Saturday, May 26, 2018

It Will Take Time But Justice Is Coming!


Greg Hunter - Weekly News Wrap-Up 5.25.18
Published on May 24, 2018

BIG NAMES LISTED!! Whistle blower CIA Agent Gave Up Everything To UNDERCOVER The Shadow Government
Published on Apr 16, 2018
OBAMAGATE - Dan Bongino (Part I)
Published on Feb 10, 2018

OBAMAGATE - Dan Bongino (Part II)
Sean Giordano
Published on Feb 10, 2018

Monica Crowley - Why the Swamp Hates Donald Trump
TJ Singh टी.जे. सिंह
Published on Jan 20, 2018
Crossfire Hurricane: Pull back curtain on FBI's investigation of Donald Trump, Russia
James S. Robbins, Opinion columnist
Published May 21, 2018

In a shocking move President Trump said he will ask the Department of Justice to investigate whether or not the FBI surveilled his 2016 Presidential campaign. For more on the story here is Zachary Devita. Buzz60
The FBI surveilled Trump's campaign. Only the motive and who gave the orders remains a mystery, but it won't remain for long.
President Donald Trump is under fire for his latest tweet storm. Again. Photo: (Evan Vucci/AP
(Photo: (Evan Vucci/AP)
President Trump is ordering the Justice Department formally to examine whether the Obama administration used the FBI to attempt a political hit on his 2016 campaign. It’s about time.
On Sunday the president tweeted that he will instruct the DOJ to investigate whether the FBI/DOJ “infiltrated or surveilled the Trump campaign for political purposes.” The last three words are key, because we already know the Trump campaign was under FBI "surveillance." Only the motive and who gave the orders remains a mystery.
Remember the umbrage in March 2017 when the president said that he had been “wiretapped” before the election? Then-FBI Director James Comey testified he had had “no information” to support that idea, and he had “looked carefully inside the FBI." Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said there was no surveillance, and as DNI 
he would have known about a court order on "something like this." PolitiFact labeled the claim 100% false.
What a difference a year makes. Recent revelations of the extent of the anti-Trump surveillance activity have forced Trump critics to adopt a new narrative. Clapper now says spying on the campaign was actually a good thing. The New York Times took issue with the term “spying,” saying rather that it was simply an “investigation.” This dickering over terms is reminiscent of when former Attorney General Loretta Lynch insisted the “investigation” into Hillary Clinton’s home-brew email server be called a “matter.”
Former FBI agent Asha Rangappa wrote in the Washington Post that the spying was in fact for Trump’s protection, which he would understand if he knew the first thing about the art of counter-intelligence. But if the FBI was trying to shield the Trump campaign from evil Russkies, why not inform the candidate up front both to warn him and to allay any potential misunderstandings? The New York Times helpfully answers that the FBI was protecting the integrity of the election by keeping the spying under wraps — and in fact if any campaign was hurt it was Hillary Clinton’s.
This flurry of revisionist interpretations comes prior to the expected release of DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report on the Hillary Clinton email investigation, which could contain criminal referrals. The IG is also looking into how the FBI obtained a 
FISA warrant to begin its spying campaign on an unnamed Trump aide. Shortly after the president’s tweet on Sunday, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein asked the Inspector General to expand this investigation to include “whether there was any impropriety or political motivation in how the FBI conducted its counterintelligence investigation.”
POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media
The FBI and Justice Department could help matters at this point with radical transparency, releasing all the information about every aspect of what they dubbed Operation Crossfire Hurricane. But at every turn the DOJ has raised national security objections to revealing practically anything important. This is harmful to the DOJ and the country. The department leadership needs to understand that a considerable number of Americans believe that the DOJ itself has become a national security threat.
Besides, how could the FBI’s spying on the Trump campaign not have been for political purposes? We have FBI special agent Peter Strzok’s private texts to his paramour FBI lawyer Lisa Page reviewing an Aug. 15, 2016, meeting in then-deputy director Andrew McCabe’s office with top FBI officials, saying the government “can’t take (the) risk” that “Trump gets elected” and the Russia investigation was their “insurance policy” against a Trump presidency. If the Strzok-Page texts were not still heavily and strategically redacted we would know much more. And the fact remains that a major party candidate has never been subjected to such a bizarrely concocted and systematic official investigation during and after an election. Derailing this bastardized process and the Mueller investigation it spawned is not obstruction of justice, but obstruction of injustice.
Whoever came up with the Rolling Stones-inspired name “Crossfire Hurricane” for the horrendous spy operation had a strange sense of humor. But as we watch the truth gradually emerge, see the abuses of power laid bare, and entertain the prospect that the principle actors behind this wretched excess may be held criminally responsible, to quote the Stones, “it’s all right now, in fact it’s a gas.” 
James S. Robbins, a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors and author of This Time We Win: Revisiting the Tet Offensive, has taught at the National Defense University and the Marine Corps University and served as a special assistant in the office of the secretary of Defense in the George W. Bush administration. Follow him on Twitter: @James_Robbins..

