Canada’s Goose Is Cooked
In a recently released poll, Canadians were asked if federal government immigration intakes should be reduced.
20% answered “YES” but 80% answered
لا طريقة سخيف , 没有他妈的方式 or ਕੋਈ ਕੁੱਟਮਾਰ ਦਾ ਤਰੀਕਾ ਨਹੀਂ
Category Archives: Uncategorized
Green party prepared to accept tens of thousands of new climate refugees
Miss Green must know that more people mean more stress on the environment, traffic gridlock and drained social services. How can she promise a greener future for Canada if she plans to flood the land with “refugees”? — Paul Fromm, Director, CanadaFirst Immigration Reform Committee
Published Sunday, September 29, 2019 10:45AM EDTLast Updated Sunday, September 29, 2019 2:07PM EDT
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May on CTV’s Question Period, September 29, 2019.SHARE
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTTAWA – Green party Leader Elizabeth May says if elected, her party would welcome the arrival of tens of thousands of new refugees to Canada who may soon be forced to leave their homeland because of climate change.
In an interview with CTV’s Question Period on Sunday, May said her party would work to ensure communities in Canada are prepared for the influx of newcomers.
“We have right now, depopulated areas across the country. We can build up infrastructure by 2030 and 2040 to accept far more people in regions, for instance in the Prairies, where there are depopulated places, in Atlantic Canada, and northern Quebec.”
May based her “tens of thousands” estimate on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s assessment that by 2050, the world could expect to see approximately 200 million more refugees displaced by environmental crises should the planet continue to warm at the rate it is now.
This would be the result of changes to things like shoreline disruption, coastal flooding, and agricultural disruption.
“One of the points Greens make is we have to prepare,” May said. “By geography, we’re one of the biggest countries in the world, by population one of the smaller. We have an obligation; we’ve been one of the biggest polluters.”
May started “climate week” in Calgary marching with local residents and moved east to Montreal by Friday, joining hundreds of thousands of protesters advocating for increased climate action.
Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh also marched in Montreal and Victoria respectively, while Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer and People’s Party Leader Maxime Bernier opted out.
May expecting new ‘passing grade’ on party costing
On Question Period, May also addressed criticism she and her party have faced over the costing of their election promises, which was released on Wednesday. As of Sunday morning, the Greens were the only federal party to have a fully-costed plan.
In the parliamentary budget officer’s cost analysis, federal spending would increase by more than $60 billion per year. This would cover big ticket items like universal drug coverage, free tuition, universal childcare, and efforts to fight climate change.
Ten of the party’s estimates are rated as having “moderate uncertainty” and over 13 have “high uncertainty.”
To that end, former PBO Kevin Page – now with the Institute for Fiscal Studies and Democracy – gave the plan a failing grade in his report [link] saying it yielded “serious gaps in economic and fiscal assumptions.”
May on Sunday said her party didn’t provide background reports and risk assessments that would have turned some of that doubt into validity.
“The bans of estimates of uncertainty are the Parliamentary Budget Office’s own numbers,” said May. “The [documents] that are missing, it’s not as if they don’t exist, it’s that we hadn’t sent them to Kevin Page. So those things will be reviewed. I think you can expect in the next couple of days a passing grade.”
She admitted that the costing on the Green’s pharmacare proposal at $27 billion was “far more than she expected.”
May clarifies stance on Bill 21
May doubled down on her stance on Quebec’s controversial secularism bill, which bans some civil servants from donning religious symbols and clothing.
During a televised leaders’ debate on Sept. 12, May said she would think about building out a strategy to create jobs for those who can’t find work in the province and are pushed out because of it.
She has since clarified her argument saying “no one should have to leave anywhere” and indicated that room could be made in other industries under federal jurisdiction, as opposed to provincial, for those who find themselves out of work because of the law.
May added that the issues surrounding Bill 21 needed to be dealt with within the province, not through federal intervention.
“On this and I think on no other issue you find the other party leaders unified not because we don’t think Bill 21 is inappropriate and a violation of charter rights,” said May. “We’re looking at Bill 21 as being one of those issues that could threaten to reopen Canada-Quebec friction. None of us want to do that.”
