Monday, March 28, 2011

More News From Canada!

Beware of NDP leadership hopefuls bearing policy gifts from Greece
Brian Topp: proposing a radical program of huge tax hikes
Canadian Taxpayers Federation By Gregory Thomas, Federal and Ontario Director
Monday, December 5, 2011
In his campaign to become the next national leader of the NDP, candidate Brian Topp is proposing a radical program of huge tax hikes. To understand why a serious contender for the leadership of Canada’s official opposition would put forward such a destructive program, it’s important to consider his world view.
When the Greek debt crisis was unfolding this past summer, Mr. Topp was at the centre of it all, in Athens, admiring the leadership skills of former Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou.
To most of us the summer was frightening; watching Papandreou plunge the world economy into near-chaos – first agreeing to a bailout package from the European Union, then announcing a national referendum on the deal (without consulting the EU or his cabinet), triggering a global stock market sell-off and finally calling off the referendum vote and resigning under pressure. Investors took a 50 per cent loss on Greek bonds, pensioners saw across-the-board reductions in their retirement benefits, while Greek employers and workers prepared for a severe recession.
For Topp, then serving as national president of Canada’s NDP, it was business as usual.
In Athens on Canada Day, for the worldwide convention of Socialist International, he wrote home to his blog , that Papandreou “is a quietly inspiring figure.” Topp said the Greek leader “opened the meeting with a calm, thoughtful, and determined overview.”
“Perhaps his most important words were his final ones,” Topp wrote, as he thrilled to the uplifting rhetoric. “We will survive, and we will win.”
Everybody knows the next chapter in the story: Papandreou and the NDP’s Socialist International counterparts proceeded to default on Greece’s debt.
This would all be pretty funny if Brian Topp were not the most likely successor to Jack Layton, poised to become the leader of Canada’s official opposition.
In the current fiscal year, the government of Canada expects to collect record revenues. Even so, finance minister Jim Flaherty is forecasting a $35 billion deficit on account of spending that has soared 31 per cent since his government took office in 2006. And Flaherty is forecasting spending to increase a further 13 per cent over the next five years, before revenues overtake spending and we finally enjoy a balanced budget.
Like most of his colleagues in Socialist International, Brian Topp believes the solution to the worldwide debt crisis (a crisis caused by over-spending) is higher taxes.
In his policy paper released in late November, Brian Topp promises that, as Prime Minister, he will hike the top federal income tax rate from 29 per cent to 35 per cent, double the taxable capital gains rate from 50 to 100 per cent, tax stock options like employment income and boost the federal business tax rate from 15 per cent to 22.12 per cent.
He explains his $18 billion tax grab, saying our current tax rates are “benefits given to people who don’t need them.” Apparently in Mr. Topp’s world, any money you earn is rightful property of the government and any amount they let you keep is a gift for which you should be grateful.
For now, the people Brian Topp claims to really want to squeeze – 173,570 people earning over $250,000 – (less than the population of Barrie, Ontario) already pay $29 billion dollars in federal income tax each year. Or put another way, they are the 0.7 per cent of all taxpayers who happen to provide 20 per cent of all federal income tax revenue. In comparison, 12 million Canadians (52 per cent of taxpayers) pay $6 billion in federal income taxes – only 4 per cent of the total.
Topp’s solution is to target the people who already pay $29 billion each year in federal income tax and take another $3 billion from them.
And what would he do with that $3 billion tax grab? Topp says the money “would then be available for productive investment.”
Many of us could probably be classed as sceptics on that point: if you needed to find a truly productive investment for that money, you might be tempted to leave it in the hands of the people who earned it, rather than turn it over to the president of the NDP, the former prime minister of Greece and all the big brains in Socialist International.
Canada Gives the Bum’s Rush to Bill Ayers, Terrorist, Obama Pal, and ACORN Conspirator
Ayers, a self-described "small-c communist," was barred Wednesday by the Canadian Border Services Agency
Special to Canada Free Press
Matthew Vadum
Friday, June 17, 2011
Canada was absolutely right to deny entry to unrepentant American terrorist Bill Ayers.
Ayers, a self-described “small-c communist,” was barred Wednesday by the Canadian Border Services Agency. He had hoped to spread his visceral hatred of freedom and democracy at the Worldview Conference on Media and Higher Education on Thursday in Toronto. The conference was co-sponsored by the notorious Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) at the University of Toronto. OISE is well known for its embrace of radical left-wing politics.
According to the National Post, conference organizers whined that Ayers was being denied his so-called academic freedom. A spokesperson said Ayers’s refused admission to the country “should raise red flags for citizens concerned with free and open debate.”
The spokesperson is absolutely right. Those flags should be red. Bright red.
