The Most Used Tools In Stephen Harper’s Toolbox Are The Words Terrorism, Terrorist Threat, Islamic Jihadists And Radicalized Canadians


Stephen Harper Rebuilding Canada

Stephen Harper Rebuilding Canada

The most used tools in Stephen Harper’s  toolbox are the words radicalized Canadians,  terrorist threat, terrorist, Islamic Jihadists and terrorism.  Under the guise of keeping Canada and Canadians safe Canada’s elected MPs  are being treated by this Conservative Party of Canada as though they could be potential sleeper spies, not to be trusted with anything related to the security and well-being of this country and its people, simply for being in opposition parties and only possible because the Conservatives are in power with a majority government. Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party of Canada have made it clear that they will not share anything that they consider sensitive information with all parliamentarians whether it is about  Canada’s finances, environment, or security and it forces me to ask what is up Canada?

Opposition MPs are Canadians  who were voted into office by other Canadians to represent them, make known their concerns and needs and give those Canadians access to decisions being made that will shape Canada for both them, their children, grandchildren and so on.  If these MPs of the opposition parties are being deemed untrustworthy and therefore not able to be a part of the decision-making process, does it not follow that the Conservative Party of Canada’s made in Canada version of democracy :

  1.  Becomes a sham, no longer representative of all Canadians, but representative of only the Canadians that voted for them?
  2. Becomes a dictatorship which seeks no consensus?
  3. In an effort to keep Canada’s population in line as their decent grows, public disobedience increases and protests get ugly will Turn Canada into a police state giving unlimited power to secret police, to spy on, arrest, detain and imprison any Canadian, because all  Canadians are now deemed  potential threats?

Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party of Canada say that they are adopting a Made In Canada Solution” to handle such issues as immigration, job creation, environmental issues, health and welfare, the economy, national security, just to name a few, but have you noticed that in all instances the Made In Canada Solution” approach this government is talking about means:

  1. That very little meaningful information will be shared with other parliamentarians, government watch dogs like the Parliamentary Budget Office, or Auditor General and even less for the ordinary Canadians?
  2. That all to often  are not only out of step with other Westminster type parliamentary governance, but also out of step with our closest neighbor and ally the United States of America?
  3. Canada is reneging on it international treaties, agreements and protocols that Canada has signed onto.

Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada with their fear mongering have forced Canadians to  become a people afraid of everything both real and imagined, because Stephen Harper wishes:

  1. To pass himself of as some great war-time leader; the only person capable of keeping Canada and Canadians safe;  capitalizing politically on the divisiveness that his fear mongering is responsible for creating.
  2. To remove the rights and freedoms of all Canadians that he and his Conservative Party of Canada decide get in the way of a government governing; Stephen Harper believes that the Canadian Constitution, The Canadian Charter of Rights and any institutions, or agencies that are in place to protect the rights and freedoms enjoyed  equally by all Canadians represent needless, “Red Tape”.
  3. Forever remove by legislation the need for Canadians to be part of Canada’s democratic process and governance by reducing their participation/ role to that of merely voting for who gets the opportunity to run decide things for them for a predetermined amount of time, so that the population works hard to guarantee their leader and their party a majority so that he/ she can make decisions that keep Canada and Canadians safe without interference from those who think differently and are different and therefore “Not real Canadians”.

What I am getting at is that Stephen Harper’s “Made In Canada Solutions” are taking Canada and Canadians further and further away from the fundamental principles and practices of democratic governance, due process of the law and equal justice for all, making Canada look more politically like the non democratic, oppressive regimes Canada claims to be trying to convert to democracy with all of its implied rights and freedoms.

  • With the creation of  the Conservative Party of Canada’s  Democratic  Reform Ministry, the Harper government let Canadians know that they thought that Canadian democracy  was  not functioning as it should. Minister of Democratic Reform Pierre Poilievre and his party  unilaterally  decided that not all eligible Canadians that were eligible to vote, needed to vote and enacted laws designed to make voting for certain Canadians citizens as challenging as possible. Pierre Poilievre accomplished his mission  by changing what used to be considered acceptable identification needed as  proof of residency, before voting to no longer being acceptable and with one vote of their majority government the Conservative Party of Canada had taken away the right to vote for over 50,000 Canadian citizens among which are (a) those in poverty and living literally on the street, (b) the elderly living in nursing homes unable to venture out and (c) those who were waiting to receive identification from the government due to theft, or loss, just to name a few.
  • With the creation of the Conservative Party of Canada’s Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Ministry,  Stephen Harper was able to enact laws to restrict the traveling of Canadian Muslims, or rid Canada of Muslims his government did not like. Steven Blaney,  Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness accomplished his mission by
  1. Using the authority granted to him unilaterally by his majority  government to create and enact laws to remove a  Canadian Muslim’s Passport while they are still in Canada, or are abroad, intentionally  stranding them in another country.  If you were a Canadian Muslim knowing how the government of the day feels about Muslims would you feel safe to visit your family in your country of origin, send money home to help support them as many Christians and Jews do every day, knowing that your actions could be misconstrued as aiding  and supporting terrorist activity which could result in your   Canadian passport being invalidated without notice and without the opportunity to return to Canada and defend yourself in a court of law, as in the case of  Imam Ali Sbeiti? I contend that to remove a person’s passport, while they are out of the country without notification before hand amounts to deportation without due process that may very well violate their constitutional rights and freedoms, but more importantly in my opinion is a mean-spirited cowardly action, not representative of  the Canadian values, spirit and high morality that I know of this country and people.
  2. Using the authority granted to him unilaterally by his majority  government to create and enact laws to make it legal for those in law enforcement and security to arrest and detain without proof, without charge or due process of law any person they or any other citizen in Canada or anywhere else in the world thought might be plotting, or considered likely to commit a terrorist act. then if they do decide to charge you with a crime under the terrorist act is it not reassuring to know that it will all be done in secret and that no one will ever see the evidence of those who accused you, definitely not your lawyer or the e presiding judge?  Now I might be crazy, but that sounds like being whisked away in the middle of the night by some Gestapo type secret police and a lot like the actions of other governments this Harper government and its allies  denounce.

