“What should be very important for Canadians to understand is that an elected Governor General, an elected Senate and a free vote in Parliament by all MP’s would secure a more realistic democracy. In our current format the Governor General is an appointed stooge, elected MP’s serve to enforce the status quo, and Senators serve to enrich the doctrine of cronyism and nepotism.
There is currently no method in the Constitutional Act of 1982 which dictates how a Prime Minister can be removed. The Act also doesn’t quite define the duties of the Prime Minister of Canada or that the Prime Minister must leave the House of Commons if the governing party has lost confidence. The reason they do so, is based on tradition. However, unlike the United States, the Head of State and the Head of Government are NOT one in the same. The Queen of England for all intents and purposes is our Head of State. We are a Monarchy while the United States is a Republic. The Governor General represents the Queen of England and is therefore our representative. The Prime Minister of Canada is the Head of Government. The person who can remove the Prime Minister or any other Minister within Parliament before an election (other than the legal system) is the Governor General.
The role of the Prime Minister is not defined in the constitution, so there is no specific formula for his dishonourable removal from office. However, none is truly necessary, since, as the Prime Minister is appointed by the Governor General, the Governor General can simply replace him. No Canadian Prime Minister has ever been removed from office for committing a crime, so how and under what circumstances it would occur cannot be known.” Joseph Pede
Way to go Joe, but it can be known. And, ultimately it is going to prove very easy to prosecute and convict Justin Trudeau et al under the existing hate/bias crimes now on the books. Easy, but perhaps too time consuming and costly for the feint of heart. In the meantime, Canada, must stop crying the blues about the Monarchy and utilize it to demand the Governor-General remove Trudeau and his inner circle of cronies from their Parliamentary seats.
The current governor general is David Johnston, who has served since 1 October 2010. His career description, awards and accommodations from his peers makes him sound like ‘Captain Canadian Democracy – Defender of Truth’. But, do not expect him to enact the sanity of your demands for he is of the same perverted spirit and mindset as the people that need to be removed. The absolute spiritual lunacy of the man is shown clearly in his book Earth, Empire and Sacred Text: Muslims and Christians … – Amazon.ca. “Earth, Empire and Sacred Text examines the Muslim-Christian theology of creation and humanity, aiming to construct a dialogue to enable both faiths to work together to preserve our planet, to bring justice to its most needy inhabitants, and to contribute to peace-building. Earth, Empire and Sacred Text opens with an analysis of the influential shift from the Cartesian view of the autonomous, disembodied self to a self-defined in discourse, community and culture. The “career” of Q. 2:30 (Adam’s God-mandated trusteeship) is then traced, from Islamic commentaries of the classical period to writings of Muslim scholars in the modern and postmodern periods. This is examined alongside the concept of human trusteeship under God in Christian and Jewish writers. The book concludes by highlighting the essential elements for a Muslim-Christian theology of human trusteeship.” If you believe that Muslims and Christians are called to, or are going to form a bond of human trusteeship to work together to preserve our planet, to bring justice to its most needy inhabitants, and to contribute to peace-building; you truly are delusional surrounding the contents of the Muslim Qur’an and Christian Bible.
Whatever, do not give any unrighteous Liberal dogs and their soulmates one moment of personal rest inside or outside of the walls of Parliament. Perhaps you need to first give the D.J. of Stupidity a new residential address as his assumed five years in office as the G-G is past. If so, what political cronies have been short-listed to potentially replace him from the not so bi-partisan unholy Canadian political pack?
Still, do not assume all Liberals are morally unrighteous rabid dogs howling along with Justin’s’ pack. Indicators are that the tide has already turned against the dope smoking, drug promoting Dream Weaver Trudeau. Still, you and the G-G D.J may want to light up, snort up or slosh down and head for another ride into Trudeau Dream Weaver fantasy land.
Canada, this is THE MAN truly qualified to lead us out of the political-economic mess we have evolved to. He can do so while ensuring the human rights of all Canadians of every political and ethnic persuasion are upheld according to the law.