Tuesday, May 22, 2018

No White Genocide BUT South Africa is in Turmoil!


Lauren Southern and The Lie of White Genocide In South Africa w/ Sisana
Search For Uhuru
Streamed live on Mar 29, 2018

Boer Project: South Africa A Reverse Apartheid?
Published on Mar 17, 2018

White Farmers Slaughtered in South Africa | Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux
Stefan Molyneux
Published on Feb 10, 2018

White Genocide in South Africa?
Faith J Goldy
Published on Dec 21, 2017

Crisis In South Africa!
Streamed live on Dec 11, 2017

Shock Video Of White Genocide Taking Place Across Africa
The Alex Jones Channel
Published on Nov 20, 2017
Genocide in South Africa - What Media Won't Tell You | Mike Cernovich Periscope
Published on Mar 26, 2017

South Africa Documentary White Revenge, shocking!
Melisizwe Diba
Published on Oct 30, 2013

South Africa's White-Supremacist Terrorists
Journeyman Pictures
Published on Mar 17, 2008
South Africa farm attacks: Black farmers also living in fear
WHITE farmers in South Africa say there is a campaign of genocide directed against them. But the other side of the issue has now been heard.
April 13, 2018
White farmers claim they are persecuted and feel unsafe with the government not doing enough to protect them. Picture: David Harrison/AFPSource:AFP
SOUTH Africa is launching an ambitious land reform program as white farmers accuse the government of using hate speech to grab property.
As racial tensions escalate across the country, the government is pursuing plans to give farms owned by white farmers to the black community without compensation.
The plan is being supported by the controversial Economic Freedom Fighters party which has long called for the change.
It comes as black South Africans hit back at the claims of violence, saying they are the victims, the ABC reported.
The father of Matlhomola Mosweu, a 16-year-old youth killed in Coligny in the country’s north west, maintained it was black people who remain the biggest victims of the violence.
Sakkie Dingake’s son was accused of stealing a sunflower from a white-owned farm and was later found dead. Two white farmers have been charged with his death but maintain their innocence.
White farmers claim they are persecuted and feel unsafe with the government not doing enough to protect them. Picture: David Harrison/AFP
White farmers claim they are persecuted and feel unsafe with the government not doing enough to protect them. Picture: David Harrison/AFPSource:AFP
“Based on my experience, it’s not blacks who are victimising them. It is them who are victimising blacks,” Mr Dingake told the ABC.
EFF national spokesman Mbuyiseni Ndlozi denied there was a campaign of genocide directed against white farmers.
“It’s an exaggeration,” he said.
“It’s not even an exaggeration, it’s a falsehood. There is no white genocide. There is no political movement to kill white people. There are no political intentions to the killing of whites.”
The issue of violence against South Africa came under the spotlight after Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton suggested persecuted white farmers should be resettled in Australia.
Just last week Mr Dutton said he was considering “several” applications from South African farmers for refugee or humanitarian status in Australia.
The offer has angered South Africa’s government, insisting no such persecution is taking place.
South Africa President Cyril Ramaphosa (centre) said his country wasn’t following Zimbabwe’s example of violence. Picture: Mujahid Safodien/AFP
According to Afriforum, a rights group representing primarily the white Afrikaner minority, 74 farm murders took place in 2016/2017. It says there have been at least 113 attacks and 17 murders as of March this year.
South Africa’s foreign ministry also maintains its people were not under any such danger.
South Africans living in the troubled nation have revealed the lengths they go to stay safe as violence escalates.
Chris Esterhuizen told the ABC farmers started their own neighbourhood watch after having little faith in police.
The group, who go on patrol in Bela Bela, Limpopo province, are armed and wear bulletproof vests as they go about their patrols.
Another farmer Berdus Henrico revealed how he was pistol whipped and shot in the shoulder two times before the gun failed with his robbers still at large.
Others have told they are too scared to leave their homes.
In an interview last month, one retiree said she was housebound and too scared to go out even during the day.

