Aboriginal healing , green theocracy to name just two .Which propaganda - yours or theirs?
Aboriginal healing , green theocracy to name just two .Which propaganda - yours or theirs?
So you went to private school ? Or you spent your days smoking in the boys room . By the way whose blood will be on her hands ? Is she the villain?My daughter is learning about World War One in grade 11 at the moment.
She is to be Great Britain in the Peace Talks. And she fully understands just how much blood is on her hands and just how tragically stupid her position will be at the peace talks.
She is learning far more in public school than I ever did about history
Other than their moronic slogans which are diametrically opposed, the alt-right and alt-left are basically identical.Don't understand the difference between left and fascist do you?
Your poor poor sad daughter. She is being fed a lot p.c bullsh*t. Take her out of that propaganda center for her own sake.So you went to private school ? Or you spent your days smoking in the boys room . By the way whose blood will be on her hands ? Is she the villain?
Maxime Bernier invited to take part in federal election leaders’ debate
https://globalnews.ca/news/5908621/...erNational&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=2019
Elizabeth May is an expert on climate change and the environment. She has a law degree from Dalhousie University. And for a time, she studied theology at St. Paul's University in Ottawa with an eye to becoming an Anglican priest.
But for all the Green Party leader's interests and talents, it seems that history is not her strong suit.
The Green's electoral platform, released Monday, begins with a personal message from May that casts the fight against human-caused global warming as a daunting, yet winnable struggle — likening it to the Allied efforts to defeat Adolf Hitler and the Nazis in the Second World War.
"Giving up is not an option. Political courage is needed. Incremental actions cannot meet the challenge," she writes.
Chooses the Dunkirk story
However, the story that May chooses to illustrate the necessary "can-do" spirit — about Winston Churchill and the spring 1940 evacuation of British troops from the beaches of Dunkirk, France — is rife with factual errors, and appears to be more in line with some fictionalized films than the history books.
"The entire British army was pinned down on a beach in northern France, at Dunkirk. France had just surrendered," she begins, swinging and missing twice: The British had sent about a third of their army to the continent. And French troops fought bravely to cover their retreat to the Channel beaches, and continued to do so for weeks after the May 27-June 4 evacuations. Their formal surrender didn't come until June 22, 1940.
May then turns her attention to the legendary "little ships," the fleet of 861 civilian fishing boats, pleasure craft and ferries that helped retrieve the trapped soldiers. She writes that it was Winston Churchill's idea to send them, although virtually every historical source credits Admiral Betram Ramsay and his staff for coming up with the plan.
And the Green leader suggests the small boats "rescued over 300,000 men," when the fact is that a British Navy flotilla, including 41 destroyers, 36 minesweepers, and more than 100 other ships carried the bulk of the 338,000 evacuees back to the U.K...….Much more in the link
OTTAWA — The federal government ran a $14-billion deficit in 2018-19, according to its latest annual financial report, the third year in a row with a shortfall bigger than $10 billion.
The deficit for the fiscal year that ended March 31 was $900 million smaller than the government projected in last spring's federal budget, however.
Revenues in 2018-19 expanded by $21 billion — or 6.7 per cent — compared to the previous year, said the report released Tuesday.
The government's revenue ratio, which is total revenues as a percentage of the size of the economy, increased last year by 15 per cent to reach its highest level since before the financial crisis in 2007-08. The growth in the ratio, which was 14.5 per cent in 2017-18, was mostly due to growth in personal and corporate income tax revenues and other taxes, the report said.
The revenue gain was partially offset by an increase of $14.6 billion — or 4.7 per cent — in program expenses and an increase of $1.4 billion — or 6.3 per cent — in public debt charges.
The 2018-19 deficit follows two straight $19-billion shortfalls, and the annual financial numbers haven't shown a surplus since 2006-07.
Overall, the federal debt increased to $685.5 billion at the end of 2018-19. The debt-to-GDP ratio — a measure of how burdensome the national debt is — fell to 30.9 per cent from 31.3 per cent in 2017-18, the report shows.
The state of federal finances has already been the subject of political debate during the election campaign as parties argue whether the government should make an effort to balance the federal books — and how quickly.
In the three full fiscal years since the Liberals came to power, the federal government has posted $52 billion worth of shortfalls even though the economy has had a solid run of growth.
The Liberals won the 2015 election on a platform that promised annual deficits of no more than $10 billion and to return to balance by 2019.
After taking office, the Liberals abandoned the pledge and argued even larger deficit-driven investments were needed to improve Canada's long-term economic growth. The government shifted its focus instead to reducing the net debt-to-GDP ratio each year.
The Conservatives have long attacked the Liberals for breaking their 2015 deficit pledge and for not providing a timeline to return to balanced budgets. They've accused the Liberals of borrowing today on the backs of future generations.
Ahead of next month's election, the Liberals have laid out projections calling for five more years of deficits of at least $10 billion.
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer is promising to pull Canada out of the red in about five years.