Scheer, Singh, and Bernier have also definitively stated they would not intervene, while Trudeau has kept the door open.
May on altered image of reusable cup
While the Greens have been applauded for their transparency on election platform budgeting, they came under fire this week for using Photoshop to alter a photo of their leader holding a single-use cup—albeit a compostable one.
In the modified photo, May is seen clutching a reusable cup with a Green party logo pasted on the front and a reusable metal straw coming out the top.
In a follow-up statement, May said she was “completely shocked” the image had been changed to appear more pro-recyclable.
She reinforced this stance on Sunday, saying it was “monumentally idiotic” and she doesn’t know why the individual thought it was “appropriate.”
“I know they’re modified, I know they’re apologetic. I’m not throwing anyone under a bus here. Obviously I wish they hadn’t done that, I can’t see a single reason to have done that because I’m transparent, I’m open.”
The full interview airs on CTV’s Question Period on Sunday at 11 a.m. ET
Self-Mutilation, the Triumph of Cultural Marxism
by
 |
| Mother nurse, 30, who is covered in “body art” is in running to be Miss Tattoo UK |
Leviticus 19:28: “You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the Lord.”
Many boomers are confounded by the epidemic of tattoos that has swept across the Western world in the past decade, claiming victims both young and old. Where once tattoos were the almost exclusive province of sailors, bikers and prison inmates, they have now laid claim to the necks, faces, torsos, legs and arms of the broader community. They are even seen on eyelids and groins. In fact there is apparently no body part that is safe from this scourge.
Is it simply a mark of fashion? A form of self-expression that attempts to announce one’s uniqueness while demonstrating quite the opposite—a slavish determination to conform? A gesture to earn the acceptance of the pack? A culturally sanctioned act of self-harm?
I think that self-mutilation is typically indicative of self-hatred. The fact that an entire generation has internalized the canon of Western self-loathing taught in secondary and post-secondary institutions and that this same generation has with few exceptions chosen to deface their bodies so comprehensively, is, IMO, no coincidence. When one contrasts their appearance with the refreshing spectacle of wholesome young women wearing hijabs, it becomes difficult to summon an overpowering enthusiasm for the cause of preserving Western Civilization. It seems that the Western civilization that we want to preserve no longer exists.
All western countries it seems have fallen victim to this tattoo craze, and the spectacle as depressing as it shocking. As a long time Australian friend of mine recently wrote:
Self-mutilation, as I too call it, is a great grief to me…
Simply, I don’t fathom it. I must be a different species. Here it is almost across the board, and respectable looking men are mutilated. As for women, shudder; I would make tattooing a female a capital crime. When we were in Denmark in 2014, I thought it worse, but we have caught up. I even see both sexes (yes, only two) in late middle age with tattoos, which must be a moronic surrender to fashion at a supposedly sane age. I despise them the most…
An extension of the theme, and an aspect of the syndrome of worship of the ugly (think hair styles, architecture, there’s no art of course) is the ubiquitous graffiti that has defaced the whole world – western world anyway. Extreme in Europe, and terrible here, it stamps a nihilist, self-loathing, undisciplined and ungovernable brand on our living environment, demoralizing and defeating any sane citizens left. Authorities not only do nothing, it does not seem to occur to them that it is a problem. Indeed, the Melbourne council has made defeat victory by rebadging vandalism as “street art” which is to be celebrated, along with moral vandalism. Dear oh dear, to think we have lived to see this.
These current fashions of dress and appearance that younger generations have embraced are no doubt a reflection of a much deeper malaise, rooted I think, in the downfall of male breadwinners. Caught in a pincer between the outsourcing of good, well paid jobs and the massive ‘in-sourcing’ of cheap foreign labour, men lost their stature as reliable providers, and the self-esteem that came with it. Hence their alarming rates of suicide and substance abuse. The statistical reality is that women feel very much less inclined to marry men of little or lesser means, and the welfare state has stepped in to make single motherhood financially viable. As they say in Sweden, women are married to the state. It’s a saying that could equally apply to America’s urban black community, and—as Charles Murray observed—working class whites as well, especially in the Rust Belt and the rural Red Counties of flyover states.