The woman, who did not want to be named, said her family are living in constant fear of being attacked or the victim of violence.
White South African farmers say they're living in fear, but blacks say they're the ones being victimised
By Africa correspondent Sally Sara
Updated 12 Apr 2018
Every night, local farmers go on patrol around Bela Bela in South Africa's Limpopo province. Armed and wearing bulletproof vests, they cover more than 160 square kilometres.
Chris Esterhuizen says they have little faith in the police, so they look after themselves.
"You wait four or five hours for the police to come out to assist you. So, we decided to do a neighbourhood watch in our area," he said.
By day, Mr Esterhuizen runs a local taxidermy business. He is always armed, even in the workshop.
He's determined to stay in South Africa, but the fear of being attacked is taking a big emotional toll.
"I think there are guys who want to leave everything. But I don't think it's so easy. You put your whole life — sorry, this is taking me very seriously. You can't leave this place. Really," he said.
According to police figures, 71 people were murdered on South African farms in the year to March 2017.
But farming group Afriforum says that figure does not reflect the full extent of the violence faced by its members.
'They want our money and our land'
In February, armed robbers stormed a farm house in the Melk River district north of Bela Bela.
Berdus Henrico was shot repeatedly at close range and pistol whipped until he was unconscious.
"I was shot two times here," he said pointing to his shoulder.
"And the other one went in here and went out the back of my neck."
The attackers tried to take one final shot at Mr Henrico's head, as his partner Estelle Nieuwenhuys watched on in horror, but the rifle jammed.
"I can't get that out of my head. Because, I believe that if that shot went down, the next one was for me," she said.
The robbers escaped and are still at large.
The couple have upgraded their security, including an electric fence.
But they are left wondering at the motive for the attack. Was it an opportunistic robbery or race-based violence?
Mr Henrico has his view.
"It's hatred from them. The most thing they want to do, is disarm our white people. They want our guns, they want our money and they want our land. That's the main thing," he said.
White farmers not the only victims
South Africa's ruling party, the African National Congress, has denounced the violence against farmers, even though it has been accused by some farming groups of failing to do enough.
ANC national spokesman Pule Mabe says farming families must be safe.
"The ANC is in solidarity with the farmers on that issue. We are standing on their side. The ANC has always declared any acts of terror on other human beings to be acts of criminality," he said.
More than two decades after the end of apartheid, South Africa's progress is still overshadowed by division and violence. And it's not just white farmers who are the victims. Some black farm workers and their families are also suffering.
In April last year, 16-year-old Matlhomola Mosweu was found dead after being accused of stealing a sunflower from a white-owned farm, near the town of Coligny in South Africa's north west.
The death has devastated his father, Sakkie Dingake.
"It was painful, to be honest, because I expected a lot of him. My son had a vision of what he wanted to become in the future," Mr Dingake said.
Two white farmers have been charged in connection with the killing. Both maintain their innocence. The case is still before the courts.
Matlhomola's parents are former farm workers. They live in a squatter camp with hundreds of others who are jobless and landless.
"Based on my experience, it's not blacks who are victimising them. It is them who are victimising blacks," Mr Dingake said.
Local residents rioted when Matlhomola's body was found, lashing out at white residents, burning down homes and looting businesses.
'There is no white genocide'
The tension in some communities is escalating, as the South African government promises to launch a land reform program.
White farmers have accused leaders of political parties, such as the opposition Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), of using hate speech to encourage genocide and land invasions.
But EFF national spokesman Mbuyiseni Ndlozi disagrees.
"It's an exaggeration. It's not even an exaggeration, it's a falsehood. There is no white genocide. There is no political movement to kill white people. There are no political intentions to the killing of whites," Mr Ndlozi said.
The EFF is backing the call for white farms to be handed back to the millions of black South Africans who work the land but don't own it. After years of avoiding any action, the South African Government says it will change the law so it can seize land without compensation.
"Land is a matter of pride. The best way you can restore the pride of our people is to give them back their land," ANC national spokesman Mr Mabe said.
White landowners, such as Mr Esterhuizen from Bela Bela, say the land wasn't stolen.
"I mean, nobody here just gets land. Where ever you go, you have to buy your farm, you have to buy your land. So the EFF guys just want to take land over. They say it's their land. So, it's a problem', Mr Esterhuizen said.
Anger over Peter Dutton's suggestion
The suggestion by Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton of special visas for white farmers to go to Australia has angered the South African Government.
"No one must ever, regardless of which country they find themselves in, must ever undermine how the people of South Africa process their own revolution. We are peace-loving individuals," Mr Mabe said.
The EFF has ridiculed the visa suggestion.
"South Africa and the history of white Australia, they share the same racism, the same hatred, the same phobia with white people in South Africa of black people," Mr Ndlozi said.
"Therefore they are plugging into that. So, we are not shocked that such a thing would come from Australia.