Canadians have become so confused by all of the fear mongering that is going on that they cannot see that this government is not only out to restrict the rights of certain Canadians that they are deeming to be terrorist threats, but are in reality systematically chipping away  most of the rights and freedoms that all Canadians used to take for granted.  This was always their ultimate goal, made easier for them to do, because the threat of terrorism, terrorist threats  and Canadians becoming radicalized has most Canadians willing to give up their rights for the security and the protection that the government promises them in return. The Harper government is making Canadians a promise it has no intention of ever making good on, because stopping terrorism is not even a real part of the Harper government agenda. The terrorist threat is just another tool in  Stephen Harper’s tool box, that  he and his party use to get Canadians to comply with their real agenda, which is to put all of the power in the hands of the government, without the need to answer to oversight bodies of any kind, be they parliamentary, or judicial.

Does it not makes sense that if this government really wanted to end terrorism and erase the threat of terrorist acts  then they would  be willing to look at the root causes of terrorism and work at trying to find  peaceful solutions to ending terrorism rather than dropping bombs on who they deem terrorists, giving them more reasons to hate and kill and closing of diplomatic channels that would have them heard?

I contend that this government is using its own form of terrorism on the Canadian people. the Harper government are keeping Canadians so scared that they are willing to do anything and give up anything in order to be able to feel safe. The price demanded of every Canadian to feel  safe in their  own country by Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party of Canada is that every Canadian willingly give up  the rights and freedoms guaranteed to them in the Canadian Constitution and the  Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Consider this: If the Harper government along with all its allies really ended terrorism, or the terrorist threat, how would they get their citizens to willingly give up their rights and freedoms and join the New World Order? The government of Canada under the governance of Stephen Harper will never give up such a valuable tool as the Terrorist Threat / Terrorism.

Eve Adams Too Blonde And Too Pretty To Be Taken Seriously In Politics, Infer Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj And Kady O’Malley


Eve Adams Too Blonde And Too Pretty To Be Taken Seriously In Politics Say Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj And Kady O'Malley

Eve Adams Too Blonde And Too Pretty To Be Taken Seriously In Politics, Infer Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj And Kady O’Malley

c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003Is it any wonder that women do not run for political office in numbers that would be expected in Canada, or get the cabinet positions that they deserve based on their experience and merit when influential women like Althia Raj, (the Huffington Post Canada’s, Ottawa bureau chief) cover stories like Eve Adams crossing the floor the way she and other female journalists did on CBC’s, “Power and Politics” ? Althia Raj’s comments have been the most sexist and chauvinistic that I have heard to date and she has repeated them on every occasion she gets over the last 4 days with other panellist either:

  1. Rolling their eyes and grimacing
  2. Emboldening the Eve Adams hating males on the program to follow suit.

You would have thought that Eve Adams was the 1st elected politician to cross the floor and that it was somehow made worst by the fact that she was a blonde, easy to look at female by the way  Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley  cynically attacked Eve Adams’s credentials. In my opinion their combined insistence that the only reason she got her job in the 1st place was because of who she was sleeping with was such  a throw back and discredit to the advances of the female in politics, in the workplace and in women’s rights in general, that I thought it rich that they kept referring to her lack of  commitment to women’s rights issues, eluding to her voting record, while in the Harper government. I watched as guest moderator of  CBC’s Power and Politics’ Rosemary Barton not only permitted, but joined Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley  when they decided to whip out their hidden penises, disregard all of Eve Adams’s hard work for over 25 years in politics and make some very sexist and chauvinistic references, inferring that:

  1. Eve Adams was only looked at as an MP by the Progressive Conservative Party, because of the relationship with her partner  Dimitri Soudas.
  2. Eve Adams was only looked at as having any value to the Liberal Party of Canada because of her relationship with her partner Dimitri Soudas.
  3. If Eve Adams was not blonde and cute that no one would even be covering the story of Eve Adams’s defection.

The  comments of  Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley did little to shed any meaningful insight to the pros and cons of Eve Adams  crossing the floor, but instead reminded me of my time in  high school where there were always a group of not so popular girls plotting to take the prettiest girls in the school down a peg by spreading unflattering roomers about them, or labeling all of the cheer leaders as sluts having sex with all of the jocks, and all blonde girls as dumb and ditzy, whose only  chance at finding happiness, respectability  and success in their life after high school  would be to go to college and university and find and marry a successful man.

I personally do not like the past politics of Eve Adams and in her case with her long standing vocal support of Stephen Harper, his method of governing and for his policies. My cynical side makes me think of the old adage about the leopard not being able to change it’s spots, but even  at my most mean spirited moment; my most sexist moment; my most swaggering chauvinistic moment would I suggest that Eve Adams’s advancement in politics and with the Conservative Party of Canada had anything to do with her looks, or who she was sleeping with, because there is absolutely no evidence of that.

I do not think that Eve Adams will be able to convince many people that it is possible for her to stop believing in what she professed was good for all Canadians and Canada over the last 25 years overnight and even if she could, how could Canadians believe that she would not change again over night.  What I am getting at is that Eve Adams does have a credibility issue, but it is not her looks, her credentials, or who she chooses to sleep with; it is can the voters in  the GTA riding she hopes to represent in the 2015 federal election as a Liberal MP, believe what Eve Adams says she believes in  today will be the same for the foreseeable future; in other words can they trust Eve Adams to know what it is she believes in.”  That being said I do not see how sitting as a back bencher in the Harper government could be said to be doing your job for your constituents either.

No one on any current event program that I have watched has tried to even answer the question, or seems to care why a 25 year staunch conservative party member suddenly chose to leave the party she has worked for and supported since the age of 14. I am not surprised when I hear men refer to a women’s looks, sexuality as having gotten her to where she is, but in this day and age to hear that type of talk from respected, highly educated women, who would call themselves progressive and feminist, such as Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley was truly a shock and a step back for journalistic integrity and responsible journalism. I would suggest that Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley all retake  journalism 101, and seriously revisit why they became reporters and if they should be trusted by Canadians to relate what is happening politically in this country.

I wonder what these ladies have had to do to advance their personal careers that makes them so cynical and ready to believe that this is the only way that a woman can realise success in todays world? The fact that Eve Adams was still parliamentary secretary to the  minister of health  and making major spending announcements on behalf of the Conservative Party of Canada right up to the time of her defections announcement meant little to the 3 amigos, who ignored that question contented with the opportunity to bash Eve Adams, and  fixate on the future job prospects of Dimitri Soudas within the Liberal Party of Canada.

