Blog Archives

National Self Preservation vs Surrender to An Invasion

Posted on by
Category: Uncategorized

Poles Resist Lukashenko Engineered “Refugee” Invasion

Posted on by

Poles Resist Lukashenko Engineered “Refugee” Invasion

Eastern Europe hasn’t been feminized & guilt ridden as much of the West has. They have leaders who put their country’s interests first the dictates of the Globalists. Good for the Poles protecting their borders against the engineered Third World invasion. They aren’t “refugees” or “migrants”. They’re invaders. No one invited them to Europe!

Clashes erupt at Belarus-Poland border as refugee crisis unfolds

Polish forces used tear gas and water cannon on refugees who allegedly threw stones at border guards.

Since the crisis unfolded in August, the Polish guards have been pushing people who managed to cross onto the Polish territory from the Belarusian side of the border [Leonid Scheglov/BelTA via Reuters]

By Agnieszka Pikulicka-WilczewskaPublished On 16 Nov 2021

Sokolka, Poland – Clashes have erupted between stranded refugees and Polish border guards at the Polish-Belarusian border.

The chaos unfolded late morning on Tuesday, with refugees stranded at the Kuznica border crossing reportedly throwing stones at Polish guards.

Keep reading

Refugee crisis deepens at the Polish-Belarusian border

EU agrees new sanctions on Belarus over border crisis

What’s Putin’s gain in the Belarus migrant crisis?

‘No way I’m going back to Iraq’: Iraqi Kurds flee to Belarus

The guards responded by using water cannon and tear gas against those who have been trying to cross the border, according to Poland’s Ministry of National Defence (MOD).

“The use of force [by Poland] is completely unjustifiable because there are legal procedures which should be used from the very beginning,” said Marta Szymanderska from Grupa Granica, a coalition of NGOs which are responding to the humanitarian crisis at the border. “The actions of the Polish forces are not only illegal but also inhuman,” she told Al Jazeera.

The MOD said: “The migrants attacked our soldiers and guards with stones and are trying to force the fence to get to the Polish territory.

“Our forces used tear gas to thwart the aggression of migrants.”

It was unclear if there were any injuries among refugees, while at least one policeman was wounded.

The Polish Border Guard said: “Illegal migrants have been gathering at the border crossing in Kuźnica, at the Belarusian side. New groups, which so far have been squatting at the border, are joining them. An attempt to forcefully cross the border is being prepared. Everything is taking place under the supervision of Belarusian forces.”

Earlier on Tuesday, more Polish police and security forces arrived at the border to prevent what Polish authorities claimed was an attempt by migrants to illegally cross into Polish – and European Union – territory.

Video footage posted on social media showed people near the border running away after being sprayed with water cannon. https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NwYWNlX2NhcmQiOnsiYnVja2V0Ijoib2ZmIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1460539077418180612&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aljazeera.com%2Fnews%2F2021%2F11%2F16%2Fchaos-at-belarus-poland-border-as-migrants-attempt-to-enter-eu&sessionId=3b3bf993e70772fe0dfe79d687bb9ee7cd61385f&theme=light&widgetsVersion=f001879%3A1634581029404&width=550px

Thousands of refugees and migrants are stranded between the Polish and Belarusian borders as a result of an East-West geopolitical crisis between Warsaw and its allies, and Minsk and Moscow.

According to international law, people looking for asylum have the right to claim it at official border crossings.

However, Polish border guards have been denying that right to many asylum seekers who have attempted to cross the border.

Since the crisis unfolded in August, Polish guards have been reportedly pushing back people who managed to cross into the Polish territory from Belarus.

Many refugees are spending weeks in the woodlands which cover the border, trying to leave the border zone and seek asylum.https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.489.0_en.html#goog_1176313067

Polish authorities passed a law which effectively legalises pushbacks, although the practice remains dubious under international law.

Moreover, the border area has been marked as a state of emergency which means that it is inaccessible to media and NGOs who cannot gather information nor provide migrants with humanitarian assistance.

The international community holds Belarus responsible for the crisis.

Earlier this year, Minsk removed visas for citizens of a number of Middle Eastern and African states and opened numerous tourist agencies offering an easy and cheap way to get to Europe.

Critics of Belarus say the move might be an act of revenge against Poland, which supported last year’s protests against longtime ruler President Alexander Lukashenko.

Activists on the ground in Poland, who are providing refugees with food, water and sleeping bags, are alarmed by the developments.


https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/16/chaos-at-belarus-poland-border-as-migrants-attempt-to-enter-eu

Category: Uncategorized

“Refugee” Hypocrisy

Posted on by

Category: Uncategorized

You Can’t Cure Stupid: Transportation Secretary Buttigieg Says There’s “Racism Built into our Roads”

Posted on by

In May 2017, the National Association of Black Journalists named Ryan as the “Journalist of the Year”

CNN’s April Ryan asks Pete Buttigieg to address the ‘racism’ built into our roadways

Buttigieg previously addressed ‘racism physically built’ in highways back in April

By Lindsay Kornick | Fox News

White House correspondent April Ryan was ridiculed on Monday after asking Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg about the racism “built into the roadways.” 

