WATCH: Trudeau RCMP Drags Reporter Out Of Press Conference

WATCH: Trudeau RCMP Drags Reporter Out Of Press Conference

NewsSpencerFernandoMay 27, 20200

Trudeau RCMP Authoritarian

Some China-style media management by the Trudeau PMO.

On the same day that Canada’s justice system showed independence and commitment to the rule of law by being indifferent to CCP threats and ruling on the Meng Wanzhou extradition challenge, Justin Trudeau appears to be once again emulating the Chinese dictators he loves so much.

Rebel News reporter Keean Bexte was let into a Trudeau press conference by security. And, considering a judge had ruled that The Rebel had the right to report on the news just like anyone else, it is of course the democratic right of Canadians to ask questions and report on the PM.

Yet, when PMO stooges saw Bexte at the press conference, the Trudeau RCMP dragged Bexte away, pushing some China-style ‘media management.’

This is incredibly disturbing and dangerous. The PM is using the police to block journalists he doesn’t like from reporting on what he says, which is of course totally anti-democratic and anti-Canadian.

China might approve of this kind of authoritarian behaviour, but it’s not supposed to work like this in Canada.

Once again we see that Trudeau wasn’t joking when he said he admired ‘China’s basic dictatorship.’

You can watch the video below:

“UNBELIEVABLE: PM Justin Trudeau had me literally dragged out of his press conference to avoid questions. I was officially let in by security, but when Trudeau’s henchman saw me, the PMO sicced the RCMP on me. A journalist. Democracy is dead in Canada. Vid: https://youtu.be/quLkAj5fYUE

"WORST EVER": Chinese Communist Party Mouthpiece Issues New Threat Against Canada, Calls Our Country "A Pathetic Clown"

Comments PolicyPrivacy Search Search for: Men

Anti-Lockdown Protests Have Spread Across Canada

Jpeg
Jpeg

Anti-Lockdown Protests Have Spread Across Canada

in mid-April,  spontaneous anti-lockdown protests sprang up across Canada. People attending expressed concerns about many issues, but the attack on free speech was one of them. As reported last month, Privy Council President Dominic LeBlanc, a close ally of Justin Trudeau, had talked about legislation criminalizing spreading misinformation over the Internet about the  coronavirus that could harm the public. As contradictions in the government’s propaganda became obvious — at first, no restrictions on travel from China (if you made such a proposal, you were a “racist”) and the WHO said face masks do no good — many began to suspect they’d been deceived. Canadians have been terrified into accepting lockdowns, restrictions of their mobility rights, restrictions on their right to earn a living or run a business and even virtual banning of religious gatherings.

New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island restrict travel by Canadians to their provinces. In Ontario, one Shanker Nesathurai, medical officer of health for Haldimand and Norfolk counties issued a public health order (later rescinded when threatened with of legal action) banning cottagers, under threat of $5,000 fines from going to the cottages they own on Lake Erie. (National Post, May 16, 2020) The same issue of the Post showed a picture of menacing signage at Port Stanley on Lake Erie: “Beach Closed. Restricted Area. No trespassing under penalty of law!” So, people are banned from public beaches. Yet, sunlight helps kill viruses. Everywhere, swaggering authorities treat Canadian adults like morons, assuming they will not keep a distance from each other. These and a host of other abuses and illogical restrictions have motivated thousands of Canadians to protest. People are concerned about the arbitrary restrictions, the crashing of the economy, the federal gun grab, and the possibility of forced vaccination.

There have been weekly protests in Vancouver and Toronto, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Hamilton, and more recently in Kelowna. This list is only partial. The first Toronto protest, April 25, which drew 50 people provoked an angry Premier Ford to denounce the protesters, whom he hadn’t met, as “a  bunch of yahoos” who were “reckless”. His reaction is typical of many politicians who believe they should command rather than listen respectfully to the views of those who elected them. Four weeks later, the weekly Saturday protest had grown to 400 people. There were almost as many Red Ensign flags fluttering in the warm Spring sunshine as Pearson pennants. People shared many earned concerns — the loss of free speech, Trudau’s opportunistic gun grab, the fear of forced vaccination, and the general joyless herding of the population in a no service, neo-Soviet totalitarianism. Their signs help tell the story.

The Vancouver “No more lockdown” protests began two weeks earlier than Toronto. They started with 25 and by May 17, had swelled to 325. B.C. Health Minister Adrian Dix dismissed the protesters as people with “marginal views. Don’t allow people who are attempting to promote themselves by using the suffering of others to distract us. Don’t look at them, but focus on what we need to do together.” (CTV, April 26, 2020) A fellow NDPer Spencer Chandra Herbert went further and seemed to want the police to charge or ticket the protesters. Herbert, who is an outspoken lobbyist for homosexual rights, is himself homosexual and “married” to one Romi Chandra, stated: “”I’ve alerted the Ministry of Public Safety for their information, and reached out to the Vancouver police who have the responsibility for enforcing orders. I don’t want our community’s safety threatened by selfish people who won’t do their part to stop COVID-19.”

In Kelowna, led by longtime freedom activist David Lindsay under the banner of CLEAR (Common Law and Education Rights), “end the lockdown” protesters from throughout the Okanagan Valley rallied in Stuart Park, opposite City Hall, on May 7. Their numbers had doubled to 40 on May 16 and they plan to be in Stuart Park every Saturday at noon until the lockdown ends, as will the Vancouver and Toronto rallies.

