Hate in the streets fuelled by Trudeau's 'post-national' vision - "an immigration policy guided by blind faith in “diversity” and “shared values” — two phrases used extensively by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau — hasn’t helped maintain a peaceful, pluralistic society. Under Trudeau’s post-national vision of Canada, the common ground shared between Canadians is just that: the land we all live on, enclosed within the same border. Addressing Parliament in October, following a series of antisemitic crimes committed against Canadian Jews in the aftermath of Hamas’s attack against Israel, Trudeau made sure to praise the “shared values” we all supposedly have. “Let us remember who we are as Canadians and what we stand for here and around the world: respect for everyone’s rights and freedoms and the rule of law; respect for different languages, ethnicities and religions; respect for human life; and respect for each other,” he said. Yet his leadership has brought about a much different reality. It should be a shared Canadian value, for example, to abhor calls for annihilating Jews and celebrations of terrorist butchery. In reality, it’s not — the past few months have provided ample evidence. One prominent example is that of Adil Charkaoui, who asked Allah to kill all the Jews in a public prayer he led in Montreal in October. Charkaoui came to Canada from Morocco and obtained citizenship, despite undergoing 20 years of police investigations for alleged Islamist links. Diversity is a strength, and immigration is a force for good. Chinese-Canadians helped build the railway; Ukrainian-Canadians settled the western Prairies; Irish-Canadians populated Atlantic Canada; Italian-Canadians, German-Canadians and others filled labour gaps and took up agriculture. Each group faced discrimination and hardship, but they eventually assimilated into Canada, a budding democracy unapologetically loyal to the Crown. They took pride in their home, building monuments and naming schools to memorialize those who helped build this country. It wasn’t perfect, but Canada became an example for the world for how diverse cultures can live together in peace. Our pluralism is enviable. Nowadays, immigrants (and other Canadians) are told a dark, cynical story about their new home that stems not from foreign propaganda, but from the office of the prime minister himself. Trudeau has declared not only that Canada’s residential schools amounted to a genocide — a crime under international law — but that the supposed genocide against Indigenous people is still ongoing. In 2020, he said that Canada is also plagued with racism, which infects “all our institutions,” placing our affirmative-action-embracing country among the likes of Rwanda and apartheid South Africa. Trudeau’s fight against “Canadian exceptionalism” has been so effective that foreign publications like Al-Jazeera and China’s Global Times happily join him in putting Canada in its place... Aside from fuelling international propaganda, Canadian governments have largely been successful in stamping out Canada’s national symbols and denigrating our shared history. Ottawa’s Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway has been renamed; historical illustrations have been removed from the latest passport; the citizenship ceremony, which should be a stately occasion, may soon be reduced to a virtual box-clicking exercise. The message sent to our one-million newcomers per year is that Canada is an unimportant, historically unremarkable country driven by a vicious desire to abuse, discriminate against and extinguish Indigenous and other non-European cultures. If some aren’t interested in embracing traditional Canadian values, who can blame them? There’s little to be proud of, according to Trudeau’s historical revisionism. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Canada has a history of military prowess (not so much anymore, but it was once a point of pride) and economic development, and has successfully integrated many waves of immigrants from all around the world. But with every depiction of a bloody Star of David at a protest, it becomes more and more apparent that Canada’s value-neutral, open-doors approach to immigration could threaten the very pluralistic values that it tries to uphold... Newcomers and Canadian-born citizens alike need a national — not post-national — identity to unite around. If Canadian pluralism is to survive, our culture needs to do more than celebrate empty notions of diversity and relentlessly litigate racial grievances. In this pride-starved country, a little bit of nationalism will go a long way."
