DAY 75

 

August 6, 2019 –75 DAYS FOR YOU TO WAKE UP

 

ONEWAKE UP TO THE TOTAL INSANITY OF MUSLIMS

hb9MUHAMMAD THE PERFECT EXAMPLE of INSANITY 

A dominant belief of Islam is that a Muslim must believe every word of the Qur’an was dictated by God to Angel Gabriel and then transmitted to Muhammad. This means every word of the Qur’an is from the mouth of their god and must be obeyed without question and absolute devout obedience.

However, it appears that Muhammad himself is shaky in this area for Allah has to ensure him that he is not insane and of great moral character.

Al-Qalam 68: 2-6 “You are not, O Muhammad, by the favor of your Lord, a madman. And indeed, for you is a reward uninterrupted. And indeed, you are of a great moral character. So, you will see and they will see Which of you is the afflicted by a devil.

The history of Islam and what it espouses through its Prophet shows the actions of a madman, one of extremely low moral character and perhaps simply demon possessed. And still his followers are told Muhammad is the most “beautiful pattern of conduct” and example for mankind to follow.

Al Ahzab 33:21: “Yusuf Ali: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern of conduct for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.”

Watch these videos pro and con about the Perfect Man, the one we are told to emulate.

 > 7:33   https://youtu.be/A3_37T7CKkE    The best role model from Let the Qur’an Speak.

> 11:53  https://youtu.be/HgKn_OaDOHI   Surah 33:53 with David Wood.

If you are going to be like Mr. Greater than All and Model for All then prepare yourself for the following:

Prepare to promote vengeance and slavery and make your motto…’you kill one of mine and I am killing one of yours’.

Al-Baqarah 2:178: “O you who believe! retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the slain, the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female, but if any remission is made to any one by his aggrieved brother, then prosecution for the bloodwit * should be made according to usage, and payment should be made to him in a good manner; this is an alleviation from your Lord and a mercy; so whoever exceeds the limit after this he shall have a painful chastisement.”  Bloodwit is a fine or amercement paid as a composition for the shedding of blood; also, it can refer to a riot or battle wherein blood was spilled.

hb10You now better see as the Prophet sees, for his vision is the revelation of Allah.

Al-Ma’idah 5:45: “And We prescribed for them therein: The life for the life, and the eye for the eye, and the nose for the nose, and the ear for the ear, and the tooth for the tooth, and for wounds retaliation. But whoso forgoes it, in the way of charity, it shall be expiation for him. Whoso judges not by that which Allah hath revealed such are wrong-doers.”

You need to practice the tradition of Muhammad, start screaming Allah Akbar and cutting off someone’s head. In this passage, a companion of the prophet recounts an episode in which he staged a surprise ambush on a settlement.      Hisham 990: “Ibn Ishaq- “I leapt upon him and cut off his head and ran in the direction of the camp shouting ‘Allah akbar’ and my two companions did likewise”.

Practice and you need not worry about squeamishness as Muslims tell us it becomes > 3:07  Just Like Killing Chickens   November 1, 2016 by Dr. Bill Warner

You want to be a model like the Prophet and not a wrong doer, so get prepared to marry your daughter-in law.  Muhammad’s Marriage to His Daughter-In-Law

For certain you will need the perfect man’s perfect marriage contract as described by Dr. Ahmud Al-Mu’bi, a Saudi Marriage Officiant.  > 3:08   https://youtu.be/Q5t9U9r9Kfs

And you definitely need to know when to keep your perfect mouth shut to perfectly please Allah and his Prophet.   Allah has three reasons for hating you for not modeling the prophets perfect mouth.

Sahih al-Bukhari 24:555: “The clerk of Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba narrated, “Muawiya wrote to Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba: Write to me something which you have heard from the Prophet.” So, Al-Mughira wrote: I heard the Prophet saying, “Allah has hated for you three things: 1. Vain talks, (useless talk) that you talk too much or about others. 2. Wasting of wealth by extravagance 3. And asking too many questions in disputed religious matters or asking others for something except in great need.”

But, no matter what you do, you will never be able to live to the high standards the Qur’an and hadith show about me says Muhammad. He is very happy to laud his main claim to fame as being given superiority over all other prophets in six respects.

Sahih Muslim 4:1062:  Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad) said: I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror in the hearts of enemies: spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.”

As to placing ‘terror in the hearts of enemies’, Muhammad models prayer as a burning issue for us. I suppose this is just an Islamic incentive to keep you from being late for assembly.

In Sahih al-Bukhari 11:626: “Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “No prayer is harder for the hypocrites than the Fajr and the ‘Isha’ prayers and if they knew the reward for these prayers at their respective times, they would certainly present themselves in the mosques even if they had to crawl.” The Prophet added, “Certainly I decided to order the Mu’adh-dhin (call-maker) to pronounce Iqama and order a man to lead the prayer and then take a fire flame to burn all those who had not left their houses so far for the prayer along with their houses.” I guess this just might instill a little terror into the less than faithful, eh?

