims and those who would fight in their behalf. I remember Canadian Greeks going back to Greece to fight against the Turks, in today’s Canada would those Greeks be considered radicalized and punished?

In my opinion to get around all of this action it has already been caught doing illegally, this government has decided to do what it does anytime it is doing something illegal and unconstitutional; this government changes the law to support their position without benefit of meaningful debate, or consideration of it constitutionality so that innocent people are caught up in the political and judicial war, having their lives torn apart for years, only to be proven innocent, but with no way to seek legal remedy, or compensation, for all that was taken from them by the government.

There was a time not so long ago before Stephen Harper and his strong, stable, majority Conservative government came to power that:

  • Canadians could travel the world without fear of being attacked by anyone, because Canadians were loved and respected.
  • Canada never had to worry about home-grown terrorists, or terrorists attacks from abroad, because  Canada did not commit terrorist attacks in other countries prior to Stephen Harper.
  • Prior to Stephen Harper Canada donated its foreign aid with no strings attached. instead of only offering aid to those who can repay in some fashion, like trade deals, giving up their water rights or rights to other natural resources, like is the policy now. Canada used to welcome refugees instead locking them up in jail. In short Canada used to be to valuable as a friend to ever consider making an enemy of.
  •  Prior to Stephen Harper things like health care, homelessness and other domestic concerns relating to poverty took priority over balancing budget and although things were not perfect Canadians thought that they were being not only heard but that their basic needs were being met and when they were not that when they voiced their discontent that they were not ignored and their needs became the governments priority.
  • Prior to Stephen Harper killing one’s own soldiers, or taking up arms against one’s own country was considered treason, not terrorism.

I do not know if going back to our old Canada is a possibility anymore, but I think that we have got to try, because it some ways we were the sanity in all of the chaos; the light at the end of the tunnel for a lot of countries facing seemingly insurmountable problems. I think that Canada used to be one of the only trusted players in the game of international affairs and we blew it, because we elected a prime minister Spike’s, Chester, who surrender our sovereignty to his hero, because he was so big and strong and has been getting slapped by Spike ever since.  If there is to be any consolation it is that Chester one day does become the hero when Spike is proven to be not so brave, but merely an untested, untried bully.

Is How You Start As A Country Where You Are Destined To Remain?


 Is How You Start As A Country Where You Are Destined To Remain?

Is How You Start As A Country Where You Are Destined To Remain?

I am beginning to wonder if  how you start  is how you will remain when it comes to the building of a nation, in terms of its core values, ideologies, and human rights? I ask this question,  because although we claim that a lot has changed since the discovery of this land mass, its subsequent colonisation and the actual formation of the country of Canada, a lot has remained the same and in Canada’s case this is not a good thing.  I keep getting the feeling in this country that  those of us not of European heritage are being tolerated and that we should be grateful for being allowed to come here in the first place.  The feeling I get is that anyone who does not share the religion, culture and view on what is and has always been a European sense of  entitlement and superiority over all others in all things then, or “Canadian values,” does not belong  in Canada and should perhaps not come here to live, or visit.

I have listened to Steven Harper and the members of the  Conservative Party of Canada talk about real Canadians, what our values are and who they consider are good candidates to immigrate to Canada and I say to myself, “Nothing has changed since the first European set foot on this country and decided that if the First Nations people they found here wished to be allowed to remain that they would have to change and stop being who they were.” The colonising Europeans did this forcing the First Nations to, change their religion (The Gods that they prayed to and adopt the European God), their culture and their lifestyle (How they dressed, what they ate and how they hunted, and finally the way they governed themselves getting First Nations to enter into treaties that were supposed to see  a sharing of the land  as nation to nation  for certain considerations; of course we know through history that government after government has failed to live up to their obligations and promises to the First Nations people while insisting that the First Nations to uphold their end of all agreements and treaties unilaterally.  What I am getting at is that Canada  from the very beginning was founded by a group of Europeans who thought and maintained the ideology that they were superior to all others racially, culturally, mentally and religiously then any other people on the planet and went as far as to deem other human beings somewhere between the ape and a human on and evolutionary scale; a convenient way to justify taking all that belonged to them, rationalizing colonization to be  a favor done for First Nations rather than the injustice it was.

Canadian governance did not stop there though, it could not stop its racist ways of the colonisation process from spreading into its immigration system. Why I say this is because when we needed special skill, or a cheap work force Canadian politicians had no problem bringing into Canada who we felt were beneath us and expendable, like the Chinese by the thousands to do the dangerous work on things like blasting a railway line through the Canadian Rockies, but when the railway line was built they were deported and laws were enacted to see that their immigration to Canada would be kept at a very low number. One Canadian  politician called for a law that would ensure that Canada’s, European ethnicity, religion and culture which was then the majority of the population of Canada be  safe guarded from those prolific Chinese breeders that if left unchecked would overrun Canada.  A person only has to listen to the immigration policies being made into law by Steven Harper and Jason Kenney and it becomes  obvious that we have regressed back to this time period in our history.  Christianity is being touted as the religion of Canada and the moral guide line to be followed by persons trying to immigrate here, or even visit this country, even though we have laws that say all religions are to be seen as having equal status under the law and that religious freedom and equality is the law in this country.  How immigrants and people dress, what religion they follow and  their  individual cultural customs are once again coming under attack by the Canadian government  and discouraged and instead of talking equality we have back slid into reasonable accommodation.  As governments of Canada give in one after another and say no to Hijabs for Muslim Women in government buildings, offices, schools etc., no turbans for Sikhs in sports, I wonder are Canadian’s capable of the change necessary to say no to a racist backward sliding  government.