During the White House press briefing, Buttigieg was taking questions about the bipartisan infrastructure bill, which passed through Congress last week. Ryan took the opportunity to ask Buttigieg about the Biden administration’s plans to “deconstruct the racism” that’s built into America’s infrastructure.

Add New Post

about:blankAdd title

n May 2017, the National Association of Black Journalists named Ryan as the “Journalist of the Year”

CNN’s April Ryan asks Pete Buttigieg to address the ‘racism’ built into our roadways

Buttigieg previously addressed ‘racism physically built’ in highways back in April

By Lindsay Kornick | Fox News

White House correspondent April Ryan was ridiculed on Monday after asking Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg about the racism “built into the roadways.” 

During the White House press briefing, Buttigieg was taking questions about the bipartisan infrastructure bill, which passed through Congress last week. Ryan took the opportunity to ask Buttigieg about the Biden administration’s plans to “deconstruct the racism” that’s built into America’s infrastructure.


“Also can you give us the construct of how you will deconstruct the racism that was built into roadways?” Ryan asked.

Ryan then referenced an earlier interview Buttigieg gave The Grio in April when he said “there is racism physically built into some of our highways.”

“I’m still surprised that had some people were surprised when I pointed to the fact that if a highway was built for the purpose of dividing a White and a Black neighborhood or if an underpass was constructed such that a bus carrying mostly Black and Puerto Rican kids to a beach, or that would have been, in New York was designed too low for it to pass by, that that obviously reflects racism that went into those design choices,” Buttigieg responded during the press briefing. 

He added “I don’t think we have anything to lose by confronting that simple reality, and I think we have everything to gain by acknowledging it and then dealing with it, which is why they are reconnecting communities that billion dollars is something we want to get to work right away putting to work.”

Republicans and critics piled on Ryan’s question for insinuating that roads are “racist.”

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, tweeted, “The roads are racist. We must get rid of roads.”

Republican Ohio Senate candidate J.D. Vance also weighed in. 

“Nothing in this country works. It takes years to repair a bridge that was built in far less time. Every big city has skyrocketing murder rates. China is about to take over the world even as we name Navy ships after pedophiles. And our reporters ask about the racism of our roads?” he commented. 

“’Please make our roads thinner and less racist’ This is where our media is today,” The Spectator contributing editor Stephen Miller wrote.

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg
              speaks to the news media during a press briefing at the
              White House in Washington, U.S., November 8, 2021.
              REUTERS/Leah Millis

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg speaks to the news media during a press briefing at the White House in Washington, U.S., November 8, 2021. REUTERS/Leah Millis (Reuters)

Ryan has been criticized for her liberal bias and for openly cheering on Democrat officials. In December, the CNN political analyst praised former President Obama in light of his new memoir.

“You cannot work in that special, unique place and not have memories, and you are one of my fondest memories, and I thank you,” she wrote on Instagram.

“Also can you give us the construct of how you will deconstruct the racism that was built into roadways?” Ryan asked.

Ryan then referenced an earlier interview Buttigieg gave The Grio in April when he said “there is racism physically built into some of our highways.”

“I’m still surprised that had some people were surprised when I pointed to the fact that if a highway was built for the purpose of dividing a White and a Black neighborhood or if an underpass was constructed such that a bus carrying mostly Black and Puerto Rican kids to a beach, or that would have been, in New York was designed too low for it to pass by, that that obviously reflects racism that went into those design choices,” Buttigieg responded during the press briefing. 

He added “I don’t think we have anything to lose by confronting that simple reality, and I think we have everything to gain by acknowledging it and then dealing with it, which is why they are reconnecting communities that billion dollars is something we want to get to work right away putting to work.”

Republicans and critics piled on Ryan’s question for insinuating that roads are “racist.”

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, tweeted, “The roads are racist. We must get rid of roads.”

Republican Ohio Senate candidate J.D. Vance also weighed in. 

“Nothing in this country works. It takes years to repair a bridge that was built in far less time. Every big city has skyrocketing murder rates. China is about to take over the world even as we name Navy ships after pedophiles. And our reporters ask about the racism of our roads?” he commented. 

“’Please make our roads thinner and less racist’ This is where our media is today,” The Spectator contributing editor Stephen Miller wrote.

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg
              speaks to the news media during a press briefing at the
              White House in Washington, U.S., November 8, 2021.
              REUTERS/Leah Millis

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg speaks to the news media during a press briefing at the White House in Washington, U.S., November 8, 2021. REUTERS/Leah Millis (Reuters)

Ryan has been criticized for her liberal bias and for openly cheering on Democrat officials. In December, the CNN political analyst praised former President Obama in light of his new memoir.

“You cannot work in that special, unique place and not have memories, and you are one of my fondest memories, and I thank you,” she wrote on Instagram.

Category: Uncategorized

‘White Is Not Right’: Walmart Training Manual For White Employees Leaked by Whistleblower

Posted on by

Inbox

‘White Is Not Right’: Walmart Training Manual For White Employees Leaked by Whistleblower

White Is Not Right’: Walmart Training Manual For White Employees Leaked https://informationliberation.com/?id=62611 The Walton Family founders of WalMart (Walton Market) were salt of the earth Arkansas folks — |”American built, American made”. They’d be disgusted by this alien White-hating shit.