Muhammad clearly stated that Islam will be victorious through terror and branded himself a terrorist.   Bukhari 4:220: “Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror cast in the hearts of the enemy, and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).”

In the light of such insanity Dr. Warner tries to provide us with knowledge that may help to reason the Muslim out of their terrorist mess.> 3:54  https://youtu.be/TT9fguD9XJE

Given our current state of affairs it is obvious that reason is not high on the list of Islamic incentives, being they are commanded to terrorise. Following are some of the scriptural directives that Allah, Qur’an and Hadith states are to be followed along their bloody pathway of terrorism. After all, “- Allah’s Apostle said… ‘I have been made victorious with terror cast in the hearts of the enemy.” (Bukhari 4:220)

hb11Ale-Imran 151: “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority”.  Those who joined companions with Allah are such persons as the Christians who added Jesus as the son and the Holy Spirit as the third personality of God.  

Al-Anfal 8:12 “Remember when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”

Terrorize them to the degree that it will be remembered by those who lead them and send them out from their places of origin; or when you go into theirs.

Al-Anfal 8:57 “If thou come on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember.”

Slaughter first and take prisoners later.
Al-Anfal 8:67 “It is not for a prophet to have captives of war until he inflicts a massacre upon Allah ‘s enemies in the land. Some Muslims desire the commodities of this world, but Allah desires for you the Hereafter. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.”

Hisham 484: Ibn Ishaq “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’

You might stay your killing for holy days, but as soon as over get back at it where ever you are. In 2016 the ISIS foreign outreach magazine (source) referred to the following verse urging the faithful to promote attacks in all nations.

At-Tawbah 9:5 “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them.”   As ISIS stated: “Allah did not only command the ‘fighting’ of disbelievers, as if to say He only wants us to conduct front line operations against them. Rather, He has also ordered that they be slain wherever they may be – on or off the battlefield.”

At-Taubah 123. “O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who are the Al-Muttaqun (the pious).”

Al-Fath 29:  “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard, ruthless against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves”.  Islam is not about treating everyone equally.

hb12Never stop jihad, never stop terrorizing until Islam is supreme.

Sahih Bukhari 8:387:  Narrated Anas bin Malik:  “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.”

Al-Baqarah 2:216 “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and ye know not.”

Al-Baqarah 2:244) “Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Hears and knows all things.”

Muhammad 47:35 “So, do not falter and cry out for peace when ye will be the uppermost, and Allah is with you, and He will not grudge the reward of your actions.”

No reasonable person could interpret this evidence from the Islamic Holy texts to show anything other than Islam commands violence and terrorism. Anyone denying this is truly delusional or a deliberate jihad liar.

Which one are you? You have to be one or the other if you have crawled into bed with Trudeau and crew. You are criminally deranged in telling us we are to embrace Islamic Insanity in any manner.

Phinehas

 

TWOISLAMIC REALITIES   

HOBSON’S CHOICE

I am heading you toward a Hobson’s Choice surrounding our military and the Citizenship Treason that is shown within it due to both Homosexuality and Islam.

A Hobson’s Choice is basically a situation of one choice only…a take it or leave it circumstance.  But, Hobson’s Choice is still a free choice in which one thing only appears to be offered. Because a person may refuse to accept what is offered, there are two options of taking it or taking nothing. In other words, one may “take it or leave it.” The phrase is said to have originated with Thomas Hobson (1544–1631), a livery stable owner in Cambridge, England, who offered rental customers the choice of either taking the horse in his stall nearest the door or taking none at all. This effectively allowed him to control the rotation of his animals and ensure they did not get run down by customers freely selecting the better-looking ones.

In your particular mindset of spiritual misconceptions which appears somehow better to you: Homosexuality or Islam? Both are evil and they are incompatible. If left unhindered they could possibly effectively destroy one another.

 

So, what is the HOBSON’S CHOICE now facing you? One is that the ‘good name’ of the Canadian Military and Prison Chaplains has become a deceptive blackened branding of Islam and Two a playground for spiritual sexual perverts. The Military has been Branded by Islam for our CANADIAN MILITARY Chaplaincy is wearing an ISIS symbol  as I posted on August 31, 2015. You need to read this posting in its entirety.

You can take a stand against this circumstance or you can walk away leaving Islam to further invade our military and government. Take it or leave it.

 

TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT!    Yes, but in reaching your decision do not accept the defeatist Merriam-Webster definition of catch–22 as being a difficult situation for which there is no easy or possible solution.