"White people would be running away, if they were to run to Australia, they would be running away from themselves. Because they are afraid of equality."
The White Genocide Hoax in South Africa – Stop the Madness
By Thabi Myeni*, AFROPUNK contributor
April 2, 2018
Contrary to white popular belief, there is no such thing as white genocide in South Africa.
The white genocide myth started making waves in 2014. Four years later, we\’re still talking about this lie because South African white supremacists are now fueling it with the help of racist pundits from ultra white imperialist countries and Fox News.
I imagine the hoax acheived its goal as early as 2015 when it became one of Dylann Roof’s motivations for brutally killing nine black people in a Charleston church. In his manifesto “The Last Rhodesian”, Dylann Roof paid homage to South African white supremacists by referencing the imaginery genocide of white people happening here. He also praised apartheid as evidence that a black majority can be controlled by a white minority.
The fact that black people in South Africa continue to be the subject of necropolitics, dispossession and systemic racial oppression for almost 400 years now without frantic global media coverage and all it took was for white people to sign a petition based on a lie for Fox News to come running, speaks volumes about the kind of people who have the power to control the media narrative and standardized outrage.
South Africa remains a deeply unequal-racial society. According to recent statistics, indegenous people own less than 4% of agricultural land and as much as 73.3% is in the hands of the white minority. Which brings us to another reason why the beneficiaries of colonisation would lie about something so henious, black people are organising themselves to take back their land. Grassroots movements like the Black First Land First (BLF) that are lobbying for indigenous people to take back what is rightfully theirs, have inspired mass resistance against white hegemony. Calls for reparations are mounting, black people are organizing themselves to pursue justice and making serious strides towards their liberation.
The worst part of this hoax is that most statistics that these white \”civil societies\” put out about white genocide have been debunked at every intersection, there’s not a single definitive statistical report that would lead any sane person to conclude that South Africa’s white race is systematically and deliberately being killed.
Crime is rampant in South Africa, which should shock no one because our Constitution (the cornerstone of our so-called democracy) itself doesn\’t seek to correct the most violent crimes this country has ever seen – white capitalism and dispossession. Where the black majority has been disenfranchised and economically excluded.
The most important take away is that crime affects everyone and if anything, white people are less affected by it because a large majority of white South Africans live in gated communities and have the luxury of security. Most violent crimes tend to happen in underdeveloped areas called townships and it just so happens that those areas are occupied by black people who were forcefully removed from their homes and packed into there like sardines after being dispossessed of land.
Furthermore, if anyone should complain about farm murders, it is the millions of indegenous people whose ancestors were slaughtered on the same farms that white people now occupy \”for generations\” today.
Let’s close the chapter on this, genocide is when a large group of people of a specific ethnicity or nation are deliberately murdered in an attempt to erase that group’s existence. Is this happening to white people in South Africa? No? Well then, end of story.
* Thabi Myeni is a student activist and aspiring writer
Statistics on land ownership []
Dyland Roof’s manifesto []
On South African inequality []
Fox news latching on to statistics that were debunked by Africa Check: []. They also recently did a segment on supposed ‘white genocide’ here and I’m not sure how to find it.
On the Black First Land First (BLF) [

Monday, May 21, 2018

The Real Justin Trudeau! (Part 6)


Justin Trudeau wants to change the rules for everyone...except himself
Published on May 18, 2018

Gavin McInnes: Canada's Justin Trudeau is ashamed of ... Canada
Published on May 16, 2018

People Need To See This... This Is Why People Dislike Justin Trudeau
Published on May 12, 2018