The now-retired education professor was a leader of the communist Weather Underground, a terrorist group that bombed U.S. targets, including the Pentagon, throughout the late 1960s and ‘70s. He said he doesn’t regret the bombings and has never disavowed the use of violence to achieve political change.
The Weather Underground plotted to use dynamite to murder military officers at a dance in Fort Dix, New Jersey in 1970. The only reason the bombing didn’t take place is because his comrades blew themselves up while making bombs in New York City.
As I write in my new book, Subversion Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers (WND Books), Ayers’s group had even more diabolical plans.
According to Larry Grathwohl, a Vietnam War veteran who infiltrated the Weather Underground, the terrorists also came up with a plan to murder millions of Americans when the communist revolution the group pressed for came to pass. Their plan was to slaughter the one-tenth of the U.S. population they expected would turn out to be “diehard capitalists” incapable of reeducation.
Ayers is a close personal friend of U.S. President Barack Obama. Obama launched his political career with a fundraiser in the living room of Ayers’s home in Chicago’s Hyde Park.
Ayers is also a longtime supporter of the U.S.-based Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), a Saul Alinsky-inspired urban terrorist group that uses violence and intimidation against corporations and governments to spread its version of “social justice.” Obama worked for ACORN and represented it in court as its lawyer.
Ideologically similar to Jack Layton’s New Democratic Party (NDP), ACORN is a profoundly antisocial organization. It tries to destroy everything that’s good in society, including free political institutions.
When Ayers and Obama sat on the boards of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and the Woods Fund of Chicago they directed funds to ACORN.
Now ACORN has metastasized to Canada. It maintains offices in Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, and Vancouver. (ACORN, incidentally, is also one of the evil groups New York Times bestselling author Ann Coulter writes about in her new book Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America.)
Investigators on a U.S. congressional committee concluded that ACORN illegally spends taxpayer dollars on partisan activities, commits “systemic fraud,” and violates racketeering and election laws.
The investigators’ findings were included in “Is ACORN Intentionally Structured As a Criminal Enterprise?” a report issued in summer 2009. The report declares that “[t]he weight of evidence against ACORN and its affiliates is astounding.”
As I write in Subversion Inc., acting in concert with other radical direct-action organizations ACORN successfully cornered the U.S. voter fraud market and helped to pump up the housing bubble that is still slowly deflating and causing havoc in U.S. markets. ACORN ridicules the work ethic and tries to recruit people onto the welfare roles. It supports gun prohibition and urges regulation of free speech. If something is good, ACORN is against it.
ACORN has no respect for democracy and the rule of law. Its mission ever since its founding in 1970 by New Left radicals has been to overthrow “the system.” ACORN routinely blackmails businesses for the political equivalent of protection money. It profits from its rent-a-mob services in which it takes money from one business with orders to stir up trouble for another business.
And now ACORN’s most famous employee, Barack Obama, is doing everything in his power to implement the destructive left-wing ACORN agenda from the White House.
Don’t let ACORN, Bill Ayers’s favorite activist group, wreck Canada.
Matthew Vadum,, is an investigative reporter at a watchdog group in Washington, D.C.
His new book Subversion Inc. can be bought at (US), (Canada), and as an e-book at Kobo (Canada).
Visit the Subversion Inc. Facebook page.
Follow Matthew on Twitter.!/vadum
One Year Later McGuinty Needs To Take Sex Ed For Six Year Olds Off The Table
Ontario PC Caucus forced Dalton McGuinty to backtrack on his new sex-ed curriculum
News on the Net
Thursday, April 21, 2011
QUEEN’S PARK— Today, in the provincial Legislature, the Ontario PC Caucus asked Dalton McGuinty why families should believe he won’t try again to sneak in changes to the Ontario elementary school curriculum and proceed with his plan to teach sex courses to six year-olds after the election. In the Legislature, McGuinty failed to assure Ontario families that sex-ed for six year olds is off the table for good.
Tomorrow marks one year since pressure from Ontario families and the Ontario PC Caucus forced Dalton McGuinty to backtrack on his new sex-ed curriculum. Last year, within 54 hours of introducing these changes to the curriculum, McGuinty reversed course on his two-years-in-the-making plan and promised to consult parents on a new curriculum. To date, no new proposals have been put forward and parents have still not been consulted.
In the next election, Ontario families will have a clear choice between the McGuinty Liberals who meddle with family decisions and whose out-of-touch priorities include sex-ed for six year olds, and Tim Hudak and the Ontario PC Caucus who will give Ontario parents the respect they deserve when it comes to decisions that affect their families.