Steven Blaney does not run simply on Conservative ideals or Trudeau style public show-boat posturing. He is fueled by just, intelligent, morally sound doctrines that will ensure the safety and economic well being of all Canadians both at home and abroad. A stalwart family man, Steven Blaney will no more derail Canada due to biased vested interests than he would his own marriage. This nation is his family home and the spirit that indwells the man for Canada I feel to be the same as that for his wife. It may well be that a long time back the Scottish lad Gerry Rafferty had a man like Blaney in mind for us Right Down the Line in in this song. He has priorities correct in both the needs of his personal life and those of our nation. The song is a pleasant break in this discourse and so will Blaney be a pleasant break as leader of this nation.
For certain mush-media has already tried to utilize the niqab issue to try to sidetrack one and all as to just how qualified in every sectors of Government that this man is. I hope the other Conservative contenders will do what is right for Canada and simply now, one by one, drop their personal goals and get behind Blaney before the selection date even occasions. One and all, get behind Blaney right now and organize your team right now for an end-run to an ultimate victory for all of Canada. Show the Nation what the force of true unity is when it is based on solid Canadian Cultural values.
Now I must remind you why the issues that Blaney raises are of Prime National Concern.
Genuine loyalty to Canada and its values simply is not possible for adherents to the Qur’an. Surah and hadith are in the link following, but more importantly read the statements by top Islamic leaders that state this fact I just uttered. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/014-loyalty-to-non-muslim-government.htm
Now, to sort out the chickens that should be allowed to strut around the Canadian barnyard is not an impossible task, and truly it is one that must be addressed in timely fashion by our government. In our ‘ball game’ of Canadian national security I will give you three examples why all Muslims have struck out and should be returned to the ‘dugouts’ they straggled in from.
One: Muslims are not to show honor or loyalty to Canada by standing for our national anthem. But, if unable to avoid this they are commanded to act in a duplicitous manner as Fatwas # 85728 and others indicate. “So, it is unlawful to stand up for such a thing and Muslims should make sure that anything they do conforms with these rules. Blind imitation of disbelievers is rejected. It is reported from Abu Dawood that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) said: ‘Whoever imitates some people, he is one of them’. So, the Muslim should not commit this Haram unless there is dire necessity like fearing to be jailed or beaten. In this case, he may make believe that he is standing for the anthem but keeps on remembering Allah and should feel deep sorrow for doing such a thing. Indeed, standing for these flags and anthems is a glorification of them. And if the person intends by such act any glorification of these things similar to glorifying Allah, then he becomes a Kafir, i.e. moves away from Islamic religion. Allah knows best.”
Two: Muslims are not to obtain citizenship of a non-Muslim country, nor to make a pledge of allegiance without dire necessity. Fatwas # 202420 is but one stating this, and again we see the command to act in a fraudulent manner so they can achieve their ends. “We have explained in them that in case of dire necessity, a Muslim who gives the pledge of allegiance to one of these governments may conceal his intention and use Tawriyah (i.e. saying something which has more than one meaning and intending a meaning different from what the listener is likely to understand), like to intend his allegiance only to the Muslims in those lands and to benefit that country by guiding its people to enter Islam. However, the Muslim does not become a disbeliever by merely repeating these words which contain allegiance to the people of Kufr, as long as his heart remains at rest with faith.”
Three: As a general rule the Muslim is forbidden to live among us because it has many negative effects on the practice of Islam. As Fatwas # 82552 states “Living in a non-Muslim country or migration to it is permissible only if a person cannot find a Muslim country where he can earn a livelihood and can practice his religion freely. It is also permissible for Muslim scholars to live in non-Muslim countries for the purpose of Da’wah i.e., calling non-Muslims to Islam and teaching Muslims Sharia rules, provided they can do so freely and would not be subjected to trials or would have to compromise or leave their religion.
All the mentioned details are related to the rule of Muslims living in non-Muslim countries. But the rule for applying and accepting citizenship of those countries is much restricted. A Muslim is not permitted to apply for citizenship of non-Muslim countries except in a dire need, such as not being able to practice his religion in his own country or fear of oppression or being in danger for his life or the threat of imprisonment or torture in his homeland and there is no Islamic country where he can live. In such circumstances one can apply for citizenship of a non-Muslim country. If he is obliged to take an oath for getting citizenship, at that moment one should try to allude to the words of oath as much as possible to escape their intended point. However, if he is able to live harmlessly in the non-Muslim country without taking the citizenship then applying for citizenship is not permissible for him. It is forbidden for him to apply for citizenship of a non-Muslim country if he is simply aspiring to material comforts or financial gain.”