Canada's Illegal Invasion
Published on May 4, 2018

Justin Trudeau Stupidest Moments!!!
Published on Mar 31, 2018
Jordan Peterson - Justin Trudeau is a TRAITOR who CANNOT be Re-elected
Conservative Guru
Published on Mar 28, 2018
Goldstein: Justin Trudeau's climate of intolerance
Lorrie Goldstein
May 21, 2018
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is interviewed by MIT's Danielle Wood at Solve At MIT: Plenary - True Stories Of Starting Up at Massachusetts Institute of Technology on May 18, 2018 in Cambridge, Massachusetts. (Photo by Paul Marotta/Getty Images for MIT Solve)
PM likens disbelief in man-made climate change to belief in female genital mutilation
If any more proof is needed that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s brain is an irony-free zone, he provided it in his speech to the graduating class of New York University at Yankee Stadium last week.
Trudeau, awarded an honorary doctor of laws by NYU, was at his grandiose best, or worst, in his commencement address.
The whole affair was tailor-made for Trudeau’s ego.
He was introduced to the students with gushing praise from university officials that sounded as if it had come straight out of the Prime Minister’s Office.
Given how much Trudeau likes to dress up, he was clothed in the official robes of the university.
To satisfy his theatrical bent, he had before him an adoring audience of young people, who hung on his every word.
Ever the actor, Trudeau played his part to the hilt.
He smiled and halfbowed before the cheering and applauding students, mouthed the words “thank you” in appreciation, employed the familiar “hand on heart” gesture he uses when he wants to show he’s being really, really sincere.
Then Trudeau revealed his superficial understanding of the theme that ran throughout his address on the importance of listening to and respecting the views of people you disagree with, if you hope to bring them around to your way of thinking.
Because in the middle of his stirring speech about respecting diversity of opinion, Trudeau compared people who don’t believe in human-influenced climate change to people who do believe in female genital mutilation.
Having gone on for 20 minutes about being open to the views of others, Trudeau said in a voice rising with indignation, complete with dramatic arm-waving and hand gestures for effect:
“Now let me be very clear, this is not an endorsement of moral relativism, or a declaration that all points of view are valid.
“Female genital mutilation is wrong, no matter how many generations have practised it.
“Anthropogenic climate change is real, no matter how much some folks want to deny it,” he thundered. Think about that.
FGM is a crime in Canada and Trudeau’s comparing it to not believing in man-made climate change.
A recent Abacus Data poll found 21% of Canadians surveyed don’t believe in manmade climate change. They believe climate changes due to natural causes.
So Trudeau is saying that more than one in five Canadians are in the same league as people who believe in female genital mutilation.
How can we take a PM who says something that ridiculous seriously?
FGM is an illegal assault on a woman in Canada, so of course we don’t debate whether it’s a valid idea.
Not believing in manmade climate change isn’t endorsing a crime, it’s expressing an opinion.
That Trudeau doesn’t seem to understand the difference is appalling.
Indeed, a cynic might suggest Trudeau has more tolerance for believing in FGM than he does for not believing in anthropogenic climate change.
Recall that in opposition, Trudeau chastised the then Conservative government for calling FGM a “barbaric” practice in its citizenship guide, because, Trudeau said, this did not demonstrate “responsible neutrality”.
This before Trudeau had to promptly apologize in the face of outrage expressed by Canadians across the country.
Today, Trudeau’s government, belatedly, calls FGM, “abhorrent”.
What’s truly abhorrent is his linking of people who disagree with him about climate change, to supporters of an illegal, barbaric, practice that mutilates women.
That Trudeau doesn’t know the difference, is appalling.
Canada gifts $50K to charity to celebrate royal couple
Nick Kirmse,
Published Saturday, May 19, 2018
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced today that Canada will donate $50,000 to charity to celebrate the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
Trudeau, who was not invited to the wedding, 
released the statement following the ceremony, celebrating the couple’s marriage.
“Sophie and I congratulate the newlyweds on behalf of the Government of Canada,” Trudeau said in the statement. “We wish Their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a lifetime of happiness, and all the best as they start this new chapter together.”
The donation will be made to the Jumpstart charity, a Canadian charity that works to make sports more accessible to disadvantaged children, helping with the costs of registration, equipment, and more.
Jumpstart quickly responded to the statement, tweeting out their thanks for the gift.
Before the wedding, Kensington Palace released a statement from the couple saying they would prefer donations be made to charity instead of gifts.
While Jumpstart wasn’t one of the charities Harry and Meghan had picked, both Prince Harry and Meghan have worked extensively with charities that use sports to empower young people in the past. 
Even More Narcisstic Than Barack Obama …Canada’s Naive, Inexperienced & Feckless New Prime Minister!
by Murray Soupcoff 
posted: April 30, 2016
Justin Trudeau and Obama... regular photo but look like gay buddies
Buyer's Remorse … Adventures in Narcisstic Stupidity, featuring Justin Trudeau
By Murray Soupcoff
So here he was without maps or supplies,
A hundred miles from any decent town;
The desert glared into his blood-shot eyes;
The silence roared displeasure: looking down,
He saw the shadow of an Average Man
Attempting the exceptional, and ran.
-- W.H. Auden, The Average Man
Oh my goodness, just a few forlorn days ago, it was the three year anniversary of one the most regretted days in Canadian politics – by the few remaining sane voters in Canada, that is.
On April 14th 2013, Justin “lightweight” Trudeau was elected leader of the party of Chretien, Martin and Canada’s socialist Socrates, Pierre Trudeau – oh what a coincidence, the father of young Justin whose recognizable last name happens to be the same as Justin's.
Indeed, on that fateful day Justin Trudeau’s chief work qualifications for becoming Liberal leader included having been a teacher, boxer and actor.
Now if that isn’t an act of narcissistic ‘ambitious reach exceeding reality’, what is?
And why do I use this clinical descriptive adjective (narcissistic) here, to describe this political decision (and future political decisions) by Trudeau the Younger?
Well, although I’m not a psychiatrist, I earned my PH.D-equivalent graduate degree as a sociologist many, many years ago; and I base my opinions on knowledge gained as a sociology graduate student, when I did a full practicum with the psychiatric department of the University of Toronto medical school.
And it’s part of what Swiss psychoanalyst Alice Miller – author of the classic monograph on narcissists, “Prisoners of Childhood,” would have described as Justin Trudeau’s “as if” behavioral patterns — acting as if he had accomplished his grandiose ambitions for himself (such as eventually becoming Canada's prime minister), even though he hadn’t done so at that time!