‘White Is Not Right’: Walmart Training Manual For White Employees Leaked by Whistleblower Chris Menahan
InformationLiberation
Oct. 15, 2021

ShareFacebookTwitterRedditTelegramVK

Email

“Walmart has launched a critical race theory training program that denounces the United States as a ‘white supremacy system’ and teaches white hourly-wage workers that they are guilty of ‘white supremacy thinking’ and ‘internalized racial superiority,'” Christopher Rufo reports.

From City Journal, “Walmart vs. Whiteness”:
According to a cache of internal documents I have obtained from a whistleblower, Walmart launched the program in 2018 in partnership with the Racial Equity Institute, a Greensboro, North Carolina, consulting firm that has worked extensively with universities, government agencies, and private corporations. The program is based on the core principles of critical race theory, including “intersectionality,” “internalized racial oppression,” “internalized racial inferiority,” and “white anti-racist development.” Since the program’s launch, Walmart has trained more than 1,000 employees and made the program mandatory for executives and recommended for hourly wage workers in Walmart stores. When reached for comment, Walmart confirmed that the company has “engaged REI for a number of training sessions since 2018” and has “found these sessions to be thought provoking and constructive.”

The program begins with the claim that the United States is a “white supremacy system,” designed by white Europeans “for the purpose of assigning and maintaining white skin access to power and privilege.” American history is presented as a long sequence of oppressions, from the “construction of a ‘white race'” by colonists in 1680 to President Obama’s stimulus legislation in 2009, “another race neutral act that has disproportionately benefited white people.” Consequently, the Walmart program argues, white Americans have been subjected to “racist conditioning” that indoctrinates them into “white supremacy,” or the view “that white people and the ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and actions of white people are superior to People of Color and their ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and actions.”

Following the principle that “diagnosis determines treatment,” the Walmart program seeks to create a psychological profile of whiteness that can then be treated through “white anti-racist development.” Whites, according to the trainers, are inherently guilty of “white privilege” and “internalized racial superiority,” the belief that “one’s comfort, wealth, privilege and success has been earned by merits and hard work” rather than through the benefits of systemic racism. Walmart’s program argues that this oppressive “white supremacy culture” can be summarized in a list of qualities including “individualism,” “objectivity,” “paternalism,” “defensiveness,” “power hoarding,” “right to comfort,” and “worship of the written word” — which all “promote white supremacy thinking” and “are damaging to both people of color and to white people.”

The training program recommends that “discussions about racist conditioning” should be conducted in racially segregated “affinity groups,” because “people of color and white people have their own work to do in understanding and addressing racism.” Walmart employees who are racial minorities, in the framework of the training program, suffer from “constructed racist oppression” and “internalized racial inferiority.” Their internal psychology is considered shattered and broken, dominated by internal messages such as “we believe there is something wrong with being a person of color,” “we have lowered self-esteem,” “we have lowered expectations,” “we have very limited choices,” and “we have a sense of limited possibility.” Minorities thus begin to believe the “myths promoted by the racist system,” develop feelings of “self-hate,” “anger,” “rage,” and “ethnocentrism,” and are forced to “forget,” “lie,” and “stop feeling” in order to secure basic survival.

The solution, according to Walmart’s program, is to encourage whites to participate in “white anti-racist development”—a psychological conditioning program that reorients white consciousness toward “anti-racism.” The training program teaches white employees that ideas such as “I’m normal,” “we’re all the same,” and “I am not the problem” are racist constructs, driven by internalized racial superiority. The program encourages whites to accept their “guilt and shame,” adopt the idea that “white is not right,” acknowledge their complicity in racism, and, finally, move toward “collective action” whereby “white can do right.” The goal is for whites to climb the “ladder of empowerment for white people” and recreate themselves with a new “anti-racist identity.”

Walmart is the largest company by revenue in the entire world. This is the ideology they and the rest of the companies that comprise the Fortune 500 are pushing.

Coca-Cola is training their white employees to “be less white” and Walmart is training them that “white is not right.”



If America is a “white supremacist system,” why are our top companies training their white employees to hate themselves and have white guilt?

Why are “our” schools training white students to hate themselves and have white guilt and why is “our” Attorney General siccing the FBI on parents for speaking out against this anti-white critical race theory propaganda at local school board meetings?
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: ,

Nick Griffin Reveals the Anti-White Kalergi Plan of Genocide of Indigenous Europeans

Posted on by

Nick Griffin Reveals the Anti-White Kalergi Plan of Genocide of Indigenous Europeans

North West England MEP and British National Party Chairman Nick Griffin tells the truth on immigration sparking huge row with Portuguese Socialist MEP during debate on Asylum. Former BNP MEP Nick Griffin addressing the European Parliament on the topic of the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan, Nick Griffin blasts EU over European genocide.The masterplan to abolish European nationalities & replace indigenous Europeans.

youtube.comNick Griffin blasts EU over European genocideNorth West England MEP and British National Party Chairman Nick Griffin tells the

Given The Choice Between Maintaining The Healthcare System Or Punishing ‘Disobedience,’ BC Has Shamefully Chosen The Latter

Posted on by

Spencer Fernando

Opinion & Insight

Given The Choice Between Maintaining The Healthcare System Or Punishing ‘Disobedience,’ BC Has Shamefully Chosen The Latter

OpinionSpencerFernandoOctober 29, 2021

As many have been saying for a long time, it’s all about control.