“Sloppy” Joe and the Values Test

Throne, Altar, Liberty

The Canadian Red Ensign

The Canadian Red Ensign

Friday, May 15, 2020

“Sloppy” Joe and the Values Test

“Sloppy” Joe Baconburger was the owner of a restaurant. It was an independent eatery called the Celestial Carnivore. As you have probably deduced it catered to a meat-eating clientele. Barbecue ribs, steaks grilled to perfection, pork chops, and prime rib – these were the staples of the supper menu. Its hamburgers, fried chicken and chili con carne were all popular. The pizza section of the menu had but a single entry and that was for “Meat Lovers”. The Carnivore was most famous, however, for a sandwich.

This sandwich was a multi-layered spectacular. Forget the mere clubhouse or even the triple-decker. This sandwich had separate layers for roast beef, roast pork, roast turkey, and roast lamb. Each layer also contained a hearty portion of ham and bacon and slices of various sorts of cheese. If you wanted, vegetable fillers such as lettuce, tomato, and cucumbers would also be added, but these were optional. It was served smothered in chili and gravy. Naysayers called it “the heart attack waiting to happen” but every day people would come from near and far to order it.

One day something strange happened. Like any other day, “Sloppy” Joe arrived at the Carnivore early, pulled into his parking spot, got out of his car, and headed towards the door. Then he ran into a wall. Or at least it felt like a wall. Whatever it was he could not see it. There was nothing there to the visible eye but something was blocking his path to the entrance.

Baffled by the invisible barrier and uncertain of what to do about it, “Sloppy” Joe turned around and took a step in the direction of his car. He was unable to go any further, however, because he found his path impeded yet again by the unseen wall. Turning to his left and right, he discovered that he was boxed in on all sides.

Uttering something that need not be put down in print, “Sloppy” Joe looked around and saw his neighbour Bob walking down the sidewalk on the other side of the street. He called over to Bob, asking him to go for help, but Bob just kept walking along. “Sloppy” Joe called louder, but there was still no response. He then screamed at the top of his lungs but Bob did not seem to hear him. Whatever was keeping him from leaving or entering his business was apparently also trapping all sound.

Eventually Bob looked around and saw “Sloppy” Joe at which point “Sloppy” Joe began to gesture as best he could within the confines of his transparent cage. Bob shook his head and said “Better stick to cooking Joe, that pantomime act is never going to sell.”

Soon thereafter one of his employees arrived for her morning shift. She waved to “Sloppy” Joe and said hello as she moved toward the restaurant entrance but did not seem to notice anything was amiss. When she got as close to the door as “Sloppy” Joe was, however, a look of surprise came over her face and then, as she turned in all directions, one of panic. “Sloppy” Joe realized that she was trapped too. One by one, his employees showed up, and each in turn got trapped within an invisible box.

“What will happen when my customers start to show up?” “Sloppy” Joe asked himself.

He did not have long to wait. The first customer, one of his regulars, showed up like clockwork at the time the restaurant normally opened its doors to the public. He too found himself stuck between the mysterious unseen walls. The same happened to every other customer that arrived after him.

Before long the area around the restaurant was surrounded by people, trapped in place by invisible boxes. There was approximately six feet of space between each of them.

All of a sudden, a loud maniacal cackle came descending upon them from above. Looking up, they saw a man standing on top of the restaurant, holding a device that resembled a cross between a machine gun and a video camera. Groaning inside, “Sloppy” Joe recognized the man as Dr. Tofu Veggiebrain the notorious mad scientist and leader of an animal rights/environmentalist activist group that wanted to make veganism mandatory and which had been targeting him and his restaurant with harassment of various sorts for years.

“How do you like my latest invention, ‘Sloppy’ Joe?” Dr. Veggiebrain asked. “I call it the Insta-Mime. Soon you and all others who murder and eat our animal brothers and sisters will be trapped between invisible walls in the world’s most despised form of performance art forever.”

It looked like he might be right. Within an hour the police, fire department, and other emergency services had been called in and they could find no way of releasing anyone from the invisible boxes. The police wrote “Sloppy” Joe and each of the others a ticket for breaking the by-law against public displays of pantomime and then took off.

Soon, however, word of the strange impromptu mime session outside of the Celestial Carnivore got out and within a couple of days it made its way to the Marshmallow Monks (1) in the Carpathian Mountains. They immediately contacted “Eddy” Johnson who rushed to the scene as Reaction Man, (2) battled Dr. Veggiebrain, and freed everyone from their invisible prison. Since this is not an actual episode in The Adventures of Reaction Man but merely an essay illustration in which he makes a cameo appearance, I will not elaborate on the details, but will instead skip ahead to the aftermath of the trial of Dr. Veggiebrain.

After Dr. Veggiebrain was convicted criminally, “Sloppy” Joe filed a civil action against him to recover the losses his business suffered over the period in which he, his employees, and his customers had been mimed. It was not difficult to obtain a ruling in his favour for the law on the matter and the principle of natural justice underlying that law are quite clear. If you deliberately harm somebody else’s business he is entitled to compensation.

Things became complicated, however, when Dr. Veggiebrain said that he would not contest the ruling and would gladly pay the damages – but only on the condition that the Celestial Carnivore sign a statement of agreement with his vegan values and convert to serving only plant-based food.

Whereas most judges would not agree to such a stipulation, “Sloppy” Joe was unfortunate enough to have Justice Bob Baddecision of the Ontario Inferior Court hear his case. Judge Baddecision, who as we know is a close friend of Lucy himself and is prone to live up to his last name, (3) considered Dr. Veggiebrain’s stipulation to be entirely reasonable, and ordered that it be carried out.

You have likely already figured out the point of this story. Therefore I will make my commentary brief.

A man’s business is his livelihood. If your actions are demonstrably responsible for harming or destroying another person’s business, by the laws of natural justice you are required to compensate him for this damage. You do not get to hold the compensation to which he is entitled hostage until he meets your demands. If you attempt to do so you are guilty of a form of blackmail or extortion.