And what about his current self-described “accomplishments” as Prime Minister these days?
Well, let’s make our point, the simplest way – comparing the historically unique achievements of Trudeau father and son:
And the tragic truth (for ordinary Canadians)?
When Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau left office the Canada debt had risen to over $154 billion, shockingly 738% higher than when previous Conservative Prime Minister Joe Clark left office.
When Stephen Harper was voted out of power – in favour of Justin Trudeau – the budget was balanced, with no deficit, and new economic policies implemented to ensure a budget surplus in future years.
Recently, however, Justin Trudeau’s first budget projected $113 billion more debt for Canada – with no budget surplus in sight.
To summarize, as one disgruntled online conservative Web site phrased it:
“Pierre Trudeau puts Canada in the toilet, and his son pulls the handle!”
But let’s now turn to another trait of what psychiatrists often call the “functioning” narcissist -- functioning in the sense of being capable of impressive achievements (versus the kind of schizoid personality whose grandiose fantasies might land them in prison or in a psychiatric institution).
And that impressive achievement might perhaps include becoming Prime Minister of Canada, thanks to a superficial charm and learned ability to “empathize” with the needs and wishes of those whom he or she interacts with [just as he or she learned to “empathize” with every need or wish of a gifted but remote parent, in order to please them -- for example, a parent like Pierre Elliot Trudeau?]
Another narcissistic trait relevant to our discussion?
Grandiose “fantasies” and “magical thinking”.
This troubled individual’s interior psychology is rooted in the narcissistic belief that his dreams, thoughts, and wishes can magically affect reality.
So as mentioned earlier, despite possessing the modest qualifications for being elected leader of a major political party in Canada -- having been a teacher, boxer and actor – Justin Trudeau’s decision to run for the position of leader of the Liberal Party might well have been based on narcissistic “magical thinking” (in my opinion, anyway) --- specifically, that he what he wished for could “magically” become reality.
And of course, mainly because of his surname and mythical biographies of his father written by Liberal acolytes, Justin the Younger did get elected – which would only reinforce his inner belief that what he wished for, in the future, could become reality.
And that might mean being able to promise all kinds of expensive “goodies”, to metaphorically bribe voters, and yet additionally promise to still be able to generate "a modest short-term deficit" of less than $10 billion for each of the first three years of his incumbency, and then a balanced budget by the 2019-2020 fiscal year (a promise which, in reality, he actually did make).
Some of those promised “goodies” (ie, free “handouts”) for voters?
(1)Tax benefit for teachers; (2) lifelong pensions for injured vets including hundreds of millions of dollars in expanded benefits; (3) $150 million in new annual funding for the CBC; (4) $1.5 billion for public transit in Calgary; (5) up to $1.5 billion over four years on a youth job strategy to help 125,000 young people find a job; (6) increase federal infrastructure investment to almost $125 billion (compared to the Harper government allocation of $65 billion); (7) over the next decade, invest $200 million a year to develop clean technologies in forestry, fisheries, mining, energy and farming; (8) put another $100 million into organizations that promote clean technology firms; and (9) add $515 million a year to funding for First Nations education, rising through the mandate to a total of $2.6 billion.
Talk about magic thinking and grandiose dreams!
And what about that promise of a modest short-term deficit" of less than $10 billion for each of the first three years, and then a balanced budget by the 2019-2020 fiscal year?
Justin & his finance minister are now projecting a $29.4-billion deficit in 2016-17, followed by a $29-billion shortfall in 2017-18, and over $22 billion in 2018-19.
According to “National Post” columnist John Ivison: “Over the next five years, Tuesday’s budget shows $113.2 billion in red ink, including a $14.3 billion shortfall for 2020-21 — after the next scheduled federal election.”
Returning to the writings Alice Miller, let’s see whether we can identify another typical narcissistic trait which might well apply to Canada’s current Prime Minister?
In particularly, Ms. Miller “deconstructed” the typical behavioral patterns of children raised by gifted and often emotionally remote parents who caused the child to feel “inferior” to their successful parent, and consequently want to win their praise to mollify that inner psychological insecurity.
This child then develops what Miller described as an amazing ability to perceive and respond intuitively (ie,
unconsciously) to the wishes of that parent – and consequently the ability to superficially “emphasize” with needs & wishes of others, a particularly valuable trait for an adult politician.
Combine that with a typical narcissistic need to be admired, and you have a potent stew for what I would label as stupid political actions with likely tragic consequences for the country involved (yes, Canada).
And as revealed by “Rebel TV”, that includes news that the Canadian military has been ordered by Justin Trudeau’s
Liberals to draft plans to house more than 6,000 Muslim migrants on a long-term basis at military bases.
Also according to the same “Rebel TV” report, the Trudeau government plans to set up refugee camp-style accommodations on seven Canadian Forces Bases across Quebec and Ontario – with $46 million of spending budgeted for the first six months.
The bad news for Canadian taxpayers?
For a typical refugee family, that’s a $200,000/year subsidy — not including Medicare or welfare!
Worse, many Canadian armed-service members have been sent eviction notices to make way for the foreign migrants.
So how to best end this er, personal primal scream against the injurious deeds of Canada’s new narcissistic Prime Minister?
Well how about the views of a prominent Brazilian journalist, written after Justin Trudeau recently visited her fair land?
Vilma Gryzinski targeted Mr. Trudeau’s “dazedly well-intentioned” (naive) policies, suggesting that his “inclusive” attitude on immigration and refugees signals "he's soft on terror".
She also sarcastically commented on the “narcissistic” leader’s recent celebrity over the attention he received for a five-year-old photo of him leaning into a table in a peacock pose — and skewed his alleged genetics as follows:
“Justin Trudeau is the incarnation of the dreams of vaguely left-wing liberalism, which is dazedly well-intentioned; a handsome guy who shows off his physics with no shame and in yoga poses — an Oedipean reproduction of his father, Pierre Trudeau.”
Nuff said, on this  distressing subject, I would think.
Murray Soupcoff is the author of 'Canada 1984' & co-author of 'Good Bye Canada'.