Coupled with this transformative economic collapse is the relentless messaging from TV commercials, sitcoms, movies, intersectional politics and aggressive feminism that fathers are unnecessary and white men are ‘privileged’ and deserving of relegation . No wonder so many young men have affected feminine mannerisms and modes of ‘thinking’ and virtue-signaling transparently designed to better ingratiate themselves to women. Conclusive testimony to the fact that the male quest for status and sex appeal is immutable. In a seller’s market, women have the upper hand. The ironic fact is, however, that on a subconscious level, even hard core feminists are repelled by these spineless creatures.
Perhaps their Islamophilia and advocacy of migrant rights conceals a secret wish to be roughly manhandled and shafted by domineering brown men. That may account for the boom in Female Sex Tourism. Maybe a two week vacation in Malmo or Brussels would suffice to get it out of their system. Or a taxi ride in Edmonton.
Catch Paul Fromm on James Edwards’ “The Political Cesspool”
— Report from Canada. The People’s Party of Canada — populist hope for real immigration reform & free speech,
https://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/radio-show-hour-3-2019-09-14/
THE ETHNOSTATE, WITH WILLIAM JOHNSON, PAUL FROMM & KENN GIVIDEN: WHY JAPAN ISN’T HUNG UP ABOUT RACISM
Sanders panders ►Bernie wants to redo USA’s racist justice system
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
Sinead O’Connor calls white people “disgusting” (then apologizes)
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
8th illegal charged with rape in Montgomery County, Maryland
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
21-year-old murdered; illegal aliens arrested
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
U of Alabama official quits after associating flag with “systemic racism”
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
2nd-generation migrants more likely to commit crimes than their parents
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
https://dailykenn.blogspot.
The Vancouver Sun & Self Censorship — Challenging the Cult of “Diversity”
The Vancouver Sun published this article, then retracted it within hours. I got this URL from Duck Duck Go … Google shows links to the controversy, but doesn’t show the bit of “bad-think” !! — Gordon Watson
EXCELLENT OP ED in the Vancouver Sun on how “Ethnic diversity harms a country’s social trust and economic well-being” was scrubbed from the internet in less than 24 hours
Thankfully, an archived version still exists. Canada should say goodbye to diversity, tolerance and inclusion to rebuild trust in one another and start accepting a new norm for immigration policy — compatibility, cohesion and social trust, says professor Mark Hecht.
(Am posting the entire article in case the archived version also disappears)
Archive (h/t Marvin W) Sometimes they get too much publicity, but can you blame them? The Danes just seem to get things right. But even the Danes can make mistakes. A decade ago the fundamental belief among Danes toward Muslim immigrants was that these newcomers would see how wonderful Denmark was and naturally want to become Danish as quickly as possible.
This turned out to be naively wrong. At least half of all Muslims polled across various western European countries believe today that their Shariah law is more important than national law, according to the Gatestone Institute. In other words, a not insignificant proportion of Muslim immigrants have no intention of assimilating into any western society, including Denmark.
Danes have pushed back.
Losing the integrity of their society — one of the best in the world by all measures — was on the line. Requirements to obtain citizenship increased. A new insistence that immigrant children go to Danish public schools instead of religious schools was implemented. Social benefits were rescinded for those who didn’t comply. This was only the beginning. But the Danes are not alone.
Many western nations assumed that increasing ethnic and cultural diversity through immigration would be beneficial. The dogma of diversity, tolerance and inclusion assumed that all members of the society wanted to be included as equal citizens. Yet, instead of diversity being a blessing, many found that they’ve ended up with a lot of arrogant people living in their countries with no intention of letting go of their previous cultures, animosities, preferences, and pretensions.
Let’s give the devil his due. Diversity, tolerance and inclusion was actually a commendable perspective. It assumed the dominant society was leaving people out of full participation. It was a valid critique. In response to inequalities, real or otherwise, measures were taken that would include everyone.