Justin Trudeau seems to have forgotten it’s his job to hold the country together - The Globe and Mail - "During his three governments, Mr. Trudeau has enacted an impressive suite of social and environmental programs: child care, dental care, carbon-emission reduction, with more – especially pharmacare – to come. Awkwardly, these programs lie in whole or in part within provincial jurisdiction. The Liberal government has responded by employing the tried-and-false tactic of using federal funding to convince or coerce provincial governments to meet federal goals. On the climate-change front, the government has imposed a carbon tax on provinces that doesn’t meet federal standards. But there are costs. In some cases, such as environmental impact assessments, courts have struck down Liberal measures, forcing the government back to the drawing board. Even when the courts say Ottawa has jurisdiction, the political friction is intense. And then there is the question of political management, or competence. Complaints from Atlantic Canadians, and the Liberal MPs who represent them, convinced Mr. Trudeau to exempt home heating oil, which is used more heavily in that region than elsewhere, from the carbon tax. That prompted Mr. Moe’s rebellion. Even Wab Kinew, the newly elected NDP Premier of Manitoba, is making a case that his province should be give carbon-tax relief. Alberta in recent years has become actively hostile toward the federal power. Much of what Ms. Smith envisions may be unconstitutional or against her province’s best interests. But Mr. Trudeau has unquestionably driven federal-Alberta relations to the brink. It’s not only the West that feels estranged. When Mr. Trudeau came to power in 2015, the sovereigntist Bloc Québécois held only 10 seats in the House of Commons. Today, it commands 32 seats, and would likely make further gains if an election were held tomorrow. Within the province, the Parti Québécois was moribund only a few years ago. Today, it leads all parties in polls. Any prime minister who is willing to tolerate – indeed who foments – such serious strains in national unity is failing to do their job. A federal government can reduce carbon emissions, improve health care, support children and meet other national priorities without putting the federation at risk. The trick is to work co-operatively with the provinces without ever bringing down the hammer. No use of the federal spending power to bribe or blackmail. No wielding of federal authority against a provincial interest... when a prime minister and a premier are at daggers drawn, the prime minister is usually more to blame. It’s their job to hold the country together. Mr. Trudeau seems to have forgotten that."
Mortimer on X - "Canada… the case study of what happens when a drama teacher, journalist and environmentalist get together to try and run a country with zero economic or financial knowledge…"
Dan Knight on X - "Ah, the sweet irony of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's vacation debacle in Jamaica – it's a story ripe with hypocrisy and a perfect illustration of the elite's double standards. First, let's set the scene: Trudeau, Canada's poster boy for progressive politics, finds himself stuck in Jamaica because his plane breaks down. Not once, but twice in recent months! But hey, maybe he can enjoy an extended stay in the Caribbean, considering he's done precious little for Canada anyway. Trudeau's office quickly jumps to clarify that his family vacation in Jamaica was 'at no cost'. How magnanimous, right? But let's cut to the chase. The real joke here is Trudeau's attempt to make us believe there are no strings attached to his so-called "free" vacation. Remember the SNC-Lavalin scandal? That's the reason Canadian companies like Bombardier have such strict anti-bribery rules. Yet, here's Trudeau, seemingly above it all, accepting perks that would have any employee fired on the spot. And here's the kicker: the Trudeau family's trip to Jamaica, which the Prime Minister’s Office claims was approved by the ethics commissioner, cost a hefty sum - all because of additional travel, security, and personnel expenses. Yet, Trudeau has the gall to say he'll reimburse the “equivalent” of a commercial airline ticket for his personal travel. A drop in the ocean compared to the total expense burdened on the Canadian taxpayer. This incident isn't just about a broken plane or a lavish vacation; it's a glaring example of the "do as I say, not as I do" attitude that permeates Trudeau's administration. While Canadian companies are bending over backward to adhere to anti-bribery rules, Trudeau seemingly waltzes above these standards, unscathed and unaccountable. Let's give a sarcastic round of applause for Prime Minister Trudeau. He's doing a fantastic job – of showing exactly what's wrong with our political elites. They live in a world where rules are for the little people, and the concept of accountability is as foreign as a Canadian winter is to Jamaica. Keep it up, Trudeau, you're doing great (wink, wink) #cdnpoli"