“One year ago, the McGuinty Liberals gave a vigorous defence of why they were pressing ahead with sex-ed for six year olds only to find that hours later, McGuinty backtracked confessing they hadn’t really consulted parents and they would do so. Now, a year later—why is there still no indication that they will consult parents?”—Lisa MacLeod, MPP Nepean-Carleton, PC Revenue and Government Accountability Critic
“Dalton McGuinty promised to consult parents on changes to the sex education curriculum that they viewed as a fait accompli last year. Today, there is still no schedule of consultations, and parents see no sign that anything will change. Why shouldn’t parent believe that the Liberals are waiting until after the next election to bring back sex classes for six year olds if they’re given the chance?”—Lisa MacLeod, MPP Nepean-Carleton, PC Revenue and Government Accountability Critic
Quick Facts:
Dalton McGuinty supported the new curriculum when he was first asked about it on Tuesday, April 20, 2010. Within 54 hours, following a public backlash, McGuinty reversed course and promised to consult parents on a new curriculum.
Today, in the legislature, the Ontario PCs asked McGuinty why families should believe that he will not bring back sex ed for six year olds. The McGuinty Liberals failed to assure parents that the curriculum was off the table for good.
Minister of Education Leona Dombrowski admitted that the Liberal sex-ed plan was a deliberate scheme over two years in the making, while falsely claiming that parents were widely consulted on the plan.
Also See:
Our Society is Now Advocating Homosexuality
31 December 2010
Sex Education in Ontario Elementary Schools is Going Too Far!!
24 June 2010
Conservative Harper attacked right from pulpit of Catholic Church today
Judi McLeod
Monday, April 4, 2011
Talking Peace and Social Justice, the far left Development and Peace representing other leftist groups came to Catholic Church in Canada today, elbowing the Gospel of Jesus Christ aside for a full-tilt campaign speech for the Coalition Opposition.
In the last message heard before the final blessing was given, parishioners were told to “get on their computers” to spread the word that the Conservative Government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper is forcing Canada into the European Union.
The exact words of Susan at St. Gabriel’s Roman Catholic Church, Burlington, Ontario, who plugged the website of the Council of Canadians among others: “The Harper Conservatives are planning our country’s entrance into the European Union. Did you know this?” (go to the 1:04 mark on CFP YouTube).
The message was delivered at St. Gabe’s 8 a.m. Mass and repeated at the 11 a.m. Mass.
The captive audience at Sunday service, who had already contributed to a collection that went to Development and Peace, experienced something of a Charlie Sheen in Detroit moment. “I already got your money, dude,” he shouted to departing audience members who walked out on his show.
Nor did the political message stop there. “We need to have better health care, a stronger economy and jobs. We need to protect our freedoms here and now,”
Susan said.
A stony silence followed the 8 a.m. message. A smattering of applause followed the delivery at the later Mass where CFP videotaped the campaign speech.
Interesting to note that at the same time Susan’s 11 a.m. message was being delivered, Canadian Liberal Party Leader Michael Ignatieff (media dubbed “Iggy”) was launching his Barack Obama style campaign electronically via LiveFeed.
In both addresses at St. Gabriel’s, parishioners were invited to write Steve Harper’s “friend” Burlington MP Mike Wallace. “Please write to him and if you do not have a computer, visit him when you’re on the second floor of the Burlington Mall.”
Development and Peace and the Council of Canadians are Canadian both non-profit organizations.
Development and Peace is the official international development organization of the Catholic Church in Canada and the Canadian member of Caritas Internationalis. Development and Peace is a membership led organization supported by parish collections, individual donations and government grants, principally from the Canadian International Development Agency.
Our vision: Committed to change
Our mission: Support partners in the Global South who promote alternatives to unfair social, political and economic structures. It educates the Canadian population about the causes of poverty and mobilizes Canadians towards actions for change. In the struggle for human dignity, the organization forms alliances with northern and southern groups working for social change. It also supports women in their search for social and economic justice.
The Council of Canadians is a member of the Canadian Peace Alliance, touted as “Canada’s largest umbrella peace organization.
It is chaired by activist Maude Barlow, board chair of the Washington-based Food & Water Watch and executive member of the San Francisco-based International Forum on Globalization and a Councillor with the Hamburg-based World Future Council. In 2008/2009, she served as Senior Advisor on Water to the 63rd President of the United Nations General Assembly.
The Council of Canadians supports the War Resisters’ Support Campaign, which is a broad based coalition of community, faith, labour and other organizations and individuals that have come together to support U.S. soldiers seeking asylum in Canada because they refuse to fight in “the illegal war in Iraq”.
Both organizations are creatures of the United Nations. Development and Peace, through CIDA, the Maurice Strong founded Canadian International Development Agency. The Council of Canadians “which seeks to establish a Department of Peace in Canada to change the dynamic of debate and decision making in cabinet and parliament towards a culture of peace and non-violence at home and abroad,” is described on its campaign page as being “in concert with the UN”.
Canadian non-profit organizations like Development and Peace and Council of Canadians are curtailed by Canada’s rules for non profits from participating in overt political activities.
