Grievances Against Canada Laid Out-Trudeau, RCMP and CSIS

Grievances Against Canada Laid Out-Trudeau, RCMP and CSIS

Tony Peters and The Black Robe

https://youtu.be/p_yym6yKflM

Canada has 2 big agencies in the country to protect our country of Canada. CSIS and RCMP, or Canadian Security Intelligence Service and Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Both with separate roles. CSIS is our spy agency, and they were one group with the RCMP until 1984 when they were split. CSIS is responsible for national security. They look at documents and listen to conversations to determine what may or may not be a threat to our nation’s security. They operate in missions like the CIA, only to a lesser degree. Whereas the RCMP is not covert in any way. They are responsible for matters within our own borders, including ethical investigations. They monitor our highways, rural areas, and protect people in a security/bodyguard capacity. http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-csis-and-rcmp/

Both of these organizations have had their issues over the years. With saying that, I do not take away the importance of what they do, Canada needs both CSIS and RCMP and what they do. They both keep us safe and lower risks to Canadians. One misstep of CSIS was in 2013, when they were spying on a naval officer for many months. This officer was handing over our secrets the Russians, and had been for a while, yet nothing was said from CSIS to the RCMP, who should have been brought into the loop. The FBI ended up being the ones to let the RCMP know about the situation. It shows a disconnect and lack of communication. Which is a problem that needs addressing, as having that issue, could definitely put all Canadians at risk. Little details can be missed, and those “little details” could lead to a big miss, which could cost hundreds of lives. 9/11 would be a good example of the costs of missing things, or not sharing information between security orgs. https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/csis-knew-of-navy-spys-activity-but-held-file-back-from-rcmp-cp-has-learned/

Speaking of 9/11, CSIS and the RCMP made a controversial decision right after this. In their defense though, it was a confusing, emotion-filled time in our recent history, so mistakes were made by people at all levels of government, and government entities. Canada had 3 Canadians arrested in Syria, and they did nothing to stop it, or step in, which actually made sense. How the RCMP and CSIS did get involved, is to provide a list of questions that they wanted to be asked, and tortured out of these Canadians. Although Canada was not the ones doing the torturing, we may as well have been, as we knew about it, and through inaction, they condoned the torture. Canada is supposed to have a non-torture policy, and is also supportive of organizations who fight the use of torture. We fight for human rights, yet allow Syria, a country with awful human rights records, to go through with torture. Hypocrisy. We supported it, and then we used the torture to get what information we wanted. A very shameful act, and needs to be learned from. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/terrorism-torture-syria-canadians-1.3669425

Of course, both organizations will have and will continue to make many more blunders and mistakes in the future, so this is not to take away from either group, they are important and necessary for country, especially with the rise of terrorism. As a result, I will not focus on their errors, although I would like to see them stand up to our government and investigate Trudeau and the Liberals for the fraud and ethical violations we have seen. Most people would be in jail for the kinds of scandals we have seen Trudeau commit. His personal swing set purchase of $7500. He claims that he is standing up for all the middle class people in Canada, but how many middle class people can afford a $7500 swing set? This was our tax payer dollars being used to pay for a swing set that only a very slim percentage of Canadians could purchase themselves. Who really needs a swing set that expensive? My children play with a swing we bought for a small fraction of this price, and they are perfectly happy with it. Why does Trudeau feel that his children are better than and more entitled than most Canadian children? To spend $7500 on one swing set, using MY TAX PAYER DOLLARS, I would have preferred he use his own money to buy this. I would have liked to see this money spend to purchase 50 swing sets for families in Canada. Families who could not otherwise afford these swings, and whose children do not have that entitled life. It is self-centered and inconsiderate to use the money taken from tax payers, who can’t afford the product themselves, to purchase a swing set for your children. Especially true with the fact that Trudeau is running a deficit, with no end in sight on that deficit. This was a theft of tax payer dollars, and not his only one, just one that stands out for me. I already did a previous article on Trudeau’s ethical dilemmas, and these should be investigated by our RCMP, not ignored. https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/06/21/watch-scheer-asks-trudeau-why-he-spent-7500-in-taxpayer-dollars-on-a-swing-set/ https://authortonypeters.blogspot.com/2019/12/grievances-against-canada-laid-out.html

In June we all saw the word “genocide” come out of Justin Trudeau’s mouth. It was a hasty, and unthoughtful use of the term. This is in reference to the disappearance and murder of many Indigenous women. Trudeau says that his government and past governments allowed, ignored, and did nothing to prevent the deaths of these thousands of Indigenous women in our country over the years. His claims and statement, has led to him and his government coming under investigation by Organization of American States, and they have said they expect full cooperation by the Canadian government. Other politicians and Canadians are upset by these statements from Trudeau, who backtracked and apologized after he realized the implications of what he claimed. It reflected poorly on all of Canada, and was a lack of consideration in his words. This is another error from Trudeau, and another ethical dilemma. Another investigation against Trudeau and his Liberal government. https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/kinsella-trudeaus-genocide-comment-sparks-international-probe

We need organizations that are going to be held to a high standard. They need to be responsible and follow their policies. Protect Canadians, keep us safe, and to keep our government following ethical laws. We need a government, that is considerate, clear thinking, and avoids ethical dilemmas. More thought needs to be used by our Prime Minister to avoid these unethical situations, do some research, or ask advisers. Help Canada be great again.