The meaning of Justin Trudeau's petty falsehoods - "Prime Minister Justin Trudeau failed, yet again, to take a trip without stirring up controversy. His office announced that he would be on a family vacation in Jamaica and would be paying for his accommodations (not for travel and security, which the government mandates and provides for all prime ministers). That turned out not to be true. Massively not true, as Trudeau stayed in a luxury villa that would ordinarily cost some $10,000/night. It was a gift from wealthy old family friends who owned the resort. Why lie about who was paying for the accommodations? After Trudeau’s previous trip to the Aga Khan’s private island ran afoul of ethics guidelines — the latter was receiving grants from the federal government — the PMO had to know that questions would be asked. So why lie when the truth would eventually come out; sooner rather than later, in fact? On Trudeau’s infamous Tofino trip for the first Truth and Reconciliation Day, his office initially lied too, claiming that the prime minister had meetings in Ottawa when in fact he was winging westward to the beach. That came out as soon as his plane was in the air and tracked by online observers. There was also the pointless obfuscation about what suite the prime minister used at the London hotel for the Queen’s funeral. That too eventually came out. To no one’s great surprise, the prime minister had the $6,000/night suite... Lies when thought necessary are still lies. But lies when unnecessary are lethal to public confidence, as if lies are told simply out of habit, or that not telling the truth is the default setting. Those who show themselves dishonest in small things will be considered untrustworthy in large things, and that matters a great deal."
Justin Trudeau's unaccountable consultocracy - "Canada has been turned into a “consultocracy” by Justin Trudeau who spends billions on management consultants because he and his cabinet lack the skills to govern. Management fees paid to consultants have skyrocketed to $17.7 billion in 2022, and McKinsey & Company virtually runs immigration. “The cost of McKinsey’s contracts has spiked 30-fold since the Harper years,” posted Radio-Canada in January. “The consulting firm McKinsey & Company has seen the amount of money it earns from federal contracts explode since Prime Minister Justin Trudeau came to power — to the point where some suggest it may have a central role in shaping Canada’s immigration policies.” After eight years of questionable Liberal leadership and billions spent on “expert” help, Canada’s two most important departments — immigration and defence — began conducting “public consultations” this spring to figure out what to do. Both are mired in controversy. In 2022, the country’s immigration system accepted a staggering 955,000 immigrants and non-permanent residents, according to a CIBC Capital Markets report. Excessive numbers of newcomers has been allowed for years, further straining housing and health care infrastructure in Toronto and across the country. Getting a family physician is impossible in many regions and emergency rooms are overwhelmed. Also this year, it became obvious that Canada’s armed forces have been gutted, neglected and unable to recruit personnel. Canada was unable to provide little in the way of weaponry or expertise to help the western alliance in Ukraine’s battle against Russia, and the U.S. and UK now patrol and surveil Canada’s Arctic. Canada’s current excessive immigration policy was conceived at a weekend gathering in 2011 in Muskoka, Ont., involving Dominic Barton, who served as global managing director of McKinsey & Company before becoming Canada’s ambassador to China for a time, and former Finance Minister Bill Morneau as well as BlackRock Inc. honcho Mark Wiseman. They decided that Canada should have a population of 100 million by 2100 and convinced Trudeau to ratchet immigration to record levels. They called their plan the Century Initiative and launched a not-for-profit to lobby for excessive immigration levels. Despite record numbers of newcomers, under Trudeau’s tenure, Ontario Labour Minister Monte McNaughton says a “looming skills crisis” is about to occur... Canadians do not want numbers of newcomers that will burden their existing healthcare, education, and housing systems, as is now the case. They want Ottawa to prioritize immigrants with needed skills to help the economy. Most would want family reunification limited to those with sponsors who can support them and buy health care insurance for them. They would want the hundreds of thousands who hold work or student visas to pay for their own health care. And only bona fide refugees from war zones should be accepted into Canada. The other “public consultation” involves the Department of National Defense (DND) and the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and follows revelations that Trudeau has never kept his security spending promises to NATO or NORAD. The DND says its consultations are aimed at asking the public how to “enable the CAF to meet any threat in the changed global security environment.” This is also embarrassing. When it comes to defence, the public response should be obvious: Do your bloody job. Protect the country and meet international commitments. Collaborate more with the U.S. and U.K. who know what they’re doing. Canadians don’t have to be consulted. Leaders should lead."