I think that it is also time for CBC to come to grips with the fact that encouraging their reporters to put their personality into their reporting of the news is leading to news coverage that is slanted and bias.  Every current events news program has color analysts on a panel, giving what is supposed to be their opinion based on the facts as they see them, but usually end up with everyone talking over the other trying to score political points for their party of choice. this inability to control the other panellists and keep the debate intelligent is something Rosemary Barton finds funny judging from her comments.  So now the host or moderator and the panellists for CBC’s current event shows are all giving their personal slanted often emotionally charged views on air, that at the end of the day forces  us the viewers  to listen to an hour of what amounts to political campaigning with all of its attack ad mentality, political spin and rhetoric, instead of factual, non bias news reporting. I wonder if there is any is any monetary, professional, or any other kind incentive paid to these color annalists by the political parties they fight so hard to  put in a good light? I wonder what is the going price is to get a spokesperson/attack dog reporter the likes of a Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj, or Kady O’Malley to cross the floor of journalistic integrity to the side of bias reporting?

Some Members And Supporters Of The Western Alliance Seem To Be Still Asking Why Their Citizens Are Under Attack At Home And Abroad?


c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003What is up Canada?  There seems to be a lot of confusion within the governments and the people of the Western Alliance and their allies as to why they are being targeted by what they are describing as Islamic, Jihadi  terrorists by both home-grown and foreign, at home and abroad. That is all except for Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, seeking to look statesmanlike in an election year declared to anyone that still listens to him  and takes what  comes out of his mouth with any degree of  respect, or seriousness that:

  1. There is no difference between teens messing around in their basements and someone who is radicalized. Prime Minister Harper said, “It would be a serious offence no matter who you are.” “It doesn’t matter what the age of the person is, or whether they’re in a basement, or whether they’re in a mosque, To him  or somewhere else.”
  2. “We are being attacked by these Islamic Jihadi terrorist groups, simply because we are Canadian.”

Minister of Public Safety  and Preparedness Steven Blaney and Minister of Defense Rob Nicolson, keep changing the definition of what a Islamic Jihadi terrorist is.

  1. The latest definition of what a Islamic Jihadi terrorist is seems to be any Canadian citizen who for whatever reason commits an act of violence against the Canadian government, who has  declared publicly that they are an Islamic convert. Safety Minister Steven Blaney  referred to a man who was  a paranoid schizophrenic and who was suicidal, as being a Islamic Jihadi terrorist for no other reason than he stated publicly that he recently had converted to Islam.

Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, is walking away from his cabinet post and politics, but not before he was successful in insuring that Canada’s international reputation in several areas was totally destroyed, such as:

  1. Canada’s reputation as a peace keeper.
  2. Canada’s reputation as a country that adhered to international law.
  3. Canada’s reputation as a country where all  refugees regardless of religion, culture and ethnicity were welcomed with open arms.
  4. Canada’s reputation for helping other countries in times of disaster without looking for repayment in terms of trade deals, or the acquiring things like a country’s water and mineral rights.

Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, is walking away from his cabinet post and politics, after insuring that those who do not believe in the Western Alliance’s  way of governing a country; the Western Alliance’s religious beliefs; the Western Alliances culture,  know that Canada believes that the only other way to insure the world a long-lasting peace and the end to terrorism can only be achieved by:

  1. Canada’s supporting  and taking an active role in sanctions, embargos and blockades of one sort or another designed to totally decimate a perceived enemy’s economy.
  2. Canada’s participation in totally destroying the infrastructure of an enemy, through bombing and other means of military action
  3. Canada’s closure of embassies in Canada and abroad and by the  expulsion of certain diplomats from this country without provocation.
  4. Canada’s declaration that we are against the Palestinians taking Israel to the world court, for war crimes they feel that Israeli’s were guilty of perpetrating against them and that if they did not desist in such provocative action that Canada would consider withdrawing promised financial support to them.
  5. Proving that who do not believe as the Western Alliance does and refuse to convert willingly, will be forced to bow down, or be crushed by the Western Alliance’s military superiority.

The Western Alliance’s theory on what constitutes acceptable rules of engagement in war amounts to, “We make the rules of war and we expect those we fight to follow them no matter how one-sided and ridiculous they are; such as:”

  1. Their right to attack a sovereign nation, kill  their enemies in their own land and demand that there be no resistance and no retaliation of any kind, be it in the form of returned violence, or the seeking of justice in the international courts.
  2.  Their right to carry out assignation attempts, or put out contracts for the murder, or capture of their heads of state, or religious leaders and demand that there be no resistance and no retaliation of any kind, be it in the form of returned violence, or the seeking of justice in the international courts.
  3. Their right to intentionally target their civilian populations and some how at the end of the day be able to say that we are justified and demand that there be no resistance and no retaliation of any kind, be it in the form of returned violence, or the seeking of justice in the international courts.

I think that you are very naïve, delusional, or mad, or all of the afore-mentioned if you go into a war thinking that you can expect your enemy not to answer violence with violence, or that calling them terrorists would alter their use of what they think will win for them, because you do not approve of their methods.  Mentally I do not think that the west can win this war because their civilian populations have been convinced by their politicians that war can be won without loss of life to their side. This has allowed for the populations of the west to lose sight of the fact  that war is a dirty business where people on both sides die.  What is worse is that the populations of the west are now demanding that wars come to an end before they are won, because soldiers are dying in combat, or demanding that a war be fought without putting their soldiers at risk; both impossible tasks.  Why else would there be such a public outcry when a soldier is killed, be it at home or in another country, or a need for a vigil, and televised funeral every time  a soldier or a peace officer is killed in this war against terrorism?

I wonder does Stephen Harper’s reasoning as to why we are being targeted by what he calls Islamic Jihadi terrorist groups brought on by the same type of  ignorance he and his caucus seem to have adopted about how to deal with  the problems that have developed between First Nations and the rest of Canada? That age-old paternalistic attitude that makes it hard for him to believe that First Nations could actually want implemented what was written in the treaties they signed with the rest of Canada (self governance and nation to nation sharing of Canada for a start), when the government of Canada already does what is best for them?