Jagmeet Singh's NDP, which promised balanced books in each of the last several election campaigns, no longer has a timetable to balance the books. Instead, it's focusing on lowering the debt-to-GDP each year.
Green Leader Elizabeth May has committed to returning Canada to budgetary balance in five years.
Maxime Bernier's new People's Party of Canada is the only political party that's promised a quick path to balanced books — within two years.
If the Trudeau Liberals hope to win even one seat in Alberta, they are going to have to do much better than insult us.
For example, we’re seeing Liberal MPs scoff at all aspects of the Alberta government’s public inquiry into the foreign funding of Canadian green groups.
On Twitter, Kent Hehr, a Liberal MP from Calgary, said: “This is not only a waste of taxpayers’ money, it’s a McCarthyesque misuse of power. While @jkenney (Jason Kenney) fuels a witch hunt against Albertans, we bought the pipeline and we’re getting it built.”
A witch hunt? Seriously?
There is overwhelming evidence, much of it uncovered and meticulously documented by researcher Vivian Krause, that in 2008 American organizers started a secret “Tar Sands” campaign to recruit and finance Canadian green and Indigenous groups and to influence governments and political parties with the hope of terminating the oilsands.
Millions went into funding this effort every year, as much as $90 million overall Krause has said, but the lavish funding and highly disciplined organized approach was to remain invisible to outsiders.
In this way we were duped. For years Albertans believed that our local green groups only wanted better environmental practices in the oilpatch and for climate change to be addressed. This sounded like a good idea to many reasonable Albertans. But we had no clue that no reform was ever going to be enough for the green activists, that the real plan was to never compromise, not until the oilsands were thwarted and landlocked.
It was only two years ago that the Tar Sands campaign’s fangs were at last bared for all to see, only after Krause found and publicized campaign leader Michael Marx boasting on his website about his successful landlocking efforts.
Just as we learned all this, we also realized that the Trudeau government was riddled with top officials pushing through devastating oil and gas policy — such as the intolerable Bill C-48 that forever bans Alberta crude oil exports off the northwest B.C. coast — and that these officials were the same people who had led green groups funded by the Tar Sands campaign. These officials included Trudeau’s right hand man Gerald Butts, top PMO staffer Sarah Goodman, Environment Minister Catherine McKenna’s chief of staff Marlo Raynolds, and Natural Resources Minister Amarjeet Sohi’s chief of staff Zoe Caron.
Little wonder that Albertans elected a provincial government dedicated to finding out what exactly went on in the Tar Sands campaign.
Yet when I put all this to Sohi in an interview and told him it had greatly eroded my trust in his government and its policies, he said: “I never thought that you would believe in conspiracy theories.”
How is a massive and secret campaign, with the harmful goal of shutting down Canada’s biggest industry, not a conspiracy?
Sohi urged looking at the facts, saying they speak of his government’s support for oil and gas development. Three pipelines are being built (TMX, Line 3 and Keystone XL), which will expand our pipeline capacity by 64 per cent, Sohi said. There’s also been significant loan guarantees and federal support for oil and gas companies to reduce emissions.
As for officials like Butts, Goodman and the others in his government, Sohi said of them: “They understand the role of the oil and gas sector, but they’re also concerned about emissions, about environmental sustainability … I think this is a false analysis that if you come from an environmental background that somehow you’re against oil and gas sector. You’re not.”
The distrust of the Trudeau Liberals is so intense here that a faction of Albertans believe Trudeau has zero intention of ever completing the TMX pipeline project.
“I shake my head,” Sohi said of this pessimistic attitude. “You have a federal government that invested $4.5 billion to save a pipeline that otherwise would not have existed today. If Trudeau was really not for the oil sector, why would he take that risk and invest that money, then put someone like me to fix the problem (with First Nations consultations), which we have done, and then take another risk of approving it again, and now to take the risk of building it?. People need to grasp that reality that he deeply cares about this province, regardless of people’s perception.”
Where does this leave us? I propose this chain of events might help thaw relations: If Trudeau acknowledges it’s a good idea for the Alberta government to get to the bottom of Tar Sands campaign, far more Albertans will acknowledge his government is working hard and in good faith on TMX.
My daughter is learning about World War One in grade 11 at the moment.
She is to be Great Britain in the Peace Talks. And she fully understands just how much blood is on her hands and just how tragically stupid her position will be at the peace talks.
She is learning far more in public school than I ever did about history
It was a joke, eh?Is Andrew Scheer ducking the Ontario premier?
Rick Mercer lashes out at Burnaby Conservatives for posting fake endorsement
Mercer can dish it out, but cannot take a joke, Read it Hoid
Try and do without that industry for a week .Nobody on Earth wants the trans mountain pipeline. if the government didn't take it over it would have been shut down
more corporate welfare for the oil industry
One, well targeted computer hack might do just that.Try and do without that industry for a week .
It was a joke, eh?
It was theft of a copyright image and brand. If you did that to a corporation, they'd sue you seven ways to Sunday.
Mercer took it pretty well considering what he had a right to do to them.
That candidate is goddam lucky that he has a sense of humour.