Affirmative action, political correctness and anti-bias training became the tools for inculcating tolerance and inclusion. Helpful? Somewhat. Yet, the most important question was overlooked: What if some did not actually want to be included?
Denmark recognized this problem long ago, and is now finding practical solutions. It knows what it was — a country that worked very well when it was homogeneous, where everyone wanted to be and was a part of the society. They spoke the same language, understood the same customs and traditions, and held the same beliefs. The result was that people trusted each other and the economy flourished.
In fact, social trust corresponds more closely than any other factor to predicting economic prosperity. Harvard economists Alberto Alesina and co-authors from a paper titled, Fractionalization, argued that greater diversity leads to stunted economic growth. In other words, diversity is a weakness as far as the economy is concerned.
In 1981 The World Values Survey began an investigation into cross-cultural beliefs, values and motivations, and has since shown that societies with high social trust are not only more economically productive but also happier. The most successful are homogeneous countries, not the diverse ones.
Denmark and the rest of Scandinavia is always at the top of those rankings. They, shine a beacon on the fact that trust is what makes society great. Interestingly, Scandinavian countries are becoming even more trusting. Canada, Great Britain, the U.S. and Australia are all going in the opposite direction. In Canada, we are becoming less trusting of one other.
If a society wants high social trust and the benefits of stability, productivity, and happiness, there are apparently two factors that stand out. According to macrosociology researcher Jan Delhey at Otto von Geuricke University in Magdeburg, Germany — Protestantism and low ethnic diversity — are the top two criteria.
Setting aside the part about Protestantism, low ethnic diversity as a single factor fits Denmark, Japan and Hungary quite well. Social trust is, unsurprisingly, relatively high in all. But not all those countries are Protestant. There are other factors at work.
So is it possible for a country to have diversity and social trust at the same time? Studies by researchers Hooghe, Reeskens and Stolle in a 2008 paper indicate that ethnic diversity in and of itself is not inherently destabilizing, at a national level. A country can indeed have multiple ethnicities and still have high social trust. But there is a catch.
It is at the neighbourhood scale where high ethnic diversity erodes trust, according to researchers Peter Thisted Dinesson and Kim Mannemar Sønderskov from 2015. The more direct the interaction with diversity, the more social trust drops. This accounts for why people segregate themselves into ethnic enclaves. People like to be around others who are the same as them. Those overwhelmed by newcomers that are not like themselves, lose trust and soon move out.
This is quite a paradox. Diversity at a national level does not necessarily erode trust but at the neighbourhood level it does. How can this be?
Switzerland is a good example of this paradox in action. With four recognized ethnicities — German, French, Italian and Romansh — they also have high levels of social trust. How? It’s simple. Each ethnicity has its own geography and government. It does not mix ethnicities, nor does one try to control the others.
If a country wants diversity, expect enclaves to form. This may work out fine in the long run, as it has in Switzerland. Or it may turn into a bloody mess, as it repeatedly does in the Balkans. The other option is low diversity. Denmark had the latter. It worked well. Now, it wants it back again and that will require its immigrants to integrate. Those who don’t will have to leave.
So, is excluding certain people from one’s society a requirement? The short answer is absolutely. The long and more reasonable answer is if you do let people into your country then make sure they hold similar values — compatibility. Make sure they want to fit into your society fully and completely — cohesion. With these two requirements satisfied, and with a sprinkle of Protestantism, the country will be well on its way to generating high levels of social trust.
Can Canada learn from Denmark? The jury is out. But the minimum requirement is that we say goodbye to diversity, tolerance and inclusion if we wish to be a society that can rebuild the trust we used to have in one another and start accepting a new norm for immigration policy — compatibility, cohesion and social trust.
Mark Hecht teaches human, political, and conservation geography at Mount Royal University in Calgary and has written extensively on issues of national identity and resource conflict.
Trudeau’s Multiculturalism “HARMING Canada” Says Muslim-Canadian Journalist
Trudeau’s Multiculturalism “HARMING Canada” Says Muslim-Canadian Journalist
“Unfortunately, when multiculturalism becomes the foundation of politics, the very essence of debate gets relegated from the common good of the country to the medieval instinct OF THE TRIBE.”