Over the past two months many people have seen their businesses suffer to the point of insolvency. This was not due to substandard goods, poor service, or other faults of their own. Nor can it be attributed solely to causes which are outside human control and for which no human agency can be held responsible. The coronavirus did not destroy these people’s businesses. Government ministers and their health officers did with their mandatory social distancing regulations, shelter in place orders, and lockdown of so-called “non-essential” businesses and services. This is why these businesses are entitled to government assistance at this time. Such assistance is not a “bail out” nor is it socialism, although it will have the same long term effect as these of saddling generations to come with an unthinkable tax and debt burden. It is certainly not the government being compassionate, no matter how much Captain Airhead tries to dress it up in these terms. It is the government paying compensation for damage it has itself inflicted.

This is why the government has no right to impose a values test on the small businesses that apply for such compensation. Since the government put these businesses in danger of bankruptcy, justice demands that the government pay restitution. As the party that has committed the injury, the government does not get to hold back this restitution until the party that has sustained the injury agrees to support abortion and the alphabet soup agenda. Its values test is a form of extortion.

Don’t let Captain Airhead get away with it.


(1) To learn more about the Order of the Marshmallownians see “Brother Moonpie and the Devil’s Apocalypse.
(2) “Eddy” Johnson previously appeared in The Adventures of Reaction Man: Episode One – The Origin and The Adventures of Reaction Man: Episode Two – Reaction Man Versus the Marxist Zombie Army.
(3) Justice Bob Baddecision of the Ontario Inferior Court and Lucy the gender-confused devil feature in Lucy’s Day in Court and Justice for Minnie?
Posted by Gerry T. Neal at 6:30 AM Labels: “Sloppy” Joe Baconburger, COVID-19, Dr. Tofu Veggiebrain, Justice Bob Baddecision, Justin Trudeau, Marshmallownians, mimes, Reaction Man, values test, vegans

Criminal Offence of Knowingly Spreading Misinformation about the Coronavirus – A Video With Paul Fromm

A Criminal Offence of Knowingly Spreading Misinformation about the Coronavirus –  A Video With Paul Fromm



https://www.bitchute.com/video/uzU8an1sbdJH/

Paul Fromm warns us about the Canadian Liberal Party considering making it a Criminal Offence to Knowingly Spread Misinformation about just the coronavirus or what?
Paul has been the  Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression since 1983. CAFE is dedicated to Free Speech, Immigration Reform, and Restoring Political Sanity. The website can be found at http://cafe.nfshost.com

Paul is also the Director of the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee at: http://canadafirst.nfshost.com/

Paul lives in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada and you can contact him at
paul@paulfromm.com .

He has been an active leader on the Canadian right for 50 years and has a steel trap memory so he is a treasure and resource of information and history.

A ‘dramatic increase’ in coronavirus deaths could make Prime Minister invoke rules to track cellphone data

A ‘dramatic increase’ in coronavirus deaths could make Prime Minister invoke rules to track cellphone data

Shruti ShekarTelecom & Tech ReporterYahoo Finance CanadaMarch 26, 2020

El primer ministro canadiense, Justin Trudeau, se dirige a canadienses sobre la pandemia de COVID-19 desde Rideau Cottaga en Ottawa, Canadá, el jueves 26 de marzo de 2020. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press vía AP)
ASSOCIATED PRESS

In an effort to further mitigate the spread of COVID-19, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has invoked the Quarantine Act requiring those returning from abroad to self-isolate. Ontario’s former information and privacy commissioner says if deaths increase exponentially the government could enact measures to track cellphone data to further limit the spread. 

“Let’s say the number of COVID-19 [deaths] in Toronto or Ontario tripled. Maybe they would use that as the excuse or a reason needed to invoke it,” Ann Cavoukian said in an interview. 

“I don’t know because I don’t want to think about it. I don’t want my mind to go there. But I would think a dramatic increase would possibly get them doing that.”

As of March 26, there are a total of 13 deaths reported in Ontario that are related to the coronavirus; there are 35 deaths in the country.  

During a press conference on March 25, Trudeau indicated that the government was “not taking measures” like collecting anonymous cellphone data to track the spread of the virus. 

“We recognize in an emergency situation we need to take certain steps that wouldn’t be taken in a non-emergency situation, but that is not something we are looking at now,” Trudeau said. “But all options are on the table to do what is necessary to keep Canadians safe.”

Cavoukian said that Trudeau said nothing was off the table because he is aware of these rules. 

“There are, unfortunately, privacy laws that can be invoked by the government that will enable them to engage in behaviours that wouldn’t be permitted under the [privacy] act. All privacy acts have these kinds of emergency measures, they’re supposed to be a last resort,” she said. 

“They’re supposed to be time-limited, clear sunset clauses, full transparency associated with what the government is doing.”

Cavoukian said that she didn’t think we were at that point yet for the prime minister to invoke rules and said “we should never get to that point.”

“When you are collecting all the personal information of citizens that just encroaches upon their freedom without privacy,” she said. 

Toronto Mayor John Tory initially said the city was collecting anonymous location data already, as first reported by The Logic, but later retracted his statements. A spokesperson clarified in an email that Toronto was not collecting any data. 

Bell, Telus, Rogers, and Shaw Communications’ Freedom Mobile confirmed in emailed statements that they have not been approached by the City of Toronto to gather cellphone data. 

Jesse Hirsh, president of Metaviews, said in an interview that these measures should have already been invoked. 

“I’m surprised that they have not already collected anonymized location

[data]

because given that both the federal government and the provincial government over the last few days have been escalating language around voluntary self-isolation, this would be one way to verify and find evidence instead of the government guessing,” he said. 

“I’d rather the government instead of guessing that people are or are not complying. I’d rather that they have accurate evidence.”