Chamber head says Canada must do more internationally - "Perrin Beatty, CEO of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, released an open letter to the prime minister this weekend, arguing that the country has to do more and develop a foreign policy and defence policy designed to meet today’s challenges. Beatty said he recently went to several events in the Indo-Pacific region and found the country was not considered a serious player... “We have too often concentrated our efforts on policies designed to produce good feelings instead of on those that will produce good results.”"
True North on X - "When asked about the declining state of Canada’s military, PM Trudeau blames the previous Harper government. When Global News’ Mercedes Stephenson points out that Trudeau has been in power for 8 years, he shifts the blame to the War in Ukraine."
Dan Knight on X - "Welcome to January 2nd, 2024, folks. As you shake off the festive spirit and step into the new year, brace yourselves. We're dissecting the 2024 New Year’s Tax Changes report by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, and it's a doozy. The federal government, in its relentless quest for revenue, has already set the stage to make you a little poorer this year. As the New Year's confetti is swept away and resolutions begin to take shape, Canadians are facing a stark, harsh reality. Your hard-earned dollars are about to be stretched even thinner, victim to a barrage of tax increases that are as inevitable as they are infuriating. In 2024, every Canadian worker will feel the financial squeeze. Federal income-based taxes are on the rise due to increasing payroll taxes. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. The Trudeau government, never one to shy away from digging deeper into your pockets, is also ramping up alcohol taxes and imposing a heftier carbon tax. It's more than just a few extra dollars here and there; it's a calculated, systematic tightening of the screws on your financial freedom. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation's report lays it all bare, providing a clear, unfiltered look at the economic challenges that lie ahead for Canadians this year. The table is set, and the numbers are stark. Whether you're earning $30,000 or $200,000, the increases are universal, relentless, and indifferent to your personal economic circumstances. The Canada Pension Plan and Employment Insurance taxes alone are set to take a bigger bite out of your paycheck. The touted second CPP tax, or "CPP2," isn't just an additional burden; it's an emblem of a government that sees no problem in reaching deeper into the pockets of its citizens. And let's talk about that carbon tax. It's not just rising; it's skyrocketing from $65 per tonne to $80 per tonne. This isn't just an abstract figure. It translates to more than 17 cents per litre of gas, a direct hit to anyone who drives a car, heats their home, or, frankly, buys anything transported by truck, train, or plane. Trudeau's government has the audacity to claim that families will somehow be "better off" with this carbon tax and its so-called rebate scheme. But let's call it what it is: a blatant falsehood. The Parliamentary Budget Officer, an independent officer of the parliament, cuts through this deception with a report showing that the average household will be out of pocket by $377 to $911 in 2024-25, even after these rebates. It's a slap in the face to hardworking Canadians who are already grappling with the rising cost of living. But wait, the duplicity doesn't end there. The federal government has imposed a second carbon tax, sneaking it in through fuel regulations. If fuel producers can't meet these overbearing regulations, they're hit with this additional tax. What does this mean for the average Canadian? By 2030, you can expect to pay up to 17 cents more per litre of gas and up to an extra $1,157 annually. It's a double dose of taxation, a one-two punch to the gut of every Canadian taxpayer. But the pain doesn't stop at the pump or with your home heating bill. The alcohol escalator tax is set to make your occasional indulgence more of a luxury, with a 4.7% increase in federal excise tax on beer, wine, and spirits. And the new digital services tax? It's a cleverly disguised cost that will inevitably be passed down to consumers, making everything from your online shopping to your social media use more expensive. The myriad of other tax changes—from the two per cent tax on share buybacks to the global minimum business tax agreement—are all part of a broader tapestry of fiscal policies that seem more focused on extraction than economic expansion. So, as you sip your morning coffee and ponder the year ahead, be aware that the financial landscape of 2024 is one of increased burden, courtesy of a government that seems to believe the solution to every problem is more tax. Welcome to the new year, Canada. It's going to be an expensive one."