It is quite clear that the Citizenship Oath or Oath of Allegiance is something the Muslim is to try to avoid, and if participating in they are to do so from a fraudulent mindset. This is why you hear the Muslim whine about the matter of not wearing the niqab in ‘legal circumstances’. It is also the reason behind the issues surrounding Obama’s swearing in ceremony as President. So, what is the worth of an oath of any kind from someone who practices deception because his ‘religion tells him to do so when it advances his agenda? Zero! Muslims owe their alliance to the ummah, the Muslim community, and not to any kafir nation. Thus, he serves the ummah before our country and deceives kafirs when it advances Islam. Believing that jihad in all of its forms is the true relationship between Muslims and kafirs, why would a Muslim defend Canada from an Islamic threat or protect the Canadian Constitution? The Bill of Rights offers all peoples freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Islamic Sharia law denies these rights to any human other than Muslims. The apostate of Islam can be killed without redress and freedom of speech is specifically denied as both Mohammed and the Koran may not be criticized. The doctrine of Islam makes a Muslim’s oath meaningless when made to kafirs, and Canadians, if you are not a Muslim you are a kafir.
Summation: All Muslims are clearly commanded by their faith to enter a process of ‘naturalization fraud’ when they seek Citizenship of our nation. Case closed and time to start enacting sentence!
The Loss of Canadian Citizenship
Pursuant to Section 7 of the Citizenship Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-29, Canadian citizenship can be lost for specific reasons listed in the statute. One such reason for loss is by Order in cases of fraud: 10. (1). Subject to section 18 but notwithstanding any other section of this Act, where the Governor in Council, on a report from the Minister, is satisfied that any person has obtained, retained, renounced or resumed citizenship under this Act by false representation or fraud or by knowingly concealing material circumstances, (a) the person ceases to be a citizen, or (b) the renunciation of citizenship by the person shall be deemed to have had no effect, as of such date as may be fixed by order of the Governor in Council with respect thereto. Presumption: (2) A person shall be deemed to have obtained citizenship by false representation or fraud or by knowingly concealing material circumstances if the person was lawfully admitted to Canada for permanent residence by false representation or fraud or by knowingly concealing material circumstances and, because of that admission, the person subsequently obtained citizenship. 1974-75-76, c. 108, s. 9.
Note: Knowingly concealing of the true Islamic position with respect to ‘citizenship application and oaths’ has been proven, thus all Muslims are eligible to have their citizenship status immediately revoked. And, belief in the radical Islamic ideology itself should be grounds enough to deport immigrants, even after they have been naturalized. People are not to support totalitarian groups or affiliate with any that engage in advocating violence or ideologies that overthrow Canadian governance. The Islamic communities clearly comprise totalitarian entities for under Islam it is impossible to separate ‘church and state: “All civil authority bows to the wisdom of religious clerics in a theocracy. The best existing example (if one can use that descriptor loosely) of such a theocracy in action is the Islamic Republic of Iran. The worst example in recent memory is the Taliban when it ruled Afghanistan. Can one doubt that both examples point clearly to a totalitarian form of government in which no form of peaceful dissension or religious liberty is tolerated? In fact, dissension and religious differences are dealt with brutally.”
I believe necessary legislation or ‘order in council’ needs be enacted that bans anyone from becoming a citizen if he or she is a follower of Islam. This is but a necessary first step to ensure that Islam and sharia law can never supersede secular law and liberty in Canada. Further, the process must be started now of stripping all citizenship rights from Muslims for their failure to disclose their beliefs and true intents in the initial circumstance. As shown in the fatwas all practicing Muslims have been involved in naturalization fraud and their citizenship should be immediately rescinded or the laws of Canada become a bad joke! Immigration laws allowing Muslims into Canada should be immediately repealed for the protection of the Canadian public.