What!? Who made this statement– the leader of a white supremacy party in Canada? Not at all–these words come from Tarek Fatah, conservative Muslim and Canadian social critic.
This fellow is on the right track. CAP commend Mr. Fatah for this statement. The man is non-white, and non-Christian. Do we therefore default to the position that he is a trouble-maker within our society? No, we do not. Yet, organizations such as ours are constantly branded racists and bigots. Whatever–CAP do not give a damn.
Liberal MP Ramesh Sangha, who represents Ontario’s Brampton Centre riding, dropped a bombshell during a recent Punjabi-language television interview where he was quoted as saying: “There cannot be two opinions that the Liberal party is pandering (to) Khalistan supporters.”
The interviewer asked Sangha – himself a Sikh – if he thought the party had a “soft corner” for Khalistanis(Sikh National separatists. Sangha replied that “it does.”
Multiculturalism is Canada’s most overlooked social ideology, as well as the most profound vehicle for social change in the history of Canada. Amount of press dedicated to the subject? In 40 years, almost NOTHING at all.
Canada happens to be one of the very few nations on earth with a policy of multiculturalism referenced within its constitution. The related piece of government legislation is the Multicultural Act of 1988.
As an aside, within Chinese numerology, the number “8” means wealth and financial prosperity. Did government plan in advance to pass the legislation in the year 1988? Would not surprise CAP in the least– Multiculturalism is a product of Trudeau-family Liberal-Globalism, after all.
What is it about the “multicult,” or diversity which has been held back from the purview of millions of Canadians for the past forty years? Let’s take a quick look:
For one thing, Multicult policy from a financial view is a giant-sized transfer of Canadian tax-dollars. Hundreds of million– BILLIONS over the decades, has been passed to Third World immigration, multicultural, and refugee non-profit organizations.
This is how Chinese, Sikh, and Muslim organizations succeeded in establishing themselves as “power-players” within Canadian society. One organization, SUCCESS Immigrant Services of Vancouver, BC, receives $23 Million per year from the provincial government alone. They are funded by all three levels of government–municipal, provincial and federal.
Despite their appearance at present, for at least 30 years this group focused exclusively on migrants from China. One group, one focus, one mission--to import Chinese migrants to Canada. A report from their website(they removed it) boasted about the percentage of European migrants they have assisted– a whopping 1% of their clientele. There’s multiculturalism for you– SUCCESS for decades was 100% uni-cultural.
There are thousands of groups like this in Canada. Then, we turn to the b-side. CAP once worked with a Polish-Canadian non-profit. We viewed one request for government funding for their non-profit. $8,000 dollars—denied
Darn, that multicult stuff really leads to social equality, eh? The whole affair is a farce. CAP will tell you why: Because there is NOTHING multicultural about Canadian multiculturalism.
Huh? What is this guy on? Let us explain. This concept means “multi”— as in, “many, manifold, a variety. Now, the fact is that the ideology is in no way inclusive of European Canada. No pride in being a Canadian of Ukrainian, German, or Polish Canadian. No money either.
Okay, so whitey is OUT. That’s a big segment of society, no? Then we consider the communities who are a component of this anti-European diversity movement. Does this adhere to authentic diversity? After all, that was the goal of the program after Pierre Trudeau FORCED the policy on Canada in the first place.
Not really. The main players are three: Sikh, Muslim and Chinese-Canada. What is so diverse about this? Not much. Rather, what we have here is a license for these wealthy and powerful communities to battle it out for power and control within society. Under Justin Trudeau, this is what is occurring as we speak.
Then, Trudeau puts on a Silk Sikh outfit, does a few Bollywood dance moves, and shouts “Diversity Is Our Strength.”
CAP will amend this by one word- “Diversity is A strength.” Big difference. Yes, it is a strength–for some. Who are the “some?” They are the most well-funded, organized, wealthy and powerful special interest ethnic communities in Canada. The ones with the hundreds of multicult organizations sucking up the most tax dollars.