He added that collecting this data raises privacy concerns but they’re “minor privacy concerns” as this data is helpful in terms of informing public health policy. 

Hirsh noted that if the government drafted policy they would be able to work with the Privacy Commissioner to ensure the protection of the data and how it would be used. 

“We can have our cake and eat it too,” he said. “The expertise exists within the federal government.”

Stephanie Carvin, a security expert and assistant professor at Carleton University, doesn’t think these measures will be taken any time soon and most likely would be taken at a later date when things have restored back to normalcy. 

“You would almost want to implement something like this if the situation improved and we had an open society again,” she said.

“Let’s say if you were able to flatten that curve and then over a period of 18 months, you’re waiting, and all of a sudden there are flare-ups in the country and you want to contain it. That’s when something more targeted might be useful.”

Carvin indicated that even if the government were to take these measures it would require a lot of moving parts and individuals to get on board to make it happen. 

“People think that there’s some kind of switch we can flick, and it’s not that easy,” she said.

She also added that even if the government were able to track the data, they would have to be explicit in terms of what they were collecting and how it was to be used. 

“It’s just not clear to me, how that would be done, by who, under what circumstances,” she said. 

SHOCK: Andrew Scheer has Rebel News reporter David Menzies arrested, handcuffed at campaign event

SHOCK: Andrew Scheer has Rebel News reporter David Menzies arrested, handcuffed at campaign event

 

 

I cannot believe it.

We sent David “The Menzoid” Menzies to report from an Andrew Scheer campaign event. Like we normally do.

CBC journalists were welcomedBut David was kicked out.

They actually sent police to throw him out.

 

They said David wasn’t “accredited”. Really? David’s been an accredited journalist for 30 years — he’s covered hundreds of political events from parties of every stripe.

Why would Scheer kick out David, but welcome the CBC — who despise the Conservatives?

None of this makes sense.

Anyways, David left the property. He went to the public sidewalk. He started filming a video about being kicked out. And then he was swarmed by police.

And this time, they arrested him and handcuffed him.

Why did they do that?

Who ordered them to do that?

He as on the sidewalk.

He’s a man in his fifties with two artificial hips. He’s not a screaming Antifa thug; he’s not a trespasser.

They handcuffed him. Why? To humiliate him?

They finally took off his cuffs and he called me. But then more police came and took away his phone. I immediately called a lawyer. Within an hour, the police let him go, without any charges.

But their point was made: don’t you dare try to ask questions of our political elites. Or the police will arrest you.

Well, point not taken.

I can tell you one thing: today’s outrageous treatment of David Menzies will not stop us from doing our jobs.

I’ll be candid, we’re more used to Justin Trudeau banning us — and Rachel Notley before she was fired by voters. It says more about them than it does about us. Actually it does say something about us: we ask questions that politicians would rather not be asked.

Can you please help us? We need your help.

There are three things you can do:

1. Tell your local conservative candidate that this is nuts.

It’s a Trudeau move, not a conservative move. Ask your Conservative candidate if they think it’s wise to have police arrest the only conservative-leaning video company in Canada. Frankly, no reporter of any stripe should be arrested. This is Canada.

2. Second, sign our petition to Andrew Scheer at LetUsReport.com.

It’s just what it sounds like. Let Us Report — just like Scheer lets the CBC report. We need to show him that Canadians — especially Conservatives — believe in free speech and freedom of the press. Maybe he’s been hanging out in Ottawa too long to remember that.

3. Please help us keep on reporting, no matter who kicks us out.

I just got off the phone with David, and I’ve told him to keep asking Andrew Scheer questions. Not gotcha questions, but real questions — the kind the CBC would never ask him. Questions like these:

• Justin Trudeau’s campaign platform calls for new political censorship of the Internet. Do you support or oppose this?
• If elected, would you end the $600 million newspaper bail-out?
• If elected, would you privatize the CBC?
• What do you think the optimum number of immigrants is each year for Canada?
• …and so many more.

Those aren’t trick questions. They’re questions any conservative should answer. But they’re questions that only Rebel News would ask. I mean, can you really see a CBC journalist pressing Scheer about ending the bail-out?

My goal as the publisher of Rebel News is to do journalism — to tell the other side of the story. Most of the time, that means asking accountability questions of the Liberals, NDP and Greens, because the mainstream media never does.

We lean conservative here at Rebel News, and we wear our heart on our sleeves — we want Trudeau gone. I just wrote the best-selling book called The Libranos: What the media won’t tell you about Justin Trudeau’s corruption. I think it’s clear what I stand for.

But that doesn’t mean we’re going to let Scheer become like Trudeau. Having police arrest David Menzies was a Trudeau move, not a move any conservative should be proud of. Actually it’s worse — I’ve never actually seen Trudeau have someone arrested, have you?

You can help us at LetUsReport.comSign our petition to Scheer to let us report. And then you can click on the link on that page to see all of our campaign plans and our budget there. We’re spending thousands of dollars flying David and our other journalists around the country, covering political events.

Andrew Scheer might think he’s at war with us, but we’re not at war with him. We just want to be able to do our job — and we will, whether he likes it or not.

So help us out — visit LetUsReport.com to sign the petition to Scheer. And if you want us to keep on going, and if you want Scheer to stop acting like Trudeau, you can chip in a few bucks, too. Please click here to help us out.

Thanks.

Let’s remind Andrew Scheer: he’s trying to replace Trudeau, not become him.

Yours truly,

Ezra Levant

P.S. Please sign our petition at LetUsReport.com. I always worried about a government crackdown on our free speech. I just never thought it would come from the Conservative Party.