You certainly are in a HOBSON’S CHOICE, but you are not in a Catch-22, for there is both a possible and easy solution to the problem. The solution is within the very nature of the elemental cause of the problem itself and laws already existing in Canada enacted to end it.

Do not think you are in a position of some free choice delusion, nor in a choice dilemma between two undesirable options. One of your options is totally desirable, and that is to remove the shame our soldiers have to face and the further invasion of Islam in our land.

However, you may be in a semblance of a ‘false dilemma’ where only two choices are considered, when in fact there are others. But, in our case we still come right back to Hobson’s Choice for all other considerations other than the two are simply stalling shadows of the Catch-22 mentality. And this mentality will result in not taking direct legal actions against Islam that will see blood flow in our streets.

THE STALLING SHADOWS

The Complications and immensities of an issue are made to appear insurmountable by the Catch-22 mentality.

Faced with the challenges of a problem, ideas are generated that it is impossible to locate the correct starting point to deal with the issue at hand. Tension is often created through feeling there simply is not sufficient time for all matters to be prepared properly so victory can be attained. Particularly in dealing with Government and Courts, many individuals feel that no matter how hard they strive they will never be fully prepared at mandatory presentation dates. These attitudes do genuinely make a mountain out of a molehill, but we have in many cases generated a set of inherently illogical rules or conditions that reinforce the Catch-22 Mindset.

When you come to a ‘facing the rules junction in seeking justice’ do not fall victim to the Urban Dictionary Catch-22 definition: in which a desired outcome or solution is impossible to attain because of an illogical, unreasonable, or senseless situation created by measures or policies whose effect is often the polar opposite of what was intended. Within our nation there truly are contradictory rules that must be overcome, but in engaging the process of overcoming there always remains a simple solution. You may not always like the solution, but it is there. Keep it all simple and consume your elephant of opposition one mouth full at a time. Do not start at the rectum, start at the trunk on which it feeds and in short order the animal will die of its own accord.

INTERFERING WITH RELIGIOUS PRACTICES?

To claim someone is interfering with religious practices in a negative manner by restricting Islam is lunacy of immense proportions. The traditional basis for invalidating laws that prohibit the exercise of an obligatory religious practice is that it confronts the adherents with a HOBSON’S CHOICE between observance of their faith and adherence to the law. In curtailing Islam through protection of Canadian law, you certainly do not place the Muslim in a HOBSON’S CHOICE for the Muslim cannot adhere to Islam in Canada if they have not first violated its Law. Our laws actually demand the prohibition of the practice of Islam for a multitude of reasons.

In Canada, when it comes to your protection of religious and cultural practices that save believers from facing hard choices, you are actually in violation of the law through standing for Islam. Religious and cultural practices are to be protected only when they are central to human identity and hence to human dignity, which is in turn central to equality. The multitude of violations of Human dignity and Human equality by Islam are exactly why all Islamists are wide open to prosecution and eviction from Canada and why you are facing a HOBSON’S CHOICE in bringing them to prosecution at this time.

Do you still feel like you are missing the key to solution of the crisis of Islam? Are you still trying to open doors in your mind that you have closed? It is you that left the key behind some door in your mind. It is the key you still believe you somehow now need to open the door so you can get back into that same room for your preconceived solutions to Islam. And, in that room you believe you will somehow find your peace, your security and your safety of mind.

In frustration, you mutter damn it, this is one big Catch 22.”  NOT SO FOOL Check the backdoor and windows of your mind for it is you that forgot the key to your thoughts justifying Islam to begin with. You thought you had it all figured out. But, what else have you mistakenly assumed mentally secure as you strutted out the door? What did you arrogantly and nobly assume you were correct about before the reality of ISIS and Islam went click upon you worldwide? Why does the HOBSON’S CHOICE now facing you seemingly darken the forlorn cloud of Catch-22 you birthed on your Fantasy Island?  There is no need for any of this in enacting the solution to Islam in Canada, as a God given window has been left wide open for you in our existing legal enactments.

The solution to dealing correctly with Islamists and ending the problems they embody always has been within the very nature of the problem itself and laws already existing in Canada.

“If any man has ears to hear, let him hear.”       Mark 4:23

 

DO WE HAVE A CATCH-22 SITUATION?

Not in the world of reality. It is simply a matter of picking up the first shovel full of Canadian law surrounding Citizenship Fraud and tossing it into the rat holes Islam crawled in through initially. It is simply a matter of Canada being the first nation to justifiably enforce its existing laws and become a Muslim free zone. And, I believe that amid the nations of this earth only Canada currently has an established set of laws that makes such action possible. This circumstance, whether you like it or not, is ultimately the only way you end the terrorist threats and Muslim foment from our ‘sea to shining sea’.