Japan chose to take an active role in the war against terror and offered to donate $200 million dollars to aid the Western Alliance and their allies to aid them in their fight to degrade and defeat ISOL and then wonders why their citizens are being targeted by ISOL in Iraq; “Really?” The answer is simple one as far as “why” for Japan. ISOL used the deaths of Japan’s 2 citizens to:

  1. Teach them and the rest of the so-called neutral countries of the world that if you  wish to be considered a neutral party as far as these 2 fanatical entities are concerned, then  as a person, group, government or country, your actions and words can never belie that neutrality whether it be  spoken, financial, military, or any other form of support.
  2. When it comes to these 2 fanatical, relentless foes there can be no partial participation. These 2 evil entities have battled each other through history, using many different names, many different approaches and a whole bunch of promises that are but worms on a hook designed to catch fish.  The Western Alliance as  one fanatical side calls itself today promises rewards of this world (money, citizenship etc.,  if you will just join them in their war against terror, but what good is any of it, if your lifetime could be reduced to tomorrow? ISOL/The Islamic State as the other fanatical side calls itself today promises those who would support them rewards only diminished by one’s lack of imagination, in the glorious afterlife, (riches, women but no one has ever come back to say that this promise was true. In reality  Japan and the world is being shown once again that the  only real reward that either side can honestly give to any person, group, or government stupid enough to answer yea to either side’s call for support, is generations of  suffering, ending only when your citizens are mercifully put out of their misery by death.

Japan has hardened its heart and vows never to forgive those responsible for killing 2 of their citizens, all too soon Japan is forgetting that it was they as a country that chose to no longer be innocent bystanders, but rather become financial supporters of the Western Alliance, making them no longer a neutral country, but an ally of the Western Alliance sworn to degrade and defeat ISOL, or  at war with ISOL’S with all of the penalties that one suffers by making that choice.

The governments of France,  Great Britain, Australia, Germany, Canada and all other “coalition member states” are the Western Alliance,  the other evil entity in this never-ending war that seeks to dominate and make the world over in their image. This makes them no innocent victims in this war that has slowly infected the world with hatred, divisiveness and mistrust of anything that is different from themselves.  In my opinion they have already lost this war on terror despite their superior weaponry, because it is they who:

  1. Have made enemies of their own minority ethnic and religious citizens,  by treating them deplorably, especially when it comes to Muslims. In all of these countries Muslims are being treated with all of the mistrust and face the same accusatory suspicion as the Japanese people were exposed to in Canada during the 2nd world war.  Thank God for small mercies that this government has not seen the need to round them up for the safety of “real Canadians” and put them in internment camps.
  2. Have turned from their democratic principles that they claim to be fighting for and are changing all of their laws to take the power from the people and give it to the government, making these countries more autocratic than democratic.
  3. Their own citizens of European heritage and Christian upbringing are renouncing their faith, culture and heritage and picking up arms against them, both at home and abroad.

I would suggest to all of the governments  should to take a good look at their  foreign policies, their treatment of religious, cultural and ethnic minorities within their countries and the violence that they inflict on the innocent civilian’s in other countries when debating terrorist attacks in their countries and on their citizens abroad, for the answer to the question of ,”Why us?”

Food for thought:

  1. When as a nation you become so terrified of your enemy that you start arresting and detaining children as young as 8 years old as they did in France because he declared, “I am with the terrorists” and because he refused to take part in the national minute of silence for the victims of the slain, can you really consider yourself winning the war on terror or giving into an irrational nation wide hysteria?
  2. When the only way you can get followers is to raid villages of your own countrymen and kill off all of the adult men and leave all of the adult females alone, capture, rape all of the teenage girls and force them to wed and become forced converts and slaves, capture and force all of the male children to convert and join your army and force them to fight for your cause, have you gained real support for your cause or created an enemy that will secretly fight against you from within?

None of these measures have worked for either side and they never will, because you cannot starve a people, kill a person’s whole family, subject them to persecution, oppression and in some cases ethnocide and genocide and expect no retaliation of any kind.  This kind of behavior from anyone only leads to resistance and retaliation, leading to a vicious circle of revenge with every hostile action being met with one more horrific than the other, until the end of time. The answer to why us is clear and it is so simple, For the  Western Alliance (whose majority of member states are religiously Christian) they only need look to their bibles for the answer of why they are being targeted by Islamic Jihadi terrorists, “Live by the sword, die by the sword” is a saying derived from a saying of Jesus, quoted in the Bible, to the effect that if you use violence, or other harsh means, against other people, you can expect to have those same means used against you; “You can expect to become a victim of whatever means you use to get what you want.”

Let me conclude by saying that I think that there is no room in the world for the violence that we are seeing from either side of this ideological, religious and toxic war that has span multiple generations, turned nation against nation and threatens to cause another world war.  Innocent people are being killed, because of intolerance, fear mongering and divisive actions of 2 old and fanatical enemies. I speak of the Western Alliances role in this war not because I agree with the actions of ISOL, al Qaeda, or any other group that kills innocent people to make a political point. I speak to the Western alliances actions in this war,  because there are too many people in too many countries who think  wrongly that the Western Alliance’s use of violence and torture to convert those in other lands to its way of thinking is justified and understandable and that its deplorable treatment of its cultural, religious and ethnic minorities is justified to preserve the security of the majority. I speak to the role of the Western Alliance in this war, because to many of its citizens believe that  violence leads to peace, if the words behind the killing sounds good and makes their country and them look like heroes.

Does Justin Trudeau’s Honesty, Transparency And Willingness To Listen To Others Make up For His Lack Of Experience?


c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003What is up Canada, does Justin Trudeau’s honesty, transparency and willingness to listen to others make up for his lack of experience, appears to be the question leading up to which leader we will vote in 2015? We as Canadians have  a lot of evidence to show us what politicians with a lot of political experience are capable of doing for Canada and to Canadians.  All Canadians have to do is look at the leader of the governing party Stephen Harper and the leader of the official opposition party Thomas Mulcair to see the proof that experience in a leader for a country is not all that needs to be looked for when choosing a country’s leader.  In the case of both Harper and Mulcair it becomes painfully obvious that all they bring to the table is experience in politics that is bad the country and the people they are supposed to be serving.  I believe that if as in the case of Harper and Mulcair that their political experience  gets in the way of them remembering that although they have been elected to govern the country, that they are still the servants of their people then they and not dictators, or sovereigns then I think that having political experience means nothing good for the country.  Harper’s and Mulcair’s political experience seems to cause them to:

  1. Close their minds and hearts to the feelings of others.
  2.  Feel that they have all of the answers and know what is best for everyone without having to ask them.
  3. Feel they have no need to consult with experts, take advice, or ask the opinion of others and honestly seek consensus.