How Captain Airhead Makes Andrew Scheer Look Much Better Than He Really Is

The Canadian Red Ensign

Thursday, June 13, 2019

How Captain Airhead Makes Andrew Scheer Look Much Better Than He Really Is

The Conservative Party of Canada really ought to be paying Captain Airhead a salary. He is the best publicity man they have. He has been doing a much better job of promoting their cause in the upcoming Dominion election than their own lackluster leadership. I do not mean merely that he makes them look good by being such a lousy, awful, and indeed, downright, horrible, alternative, although that is certainly the case. What I mean is that if there were a speck of truth to be found in any of his recent, scare-mongering, accusations against the Conservatives, the party would certainly rise in my esteem as it would that of any sensible and sane person. Evelyn Waugh once said that the problem with the Conservative Party was that it “has not turned the clock back a single second” and the Canadian incarnation of the party has given no indication that it plans to do so any time in the near future. Yet Justin Trudeau would have us believe that the Conservatives, if elected, would set the clock back by about a hundred years. My response to which is to say that if this happens, it would be a good start, but we need to go much further than that.

To say this, of course, is to commit the unpardonable sin of the Modern Age, blasphemy against the spirit of progress. It is a sin to which I gladly, and unrepentantly, plead guilty. Readers of C. S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia might recall how in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, Governor Gumpas of the Lone Islands, upon being told by King Caspian that the slave trade “must be stopped”, protests “But that would be putting the clock back”, adding “Have you no idea of progress, of development?” to which Caspian replies “I have seen then both in an egg…We call it ‘Going Bad’ in Narnia.” Needless to say, I subscribe to Caspian’s – and Lewis’ – view of progress. This is the view of genuine British and Canadian Toryism – that progress does not happen, and if it does it is a bad thing and we need to put a stop to it. Sadly, the Canadian Conservative Party of our day, like the British Conservative Party of Waugh’s day, have abandoned the more authentic views of their tradition for something closer to American republicanism, which worships at the altar of the same idol of progress as liberalism and the Left. Justin Trudeau is deluded if he seriously thinks otherwise.

I am not going to dwell at any length on Trudeau’s accusations that Andrew Scheer is in bed with “racists”, “white supremacists” and “white nationalists” as I have already dealt with this in another essay. It shows how extremely unhealthy, the political climate has become in present day Canada, that these labels can be attached to people who do not so describe themselves and who neither subscribe to a racialist ideology like National Socialism nor have engaged in violent rhetoric or action either as individuals or organized groups towards other races. All that one needs to do is to oppose a particular kind of racism – the anti-white racism manifested in the immigration policy of making the country as diverse as possible as fast as possible and hence as least white as possible as fast as possible, in the progressive notion that all whites and only whites are racists, and in the cartoonish re-writing of history into a bad melodrama in which whites are assigned the role of the moustache-twirling, villain in the top hat and large black coat and everyone else plays the helpless maiden whom he has tied to the railroad track. Heck, one does not even have to actively oppose this anti-white racism himself – it is sufficient to be seen in the same room as someone who does. My respect for Mr. Scheer and the Conservative Party would skyrocket if they actually did take a bold, consistent, and principled stand against this pervasive form of progressive anti-white racism, but I am not holding my breath waiting for that to happen. The accusations against them are entirely of the “you were seen with so-and-so, who said such-and-such” variety. Indeed, the disgusting manner in which Scheer threw Michael Cooper under the bus, the fact that he seems to have enforced silence upon his party about the Grits’ disturbing plans to bring back the vile Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, and the way in which Warren Kinsella, of all people, has been defending Scheer against Trudeau’s charges using arguments amusingly similar to those that I would have used to ridicule Kinsella’s book Web of Hate twenty years ago, all point inevitably to the conclusion that Scheer, like Harper before him, is on the same side as Trudeau on these issues, leaving the many Canadians who wish for the freedom to think differently from Kinsella, Richard Warman, Bernie Farber, Harry Abrams, Helmut-Harry Loewen and others of that ilk, without anyone in Parliament to speak for them.

What I am more interested in addressing here are Captain Airhead’s accusations of what he considers to be sexism. Back when Stephen Harper was Conservative leader the Liberals were constantly accusing him of having a “hidden agenda,” i.e., to re-criminalize abortion. Trudeau, who has constructed a political image of himself as a “male feminist” which has taken a severe beating over the last couple of years for reasons that I will not get into here, and who as part of that image takes a rather clownish, over-the-top, hard-line, “it’s a woman’s right” stance on abortion, has revived the old “hidden agenda” line for use against Scheer. He has been able to use recent events south of the border, where several states have passed strong anti-abortion legislation now that there is a perceived right-wing majority on the Supreme Court in the hopes of provoking a legal battle that will end in the overturning of Roe v. Wade, to help him stoke the fears of his feminist support base.

Again, if there were the slightest amount of truth to Trudeau’s accusations, the Conservative Party’s stock would certainly rise in my books. I remember very well, however, that while Stephen Harper allowed pro-life people to run for his party at a time even as the other major party leaders began telling them they were persona non grata, this was the extent of his “support” for the pro-life cause. Pro-life people were allowed to run as Conservatives but woe unto them if they actually tried to do something to end abortion. There is not the slightest amount of evidence that things are any different now. This is extremely unfortunate for Canada because the current status quo on abortion, of which Trudeau is so proud, is an ever growing bloodstain on our country that cries out to heaven for divine justice, and there are no realistic options for changing that status quo, that do not require action by the Conservatives in the Dominion parliament. Even if it could be accomplished at the provincial level, which it cannot, the provincial Conservatives seem to have no more inclination to do so than their federal counterparts. The right-populist premier of Upper Canada assured the media last month, after progressives threw a tantrum when one of his MPPs pledged at a pro-life rally “to make abortion unthinkable in our lifetime” that his government “will not re-open the abortion debate.” Even more recently the provincial Conservative government here in Manitoba has announced that an abortion pill will now be fully covered by the public. There are many health care products and services which are necessary to help people who are suffering from excruciating pain or are in danger of going blind which are not fully covered by the public, but a pill that murders babies soon will be.