The Canadian government under the leadership of Stephen Harper in my opinion is guilty of erasing whatever little progress this country has made in trying to atone for its racist past and their sense of  entitlement and superiority in terms of the immigrants we used and then expelled from this country, by now saying that when immigrating to Canada, or merely visiting Canada, immigrants must now  drop their religious beliefs and cultural habits at the customs and not even ask nor expect a reasonable accommodation, even if it is within our power to grant without undo hardship.

I think that when giving 5 visiting male travellers, who happen to be Hindu priests, called sadhu who made a request to CBSA to be screened by males only because their strict lifestyle  requires them to avoid any contact with women, becomes a problem and a political football, responsible for national news headline coverage, it stands to prove just how far we have digressed in terms of our willingness to not only see all religions as equal,  treat them as equal, or even be willing to make reasonable accommodation for.  What harm did it do to accommodate these individuals to national security, or in any other way?

  • Did the female customs agent really have a reason to be insulted as she claimed, or was she looking to cause a scene and get her 15 minutes of fame?
  • Was this female customs agent truly concerned with a sense of fairness for all travelers crossing our borders, or were her own prejudices bubbling out and into the light of day through the cracks in her self-righteous veneer?
  • Since the 5 were checked out in all of the same ways using all of the same techniques  and procedures as they would have if the female agent would have used, exactly what risk to Canada and Canadians was risked by making the religious accommodation to these 5 visiting Hindu priests called sadhus, or is a slight inconvenience now consider a threat?

I remember once as a mover I was sent with a lady packer to unpack a group of people who had just moved into a community in the |Laurentian Mountains. My company was not familiar with the rules of men being in the presence of women for hermetic Jews.  When we arrived to move in and unpack some boxes the lady was told that she could not enter into the house or touch any of the contents inside the boxes, because of the laws governing their religion.  Now I guess we could have refused to work under those conditions since it would mean that I would have to do most  of the work, but I did not; what I did do was ask that the men help in the unloading of the truck and any unpacking that they wanted done, so that we could be finished by sundown which was another of their religious concerns.  We all cooperated and it all got done. I guess the company could have refused and started worrying about how often this would happen and thinking up all kinds of doomsday scenarios and I guess the lady packer could have claimed to be offended, but we did not make a mountain out of a mole hill we just did our job without insulting anyone and everyone was happier for it.

That these 5 visiting Hindu priests called sadhus were compared to visiting white supremacists, by this lady customs agent, representatives of her union and even mentioned in statements by the Conservative Government of Canada, I think that it becomes clear that Canada under Stephen Harper we have become a small-minded people once again with misguided views of ourselves as superior to all others from a cultural, ethnic and religious perspective, believing that only our values and rights are in need of protecting and need to be protected. What a sad day for Canada and all Canadians to have stooped to this new low to beheaded in the opposite direction of human rights and freedoms for everyone regardless of ethnicity, culture, or religion. it seems that Canada is destined to remain where we started as we revisit a time in our history in which we operated from a European sense of  entitlement and superiority over all others in all things.

Interesting note: In a debate I listened to titled, “Can Israel Exist as both Jewish and Democratic?,”  the debaters being

Mira Sucharov, Professor of Political Science at Carleton University and journalist and author, Max Blumenthal, that Mira Sucharov gave Canada’s treatment of it First Nations and Canada’s immigration policies throughout history and to this very day to justify a democratic country’s right to be a little racist.  Mira Sucharov stated several times that Israel’s policies are a little racist, but because they are driven by a need to keep the core of Israel’s democracy a  Jewish majority things like:
  • The deportation of African refugees back to their original countries where they faced certain death as acceptable.
  • The fact that only Jews can immigrate to Israel.
  • The fact that the state controlled Israeli Rabbis have been ordered by the government to accept no Palestinian, or arabic conversions to Judaism.
  • The fact that only Jews can own land titles.
  • The fact that Jewish students are taught to  fear Palestinians so that they will join the army.
  • The fact that Israel is a work in progress and has no borders, because it is not finished grabbing land.

Mira Sucharov kept saying Palestine which is now Israel like the Palestinians were a flea on the back of a wolf and kept inferring to Israel’s military might as all that was necessary in the determination of what was right or wrong or the final outcome in the dispute. Through it all  it was interesting to note that Mira Sucharov kept referring to the European racist colonization of North America and the great countries of Canada and the USA that arose out of the that racist colonization and practices that are still going on today as comparable to what Israel has done to the Palestinians in the past and is still doing to them today. I have to ask, “What is up Canada?”