He was formerly a Senior Partner with Ian Sone & Associates Ltd., Canada's pioneering social-research consulting firm evaluating (bloated) government programs assisting "the needy", and is now the publisher and editor of this conservative/libertarian Web site.
He was also a computer columnist for "Globe & Mail Report on Business"? for 20 years, and producer & head writer, "Inside From The Outside"?, CBC Radio (starring Max Ferguson & Barbara Hamilton).
You can contact Murray at the following e-mail address:
His Facebook page Web address is:  
Politics and Commentary Recommended Reading Socio-cultural analysis
Murray Soupcoff
Publisher of "Soupcoff Report"​ investment newsletter Senior Associate & founding partner of Ian Sone & Associates Ltd, Canada's first independent social-research firm, as well as original Canadian initiator of (sociological) "evaluations"​ of federal and provincial social programs set up to assist Canada's disadvantaged populations Computer columnist for "Globe & Mail Report on Business"​ for 20 years Producer & head writer, "Inside From The Outside"​, CBC Radio (starring Max Ferguson & Barbara Hamilton) Currently retired, but still active investor and (until recently) contributor to the "Globe Mail" online investment blog. You can contact Murray Soupcoff at the following e-mail address:
Why Justin Trudeau may be more dangerous than Harper
by Damien Gillis in Politics
Posted May 6, 2013
Adrian Wyld/CP
Justin Trudeau just may be Canada’s most dangerous man.
He of the throngs of adoring supporters, the pretty new face that promises to resurrect “Canada’s party”.
The key positions he’s taken thus far – supporting the sellout of our strategic energy resources to the 
Chinese Government, giving away our sovereignty through the Canada-China Trade deal, new pipelines to expand the Tar Sands – hardly vary from those of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. They just look and sound far more attractive coming from Canada’s prodigal son.
And that’s what scares me.
Trudeau’s latest decision to out-Harper Mr. Harper on boosting the proposed Keystone XL pipeline to Texas gives us a sobering sense of where the young Liberal leader is headed. Perhaps more troubling is the question of what he actually believes – or whether these positions derive from polling data, focus groups, and a cynical drive to get elected at all costs (more on that in a moment).
In his first swing out west following a successful leadership bid, Trudeau took the time to praise Alberta Premier Alison Redford’s efforts to secure access for Keystone by talking up improved “environmental sustainability” in the Tar Sands (exactly how, we’re left to wonder, beyond a carbon tax proposed by Redford).
“I’m very hopeful despite the political games being played by the NDP…that we will see the Keystone pipeline approved soon,” Trudeau proclaimed.
If Bay Street and the energy sector see that Trudeau is prepared to fulfill the same key objectives as Harper, they will not think twice about swinging their support back to the Liberals. This latest statement on Keystone signals that Mr. Trudeau is truly open for business. For this reason, while backing Keystone may be unpopular with certain segments of the Canadian public, it could prove a shrewd political move in the long-run.
Harper is uncharacteristically weak at the moment. There is the infighting within his usually locked-down caucus, the cratering polling figures (a recent Nanos poll has the Liberals leading the Conservatives for the first time in years, at 34 to 31% support), and an authoritarian image that is becoming increasingly problematic. He and his embattled foot soldiers, the likes of Joe Oliver and Jason Kenney, have had a very bad month.
Oliver overplayed his hand a couple of weeks ago when he attacked the world’s most respected climate scientist, the recently retired James Hansen of NASA, while on a “diplomatic” mission to Washington to build support for Keystone.
The tone-deaf Oliver ranted that Hansen should be “ashamed” of “exaggerating” the effects of climate change and impacts of the Tar Sands, apparently missing the irony of attacking his hosts while trying win them over. The comments, which backfired severely, were picked up by everyone from the New York Times to the UK’s Guardian. Hansen shot back, aptly branding Oliver a “Neanderthal”.
On this score, Trudeau seems to understand something his Conservative opponents don’t – i.e. cultivating buy-in for Keystone requires more sophisticated framing and at least a modicum of tact with our southern neighbours.
Meanwhile, the most likeable and politically adept figure in the Harper Government, Immigration Minister Kenney, finds himself embroiled in the growing scandal over his government’s foreign temporary worker program. The seriousness of this political pitfall is evident in the unusual backtracking Harper is doing on the program.
He’s right to do so. The problem for Harper with issues like this one, the buyout of Canadian energy company Nexen by Chinese state-owned CNOOC, and the botched fighter jet program, is the way they rile his base. Unpopular with small “c” conservatives, they drive division within Harper’s tenuous right-wing alliance.
With these troubles brewing on the home front and attack ads aimed at Trudeau falling short of the effect they had on his predecessors – Michael Ignatieff and Stéphane Dion – things are shaping up nicely for Harper’s young challenger.
The question is, what does this mean for Canada?
If all Mr. Trudeau represents is a better-packaged version of Harper’s economic vision, then how will the Canadian public and environment – not to mention the planet – be any better off?
The thing that has always bothered me about Justin – ever since his entry onto the public scene at his famous father’s funeral – is that he’s never appeared to stand for anything real. Years later, even following a lengthy leadership race and literally thousands of media clips and public appearances, I still don’t know what core principles motivate his drive to lead the country. He speaks in platitudes, clever but meaningless tweets – which is partly what makes him so effective with social media and our soundbite-obsessed mainstream press.
He is our version of Robert Redford’s character in The Candidate.
Evidently, if Justin stands for anything, it’s selling out Canada’s strategic resources and exploiting the climate-destroying Tar Sands. Where his father tried and failed to build a made-in-Canada energy policy, the younger Trudeau is going in the opposite direction.
Even that, though, I suspect, is more a reflection of his willingness to shape-shift his policies into whatever form advisers tell him will track best politically.
With Harper, by contrast, we have a sense that his zeal for expanding Canada’s fossil fuel industries through foreign ownership is something in which he believes on a deep, ideological level. I’m not sure which is better – the guy who believes in something I and many other Canadians patently don’t, or the guy who probably doesn’t but is willing to say he does, just to get elected. If these are our two choices, then I’m ready for a third.
Real leadership means fighting for real principles, even when they’re unpopular. Great politicians find a way to sell good ideas to the public and media
Justin Trudeau does none of these things. But, boy, does he look good not doing them.
Also See:

Gay Lifestyle Not Easy!

27 April 2018


Is Fidel Castro Justin Trudeau's Father?

25 March 2018

Is Justin Trudeau Mentally Unstable?

(Part 1)
16 December 2017
(Part 2)
23 December 2017

Trudeau Gives Terrorists Another $31 Million!

07 November 2017

Canada To Legalize Marijuana By 01 July 2018!

01 December 2017

Pierre Poilievre Exposes Trudeau and the Liberal Government!

05 December 2017

Trudeau Connecting With Canadians!

02 November 2017

ISIS Strikes: Terrorist Attack in Edmonton, Canada.

02 October 2017

Trudeau Piling More Taxes On Canadians!

09 September 2017

Did You Vote For Justin Trudeau?

20 August 2017

Kevin Johnson Charged with "Hate Crime" For Criticizing Islam!

27 July 2017


Backlash Against $10.5 Million Deal To Khadr!

12 July 2017

Trudeau Gives $10-million To Terrorist Omar Khadr!!

06 July 2017

Trudeau Wants Our Guns!

07 June 2017

Mao, Admired by Trudeau, is Worse than Hitler!

20 May 2017

Does Trudeau Practice Taqiyya?

16 May 2017

Is Trudeau a Muslim?

11 May 2017

How Long Before We See This In Canada, Trudeau?

29 April 2017

Trudeau Will Always Be Remembered As A Traitor To Canada! 

(Part 1)
24 March 2017
(Part 2)
21 April 2017

Canada Passes Motion 103 Prohibiting "Islamophobia"!

09 March 2017

Is Alternate News a Thorn In Trudeau's Side? I Hope So?

04 April 2017

Where Is Trudeau When You Need Him?

23 March 2017

Trudeau Donates $650 Million For Global Abortions!

13 March 2017

Canada Passes Motion 103 Prohibiting "Islamophobia"!

09 March 2017

Trudeau Wants a Bill to Stop Islamophobia in Canada!

01 March 2017

Canadian Girls Sexually Assaulted By Trudeau Refugee!

13 February 2017

First Meeting Between Trudeau and Trump!

14 February 2017

The Real Justin Trudeau! 

(Part 1)

19 January 2017
(Part 2)
13 April 2017
(Part 4)
08 July 2017
(Part 5)
10 January 2018

Justin Trudeau's First Year as Prime Minister!

24 October 2016

Is Justin Trudeau a Victim of MK Ultra Mind Control?

24 September 2016

Canadian Senate, Senators, and Other Related Stuff!?

29 July 2016

Harper's Gone! Here's Justin! 

(Part 1)
09 February 2016
(Part 2)
17 March 2016
(Part 3)
25 May 2016

How Does the Future Look for Canada?

17 December 2015

Are You a Fan of Justin Trudeau?

18 November 2015

Why is Obama Getting Involved with Canadian Politics?

24 October 2015

Abolish the Senate! We Don't Need It!

30 May 2013

Canada, It's Time to Abolish the Senate!

18 March 2013

Will Fidel Castro be Remembered in History as a Tyrant or Hero?

28 November 2016

Who is Fidel Castro?

11 May 2015