It is these things that tell me that for all of their political experience Stephen Harper  and Thomas Mulcair have become a bad thing for democracy, this country and its people.

Stephen Harper, Thomas Mulcair   and a majority of Canadians consider Justin Trudeau the politician to beat in the 2015 federal election, despite what Harper and Mulcair are saying about his lack of political experience.  Both leaders are trying to persuade the non committed voter to vote for them and not Justin Trudeau, because they see Trudeau as being too young, too rich and too politically inexperienced to deal with all of the problems that they the more experienced politicians have gotten this country into and vow to continue to get us into if re-elected, or elected in 2015.

 Understand that Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair are not that far apart when it comes to gas fracking, pipelines, decriminalization of marijuana, or how to deal with the Middle East conflict.   I get a sense that Canadians are not all that thrilled with what politicians have been saying and doing in terms of governing this country and are looking for a leader who is not already corrupted by years of political experience and who stills believes it is their duty to Canadians to:

  •  End tragedies plaguing this country like child poverty, communities with no drinkable water, homelessness etc..
  • Be open, transparent and honest when addressing the concerns of all Canadians.
  • Give all Canadians cause to hope  and work with us to help us turn our dreams into realities.

Stephen Harper and his government are  experienced at embarrassing Canadians with  political scandals.

  1. Shoe Store Project – 2007 – Prime Minister’s Office under Stephen Harper plans $2 million, government-controlled media centre to replace current National Press Theatre (which is run by press gallery staff, instead of those from the PMO).
  2. Julie Couillard scandal – 2007 – Conservative Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier resigned after leaving sensitive NATO documents in the home of Julie Couillard, an ex-girlfriend with links to the Hells Angels biker gang
  3. In and Out scandal – 2007 – alleged circumvention of election finance rules by the Conservatives in the 2006 election campaign.
  4. First Prorogation – 2008 – prorogued government to avoid a non-confidence vote.
  5. Afghan Detainees Inquiry or Prorogation 2 – 2010 – prorogued government a second time claiming it was for the Olympics to avoid inquiry into the maltreatment of Afghan detainees. Harper was found to be in Contempt of Parliament for refusing to share information. The first time in Canadian history.
  6. Robocall scandal – 2012 – Allegations of widespread voter fraud occurring during the 2011 Canadian federal election. Robotic and live calls to voters are claimed to have been made in 38 ridings. Currently under investigation by the RCMP and Elections Canada.
  7. The ETS Scandal – An ongoing Canadian political scandal involving alleged wrongdoing by Canadian government officials in the award of a $400-million information technology services contract and allegations of political interference in the ensuing cover-up.
  8. F-35 Fighter Jet Scandal – 2012 – Involved misleading costs of F-35 Fighter Jets to replace former CF18s.
  9. CFIA Scandal – 2012 – is an ongoing scandal involving food inspection services being insufficient to the Canadian public this comes after the budget cuts to Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the temporary closure of XL Meats due to a widespread E-coli outbreak in Alberta.
  10. Canadian Senate expenses scandal – 2012 – An ongoing investigation concerning the expense claims of certain Canadian senators which began in late 2012. Senators Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin, and Patrick Brazeau claimed travel and housing expenses from the Senate for which they were not eligible.
  11. Nutrition North Program scandal, that has elders eating out of the garbage, because the subsidy program is not working and the prices of food is too high for them to afford.

I will stop here because I think that my point is made that sometimes the experience of our politicians is not always a good thing and often just leaves them, more arrogant, more cynical and more adept at misleading us the voter and more likely to willing do so and feel justified in doing so when caught.

 Stephen Harper is experienced at breaking records set by other governments that were not good for democracy, the country, or its people:

  1. The amount of times that they have used prorogation to allow his government not to answer difficult questions.
  2. Imposed time allocation to shut down debates in the house of commons.
  3. The amount of times that they have used omnibus budget bills to make the total content of the bill impossible to be looked at in-depth and to avoid having the things that have nothing to do with the budget to be scrutinised in their proper  committees and by the committee members of the opposition parties whose expertise is in those matters and made for a meaningful debate.

In my opinion  since The New Democratic Party of Canada made  Thomas Mulcair their leader the federal NDP has become more Autocratic than Democratic.

Since becoming the leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, Thomas Mulcair has proven that his experience leads him to believe that the only way to win votes and elections is to be as arrogant, dishonest and as hypocritical as Stephen Harper. Thomas Mulcair with all of his so called political experience has lost just about all of the credibility that Jack Layton gained for the federal party, by abandoning the NDP’s principles and policies in his pursuit of power.

  1. Thomas Mulcair is supportive of Energy East, a raw bitumen export pipeline that will expand tar sands production 40% above the current rate of 2 million barrels per day – this flies in the face of NDP climate policy.
  2. Thomas Mulcair supports Kinder Morgan he states that with a better environmental assessment process Kinder Morgan would be OK. Kennedy Stewart’s petition only opposes the pipeline going through Burnaby.
  3. Every New Democratic Party MP voted in what had to be a whipped vote to support the Canada Korea free trade agreement. This went against NDP trade policy which opposes supporting any trade agreement with Investor State provisions.
  4. Thomas Mulcair is opposed to decriminalizing marijuana and has stated on national TV that he will not follow through with NDP policy to decriminalize.
  5. Thomas Mulcair supports gas fracking.

I guess Thomas Mulcair’s experience has told him that Canadians respond to American style of politics and in an effort to try to win election in 2015, he and his party faithful have personal attacks on the other party leaders as well as opposition MPs  rather than promoting what are his and their personal attributes that put him and them above the other leaders and MPs and worthy of getting our votes at election time. The NDP has wasted a lot of time and energy in the House of Commons in trying criticizing their opponents on topics devoid of fact, that appear to have nothing to do with the matter being debated. He like Harper has decided that the way to change how your party addresses certain sensitive political issues is to either force them out.