NDP, Conservatives want to know why Liberals inked $150M deal with vaccine maker with big tobacco ties - "The NDP and Conservatives want answers about why the federal government signed a vaccine contract with a company financially tied to the tobacco industry, going against its own policies and leading to a $150-million loss... "That is a gross violation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.""
sonofabench on X - "Watch both videos. First is a man who honked his horn during the truckers' freedom convoy Second is a Muslim radical who threatened police with "I'll cut you six feet deep." Guess which one was arrested in Trudeau's Canada?"
Candice Malcolm on X - "The Freedom Convoy is the perfect example. Trudeau didn't want to deal with anyone critical of his covid regime, so he labelled the entire protest as "fringe," "hateful" and "far-right." The legacy media took their cues and began writing numerous stories smearing them in any way possible. By the time the truckers arrived in Ottawa, the narrative was set. These were hateful, radical, MAGA-funded, far-right, racists, and yes, even Nazis. Of course, none of that was true. They were blue collar and a little rough around the edges, sure, but for the most part they were apolitical, freedom-loving Canadians who wanted change. Even left-wing New York Times journalist Michelle Goldberg observed this. She had covered many far-right rallies in the US, and based on the Canadian news coverage, that is what she expected. Instead, she said she was "astonished" by what she encountered. Quirky, ordinary, freedom-loving Canadians from many different backgrounds, most who had never been to a rally or protest in their lives. Her reports shared the heartbreaking stories of so many Canadians who were hurt by draconian laws. She wrote about the many hugs she received, even as a member of the mainstream media, and descried a happy, joyous and peaceful environment. Can you imagine that it took a journalist from THE NEW YORK TIMES to offer balance, independence, nuance and fairness to the truckers. Why couldn't the legacy media cover the protests honestly and fairly? Can you think of a single member of the legacy media in Canada who -- like Michelle Goldberg -- covered the truckers objectively? Could this perhaps have something to do with government funding?"
Tamara Lich exposed the incompetence of the Canadian state - "Had a group of protesters calling itself the “freedom convoy” descended on the capital but instead of standing against pandemic restrictions, they stood for abortion rights, or were supporting Black Lives Matter, or were demanding the right for solar panels to be declared sentient beings, the narrative surrounding the protest would be much different. Instead of the unfounded epithets of “racists” and “misogynists” being hurled from people with degrees in journalism or sociology, the protesters would have been heralded as “very brave.” And if the government had dared to invoke the Emergencies Act to quell the uprising, the move would have been condemned (correctly, I might add) as an unnecessary, illiberal and authoritarian over-reaction... Their views made the convoy less likeable, but they were no more prone to an actual insurrection, despite whatever fantasies some of the convoy leaders held, than any garden-variety protest. In fact, despite the size and unusual methods of the convoy, it was less prone to violence than your typical student or anti-capitalist protest. Just ask Montreal. That the convoy was so widely and viciously condemned had much more to do with the views being expressed than with what actually happened. For some reason, the sensible position — that while the protest needed to be contained and controlled, it didn’t pose an inherent threat — was dismissed as naive or as an apologia for fascism. Even when, during the public inquiry last year, it was revealed that intelligence officers for both the Ontario Provincial Police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service did not believe there was a direct threat to national security, journalists and commentators largely remained committed to the notion that Canada really was on the verge of anarchy. The convoy, as an organization, it turns out, was, much like protest movements of the left, beset by internal squabbling and incoherent messaging. There was no credible plot to “overthrow the government,” unless making hundreds of phone calls to the Governor General’s office pleading with her to dismiss Prime Minister Justin Trudeau counts as credible. The decision to invoke the Emergencies Act, according to Trudeau, rested not on an actual threat of violence, but on the possibility that such a threat could emerge. Setting aside the point that this reasoning is an inversion of the standards set for invoking the act, it wasn’t the convoy itself that increased the possibility of violence breaking out, but the utter failure of police to maintain any semblance of order. That Lich’s case, and that of fellow convoy leader Chris Barber, has gone to trial at all is less an indictment of the actual crimes they are alleged to have committed — mischief, obstructing police and intimidation — than of the sheer incompetence of the Canadian state. The fact that the capital of a G7 nation can’t handle anything more serious than a speeding ticket without collapsing into chaos is the real crime here... In more serious places — Berlin, Paris, Washington, D.C. — thousands of protesters, even tens of thousands, don’t cause city life to seize up, even if those demonstrations contain large factions determined to riot, factions that were largely absent in Ottawa, thank God."