Unify The West Server https://discord.gg/rBKxjD3

Unify The West Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/443787693008469/

Bittube https://bittube.me/ref/108132

           https://bittubers.com/profile/CoolExplorations

Youtube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmomItvppo2JUxrZ1_Z3_LA?view_as=subscriber

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/453437844784168/

Blog http://authortonypeters.blogspot.com/

Instagram https://www.instagram.com/authortonypeters/

Twitter https://twitter.com/TonyAPe35985133

Patreon https://www.patreon.com/coolexplorations

http://chng.it/VfdmRpBF

Minister of Middle Class Prosperity, Say What?

Minister of Middle Class Prosperity, Say What?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRei0sxRSAk&t=2s

Mona Fortier, a name most people did not know until November 20^th of this year, when she was given two minister titles in cabinet, Minister of Middle Class Prosperity, whatever that means, and Associate Finance Minister. Mona Fortier was first elected in 2017, when she became the first female Member of Parliament for the Ottawa-Vanier region, according to the Government of Canada website. She claims that she has always thought that the best way to help her community, is to get involved and take action. The Government of Canada lists her areas of expertise as “health care, education, job creation, and francophone affairs”. Job creation, ironic, since Prime Minister Trudeau created a cabinet position just for her, a move many seem to suspect is simply to make Trudeau look like he is encouraging gender parity (according to The Star). She has, however, received a number of awards for her community involvement mentioned earlier, including a medal from the Queen in 2012, Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal.

With a little background on her political career, it is easier to see why she was given a position that one would think would involve job creation and helping people in the middle-class to make more money, or “prosper”. The position has caused a lot of confusion though, as no one, including Fortier, can properly explain what this new, made up position, really is. Minister of Middle Class Prosperity seems like a loaded position. Who determines what middle-class is? Who actually knows what middle-class is? From speaking to various Canadians, they all seem to have differing opinions on what middle-class is. Hence the confusion. Middle-class, really is a very ambiguous term, since there is no clear line of where poverty turns to middle-class. The National Post has stated that the Liberals claim that poverty rates are at an all-time low, yet wonder at how their official party line narrows its focus on the middle class, who, by Liberal claims, are not actually largely at risk of falling into poverty. Why the focus on “Middle-Class Prosperity” then? A really good question. The reason for this, as I see it, would be due to the fact that the East is prospering and have a growing middle-class, yet the west has been decreasing in the number of middle-class citizens, with more and more becoming impoverished daily. As long as the Liberals can bolster middle-class numbers and use this new position to appear to give a crap, they can keep attracting new eastern voters, winning further elections. The same strategy Trudeau has in increasing our immigration numbers.

This can come with consequences though. An example of which is how Canada appears on a global scale and at the country level. Canada has been scoring lower and lower on rankings surrounding equality, due to the battle of food insecurity (National Post). Looking at this though, shows that the real problem is not for middle-class citizens to further prosper, it appears as if the true problem lies in bringing our impoverished citizens out of their poverty. By helping this “class” to prosper, we then do in fact grow our middle-class. Helping our impoverished saves lives, and drives up the morale of the country, something more advantageous than what Fortier’s new cabinet position is designed to do.

Mona Fortier sees her position as fitting into her own personal goals. She claims, on the Government of Canada website, to be focused on environment, business prosperity, and “making life more affordable for Canadians”. Sounds like a line right out of Trudeau’s playbook, no wonder he chose her, cut from the same mold. She also claims that Canada needs “an ambitious plan to build stronger and better communities while growing the middle class”. What this plan is supposed to be, is yet to be determined. Which fits in with the confusion surrounding this position. A Conservative, Melissa Lantsman, states that this is a, “Politically-driven minister with an unclear set of responsibilities.” She suspects that this made up position is an attempt by the Liberal Party to do what they failed to do in their last term, which is to be the party for the middle-class as Trudeau has claimed. With the majority of Canadians visualizing themselves as being part of this class, it really is murky, some stats would place up to %60 of Canadians in this category. Stats Canada defines middle-class as making $25,000-$66,000. In 2017, Stats Canada placed 9.5% or 3.4 million Canadians in the poverty category, which is awfully convenient, since this is the year with the lowest stats in history. Here in 2019 these stats will be higher, since Alberta, Saskatchewan and Northern British Columbia have all been hit hard economically. The Liberals seem to want this to appear to be their way of presenting the issues of the middle class and show off the ways that they are supporting them, even if it is just that, the appearance of helping. Their whole election campaign, once again, was focused mainly on this exact appearance which seemed to work for them, even though their past successes in this was limited.