Hassainia, the MP for Verchères-Les Patriotes in Quebec said of Thomas Mulcair and the NDP one week after her resignation, “I didn’t resign only because of the party’s position on the Israeli attacks against Gaza, but  because Thomas Mulcair and the NDP are being dishonest  when they say that the Israelis are the oppressed in the present conflict.” I resigned also, because, the NDP no longer shared my values and by this I mean, “The NDP has one of the youngest caucuses in Canada, and it has the most women. We promote the value of work–family balance, but as soon as someone inside the party has to deal with both, as I had to, it’s less clear, especially when there’s no maternity leave.  We have to apply the policies that we defend internally as well.” Note: Hassainia is the fourth MP to quit the NDP caucus since the “orange wave” of 2011.  Lise Saint-Denis joined the Liberal Party, Claude Patry chose the Bloc Québécois and Bruce Hyer left to sit as an independent before joining the Green Party.

Thomas Mulcair experience seems to have also led him to believe as leader of the Official Opposition he and his party are above the law, jus like Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada.  Under his leadership Thomas Mulcair has allowed for political scandal to infest his party.

  1. Refusing to stop for the gate-keeper on Parliament Hill who was just doing his job.
  2. Refusing to stop for the  RCMP pursuing in their car signal lights flashing, trying to get him to pull over.
  3. Refusing to apologise to anyone for his actions and refusing to take responsibility for breaking the law.
  4. Guilty of causing his own members to resign from the party, dissatisfied with his dictatorial style of  leadership and where that style of leadership is taking the NDP as a political party.
  5. Guilty of approving the Satellite Offices Scheme which turned into the Satellite Office  Scandal.
  6. Guilty of approving the NDP mass mailings scandal, involving taxpayer dollars.
  7. Guilty of personally doing nothing to help 2 female MPs in his party, who alleged they were sexually harassed by 2 Liberal male MPS,  with the exception of whining about the actions taken by Justin Trudeau.
  8. Failing to stop the  2 female MPs in his own party scandal in which 2 female NDP MPS from publicly naming the 2 accused male Liberal MPs and giving graphic interviews of the events, while insisting  their right to remain anonymous, be kept.

In fairness Justin Trudeau does not have the experience of the other 2 politicians have and he is far from perfect, but I think that his lack of experience and imperfections are a breath of fresh air and will work in his favor, because

  1. The political process has not yet hardened his heart and mind against Canadians and he still feels that he is one of us; neither above or below us which translates to him relating and talking to Canadians, not at them.
  2. Justin Trudeau is hard to control by political machines, because he still feels  obligated to say what is on his mind and many people may not appreciate what it is he is saying, or perhaps may get offended by what comes out of his mouth sometimes, but he is not afraid to simply tell it like he sees it without a scripted pre-written response and everyone knows that what he says he means.
  3. Justin Trudeau proved with his actions during the senate scandal and the sexual harassment  that he does not feel that either his party , or himself are above the law and that once he is aware that laws are, or could have been broken that he is  not afraid to take action, own the problem and no matter the cost politically to him and his party try his best to do the right thing under the laws of this country, parliament and in the best interest of all Canadians.
  4. Justin Trudeau also refuse to use attack ads and follow the American style of politics, rather putting his reputation as an honest, hard-working person out there for all to judge instead.
  5. Justin Trudeau also feels that one should never shut down diplomacy and turn to violence to settle problems and that the more people you kill only creates more enemies and never makes for lasting friendships, or trusted partners.
  6. He is the only federal leader right now that is willing to state openly that he believes that to solve a problem like terrorism be it home-grown or foreign, requires that the root causes of what has upset these terrorists, must be understood and fixed, before they will see the value in peace.

I guess if you are the type of Canadian that likes to be lied to, treated like a child who does not know what is good for you and must be spied on, abused, told what to do and led around by the nose, then I guess that Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair with all of their experience doing that and a whole lot of other dictator like things is the way to go.  I for one like the fresh, honest, transparent face that Justin Trudeau brings to politics with his in experienced self and I am willing to have my feelings hurt just a little if that is the price for him saying truthfully how he feels in an open a spontaneous manner. Justin Trudeau’s mistakes are honest and human, unlike the other 2 leaders whose mistakes are not mistakes at all, but instead calculated, deliberate actions used to garner votes based such tactics being utilised in the past successfully to win votes. Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair’s political experience when confronted with wrong doing allow them to either lie, evade stand on their experience  in politics. Even when found guilty of the crime for which they were accused both of these leaders show little or no remorse, but instead cite case after case where their wrong doing has been used in the past by other experienced politicians successfully and without fear of punishment.

I think that Canadians are tired of what the old style of experienced politician is doing or not doing on our behalf and is ready to let the country be governed by a political party who has a leader who does not think that they have all of the answers and still sees others views, opinions and ideas as important and necessary to have before acting on their behalf; a person who really believes in not only the rules of democracy, but in the spirit of democracy as well.

Are Machine Guns For The RCMP, New Powers For Our Politicians, Police And Spies To Snoop, Or The More People We Kill The Answer To Canada’s Terrorism Problems?


c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003What is up Canada? Are machine guns for the RCMP, new powers for our politicians, police and spies to snoop on Canadians at home and while they are traveling, or the more people we kill, the answer to Canada’s Terrorism Problems?  Has anything that this government has done since they decided to join the USA in exacting its never-ending revenge on all the Islamic states in the world for the few Islamic extremist who ordered and carried out the attacks  in the USA on 9/11 helped to protect Canadians from terrorist threats and attacks in Canada, or abroad? I do not think so. Has anything that the USA led allies including Canada has done up to this point helped to reduce the number of terrorists, or terrorist attacks in the world, or has it all gotten a whole lot worse? I would say that for Canada it has gotten a whole lot worse since everything that happens of a violent nature is deemed to be a terrorist attack and in some way related to radicalization of a young Canadian into a Islamic terrorist group.    It is like the more power the government takes for itself, the better they arm the RCMP and the more snooping power they give to the police and our spies, the less Canadians are being protected. We are being asked in the name of  aiding in our own protection by this government and these protection agencies to give up our rights listed below and are getting nothing in return, because all of these things do not seek to solve the problem, but instead seek to mask the problem.

  • Right to have the police obtain a warrant before they start collecting information regarding our internet,  our cellphones, or anything else digital.
  • Right to have the police get a warrant before they search our homes and other private property from which they feel may contain evidence of a crime that has been committed or will be committed somewhere in the future.
  • Right to a fair and open trial based on evidence deemed relevant to the case by a judge, with evidence and witnesses that can be cross-examined and allow for ourselves to be able to be arrested without a warrant and to be judged by hearsay from witnesses that will no longer be identified and can not be cross-examined even by the presiding judge.
  • Right to travel freely whenever and wherever we want, because somewhere at sometime some cop, or  pencil pusher working in a policing, or spying agency somewhere within Canada or within the Five Eyes has determined that you could be a home-grown terrorist looking to engage in terrorist activity abroad, based on evidence that no one else including you, or a judge will ever see.