It is difficult to think of anything that puts the lie to the entire left-liberal concept of progress more than this matter of abortion. The progressive position is that a pregnant woman has the right to terminate her pregnancy. Canadian progressives, including the leadership of the Liberal Party, take the most extreme degree of this position, which allows for no qualifications such as “up to this-or-that stage of development”, insists that this “right” be protected against even interference of the persuasive variety, requires that the public pay for it, insists that the debate is closed and that the other side should be made to shut up, and boasts that their victory shows how advanced we have become in our thinking. Their entire position, however, is based upon a lie. The position that a woman has or ought to have the right to terminate her pregnancy could scarcely be formulated, much less justified, apart from the notion that the pregnancy is something that concerns her, her body, and her health alone. “Pro-choice” lingo such as “the procedure”, “reproductive rights”, “control of her own body” is all carefully selected to create this impression. Yet, obviously, pregnancy is not simply a matter of a woman, her health, and her body. It also concerns her baby, whose very life is at stake in the pregnancy. An abortion is not merely a medical procedure undergone for the health of the pregnant woman. It is the termination of the life of a baby.

Far from being an advanced state of ethical thinking the so-called “pro-choice” position of the progressive left is a regression into the darkest form of paganism. In the times of ancient paganism, infanticide was not an uncommon way of keeping the family within the means of its resources. The story of Oedipus is but one of the ancient legends that address the cruelty of the practice of exposure by telling of a child rescued from this fate by a kindly couple. Worse, the worship of several pagan idols required the sacrifice of children, usually the first-born. Several of the most important ethicists of ancient Greece and Rome condemned this practice in Carthage, the city-state in what is now Tunisia in northern Africa which was Rome’s rival for control of the Mediterranean world in the third and fourth centuries BC. The Carthaginians would sacrifice their children to an idol, whom the Greek and Roman commentators identified with Kronos or Saturn from their own mythologies, by placing them in the heated arms of a huge bronze statue. This is a practice they inherited from Tyre, the Phoenician city-state in what is now Lebanon, of which Carthage was originally a colony. The Phoenicians shared this practice with their southern neighbours, the tribes of Canaan, and this practice is clearly identified in the Old Testament as one of the worst forms of the wickedness that brought divine judgement upon the Canaanites in the form of Israel being sent to conquer and drive them out of the Promised Land. Later, when the Israelites apostatized into the idolatry of their neighbours, this practice is again pointed to by the Prophets as having particularly defiled their land and led ultimately to the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. A curse was pronounced upon the place outside Jerusalem where these sacrifices took place and by the time of the New Testament it was regarded as a defiled place, fit only for burning refuse and the bodies of criminals, and lent its name to the fate of those to be condemned at the Final Judgement.

Even before the Exodus, and the giving of the Mosaic Law which strictly forbade the Israelites from participating in the abominations of Canaan, such as child sacrifice, and required that they redeem their firstborn with animal sacrifices instead, the Book of Genesis draws a contrast between the true and living God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the false gods of the pagans. God commands Abraham to sacrifice his son, but prevents him from actually going through with the sacrifice, for it is faith and not his son, that God wanted from Abraham. Abraham, when asked by Isaac where the lamb for the sacrifice is, makes the prophecy that God Himself will provide a lamb, a prophecy that we see fulfilled in the New Testament when John the Baptist, speaking of Jesus, says “Behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” The pagan idols, who are really devils, require their worshippers to sacrifice their children, the true and living God, gave His only-begotten Son as the sacrificial Lamb Who would take away the sin of the world.

As the Christian religion grew and spread throughout the ancient world, its influence led, among other things, to the Roman Empire’s finally banning infanticide. If anything actually deserves to be described as an enlightened ethical step forward in the right direction this was it. By using this language to describe the revival of pagan baby murder, the Left demonstrates just how much its concept of “progress” really is King Caspian’s “going bad” after all. It also reveals itself to be just another form of ancient, pagan, devil worship.

The question for Andrew Scheer and the Conservative Party is, what God do you serve? Scheer, who was raised in the Roman Catholic Church, claims to be a Christian but this is also the case with Justin Trudeau. As long as Scheer, like his predecessor Harper, prevents the members of his party from actively combating the evil of baby murder and instead requires them to join in the loony Left’s crusade against its chimerical bugbear of “white racism”, it is not the true and living God that he is serving.

Fortunately for him, he has Justin Trudeau to make him look so much better than he really is. How much better for us, it would be, however, if instead of relying on this, he were to come out and take a bold stand on the things for which the Conservative Party ought to be standing. He could start by promising the turn the clock back a century and a half, to right after Confederation before the Liberal Party got their grubby hands on the country and things started to go downhill.

Liberals attack Facebook — for not censoring enough!

Liberals attack Facebook — for not censoring enough!

The Rebel
Dear Paul,

The last piece of Trudeau’s censorship machine fell into place in Canada this week. Canada’s Minister of Democratic Institutions, Karina Gould, announced that she managed to persuade high tech companies to censor the Internet in the upcoming political election, a “declaration” in the name of “electoral integrity.”

But it has nothing to do with electoral integrity. It’s really just the latest move by Trudeau’s Liberals to crack down on what they call “disinformation” and “fake news”, which is really just news they don’t like.

All the big tech companies were paraded through Parliament. And all of them were bashed — for not censoring enough:

Ezra_big_tech_attack.PNG

Not one voice for free speech today in Parliament. The Liberals want to shut people up. But so do the Conservatives.