This is Multicult in the real world. It is not Trudeau, Hussen, Butts, Morneau and Khalid multiculturalism. This brand is a giant LIE. A deception designed to empower some, and DISEMPOWER others.
Multiculturalism as a political ideology began in 1971— a full 47 years ago. Think back–have you ever ONCE read anything like this within Canadian media? CAP knows that the answer is “no”–because we have followed these issues for the past 37 years.
We have now discussed who benefits. Now, let’s look at who suffers. Anglophone Canada, because we are being trans-itioned into minority status by government. Christian Canada, because Justin Trudeau is dedicated to one religion only-Islam. Nationalists, Patriots, Conservatives, Francophones– white people, basically.
To add insult-to-injury, PM Trudeau has personally trans-itioned Anglophone Canada into a motley gang of racists, bigots and xenophobes. Would this be anywhere near as extreme if Papa Pierre had not unilaterally forced the policy upon society?
Yes, much less–in fact the branding-like-cattle racist tag of Trudeau, may not have occurred at all. This is the story of multiculturalism in Canada. It is NOTHING like the manner in which the ideology is portrayed by government and media.
It is, in fact, a stone-cold deception of the people of Canada. Those portrayed as victims are in reality, the privileged. Those branded as oppressors are in reality the victims.
Canada–you have been hood-winked. Multiculturalism is destructive for specific segments of society. The policy was founded by Pierre Trudeau, and hit out of the ball-park by Justin Trudeau.
Then, Justin gets elected for a second term. Insane, isn’t it?
— BRAD SALZBERG
“When the godfather of the European Union, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, published the plan for a united Europe and the ethnocide of the peoples of Europe, the encouragement of mass non-white immigration was central to the plot. — Nick Griffin
Nick Griffin blasts EU over European genocide
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 “When the godfather of the European Union, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, published the plan for a united Europe and the ethnocide of the peoples of Europe, the encouragement of mass non-white immigration was central to the plot. Since then, an unholy alliance of leftists, capitalists and Zionist supremacists has schemed to promote immigration and miscegenation with the deliberate aim of breeding us out of existence in our homelands. As indigenous resistance to this human genetic-modification industry grows, the criminal elite seeks new ways to camouflage their project. First, their immigrant pawns were temporary guest workers; then it was a multiracial experiment; then they were refugees, and then the answer to a shrinking population. Different excuses, different lies — and asylum is just another one. But the real aim stays the same: the biggest genocide in human history, the final solution to the Christian European problem. This crime demands a new set of Nuremberg trials, and you people will be in the dock.” Nobody else would dare tell it how it is like this.
Behind the Smiling Mask of Andrew Scheer’s Conservative Party
You might recall seeing a photo months ago (above) of Andrew Scheer standing with— reportedly—some of the most dangerous Islamic leaders in the country. Of course, many of Scheer’s apologists would dismiss the embarrassing photo op by saying that he was simply unaware of the sordid connections of the people posing next to him. But this video indicates that Mr. Scheer was not only aware of who these people are, but he has maintained close personal contact with them:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOfyR-nmmEE
http://www.riseoftheislamist.com/
After seeing this photo and viewing the video, one is moved to ask some serious questions. Questions like:
Is this what a leader of a so called “Conservative” Party looks like?
Is this what a “Conservative” Party stands for?
In my estimation, a “conservative” should want to conserve our Western, European and Christian heritage—not the culture of Islam, a totalitarian blend of religion and politics, an ideology whose holy text prescribes “hijra”, conquest by immigration. https://www.cspii.org/blog/immigration-islamic-doctrine-and-history
Islamophobia? A phobia is an irrational fear. Let’s not fool ourselves. A fear of this ideology is entirely rational, as 1400 years of history attests. It should be pointed out, however, that there is a difference between attacking an ideology and maligning all of its adherents. Most adherents are ordinary law-abiding folk who, like all citizens, deserve full protection from harm or discrimination under the law. But while individuals deserve protection, ideas and ideologies don’t. Belief systems are fair game. It took a long time for Western democracies to dispatch laws against blasphemy, but it seems that politicians and the lobbies they pander to are intent on resurrecting them. Ironically they are quick to warn us of the spectre of violent “white nationalist” extremism while simultaneously courting the votes of the apostles of violent extremism in mosques.