 Mona Fortier was interviewed by CBC in trying to help people understand what this position means to Canadians. In the interview, Mona even seems to be confused as to what the position actually involves. The hope would be that she will focus her attention on affordable housing, to help those below the poverty line, and bring them into the middle-class category, but this isn’t the feel that is given by her interview. She does claim that her focus will be on making life more affordable for Canadians and to develop the economy. She was asked to put her own definition on middle-class. Which she seemed to give a Trudeau answer by really avoiding the question, since defining it is such a difficult task. Eventually she did come up with an answer. Fortier defines middle-class as, “where people feel that they can afford their way of life. They have quality of life…It’s having the cost of living where you can do what you want with your family.” Which led her to then to re-affirm that the Liberals intend to have a strong economy, which is hard to believe with how they have destroyed and mis-managed the western economy. Prime Minister Trudeau did promise Canadians that the Liberals would make a middle-class tax cut, and Fortier follows this same path, stating that the Liberals will be making cuts for sure. This cut though comes with doubts though, as David MacDonald, of Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, says that the only ones to really find the cuts advantageous is the higher middle-class citizens. Fortier counters this with saying that will have different methods of helping the differing levels of middle-class, including helping people with children’s bills. She states that the upper-class Canadians need to give more money, so they will support those that drive the economy through the middle-class. No real direction or answer came on the question of how they are going to do this, making one wonder if they even have any clue.

The real focus, to which I agree, should be the impoverished portion of our population, and the lower middle-class. The Star has done great research on this, and in a previous article of my own, I also did a lot of research. People are finding it hard to get by, building up more debt than they are bringing in through job income, and this has been on the rise over the last decade especially, but it really goes further back than that. Trudeau and the Liberal Party seem like they are confused as to how to handle this, which explains their disjointed methods of tackling the poverty issue, and explains why Trudeau focuses on middle-class, not impoverished Canadians. Liberals have tried and succeeded in bringing 825,000 people out of poverty. They have made cuts to the taxes that businesses are hit with, and provided more in the form of the Canada Child Tax Benefit. In 2016, they set up the Affordable Housing Innovation Fund, which was supposed to help people get financing for “affordable rental housing projects”. According to the Star the wide variety of projects funded by this, shows a “lack of cohesion”. The fund right now is not taking in applications. In 2017, the government followed this effort up by setting up the National Housing Strategy. As I mentioned in my previous article, this will cost $55 million over the course of 11 years. It is designed to reduce homelessness rates by %50, through building 125,000 homes, renovating 300,000 homes, as well as other means of accomplishing this. In other words, they are aiming, and promising, to “strengthen the middle-class” and create “social housing stability” for those who are in need the most. Whether this strategy works or not remains to be seen, but from the aforementioned lack of focus, doubts remain.

As an attempt is being made here to explain a little about what could potentially be behind the new cabinet position, the views of Canadian citizens must be explored. When the position was announced, people began asking why the Liberal Party would put in a position just for the middle-class, when they are not the group of people in need of financial help most. Kathy Wells tweeted, “How about a Minister of Poverty, Unaffordable Housing and Rising Consumer Debt, Mr. Trudeau?” Another tweet by Gillian Kolla scoffs, “Looking forward to the announcement of the Minister of Thousands of People Homeless Every Night Across Canada.” Rabble.ca had more people commenting in regards to Fortier’s position. Lagatta4 jokingly refers to the position as the “Ministry of Silly Walks”, in reference to Monty Python, then furthers it with saying that, “it is strange to have a Ministry based only on classist bullshit.” More comments continue on talking about the middle-class being thrown some bones, but that this seems like an effort to pit the impoverished against those in the middle-class. An effort to separate them. One person points out the terrible poverty rates in Fortier’s own riding, and how little the Liberal Party has done to resolve the problem. The poster leaves it off saying that it is, “Too bad there isn’t a Minister of Child Poverty.”

Through the article I was hoping to discover for myself what the Minister of Middle Class Prosperity actually means. However, it would appear that everyone, from regular citizens, reporters, up to Fortier herself, who seems confused by the position. I guess time will reveal what the position will entail and what it will hope to accomplish, or if it will even accomplish anything. It may very well be what some suspect, a filler position to make Trudeau look like he has more women on his Cabinet.

Join Our Server: https://discord.gg/rBKxjD3
Join us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/443787693008469/