Denaturalized people usually revert to their prior immigration status, which is often as a permanent resident alien. Simple reverting to prior status is not sufficient for Muslims, for it still allows the perpetrators of deception and terrorism to wander our society at will. But resident aliens convicted of certain crimes, particularly national security crimes should be subject to immediate deportation. Even in the absence of a criminal conviction, permanent residents can be deported if they obtained that status through fraud or misrepresentation. It would seem quite clear that our Muslim miscreants should stand for deportation due to their fraudulent conduct. This cannot be a case by case, drawn out process but one of immediate enactment if those adhering to the Islamic faith do not renounce the commandments of the Qur’an that demands their pursuit of sharia law and the hate crimes perpetuated through their beliefs. It does not matter what generation of Muslims you are dealing with for they have all lied during the naturalization process. As a group, they should be forced to, either, vocally renounce their belief in the practice of undemocratic Islamic law or have their citizenship immediately revoked. This would not infringe on their civil liberties or human rights as they have no Canadian entitlement to such given their initial actions and faith based convictions. As to taking such an oath of renunciation, it is probably best along with the use of a polygraph as you are dealing with ‘faith justified liars’.
Do we have catch 22 situations? Not really, it is simply a matter of Canada being the first nation to justifiably enforce its laws and become a Muslim free zone. This circumstance, whether you like it or not, is ultimately the only way you end the terrorist threats and Muslim foment from ‘sea to shining sea’. The federal government should require new immigrants to take an oath of loyalty to Canada and its values, deporting them if they breach it. They must take an oath swearing that they will give their complete allegiance and loyalty to Canada. Too much emphasis has been placed on the rights of newcomers rather than on their obligations as citizens of Canada. As well Canada’s official multiculturalism policy encourages immigrants to place the ‘loyalties and enmities’ of their homelands before their duty to Canada. These have been strong contributing factors in encouraging Muslims to treat our country as a convenient and generous platform from which to engage in or mount support for their favorite conflicts abroad.
It is time that all immigrants be made to understand it is their responsibility and not the governments that they comprehend what are core Canadian values. Clear notice of the expectation must be given that they earnestly strive to live up to Canadian values, not Islamic values, and if they violate them they shall be quickly ejected from Canada in the direction they came from. There is not much I just raised that was not already stressed on March 01, 2006 when former senior Foreign Affairs official Martin Collacott released a Fraser Institute report stressing ‘radical Islamic terrorists are currently the greatest danger to Canada’s security.’ This is the same catch-phrase statement that Blaney has just made. The Collacott advice and warnings were given 8 years ago from this publishing date. We would not be ‘hurried in dealing’ with Islamic extremism to the degree we are today if Harper had been elected to govern this nation before 2006!
Canadian politicians and all ‘groupies’: to procrastinate any further, you truly do so to your own peril, for “all faithful Muslims fundamentally agree on one basic precept in the Koran; that is, jihad or holy war against the infidel. Many millions of Muslims, both Sunni and Shiite, however, disagree on how to violently wage jihad. That is, whether to seize power politically by population density (as it was done in the UK) in order to get sharia law imposed, or to kill, bomb, and terrorize the infidel into submission. Once sharia law is declared legal by a democratic regime, it assumes its inexorably fascist form and is can only be stopped by that democratic host regime abolishing the law and holding Muslim’s accountable for their crimes against natural law, liberty and freedom of religion.”
“Millions of seemingly peaceful and loving Muslims regularly go to their Mosques, located in many cities, to worship their Islamic god and to earnestly pray that all infidels will eventually be forced to submit to Islam. In their scheduled meetings, these Muslims plan ways to make this happen, either violently or by subtle political subterfuge. It is wise to remember that all devout Muslims who render the Qur’an as the divine word of their god, Allah, have been commanded by their prophet, Mohammed, to lie, cheat, and deceive the infidel, by behaving in ways that Allah has forbidden them to do with other Muslims. Thus, they may do such things as drinking alcohol, eating pork and other foods they regard as unclean, cheating, and lying. The end result of the infidels’ submission to Allah, justifies any, and all means used to make that end result occur. This makes negotiating with Islam and compromising with it in any manner a truly suicidal affair.”