As an indefatigable researcher noted several months ago, the “Conservative” Party has approved three current federal candidates with ties to Islamic extremism (and a sitting Conservative Senator as well). “The party has been well advised of the background of these individuals and yet, to date, have not taken action to remove them. The recent report of Andrew Scheer’s alignment with radical Imams is of growing concern.”
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kGOTvZxaKiYVAOpLhWXxC07x0HBA0AJ4
She further notes that “A Conservative Candidate, Ghada Melek, is a Coptic Christian currently being unfairly targeted by the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) who are calling on Melek to drop out of the race “following reports about her past social media posts,” which the NCCM deems to be “Islamophobic.”
https://www.nccm.ca/nccm-calls-for-conservative-candidate-ghada-meleks-resignation/
The story by Christine Williams can be found here:
After reading this account one is moved to ask “What position will Andrew Scheer take?” Now that is the $64,000 question, isn’t it?
The federal election is fast approaching and many longstanding Conservative members have been fearful of splitting the vote since Maxime Bernier decided to step away from the party a year ago, a decision that most pundits described as foolhardy and suicidal. But as we bear witness to the shameless pandering, opportunism and corruption unfolding among the top echelons of the Conservative, Mr. Bernier’s decision to form a party is looking more and more like a courageous demonstration of integrity and principle.
Bernier’s conspicuous disregard for political correctness and clear articulation of what many ordinary Canadians believe has attracted supporters from across the political spectrum, but many traditional Conservative voters hesitate to make the leap because they hear the voice of the Conservative Party establishment whispering in their ears : “A vote for Bernier is a vote for Trudeau”, or in the case of my own constituency, “A vote for the Peoples’ Party of Canada is a vote for the despicable NDP incumbent, Rachel Blainey.”
The time-worn rationalization for strategic voting simply put is that we must not “split the vote” because dethroning (fill in the blank) is paramount. We must pinch our noses and choose the lesser of the evils.
The problem with this conventional view is two-fold. One is that when all is said and done, there is little to choose between the major parties. Upon closer examination, the Conservative Party looks like a Liberal Party that happens to believe in balanced budgets. But life is not just about numbers. It is, among other things, about the maintenance of our sovereignty, ethno-cultural heritage, family structure and most importantly, the freedom to speak our minds, including the right to criticize any religion. In an authentic democracy, there can be no right “not to be offended.”
Secondly, we must consider the broader moral question. If we always choose the lesser of evils we will be guaranteeing the perpetual reign of evil. At some point, we must be prepared to say “None of the above”. But it seems that whenever we consider voting for our principles, we are told that “this is not the time… our most urgent mission is to rid the country of Trudeau, and once that mission is accomplished, then we can do the fine tuning.” But history suggests that the time for fine tuning never comes, because there is always a new devil on the scene that we must unite against.
We must bite the bullet. We must risk the re-election of Boy Wonder in order to establish a beach head for a party of principle that can keep building its base so that it can be in a position to form a government four years from now. We must be patient. Growing a fledgling party takes time, and in less than a year, Maxime Bernier has made enormous strides—as have the passionately patriotic people who have made his cause their cause. Bernier leads, but he also listens. Bernier launched the People’s Party of Canada, but the PPC is not a “top down” party, but a “bottom up” organization where members feel like participants rather simple foot soldiers. It’s populism in action.
Meanwhile, we will continue to work tirelessly in our endeavour to do the homework and keep Canadians informed. In return, our only request is that once apprised of the facts, each of us must find the courage to share them with all the people in our respective social networks. Our workmates, our neighbours, our friends and especially the members of our own families. Surely that is the least we can do.
Knowledge is Power. You have it. Now share it!
Tim Murray
Additional information about Maxime Bernier
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVwo0yp01y
https://twitter.com/maximebernier/status/1124003082780782594