About two weeks ago, I wrote the following:

“Across the country, provinces are requiring doctors and nurses to be double-vaccinated.

Even though many of those individuals have already had covid & recovered, and even though they have access to PPE & rapid testing, governments are pushing for vaccine mandates.

And they aren’t just asking nicely.

They are imposing those mandates by threatening to fire healthcare workers who don’t comply.

That’s right.

The same people who have been endlessly prattling on about how their restriction of freedom is justified so we can save the healthcare system are planning to strip that healthcare system of potentially thousands of needed workers.

It boggles the mind.”

And now, guess what’s happening?

BC has crippled their healthcare system:

“Surgeries are being postponed and access to diagnostic tests at hospitals and clinics in B.C. is being reduced because of the loss of health-care workers who have not been vaccinated.

More than 4,000 health-care workers in B.C. who have not received at least one dose of vaccine were placed on unpaid leave on Tuesday. They have until Nov. 15 to get their first dose or they will be fired. In the meantime, the minister of health said health authorities have been working on plans to fill those vacancies.”

Make no mistake, while the BC government acts as if this is outside their control, they made a deliberate decision to weaken their own healthcare system by imposing vaccine mandates.

Obviously, the healthcare system needed those workers, otherwise they wouldn’t be having to postpone surgeries and tests.

Additionally, if unvaccinated workers had been causing massive spread of the virus, surely we would have heard about it by now and governments would have imposed mandates far sooner.

Of course, we know that both vaccinated and unvaccinated people can spread the virus, so that’s not the issue here.

The real issue is the demand for control and obedience.

The BC government was given a choice:

Maintaining their healthcare system, or punishing people for ‘disobeying’ the dictates of politicians.

Clearly, they chose the latter.

It’s a deeply shameful move, and wildly hypocritical.

In ‘justifying’ all the restrictions placed on our rights and freedoms, politicians said it was all about ‘protecting the healthcare system.’

But if that was truly the case, then removing 4,000 healthcare workers from the system would never even be considered as an option.

Instead, the ability for people to show natural immunity and/or rapid testing would suffice, with mandatory vaccination not required.

That would be the evidence-based, ‘following the science’ approach.

Yet, that again assumes those in power are acting in good faith, which they clearly are not.

Addicted to power

Over the past year-and-a-half, politicians and public officials have dramatically expanded their power.

Unfortunately, power is addictive.

“Power, especially absolute and unchecked power, is intoxicating. Its effects occur at the cellular and neurochemical level. They are manifested behaviourally in a variety of ways, ranging from heightened cognitive functions to lack of inhibition, poor judgement, extreme narcissism, perverted behaviour, and gruesome cruelty.

The primary neurochemical involved in the reward of power that is known today is dopamine, the same chemical transmitter responsible for producing a sense of pleasure. Power activates the very same reward circuitry in the brain and creates an addictive “high” in much the same way as drug addiction. Like addicts, most people in positions of power will seek to maintain the high they get from power, sometimes at all costs. When withheld, power – like any highly addictive agent – produces cravings at the cellular level that generate strong behavioural opposition to giving it up.”

This means we must acknowledge that the brains of those in power are almost certainly different than they were a year-and-a-half ago, different in such a way as to want more and more power.

Much of this enjoyment of exercising power comes from the coercion-punishment relationship.

Politicians have been able to coerce people into following their orders, and then punish those who refuse.

That’s already how political parties are structured, but now our entire society is increasingly structured in a similar manner.

Politicians can shut down businesses – targeting small businesses without lobbying power of course – can impose curfews, can decide who can gather – even in homes – can shut down religious gatherings, and can tell others not to go on vacation while they and their colleagues do so. Further, they can impose rules that others are severely punished for violating, while exempting themselves from punishment.

All of that has generated a huge rush of power, power which politicians don’t want to give up.

Politicians also realize that their expanded level of power hinges on the populace being afraid of a ‘crisis,’ hence why they are attempting to transition from covid to climate change as the ‘crisis’ that demands expanded state power and restricted individual freedoms.

Return to normal?

As we’ve seen above, the minds of many of our leaders are now addicted to power in a way they likely weren’t before, and thus they will not want to ‘return to normal,’ since a return to normal would mean a lower level of power.

This helps illuminate the foolishness of the COP26 Conference, where politicians will go and make pledges to weaken their own economies and expand state power, even as China’s continued increase in coal production renders it all meaningless.

The ‘crisis’ is only the excuse for doing what those in power want to do anyway: Expand their power even more.

Much of the public still hasn’t grasped this, as they still believe their governments have their best interests at heart.

For those who are aware of it, the pattern of events become more and more clear.