From The Canadian Government Website:
Political purposes
Organizations with political purposes will not qualify for registration.
The courts have determined political purposes to be those that seek to:
further the interests of a particular political party; or support a political party or candidate for public office; or
retain, oppose, or change the law, policy, or decision of any level of government in Canada or a foreign country.
In addition, a registered charity cannot engage in any partisan political activity (i.e., one that involves direct or indirect support of, or opposition to, any political party or candidate for public office).
However, a registered charity can engage, to a limited extent, in non-partisan political activities which help accomplish the charity’s purpose.
For more information and examples, see Policy Statement CPS-022, Political Activities.
Entering a Catholic church and campaigning for a political party is certainly partisan political activity and both organizations should have their charitable status pulled.
Most parishioners do not expect to hear speeches for political parties during election campaigns at their local church Sunday services.
The age-old hymn What A Friend We Have in Jesus could have easily been replaced today by What a Friend Iggy has in the Canadian far left.
Meanwhile, during election saving your immortal soul via the pulpit is being trumped by “Peace, Brother, Peace.”
Why are Canadian Conservatives covering for Obama in Libya?
So it should come as no surprise to any that Canada is in Drudge headlines “Canada Takes Charge on Libya” today
Judi McLeod
Friday, March 25, 2011
It could easily be argued that Canada is the most pro-UN country among all Western nations.

Canadian Maurice Strong, senior advisor to former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, who had more UN titles than any other person living or dead, until his name was connected to the United Nations Oil For food Scandal in 2005, was kingpin for the sweeping major reforms under Annan, and of most UN initiatives seeking a One World Government.
Canadian Louise Arbour was from 2004 to 2008 UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and a former chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rawanda.
Canadian Louise Frechette was until 2005 UN Deputy Secretary-General for eight years.
The United States of America has troops. Canada has “Peace Keepers”.
Former Liberal Canadian Prime Minister Lester Pearson, while he was President of the UN General Assembly in 1957, proposed the concept of UN Peacekeeping Forces.
Former Canadian Ambassador to the United Nations and President of the United Nations Security Council
George Ignatieff, is the father of current day Canadian Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.
In fact, pull out a file from almost any UN portfolio, and you will find Canadian names with big titles.
So it should come as no surprise to any that Canada is in Drudge headlines “Canada Takes Charge on Libya” today.
According to Yahoo News, A Canadian general will take over command of the NATO mission on Libya”.
“Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay said Friday that Lt. General Charles Bouchard has been designated to lead the alliance’s military campaign in Libya. (Yahoo News, March 25, 2011). “Bouchard is stationed in Naples, Italy, at the Allied Joint Force Command.
“Bouchard’s recent job was deputy commander of NORAD, reporting to an American general.
“He will be commander of the NATO operations, yet to be fully defined NATO operations,” MacKay said.
Looks like President Barack Obama, who has yet to explain to Americans, what America is doing in Libya, got cover from Canada.
MacKay’s statement came only hours before the Prime Minister Stephen Harper two-time minority government fell.
Until the Libya flyover, the last military statements from MacKay and Harper were about withdrawing the 2,500 Canadian troops from Afghanistan on a deadline of July, 2011.
In May, Parliament passed a resolution that Canada would continue until July 2011 its military presence in the volatile southern province of Kandahar, where most of Canada’s roughly 2,500 troops in Afghanistan are based.
In response to public requests from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that Canadian military forces stay on in Afghanistan after 2011, Prime Minister Stephen Harper reportedly told Clinton that by then the Canadian presence would be a civilian mission focused on aid and reconstruction.
As Rush Limbaugh stated on his radio show today, many people don’t know the origination of NATO. “Some have forgotten and some are too young”, Limbaugh said.
“North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is a military alliance consisting of the United States, Canada, and 14 other Western countries [since this publication, 5 other countries have joined NATO, making 19 member states in all: see links below.] The 14 countries are Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. Formed in 1949, NATO was set up largely to discourage an attack by the Soviet Union on the non-Communist nations of Western Europe. After World War II ended in 1945, an intense rivalry had developed between Communist countries, led by the Soviet Union, and non-Communist nations, led by the United States. This rivalry became known as the Cold War. In 1955, the Soviet Union and Communist nations of Eastern Europe formed their own military alliance to oppose NATO. The Soviet-led alliance was called the Warsaw Pact. NATO was established not only to discourage Communist aggression but also to keep the peace among former enemies in Western Europe. In World War II, for example, Italy and Germany had fought most of the other countries that later became NATO members. In forming NATO, each member country agreed to treat an attack on any other member as an attack on itself. Militarily, the United States was—and still is—the alliance’s most powerful member, in part because of its large supply of nuclear weapons.
“Canada takes charge on Libya?”
Something’s off here. And the off is sporting a big red maple leaf.