None of the things mentioned above are the way of doing things in Canada, but they are in line with how nations we call oppressive regimes operate.  The Harper government is changing Canada into a  country where the government and the policing agencies do not need to answer, or prove just cause to an independent judicial oversight body for their actions when restricting, or denying the rights of its civilian population.  Even while Stephen Harper and his government are bombing other countries, participating in the torture of captured enemies and engaging in diplomatic isolation tactics for other nations who they deem to be oppressive regimes, Stephen Harper and his government are rewriting the laws of Canada to give themselves and Canadian policing and spying agencies the very same power over Canadian citizens as those countries we call backward, lawless, inhumane, totalitarian and anti democratic. How he still insists on the validity of Canada’s claim to be a leader in the fight for democratic governance and an end to social and legal injustice with a straight face, I do not know. I do know however that lasting peace can not be achieved through coercion such as trade  sanctions embargoes, diplomatic isolation and in some cases helping to enforce no fly zones, naval blockades and even going to war to unseat what we call rogue governments.  History has shown that these tactics only increase resentment and the hardening of positions.

I do not think that any of the measures in the new laws will help protect Canadians from any type of terrorist threat, whether it be foreign, or domestic, because none of these measures address the real problems that must be solved before peace can be won. Everyone made fun of Justin Trudeau when he talked of getting to the root source of the problems that are causing young Canadian males to turn away from their government and country and try to go abroad and fight for organizations like ISIS and kill Canadians and her allies. Everyone tried to make Justin Trudeau seem idiotic when he said the answer to the war on terrorism could only be found by finding out what the root causes are that make people chose to be terrorists in the first place and relieve the source of such desperate actions, but I think in both scenarios Justin Trudeau was right.

Canadian home grow terrorist attacks: How many people can we put in jail, stop from traveling abroad and even if we could stop them all what are we asking for more soldiers run down in the street, more shootings at historical sites, or attacks on government building, police stations, maybe city halls, national assemblies, or parliament hill once again?  Is this so much better than finding out what is hurting people and driving them to commit such senseless acts of violence, whether they are real or imagined? I like Justin Trudeau do not think so.

Neither do I believe that arming the RCMP with machine guns will keep them from getting killed when they are ambushed.  those that died in Moncton did not die because they were out gunned they died because they were caught off guard, ambushed and had no chance to defend themselves. Maybe the Harper government could make those types of weapons that killed the members of the RCMP illegal in Canada instead of insisting that they are the right of every Canadian to own, or barring that reinstate the Long Gun Registry so that those officers who answer emergency calls are not walking into incidents where the  criminal has the potential of being better armed.

Terrorism abroad:  The USA and it’s better gunned allies have bombed, civilian targets and military targets in almost every Islamic nation trying to win it’s so called war on terrorism. These so called anti terrorist groups have crippled economies, denied access to trade markets, starved and denied innocent men , women and children food, water, medicine in an effort to break them and force them to give in to what the participating countries in the Western alliance want, which in my opinion means the end to their existence as free independent Islamic nations; much the same as they did to the North American Indians, the people of the African nations especially South Africa, the people of Hawaii and the Polynesian Islands.

They have named themselves, The Coalition of The Willing, The Western Alliance and made it clear that they support Israel no matter what crimes against humanity it perpetrates and I am sure in the eyes of most of the Islamic nations they invade, bomb, occupy and kill innocent people they are called terrorists and considered enemies that need to be resisted by any means necessary.  In its latest act of stupidity the Harper government along with the Tom Mulcair’s NDP and the Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party of Canada have come together to acknowledge that the Palestinians not only have reason, but it is also their right under international law  to sue for Israel for what it considers war crimes that Israel has perpetrated against them and in the same breath denounce such an attempt calling such an attempt ill-advised and detrimental to a lasting peace achieved through negotiations.  The USA and its allies are not only denouncing the Palestinian effort  to avail themselves of their legal right to sue for justice, but are threatening to withhold a promised financial aid package, claiming that to sue Israel for the war crimes it has committed, is counter productive to a negotiated settlement with Israel for a 2 state solution.   How productive is giving these people no solution other than doing what they are told? The USA and their allies have only one offer on the table for the nations of Islam and that is to accept the USA and their allies which includes Israel as their betters and accept the paternalistic arrangement that would leave them without a way to defend themselves militarily, legally in the world court, as well as leave them financially dependant on handouts from it handlers, who at anytime could simply withdraw that support to get compliance to new rules and regulations imposed by the west, as they are doing to Palestinians right now.  How can any sane person in this day and age think that this is the road map to peace in the Middle east or anywhere else.  If you killed my grandfather, grandmother,  father, mother, uncles and aunts and now you are killing my children, my grandchildren, nephews and nieces and call them collateral damage, do you think that you are making more terrorists as you call them, or allies ready to work towards peaceful solution?

The answer to the terrorist threats both international and domestic is very clear, but is being muddied by glory seeking greedy politicians and a fanatical leader in the Middle East who does not want a peaceful negotiated settlement and has stated publicly that he would not allow for a 2 state solution as long as he is the leader of his country.  If countries like Canada who claim to want terrorism to end  and be replaced by peaceful negotiated settlements and truly seek the end to the never-ending wars and the senseless deaths of millions around the world and now at home to end, all sides must be able to see the value in such a brokered peace. I think there needs to be:

  • Support for those who work towards a legal solution whether it is in the world court, or at the negotiating table and condemnation for those who do not, no matter which side dispute we align ourselves with.
  • A realistic offer for peace put on the table.
  • An understanding in the west that it cannot win this war by employing bombing raids that target civilians, embargoes and trade sanctions that end up starving and denying medical supplies to innocent men, women and children, by creating no fly zones that allow the side we are on to bomb the other side.
  • An end to the USA and its allies putting wanted dead or alive contracts on the heads of other countries leaders.
  • An end to all of the interfering by Canada and its allies with another country’s right to seek legal recourse within the confines of international law.