Whether it’s the weakening of our healthcare system to perpetuate a feeling of crisis and punish those who ‘disobey,’ the weakening of our energy sector and forced dependence on foreign countries, restrictions on free speech, or a huge increase in the money supply, the trend is toward less freedom, and more government control.

As people who can see this reality, it’s essential that we try to wake up as many people as we can and help others see the pattern behind the actions of those who seek to infringe expand their power at our expense.

Spencer Fernando

Election 2021: Reflections on a Waste of Time

Posted on by

Throne, Altar, Liberty

The Canadian Red Ensign

The Canadian Red Ensign

Monday, September 27, 2021

Election 2021: Reflections on a Waste of Time

Dominion Election 2021 has come and gone with the result being the restoration of the status quo ante.   This proves that the Conservatives, Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition in both the previous and the new Parliament, were absolutely correct in saying that this election was a colossal waste of time and money and an unpardonable one at that, having been called so soon after the last one and at a time when the public is still in the grip of an irrational paranoid panic because of a public health scare, going on two year’s old, stirred up by the fear pornographers of the mass media noise machine, aided and abetted by the politicians and public health mandarins.   Note that in the place of that last part – everything from “grip” on – the Conservatives would have just said pandemic.   My wording is a more accurate description.
Since this means that  the incumbent Prime Minister, Captain Airhead, who occasionally uses the alias Justin Trudeau, gets to keep the job unless the Liberal Party decides to punish him for risking everything in a foolish and failed, egotistical bid for a majority, it is also evidence of the gross stupidity of a large part of the Canadian electorate.   This demonstrates further a point that I have made many times in the past – the universal franchise ideal of classical liberalism just does not live up to its hype and there is much that can be said on behalf of the pre-liberal wisdom that votes should be weighed and not just counted.
Or rather, to soften the judgement of the previous paragraph somewhat, this is what the results of this election would be saying if the election actually had been what almost everyone – the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, the idiotic clown who leads the socialist party, the media commentariat of all political stripes, and most of the public – thought of it as being, that is to say, the election of the next Prime Minister.   That so many Canadians think of our Dominion elections primarily in terms of who the next Prime Minister will be is one of the many unfortunate consequences of the permeation of our culture with imported American Hollywood pop culture.   Every four years Americans vote on who their next President will be.   In our Dominion elections we do not vote for who the next Prime Minister will be.   We vote for who will represent our local constituency in the lower House of the next Parliament.    A Dominion election is the election of the next Parliament, not the next Prime Minister,   The person invited by the Crown to fill the office of Prime Minister – the person who leads the Cabinet of Ministers who carry out the day-to-day executive administration of the government – is the person who commands the most support in the House.   This is either the leader of a party that has won a majority of seats in the House or, in the absence of a majority, the party leader who can convince one or more parties other than his own to back him, usually, but not necessarily, the leader of the party which won the plurality.
I have from time to time heard some people gripe about this and suggest that we should have a separate ballot in which we vote directly for the Prime Minister.   I very much beg to differ with such people.   This would be objectionable, in my opinion, not just because it would make our system more like that of the United States, although that is good grounds in itself for opposing the proposal.   It would also be a step further towards undermining the way our constitutional system is designed to de-emphasize the office and role of Prime Minister.    The Canadians of the present day are sorely in need of a true appreciation of this aspect of our constitution and a better understanding of how a great many of our country’s problems stem from a century’s worth of effort on the part of the Liberal Party under leaders from William Lyon Mackenzie King to Captain Airhead to subvert our constitution in this very aspect and turn our country into an elected Prime Ministerial dictatorship.
Before proceeding further with that thought, allow me to address those who might object to my characterization of this as a Liberal project by pointing out that the last Conservative Prime Minister also treated the office in this way.   Stephen Harper grew up a Liberal.   He left that party in his twenty’s but never really became a traditional Canadian Tory. He was first elected to Parliament as a member of the Western protest party, the Reform Party of Canada.   The Reform Party, of which this writer was also a member in the 1990s, was first and foremost a populist party.  While it affected a small-c conservatism, support for Canada’s historical traditions and constitution was never a large part of what it understood by this word, which is a significant part of the reason this writer walked away from it shortly before the completion of the second stage of its merger with the Progressive Conservatives.   Indeed, what it thought of as conservatism was largely indistinguishable from the original platform and policies of the Liberal Party, and, demonstrating, perhaps, its indifference to Canadian history and tradition, it gave itself the name by which the Liberal Party had gone prior to Confederation.   Harper, who was chosen as leader after the completion of the merger, always seemed to be more of a Mackenzie King Liberal than a Macdonald-Meighen-Diefenbaker Conservative.
Our constitution is sometimes called the Westminster Parliamentary system after the Mother Parliament in the United Kingdom from which we inherited the system and on which ours is modelled.   The centuries of history, the most memorable highlight of which was the Magna Carta, by which the constitution of Alfred the Great, which the Norman kings swore to uphold following William’s Conquest, evolved into the original Westminster Parliament in a form we would recognize today, produced a concrete actualization of what the ancient Greeks thought of as the ideal constitution.   The mixed constitution, about which Aristotle and Polybius wrote, the former telling how it had been a much discussed ideal even before his day, was regarded by the ancients as the most stable and just constitution.   The three basic constitution-types – the rule of the one, the few, and the many – each had their strengths and weaknesses, and tended to follow a cyclical pattern in which the best form of each would be corrupted over time into its worst form – aristocracy would be corrupted into oligarchy, for example, to use the terms applied to the good and bad forms of the rule of the few – prompting its replacement, usually through violent and destructive means, with one of the other types.   A mixed constitution, the ancients reasoned, in which each of these simple constitutions was incorporated as an element, would balance the weaknesses of each element with the strengths of the others and so be a more stable and less corruptible whole.    
Our constitution is also sometimes called Crown-in-Parliament or King/Queen-in-Parliament depending upon the sex of the reigning monarch.   This expression can be used for our constitution as a whole, although it is more strictly the term for the legislative branch of government.  In our constitution the powers are both united and separated, the union or fusion being ,appropriately, in the institution of the Crown as this is the institution that embodies the ancient “rule of one”.   The monarch, the office in which Sovereignty is vested, is the representative of the unified whole, both of the state and the country, and, accordingly, the office is filled by hereditary succession rather than by partisan politics so the officeholder can be above the inherently divisive latter.   The House of Commons is the element that embodies the ancient rule of the many in our constitution.   It is the Lower House of Parliament but, especially in discussions of this nature, is often called by the name of the whole, just as the union of that whole with the Crown in Crown-in-Parliament can mean either the legislative branch of our constitution, as opposed to the executive Crown-in-Counsel and the Judicial Crown-on-the-Bench, or the entire Westminster constitution.   By calling the whole by this name, the emphasis is placed on the two ancient and time-proven institutions, the monarchy and Parliament.