An antisemitic menace stalks Canada and Trudeau couldn't care less - "It is very hard, indeed it may be impossible, to disagree with the flood of online remarks asserting that the treatment of the pro-Hamas, anti-Israel protests differ rather troublingly from the treatment meted out to Canadian truckers. I’m not aware that Tamara Lich at any point during the trucker’s sojourn in Ottawa, in full voice, and in direct proximity to police officers, gave vent to “I’ll kill you … I’ll put you six feet deep” to either a policeman or to a passerby. During the weeks of the Freedom Convoy protest, as far as I know, and equally as far as the authorities are aware, at no point did she express murderous intent, make explicit death threats, or act with grand insouciance while doing so in the presence of numerous police. Yet Lich has been arrested, jailed, hounded and is still undergoing criminal proceedings, while a very fresh instance of “I’ll kill you … I’ll put you six feet under,” has — as I write on Monday evening — very little or none of the consequences Lich has been burdened with. There’s another great difference between the convoy protest and the full wave of antisemitic crowd scenes that have visited the large cities of Canada these past weeks, and some of the smaller ones. The convoy I freely own may have been very annoying — to some. And it may also have been more than an inconvenience. But at no time — despite lurid and utterly false accusations of attempted arson — did it carry an atmosphere of menace, did it traffic in wild and absolutely hateful accusations, as do the pro-Palestinian mobs who carry signs equating Israel with Nazi Germany, accusing Israel of — of all insulting untruths — genocide and apartheid; nor did it go about the City of Ottawa targeting stores with a specific ethnicity and religion and protesting those stores for “supporting genocide.” Not a coffee shop. Not a bookstore. Not a clothing outlet. Nor, and here I’ll stop the contrasting, did they have various spokespeople (Harsha Walia, Fred Hahn will serve as illustration) celebrating as savage a mass murder, torture, rape of 1,200 and the kidnapping of 250 innocent people — from babies to the very old. I suppose I should add that the trucker protest was not accompanied by any firebombs at religious buildings, terror plots uncovered, or quite explicit hateful expressions of any kind. No wonder the police were so active. Annoying the convoy may have been, but their cause was rational, their behaviour was lawful, there was no menace (beyond the frightful scenes at the hot tub). However that protest got prime ministerial denunciation even before it began. The current rampage of obviously orchestrated and scary (ask any Jewish Canadian) manifestations has so far received not a fraction of the invective Justin Trudeau loosed upon the truckers... I presume, as no one’s pronouns were offended, or Pride banners defaced, all is well as far as the government is concerned."
Amazing Zoltan on X - "Plagued by homelessness, crime and food insecurity, Canada just sent $10 million to Iraq to help with "Iraqi youth unemployment." I can't even."
Pierre Poilievre on X - "The Trudeau government pays foreign marksmen almost $1 million to fly around in helicopters shooting excess deer, while he works to ban hunting rifles of Canadians. He’s paying almost $10,000 per deer, when our hunters would have done it for the meat. Asinine."
Albertarian on X - "The irony of Parks Canada culling the deer on Sidney Island at $ 834 000. They were shooting from a helicopter using a — semiautomatic .223 firearm with extended 30 round magazine. Trudeau - “Nobody wants assault-style weapons …you don't use them for hunting….” PM is a 🤡."