They don’t like to talk about things that are too conservative for them, like criticism of immigration, political Islam, abortion or how trans rights have gone nuts.

If Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives won’t fight back against Trudeau’s attempt to censor your social media, who will?

Yours truly,

Ezra Levant.

New Zealand and the New World Order

Dear Des,

New Zealand has emerged as the little darling of the New World Order. That is to say, it has become a creepily authoritarian place overnight.

In the wake of the mosque shooting in Christchurch, Kiwi Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern made it a crime to possess or to share the video of the attack, with two men currently facing up to 14 years in prison for this (!) and she made Facebook remove 1.5 million copies of the video within 24 hours of the attack.

In addition, Ardern announced the development of legislation to criminalize possession of semi-automatic weapons and she has also ordered armed police officers to make unannounced visits to the homes of people whose social media posts indicate they have conservative views, for example by opposing the UN Migration Pact or by supporting (gasp) Donald Trump, as told here by a mild-mannered YouTuber whose home has already been visited more than once.

These moves and more are being crowned today by the “Christchurch Call”, a summit of world leaders and Big Tech CEOs hosted by Ardern, where participants are pledging to eliminate extremist content online.

Simultaneous to this, former Rothschild banker, Emmanuel Macron is bringing 80 tech chiefs to Paris for his Tech for Good conference. Attendees of the events include the usual Globalist suspects, like Jordan’s King Abdullah II, Canadian Premier Justin Trudeau, British Prime Minister Theresa May and EU Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey will have bilateral talks with Ardern and Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi will have bilateral talks with Macron. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg will not attend either event but he did meet in Paris with Macron last week.

Ardern said, “(We’re) asking both nations and private corporations to make changes to prevent the posting of terrorist content online, to ensure its efficient and fast removal and to prevent the use of live-streaming as a tool for broadcasting terrorist attacks,” she wrote in The Times.

Tech firms are being urged to develop “concrete measures”, such as enabling live-streams only on social media accounts whose owners have been identified. This implies a step closer toward the social credit dystopia unfolding in China.

Alas, “It’s a global problem that requires a global response,” said Ardern.

Running Time: 16 min

https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/62387-2/

. jUST

SCHADENFREUDE

THE CANADIAN RED ENSIGN

The Canadian Red Ensign

MONDAY, APRIL 8, 2019

Schadenfreude

On the fourth Sunday in Lent we were given a sermon on the “love thy enemy” passage in the Sermon on the Mount. While it is probably not entirely within the spirit of that passage to engage in schadenfreude over one’s enemies’ misfortunes, I find it impossible to resist doing so since this era of triumphant liberalism afford few opportunities for such to a man of the right.

The Liberal Party of Canada has, over the years, made itself odious to all sorts of Canadians but most consistently to two distinct groups who despise them for very different reasons. The old Tories of the kind frequently but erroneously called “Red,” (1) i.e., the ones who prize Canada’s British and Loyalist history, traditions, and heritage, her constitutional monarchy, Westminster parliamentary system of government, and Common Law, her ongoing ties to the British Commonwealth and who associate all of this with an older, more organic, more rooted, vision of society than modern, individualistic, commercialism see the Liberals, quite correctly, as a party of rootless, modernizers who can conceive of value in no terms other than those of a price tag and whose goal is to sell out the Dominion and everything for which she once stood to Yankee capitalism for a quick buck. On the other hand, the rugged, rural, inhabitants of the prairie provinces of the Canadian West whom the Liberals and their academic and media fellow travelers dismiss with “redneck” and other, worse, epithets, have long loathed the Grits as being a party of totalitarian socialists who a) tax them to death, b) ignore, or worse, aggravate, their economic difficulties, and c) display the same arrogant contempt towards them that the Obama/Clinton Democrats display towards middle and working class red state Americans. Both of these negative views of the Liberals are entirely valid. (2) Someone like myself, who has belonged to both groups simultaneously for all of his life – a Redneck Tory, would be one way of putting it, I suppose – has particularly good reason to look upon the Liberal Party with utter abhorrence.

The Liberal Party has always been bad but it has sunk to new depths of depravity under the current leadership of Captain Airhead who, more than any of his predecessors, has brought shame and disgrace upon the office of Her Majesty’s First Minister in this Dominion. Will Ferguson divided Canada’s Prime Ministers into two categories, “Boneheads” and “Bastards”, but Captain Airhead has the distinction of being both. Smug, arrogant, self-righteous and preening, all of his public statements and actions, before and after taking office, have been calculated to project, with the cooperation of a fawning media, a carefully crafted image of himself. Since that image was that of the opposite of, at first, his predecessor Stephen Harper, then later of American President Donald Trump, it has all along resembled a bad caricature of the worst sort of loony leftist. He began his term by trying to import the migrant crisis that has been threatening to inundate Europe and create a Camp of the Saints scenario for half of a decade, creating a miniature version of America’s southern border crisis on the 49th Parallel, and at the end of his term, signed an insane and evil United Nations accord on migration which in effect, amounted to an agreement to surrender the Dominion’s essential right to maintain and police her own borders. Any and all criticism of this, or, for that matter, any of his other policies, was met with accusations of “racism”. He used the federal summer jobs funding program to coerce employers into agreeing with abortion on demand, having previously evicted pro-lifers from the Liberal Party, and otherwise attempted to shove his “woke” notions down all Canadians throats by legislation, or at any rate Parliamentary motions, condemning “Islamophobia” and protecting the new found “right” of individuals to choose or even make up their own gender identity. Jumping on board the bandwagon of an environmentalist movement that had long ago lost sight of its original, legitimate, goal – the conservation and preservation for future generations of natural resources and aesthetics – and gone to seed on apocalyptic, end-of-the-world, alarmism, he sabotaged and destroyed Canada’s energy industry and then, just this year, pulled the world’s most tasteless April Fool’s prank, by slapping down a carbon tax that will accomplish nothing but a needless rise in the cost of living, which hurts the poor and the working class the most. All the while his extravagance with the public purse has made his father, previously noted for his record deficits, look like a model of budgetary austerity in comparison. Speaking of money, he had the audacity to take the image of our first – and greatest – Prime Minister, the man who spearheaded the Confederation project and led the Dominion for most of its first two decades, fighting tooth and nail to get the railroad built and prevent the country from splitting up and falling into the avaricious hands of the republic to our south, off of our ten dollar bill and replace it with that of a woman who achieved fame, decades after the fact thanks to the Liberals’ desperate sifting of Canadian history for an equivalent of the figures in America’s Civil Rights Movement, for sitting down in a theatre.