Placing the emphasis on these institutions means that it is not placed on the office of Prime Minister.   This is important because the office of Prime Minister, at the head of the Cabinet of executive Ministers, is one of great power.   The power attached to the office creates the necessity that the officeholder be held accountable for his exercise of that power and that the role of the office be one of humility.    To meet the first need, the Prime Minister is supposed to be strictly accountable to Parliament.   This is why there is an official role for the largest non-governing party as Opposition.   The Opposition’s job is to question and challenge the Prime Minister, to hold his feet to the fire and make him give account to the House of Commons for his actions.   One of the roles of the other House of Parliament, the Senate, which is the element corresponding to the ancient rule of the few in our constitution, is to hold the Prime Minister accountable in a different manner, by deliberating on the legislation that passes the House, giving it “sober, second thought”, and sending it back to the House if problems are found with it.    If the Prime Minister’s relationship with Parliament is supposed to keep him accountable, his relationship with the Crown is supposed to keep him humble.    It is the Queen who as hereditary monarch, above factional politics, represents Canada as a unified whole, and the Governor General who represents the Queen.   While the Prime Minister exercises the executive powers of government, he does so in the name of the Sovereign, and he is supposed to do so in an attitude of humility as the “first servant” suggested by his official title.   This role calls for a kind of modesty that is conspicuously lacking in the present holder of this office, who more than any of his predecessors has rejected the accountability and humility of his office.   A short time before the last Parliament was dissolved he actually took the Speaker of the House to court to challenge a House ruling that he would have to provide Parliament with un-redacted documents about the firing of two researchers from the virology lab in Winnipeg.   This blatant repudiation of full accountability to Parliament ought to have disqualified him and his party from even running in the election.   As for humility, he has treated his office as one of  such shameless self-aggrandizement and self-promotion as to make the Kims of North Korea seem meek and unassuming by comparison.    Upon winning a second minority government, after arrogantly assuming that he would be handed a majority, he claimed absurdly that the electorate had given him a “clear mandate” which utter nonsense indicates that he has become victim to the delusions of his own propaganda.
He would never have been able to get away with any of this if Canadians had a true appreciation for our constitution and its principles.    Making the office of Prime Minister one that is directly elected, and our elections, therefore, even more like American presidential elections, would only make this worse.
There is another change to our system that has been proposed, indeed, far more often than the one discussed above.    Many would like to see us abandon what is absurdly called first-past-the-post for proportional representation as the means of filling the House with elected Members.   This is a change that the current Prime Minister had promised to make when he was first elected with a majority government in 2015.   He did not do so.   Had he done so, he would not be Prime Minister today, because the Conservatives won the popular vote this year as well as in 2019.   Proportional representation would have meant a Conservative government as the result of both elections.    Another difference that proportional representation would have brought about is that Maxime Bernier’s populist-libertarian-nationalist party, the People’s Party of Canada would have had members elected, at least in this Dominion election.   They received over five percent of the popular vote, double that of the self-destructing Greens who were able to elect two Members, including their leader emeritus although not their new leader.   This sounds like I am making an argument for proportional representation.   A Conservative government, led by Andrew Scheer in 2019, or even by Erin O’Toole this year, despite the latter’s gross sell-out to the left, would have been preferable to the Trudeau Liberals.   The presence of the People’s Party is desperately needed in Parliament where all currently sitting parties are skewed to the far left and to the idea that every problem requires government action as a solution.   Having said that, while the outcome of proportional representation would have been better in these regards in 2019 and again in 2021, the present system is still the better one.   The current system is based on the idea that the people of a local constituency, being a community or group of communities with particular interests, vote for the person who will represent that constituency in Parliament.   The person elected as Member is supposed to be responsible primarily to the constituency, and to speak on their behalf including all those who voted against him as well as those who voted for him..   In other words, the individual Member is supposed to act towards his constituents in the opposite way to how Liberal governments have acted towards rural areas and especially the prairie provinces, since at least the first Trudeau premiership, that is to say, in a manner that looks a lot like punishing them for voting against their party.   This is a good ideal and standard to guide elected Members.   By contrast, proportional representation would give us a House filled by people who represent only their party, its ideology, and the percentage of the electorate who voted for them.   That is hardly a desirable improvement.   The so-called first-past-the-post is by far the saner and more civilized way of doing things, even if it gives us results that for other reasons we would not prefer.
As stated in the previous paragraph, the ideas of Bernier’s People’s Party, ludicrously called “far right” by the CBC and its echo chambers in the private media, are desperately needed in Parliament right now.   In his column just before the election, Ken Waddell, who publishes my hometown newspaper the Rivers Banner as well as his own hometown newspaper the Neepawa Banner, and who was at one time considered for the leadership of our provincial Progressive Conservatives, said the following in this regards:
I have often encouraged people in the NDP or Green party to get involved with the Liberals or the Conservatives and bring their ideas forward. The Greens and NDP are not likely ever going to form government. Even less so will the Maverick Party, the Peoples’ Party of Canada or the Christian Heritage Party. They have a narrow list of policies. It would be better if they got involved, truly involved, with one of the two main parties and worked to bring their ideas to the forefront. A lot of good talent in the splinter parties is wasted on tilting at windmills instead of actually bringing about good policies. It’s too bad, really, as there are some good people and good ideas outside of the Liberal and Conservative parties, but the ideas will never see the light of day hidden in the splinter groups. God bless those who toil for the smaller parties, but I think their time and talents are being wasted.
I remember when Charley Reese of the Orlando Sentinel used to make this argument about third parties other than the Republicans and Democrats in the United States.   The argument was much stronger in that context because the American system is designed to be a two-party system, stacked against anyone other than the Republicans or Democrats..   Our system is not designed that way as seen in the number of times there have been minority governments that can only govern when propped up by one or more parties other than either itself or its main rival which is in Opposition.    There is, however, another problem with Mr. Waddell’s suggestion here.   While the Greens and NDP might be able to get away with putting their ideas forward  as Liberals since the latter have largely incorporated the agendas of the former, nobody would be able to do as he suggests with the ideas of the Maverick, People’s, or Christian Heritage Parties in either the Liberals or the Conservatives.    Both of these parties strictly police their members to keep just these very ideas out.   The Conservative Party, under the present leadership, is in some ways worse than the Liberals in this regards.   Whether we are talking about social conservatism of  the type associated with the Christian Heritage Party or libertarian opposition to public health tyranny such as the People’s Party has been promoting, Erin O’Toole has expelled Members over these ideas and severely whipped those allowed to remain in caucus so as to make them afraid to speak their minds.  The present Liberal and Conservative leaders both govern their own parties the way the Liberals have for a century now wanted the country run, as an elected dictatorship.    For this reason, the option proposed by Mr. Waddell is simply not available. — Gerry T. Neal:

Category: Uncategorized | Tags:

Red Chinese Meddling Cost Straight Shooting Anti-Communist Tory MP His Seat

Posted on by

Red Chinese Meddling Cost Straight Shooting Anti-Communist Tory MP His Seat

Defeated Conservative MP fears attacks by pro-Beijing forces swung votes against him

There was evidence that China’s focus turned during the election to the Conservatives, whose platform outlined a multi-pronged approach to confronting Beijing Author of the article: Tom Blackwell Publishing date: Sep 22, 2021  

Due to a private members bill critical of China that Conservative Kenny Chiu introduced last April, he was hounded by supporters of the Chinese Communist Party during the federal election.
Due to a private members bill critical of China that Conservative Kenny Chiu introduced last April, he was hounded by supporters of the Chinese Communist Party during the federal election. Photo by Jason Payne/Postmedia/File

When Kenny Chiu introduced a private member’s bill that would set up a registry for agents of foreign governments, he may well have painted a target on his back.

The bill was inspired largely by China’s suspected interference in Canada and the B.C. Conservative says he was attacked over it in Chinese-language media throughout the election. https://www.youtube.com/embed

Some of the bashing bled into mainstream social media, with one poster on Twitter this week saying “I’ve never seen a more self-hating Chinese person in my life.”

Much of the criticism, Chiu says, misrepresented what that legislation really stated, but it had its effect.

Constituents in his Steveston-Richmond East riding who had previously voted for Chiu suddenly gave him the cold shoulder.

“When I go door knocking … there have been supporters of mine who just shut the door in my face,” said the politician. “There is so much hatred that I sense.”

