Olivia Chow tweets: “Great candidates that share my values for a caring, better city.” And who are these great candidates?
Ausma Malik for one. Malik organized and chaired, “On Our Own Terms: Muslim Youth Speak Out” at the University of Toronto. One of their first operations was building support and raising money for the “Toronto 18” – radical Islamist men who had recently been charged with terrorism for conspiring to blow up the Toronto Stock Exchange, raid the Canadian Parliament Buildings and behead Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Ringleader Zakaria Amara pleaded guilty to terrorism charges and together with several of his co-conspirators was convicted of terrorism.
Malik spoke at a pro-Hezbollah rally in Toronto. The Globe reported that the demonstrators cheered when it was announced that Hezbollah had killed 22 Israeli soldiers who were fighting in southern Lebanon against terrorists. (Canada, the United States, The European Union, Britain, Australia and Israel have classified Hezbollah a terrorist organization.)
Malik took part and wrote a report on the problems Muslim students faced in Ontario colleges and universities which decried the lack of halal food choices, prayer spaces, foot washing stations, and condemned the inflexible academic policies that were at odds with Islamic religious obligations such as separate classes for men and women. In other words, Malik wants to impose Sharia law-compliant practices on Ontario’s secular educational system.
Of course, Olivia Chow kicked off her campaign with her unique selling point: “I’m not white, not male” – this tracks the core “progressive” narrative of “white man devil, brown woman angel.” And while having brown females running the forth largest city in North America is fine in theory, electing those that openly support the most radical offcuts of the Nation of Islam, especially as Canadian troops are deployed to fight the Islamic State, would be nothing less than insecure in the extreme, even suicidal.
Here’s a question that’s been bothering me regarding separations pro’s and cons…
I keep hearing that separation doesn’t work. It can’t work, or so they say. The USA separated from Great Britain. They did fine. Why not Scotland? Why not Quebec, Alberta, Newfoundland or Ontario?
I’m starting to believe that if there were a federal separatist party in every province for instance, that we’d be way better off. It would hold Ottawa to account and reduce the strength of lobbyists, banks, predatory multi-nationals, the IMF and/or any bird brained ideas coming out of Ottawa? We have a terrible government in Ottawa right now and to my mind, the only way for Canadian citizens to regain control of their government and control the antics of the moronic like Peter McKay, Harpo, Baird, Van Loan, Oliver, Ambrose, Glover, Raitt et al, is to have every province constantly threatening the status quo in Ottawa with the threat of separation.
Separation has never been tried. How can we know for certain that it won’t work? As I said above, it worked for the USA.
Look what happened when nations chose to join, for example, the EU. Spain is belly up, Greece is belly up and Germany is footing the bill. Amalgamation seems to be a greater threat to sovereignty and economics than separation (it seems) could ever be.
Also, I’m pretty sure that referendums would cost far less than Harpo’s stupid corporate tax cuts have cost the middle class, or what NAFTA has cost us in jobs and national identity. Sometimes, it’s better to just walk away and nowadays, I’m beginning to think that Canadians should be willing to look at all options. Our less than equal relationship with the USA and NAFTA killed manufacturing in Ontario. Killed jobs. Caused a recession. The US doesn’t pay what it owes us or Harper forgave their debts… I say separation is as good a tool as any for provinces to make Canada work better.
Olivia Chow tweets: “Great candidates that share my values for a caring, better city.” And who are these great candidates?
Ausma Malik for one. Malik organized and chaired, “On Our Own Terms: Muslim Youth Speak Out” at the University of Toronto. One of their first operations was building support and raising money for the “Toronto 18” – radical Islamist men who had recently been charged with terrorism for conspiring to blow up the Toronto Stock Exchange, raid the Canadian Parliament Buildings and behead Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Ringleader Zakaria Amara pleaded guilty to terrorism charges and together with several of his co-conspirators was convicted of terrorism.
Malik spoke at a pro-Hezbollah rally in Toronto. The Globe reported that the demonstrators cheered when it was announced that Hezbollah had killed 22 Israeli soldiers who were fighting in southern Lebanon against terrorists. (Canada, the United States, The European Union, Britain, Australia and Israel have classified Hezbollah a terrorist organization.)
Malik took part and wrote a report on the problems Muslim students faced in Ontario colleges and universities which decried the lack of halal food choices, prayer spaces, foot washing stations, and condemned the inflexible academic policies that were at odds with Islamic religious obligations such as separate classes for men and women. In other words, Malik wants to impose Sharia law-compliant practices on Ontario’s secular educational system.
Of course, Olivia Chow kicked off her campaign with her unique selling point: “I’m not white, not male” – this tracks the core “progressive” narrative of “white man devil, brown woman angel.” And while having brown females running the forth largest city in North America is fine in theory, electing those that openly support the most radical offcuts of the Nation of Islam, especially as Canadian troops are deployed to fight the Islamic State, would be nothing less than insecure in the extreme, even suicidal.
And the crazy is back
Here’s a question that’s been bothering me regarding separations pro’s and cons…
I keep hearing that separation doesn’t work. It can’t work, or so they say. The USA separated from Great Britain. They did fine. Why not Scotland? Why not Quebec, Alberta, Newfoundland or Ontario?
I’m starting to believe that if there were a federal separatist party in every province for instance, that we’d be way better off. It would hold Ottawa to account and reduce the strength of lobbyists, banks, predatory multi-nationals, the IMF and/or any bird brained ideas coming out of Ottawa? We have a terrible government in Ottawa right now and to my mind, the only way for Canadian citizens to regain control of their government and control the antics of the moronic like Peter McKay, Harpo, Baird, Van Loan, Oliver, Ambrose, Glover, Raitt et al, is to have every province constantly threatening the status quo in Ottawa with the threat of separation.
Separation has never been tried. How can we know for certain that it won’t work? As I said above, it worked for the USA.
Look what happened when nations chose to join, for example, the EU. Spain is belly up, Greece is belly up and Germany is footing the bill. Amalgamation seems to be a greater threat to sovereignty and economics than separation (it seems) could ever be.
Also, I’m pretty sure that referendums would cost far less than Harpo’s stupid corporate tax cuts have cost the middle class, or what NAFTA has cost us in jobs and national identity. Sometimes, it’s better to just walk away and nowadays, I’m beginning to think that Canadians should be willing to look at all options. Our less than equal relationship with the USA and NAFTA killed manufacturing in Ontario. Killed jobs. Caused a recession. The US doesn’t pay what it owes us or Harper forgave their debts… I say separation is as good a tool as any for provinces to make Canada work better.
Looking forward to hearing back on this one…