Three Necessary Political Actions to Be Taken Now
1. Removal of all Muslims from any position within government organizations that may be determined strategic to national security in any form.
2. Place an immediate moratorium on Muslim immigration.
3. Establish and fully enforce ‘The Criteria of Qualification for Immediate Arrest, Seizure and Deportation for Citizenship Fraud’
The wearing of the niqab was disallowed for Canadian citizenship candidates in 2011 when reciting the Oath of Citizenship. This action taken by then Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney sparked confused people to debates and allowed duplicitous actions by sharia driven interest groups to advance their cause.
The matter reached another juncture through the actions of Toronto resident Zunera Ishaq who challenged the ruling that those taking the oath to do so without any face covering. Zunera Ishaq, a Pakistani national and Sunni Muslim who wears a niqab when in public, came to Canada in 2008 and passed her citizenship test at the end of 2013. She expressed willingness to unveil herself and recite the oath in private, but refused the demand she remove her niqāb in a public ceremony. After learning that she would have to remove her niqab in public for the oath-taking she wrote a letter asking that her ceremony be postponed, and filed an application for a review of the policy with the Federal Court in Jan. 2014. She was supported in her actions by the National Council of Canadian Muslims, the radicalized name change group discussed in my posting Evil Times. And, as we know from the facts presented in my article there were and are serious ‘Islamic identity crisis issues’ at stake affecting our national security at play here. Yet, Federal Court Judge Keith M. Boswell who was appointed by Harper in 2014 ruled in Ishaq’s favor.
The following extracts come from the posting by Morgan Lowrie – CP February 12, 2015. Ishaq ‘had sued the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration claiming the government’s policy on veils violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” “A federal judge ruled in Ottawa last week that a portion of the law requiring citizenship candidates to remove their face coverings while taking the oath was unlawful.” “Speaking at an event in Quebec on Thursday, Harper said the government intends to appeal the ruling.” Harper stated: “I believe, and I think most Canadians believe that it is offensive that someone would hide their identity at the very moment where they are committing to join the Canadian family,” he said in Victoriaville, Que. “This is a society that is transparent, open, and where people are equal.”
Do not get caught into the bickering-legal debate about processes of oath taking for the issues at stake are what I have stated. Also, there is a general confusion as to the reality of the circumstance in many ongoing media sideshows that are out of contact with the reality of what Canadians truly think. Three of Canada’s major papers: the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, and the National Post, all applauded the judge’s decision with editorials explaining how religious freedoms must prevail. This out to lunch bunch appear oblivious to the fact that the Islamic dress of the niqab and burka comprise a part of the Muslim sharia designed to subjugate and silence women. Of those who comprehend this, most appear to unfortunately see this matter as simply about the openness and the equality of men and women in Canada and not the intended Islamic political designs. However, as to the donning of the niqab for the Oath at issue: “An Angus Reid poll last year found 90% of Quebecers and nearly 70% of Canadians outside Quebec supported a proposed provincial ban on the niqab in government offices, schools, and publicly funded institutions.”
Nearly 70% of Canadians have already indicated that they would not support the decision reached by Keith M. Boswell as was stated. “To the extent that the Policy interferes with a citizenship judge’s duty to allow candidates for citizenship the greatest possible freedom in the solemnization or the solemn affirmation of the oath, it is unlawful,” he wrote.” Boswell, wake up and rescind your decision for there is no restriction of freedom in prevention of fraudulent actions. So, do not get side-tracked nearly 70% of Canada and look to the security of the nation.
On Feb 26, 2015 Steve Rukavina posted the story of Quebec Judge Eliana Marengo telling mouthy Muslim El-Alloul, who appeared in her Montreal courtroom she would not hear her case until she removed her hijab. This created both a ‘garner your brownie points political muttering by Federal opposition parties’ and ‘standard Islamic whines’ orchestrated by the NCCM. But it also garnered a very simple response from PM Turner: “If someone is not covering their face, we believe they should be allowed to testify,” Harper spokesman Stephen Lecce said in a one-line statement.”