And then on Monday, Chiu lost to Liberal Parm Bains by almost 3,000 votes, just two years after he was first elected, even as the Liberals more or less duplicated their 2019 performance.

His defeat — and that of other Conservative MPs in ridings dominated by Chinese Canadians, – has raised the question of whether proxies for the People’s Republic government managed to influence the election – just as security agencies and other watchdogs have warned could happen.

Chiu stresses that his issue is with China’s regime, but said online critics implied that meant he was opposed to the country itself and even the race, despite his own Chinese heritage.

He said Chinese-Canadians — even if they ended up disliking him – are victims themselves of such disinformation.

Charles Burton, a former diplomat in Beijing who’s fluent in Mandarin, said he tried to help Chiu by seeking out and warning him about disinformation on WeChat, the popular Chinese social media site, and elsewhere online.

But there seemed little they could do about it.

“It spread like a cancer over his campaign,” said Burton, a fellow with the Macdonald Laurier Institute and prominent critic of Beijing. “He just saw his campaign disintegrating over the last couple of weeks.”

Burton said Canadian authorities should investigate the online campaigns to determine if the Chinese government itself was behind the attacks.

He is not the first to raise the issue. David Vigneault, head of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, said in a speech in February that attempts by foreign states to influence Canadian politics and politicians were among the agency’s “most paramount concerns.”

Bains could not be reached for comment Tuesday, and there is no suggestion he had anything to do with the online sniping Chiu faced.

In fact, the Liberals themselves have been the target of harsh attacks from the Chinese government and state-run media in the ongoing feud over the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou.

It spread like a cancer over his campaign

But there was evidence that China’s focus turned during the election to the Conservatives, whose platform outlined a multi-pronged approach to confronting Beijing. That included barring Huawei from 5G networks, imposing Magnitsky-style sanctions on Chinese rights violators and advising universities against partnering with state-owned companies.

The Liberal platform made a brief mention of measures to combat “illegal and unacceptable behaviour by authoritarian states,” singling out China, Iran and Russia.

In what appeared to be a comment on the Conservative blueprint, Chinese ambassador Cong Peiwu told the Hill Times newspaper in August that China opposes politicians who “hype” or “smear” the country. Then barely a week before election day, the Chinese Communist Party-run Global Times ran a story blasting the Tories’ policies, predicting that if the party were elected China would launch a “strong counterstrike” against Canada.

Michael Chan, a former Ontario Liberal cabinet minister who has spoken in defence of Beijing, wrote in a recent Chinese-language column that implementing the Conservative policies could trigger hatred and discrimination against Chinese people.

It’s impossible at this point to determine what factors caused results in individual ridings, but Chiu was not the only Conservative incumbent to be defeated in seats with large Chinese-Canadian populations, people exposed to such ethnic-Chinese media.

Though not all the votes had been counted Tuesday, Alice Wong appeared headed for defeat in Richmond Centre, next to Chiu’s riding, despite having held the seat through four previous elections.

Bob Saroya lost the Toronto-area riding of Markham-Unionville — where almost two thirds of residents are ethnic Chinese — to Liberal Paul Chiang after taking the previous two elections.

They have chat rooms and chat groups dedicated to unseating Kenny Chiu

Chiu, a Hong Kong native, says he has never been shy about his dislike of the Communist government in Beijing. But last April he introduced a private member’s bill that would require any agents of a foreign government to register with Ottawa and report on their activities. It was modelled after similar legislation in Australia and a law that has been in force in the United States for several decades.

Local Chinese-language media ignored the bill when it was introduced but as the election campaign turned into a dead heat between the Liberals and Conservatives, “attacks rained down on me,” the former MP said.

An article posted anonymously on WeChat, and that later showed up on various other online platforms, suggested it was designed to “suppress” the Chinese community and that anyone connected to China would have to register.

A similar story on a Chinese-language site called Today Commercial News said it would curb the freedom of speech of the Chinese community and have a “profound impact” on Chinese Canadians.

In fact, the legislation would require registration only for those acting on behalf of foreign governments or political groups who lobby a senior civil servant or an elected politician. It has actually been criticized for being too narrowly focused.

Other WeChat posts suggested erroneously the Conservatives had proposed to ban the widely used social media site itself.

“It’s very much organized,” said Chiu. “They have chat rooms and chat groups dedicated to unseating Kenny Chiu.”

Meanwhile, the president of the Chinese Benevolent Association, a group that has repeatedly run advertisements backing up Beijing on contentious issues like Hong Kong’s National Security Law, hosted a free lunch on behalf of the Liberal candidate in Vancouver East riding.

New Democrat Jenny Kwan still managed to win the seat handily, however.

• Email: tblackwell@postmedia.com | Twitter: tomblackwellNP

Islam’s Strategy of Expansion & Conquest

Posted on by

Islam’s Strategy of Expansion & Conquest

In 2017, President Erdogan of Turkey told Moselms living in Europe to be patient and multiply and, within a few generations, they would conquer and control Europe: “Make not three, but five children. Because you are the future of Europe. That will be the best response to the injustices against you.”