The war is now in our country thanks to Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada and their unfair, unjustifiable, unconditional support of Israel no matter how many innocent lives they take, no matter how they violate treaties, and no matter how much land they illegally occupy and resettle.  John Baird thought only to laugh at the Palestinian display of their ill feeling for Canada and in fact sought to mock their efforts.  John Baird acknowledged that the only reason Canada supports Israel unconditionally, because it is the only democratic government in the Middle East .  The names freedom fighter and terrorist mean little and are used by the west according to what side of a confrontation they backing at the moment.  When the Russians were in Afghanistan they armed the Afghanis and called them freedom fighters, today they call those who would repel them and reject their control the way they repelled the Russian invaders, terrorists. Canada used to call the Tamils of Sri Lanka freedom fighters, until we decided to back the other side who we knew were guilty of crimes against humanity, Canada now calls them terrorists now as well and has put them on a terrorist list.  There are too many, Palestinians, Syrians and Afghanis living in Canada for example to just keep being a party to the killing of their innocent loved ones back where they originated in the name of democracy and peace and expect no type of retaliatory action from any of them, in any fashion, ever.

Now thanks to Stephen Harper and his government we have Canadians joining terrorist groups and  killing Canadians at home and abroad. What is up Canada, do you think we are really winning the war on terror, either internationally, or domestically? Do you really think that giving the RCMP machine guns, policing agencies and spy agencies the power to violate your privacy rights and the government the authority to remove someone’s citizenship will really help to keep you safe? I don’t.

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.”

Is The Two State Solution Based On The Palestinians Becoming The Middle East’s Version Of The North American Indian’s Reality?


c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003What is up Canada? Why would Canadian politicians see the Palestinian move to gain admission to the International Criminal Court as a bad thing.  When the Palestinians try to defend themselves and end the illegal occupation of their lands by Israel through violence, they are labelled terrorists and told by Canada, the USA  and the other members of the Western Alliance to seek peaceful solutions to their land being stolen and resettled illegally by Israel. Now when they try to avail themselves of the only legal, peaceful solution available to them through the ICC, they are told that if they pursue this line of action although it is their right to do so and is legal and understandable that they could face financial sanctions from the USA while Canada’s Foreign Minister John Baird publicly denounces their attempt to seek justice.

I get confused at what Canada does want the Palestinians to do in its efforts to seek justice for what it feels are war crimes that Israeli government has committed against the Palestinian people  via peaceful and international accepted  legal means, when I see statements being made like this by Canadian politicians in the National Post:

  • The Canadian government is condemning a move by the Palestinian Authority to join the International Criminal Court in a bid to eventually launch war-crimes prosecutions against Israel.
  • Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird says the action taken by Palestinians this week is a “concerning and dangerous development.” “Such a provocative decision only furthers the divide between Palestinians and Israelis, and will carry unfortunate consequences,” he said. “Canada has expressed these concerns directly to the Palestinian Authority for nearly four years now.”
  • NDP foreign affairs critic Paul Dewar said Friday that the Palestinian bid for ICC membership is “understandable” and “entirely legal,” but nonetheless represents a “ramping up” of tensions that isn’t helpful to the goal of getting a negotiated settlement. “This isn’t going to solve the quagmire that we see between the Israelis and the Palestinians. It doesn’t lead to what we want to see, which is the creation of a state of Palestine with recognition from the Israelis.”
  • Liberal foreign affairs critic Marc Garneau said Friday the Palestinians’ “unilateral” action gets in the way of a “two-state solution.” “I think it sends a signal which is counter-productive. They are free to apply but I think it is a mistake on their part and will only make the situation worse by entrenching positions,” Garneau said.

Is Canada’s and the USA’s position that the two state solution is in reality based on:

  • The Palestinians becoming the Middle East’s version of the North American Indian’s reality?
  • A two state solution that makes the Palestinians the wards of  Israel, to be forever recognised as an independent nation subordinate to Israeli laws, to be given the  right to self governance with an Israeli veto taking priority?
  • Palestinians accepting to teach in their schools and mosques what is dictated to them by the Israelis?
  • Palestinians being willing to give up their lands to Israel, forget and seek no justice in the courts for the bombing of  their children as they played on the beach, slept in their beds and prayed in their mosques?

If not why would the United States congress be threatening to cut $400 million in funding to the Palestinians, for seeking a legal solution to what it feels are war crimes that have been committed against it by Israel?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reacted angrily, saying the ICC should not accept the Palestinian Authority because it is not a state. He said the Palestinian government includes Hamas, which commits war crimes, but I say  that when he allowed for the shelling and bombing of known civilian targets, he was knowingly committing war crimes and should be tried for them. If he decides to level charges against the Palestinians, I believe that it is his right to do so.  What I do not get is the deliberate interference by Canada and the USA to thwart what has already been acknowledged as, “understandable” and “entirely legal.”

I would ask again, “What is up Canada, is it Canada’s and the USA’s position that the two state solution is in reality based on the Palestinian people becoming the Middle East’s version of the North American Indian’s reality? Is it the same paternalistic approach, the same sort of treaties that will never be honored, the same type of land claims that will never be settled, the same 3rd world living conditions on the one big reserve, or reservation that will be all that is left to Palestine after the solution is forced upon them. It seems that Canadian politicians will not be content until the Palestinians cave in under the weight of embargoes, sanctions, blockades and other forms of coercion, that is being offered as an offer the Palestinians are not entitled to refuse?

What will make Canada happy?

  • Will it be the successful use of an Israeli version of our residential schools imposed on the Palestinians so that their children can be properly assimilated into the west’s way of thinking and value system?
  • Will it be when the Palestinians are wiped off the face of the earth either by violence, or by the loss of their language, religion and culture,  by the Israelis and no longer pose a threat either real or imaginary to the west?

What is clear to me is that the west will continue to back Israel no matter what crimes against humanity they commit and justify it all with rhetoric.  Canada since Stephen Harper took office as the prime minister of Canada is complicit in the deaths of every innocent Palestinian man, woman and child that has died at the hands of Israel.  We are now guilty of interfering with a legal court investigation, by illegally tampering with a United Nations recognised nation seeking membership in the ICC. As well as trying to stop said nation from seeking  justice  in the ICC with threats and coercion and bribery.  Is this truly how Canada sees justice being meted out fairly and without prejudice? Has justice truly come to mean just for us?