It has been with much joy and pleasure, therefore, that I have been watching Captain Airhead’s image and popularity implode over the past couple of months. If there has been a cloud amidst all the silver lining of the SNC-Lavalin Affair it is that it took an ordinary, run-of-the-mill, corruption scandal to bring about the collapse of his reputation after all the evils mentioned in the preceding paragraph failed to do so. Perhaps the best way to look at that is to regard it as a case of the straw finally breaking the humpy back of the camel. To briefly summarize the scandal, a large corporation that has been a significant contributor to Liberal Party funds and which is based in the home province of the Prime Minister has been under prosecution for bribing a foreign government and last year our government snuck a bill in with the budget that allows for slap-on-the-wrist treatment of white collar crimes of this nature. When Jody Wilson-Raybould was shifted out of her Cabinet position of Minister of Justice and Attorney General in January of this year, rumours began to circulate that this was because she had refused to give in to pressure from the Prime Minister’s Office to apply the new rules retroactively to SNC Lavalin. As Jay Currie observed, the real scandal in all of this ought to have been the revelation that the government snuck legislation in to give their friends a break. Instead, what everyone jumped on was the compromise of an independent judiciary by inappropriate political interference in a prosecution. To put the same matter in Canadian rather than Yankee terms, as our press should have been doing all along although they have probably long ago forgotten what little they ever knew of Canadian civics, the rulings of the courts of the Queen-on-the-bench are not to be decided and dictated for political reasons by the ministers of the Queen-in-Council. Whether we speak Canadian or American it is a rotten and corrupt thing to do – and the Prime Minister’s being guilty of it would not have come as news to anyone still capable of remembering that we were not always at war with Eastasia. What, after all, did his inappropriate tweets following the Gerald Stanley jury acquittal last year constitute if not an unashamed and public display of such interference? Indeed, this was a far worse instance of such interference and one in which Jody Wilson-Raybould was equally guilty for it had all the appearance of promising changes to the jury selection process that would compromise such ancient principles as the right of the accused to presumption of innocence and the right of the accused – not the victim – to a trial of his peers and put in the place of the justice based on such principles, a primitive form of blood-based-vengeance, as if the Oresteia were being played out in reverse. It was at this point that Captain Airhead and the then-Justice Minister should both have received a summons to Rideau Hall and been told that Her Majesty no longer requires their services. Of course this didn’t happen and for that we ought to burn an effigy of William Lyon Mackenzie King annually for it was that, longest sitting Grit premier, who subverted the Westminster system and undermined the accountability of the Prime Minister’s Office turning it into a virtual dictatorship whenever there is a majority government..

As the SNC-Lavalin scandal developed, Captain Airhead’s team tried desperately to salvage their leader’s reputation, but their every effort, beginning with the self-immolation of Seymour Butts – my apologies to Matt Groening and his creative staff for appropriating what was originally a joke of theirs but I refuse to sully my own Christian name by admitting that it is shared by this man – was like adding fuel to the fire. Now, the very people who for the past four years swooned at the very mention of Captain Airhead’s name, are falling over themselves in their efforts to get as far away from him as possible. The scandal having broken on the eve of the next Dominion election things have gotten so bad for the Airhead Grits that they can think of nothing else to do than recycle the lame tactics that failed to win Hilary Clinton the last American presidential election by telling us that Andrew Scheer is courting the “far right” and, most hilariously since it has come a week after Robert Mueller announced that he could find no evidence that the Trump team had colluded with Russia, warning us about Russian interference in the upcoming election.

There is a lesson in this for Captain “Because it is 2015” Airhead if he is capable of learning it. Those who ride to the top on the crest of the wave of fashion, will crash and crash hard, when the tide goes out.Taylor Swift may very well have been right and she and whoever she was singing to at the time will “never go out of style”, but Justin, baby, you just ain’t her.

(1) This is due mainly to the socialist sympathies of George Grant and Eugene Forsey. While Grant attempted to argue that “socialism” was “conservative” his argument depended entirely upon a clever redefinition of socialism and he, like Forsey, acknowledged that this positive view of socialism was not that of the Tories as a group.

(2) This is true despite the fact that one view sees the Grits as being capitalist while the other sees them as being socialist. Capitalism and socialism are but two sides to the same coin which is the economy of the Modern Age. The true reactionary seeks wisdom, economic and otherwise, in the older traditions that predated the Modern Age. George Grant was a man who sought to do just that and this is reflected in his admirable criticism of capitalism but it was lamentable, pun intended, that he chose to stay within the limits of Modern thinking in using the term “socialism” for the opposite of where capitalism had gone wrong. Friedrich Hayek, on the other hand, was a man who made no effort whatsoever to think outside of the Modern box, and while he produced an otherwise admirable critique of socialism, could see it in no other terms than a return to pre-Modern feudalism, which it was not.