And, this one liner shows quite simply that Harper will not be drawn into useless bickering as the issue is not one about ‘head covering at all’ …it is about “face covering, concealment and values not conducive to the free and open society he espouses”. Wearing a turban does not conceal your identity whether you don it in the soccer field or serve in the RCMP. But, take a look at the Muslim dress shown in ascending order of concealment that follows. You will see quite clearly why Stephen Harper does not care about the hijab any more than the turban or the babushka worn by an old woman painting Easter Eggs! His genuine concern is about national security to a degree that few seem to have the courage to emulate.
Hijab is the noun form of the Arabic verb meaning “to cover” or “to shelter.” In general, hijab refers to any clothing a Muslim woman wears to fulfil the religion’s requirement for modest dress. However, the word has come to describe this headscarf that covers most of the hair and neck, and sometimes the shoulders. While this garment normally identifies the wearer as a follower of Islam the facial recognition identity is not hindered that would enable easier criminal behavior or security breaching. However, being ‘face free’ does not alter the fact that these individuals will deliberately lie to advance the cause of Islam.
A khemar is a headscarf that covers the head, neck, shoulders, upper body and arms, leaving only the face exposed. Khemar is the word used in the Qur’an when it refers to a veil or headscarf. Once again we see the general factors as with the hijab. However, being face free does not alter the fact that these individuals will deliberately lie to advance the cause of Islam.
The chador is a full-length garment made from a semi-circle of cloth draped over the head and open in the front. It is held shut with the hands or teeth and tied at the waist. The chador doesn’t have openings for the hands. It is usually associated with Muslim dress in Iran. A greater degree to concealment is evident. Does the Qur’an demand closure with the teeth so the hands can be free to carry a concealed bomb or to ensure the woman cannot clearly speak out? If held closed to such position with the hands the men have double protection of the girls not speaking rebellion in any form. I call this the ‘chador bomb free closure hold position’. It is bomb free as long as granny does not have it strapped to her torso. In any case, none of this alters the fact that this individual will deliberately lie to advance the cause of Islam.
Our notorious niqab is a headscarf that covers not only the hair, but also most of the face, leaving only the eyes exposed. You have already assumed this is a woman shown. Why? This could be an effeminate, homosexual or cross dressing transgender Muslim convert-pervert of some sort. In any case, none of this alters the fact that this individual will deliberately lie to advance the cause of Islam. And this is exactly what defines Zunera Ishaq: just another died in the wool liar advancing the cause of Islam. It is time to get your ‘head out of the bag babe’ at our public Citizen Oath ceremony or prepare to get out of Canada. The NCCM will be dragging their tails outward soon so simply latch onto one of lizards and continue to follow them.
The bulky burka is a head-to-toe covering seen often in Afghanistan. Women appearing in public were required to wear this covering, usually coloured grey or blue, during the country’s Taliban rule. The entire body is concealed, including the eyes, which are covered with a fabric net that allows the wearer to see. In Canada, you normally run into these covered in black. Whatever the color does not alter the fact that these girls (if they are girls) will deliberately lie to advance the cause of Islam. Someone named this garb ‘La Bomba Bag Express’ which could be kind of appropriate given the increasing numbers of Islamic female suicide bombers.
Has the connection sunk in? This garb is not a ‘cultural or civil rights issue’, it is about, and represents a basic belief system that is at war with the Constitution and traditional values of Canada. And, Stephen Harper is not anti-any-culture, he simply is about ensuring Canada’s national security. National security is the #1 concern Canada faces and I believe a good Harper ad campaign could be taken in part from the successful Dollar Bill Clinton liars blurb coined by James Carville: “It’s the economy, stupid.”
Canada, “It’s about national security, stupid!” And, Canada, I think you can rest assured that Harper will not be found in some Clinton-Monica Lewinsky style sexual posture in his office or elsewhere. (Nor will Steven Blaney). The evidence of his personal convictions displayed in public office show some belief that “a good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favor rather than silver and gold. The rich and poor meet together: The Lord is the maker of them all. A prudent man foresees the evil, and hides himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Proverbs 22:1-3)
Nope: do not try to cloud the issues about who the man Steven Blaney is and the fact he was right about the niqab when he first stated his views and he is right now.
Phinehas/ Kenneth A Gran