For certain, the Federal government should require new immigrants to take an oath of absolute loyalty to Canada and its values, deporting them if they breach it. For certain the Federal government should ensure the Provinces and all other levels of government come into full compliance with the law surrounding such an oath of loyalty. The leadership of any level of government that fails to ensure such compliance should be fully prosecutable under Canadian laws surrounding treason, fined and jailed for a mandatory period of time.

All immigrants 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 to be citizens of Canada. As such, there are also changes necessary for Canada’s official multiculturalism policy. The laxness of the policy effectively encourages immigrants to place the ‘loyalties and enmities’ of their homelands before their duty to Canada. These have been strong contributing factors in encouraging sectarian Muslims to treat our country as a convenient and generous platform from which to engage in their personal feuds here, or to mount support for their favorite conflicts abroad. These people must be expunged from Canada. Canadian politicians and all ‘kaffir groupies’: procrastinate any further and you do so to your own peril. You are simply another kaffir waiting to have your throat slit.

ISLAM MUST BE EXTINGUISHED IN CANADA!

It is a righteous action with God that this take place.

Phinehas

 

Galatians 4:16    Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

 

THREECONSTITUTIONAL LEGALITIES

HATE SPEECH 

 We know from general definition that hate crime is a crime motivated by racial, sexual, or other prejudice, typically one involving violence. We also know that a hate crime law is a law intended to also deter bias-motivated violence. But hate crime laws are distinct from laws against hate speech in the United States where hate crime laws enhance the penalties associated with conduct that is already criminal under other laws, while hate speech laws criminalize a specific category of speech. U.S. hate speech laws that exist are mainly in conflict with the first amendment right to freedom of speech, so they have repeatedly been overturned as unconstitutional. But, what about here in Canada?  Well, the first time someone was charged with hate speech over the internet occurred on 27 March 1996. “A Winnipeg teenager was arrested by the police for sending an email to a local political activist that contained the message ‘Death to homosexuals’ it’s prescribed in the Bible! Better watch out next Gay Pride Week.’ (Nairne, 1996).” That was over ten years ago and a lot has taken place since needing our consideration.

THE LAW SURROUNDING HATE SPEECH INTERNATIONALLY

In most countries hate speech is not considered a legal term, but it is generally considered speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of such attributes as gender, ethnic origin, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation. In some countries however, hate speech is speech, a gesture or conduct, writing, or a display which is forbidden because it incites violence or prejudicial action against a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group.

In some countries, a victim of hate speech may seek redress under civil law, criminal law, or both. But like all other matters the United Nations General Assembly is trying to tell the world how it must conduct itself in relationship to hate speech and hate/bias crime.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is a multilateral treaty adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 16 December 1966, and in force from 23 March 1976. It commits its parties to respect the civil and political rights of individuals, including the right to lifefreedom of religion, freedom of speechfreedom of assembly, electoral rights and rights to due process and a fair trial. As of April 2014, the Covenant has 74 signatories and 168 parties.

The ICCPR is part of the International Bill of Human Rights, along with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The ICCPR is monitored by the United Nations Human Rights Committee (a separate body to the United Nations Human Rights Council), which reviews regular reports of States parties on how the rights are being implemented. States must report initially one year after acceding to the Covenant and then whenever the Committee requests (usually every four years). The Committee normally meets in Geneva and normally holds three sessions per year.

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) prohibits all incitement of racism. On 3 May 2011, Michael O’Flaherty with the United Nations Human Rights Committee published General Comment No. 34 on the ICCPR, which among other comments expresses concern that many forms of “hate speech” do not meet the level of seriousness set out in Article 20. Concerning the debate over how freedom of speech applies to the Internet, conferences concerning such sites have been sponsored by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.”

However, for many outside observers, the term “hate speech” is simply viewed as a ‘politically correct’ expression used to intimidate or silence critics of social policies that have been poorly implemented by politicians in a rush to appear politically correct. In modern usage, the term politically correct language, is used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended not to offend or disadvantage any particular group of people in society. Special interest groups often push the idea of there being necessary ‘political correctness’ and ‘politically correct speech’ in order to divert attention from more substantive matters of discrimination; and as part of a broader advancing of their own cultural objectives. Political policies that reinforce ‘political correctness’ are usually excessively weighted in favor of the minority of concern as opposed to the rights of the majority they are supposed to be a homogeneous part of.

A website that uses hate speech is called a hate site. Most of these sites contain Internet forums that emphasize a particular viewpoint. An Internet forum, or message board, is an online discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages. They differ from chat rooms in that messages are often longer than one line of text and are at least temporarily archived. Also, depending on the access level of a user or the forum set-up, a posted message might need to be approved by a moderator before it becomes visible.

Some communication theories give insight into the possible harm caused by hate speech and hate sites such as, ‘racist expressions allowing minorities to be categorized with negative attributes are directly harmful to them’. What is overlooked is the fact that whether negative attributes are ascribed to a minority or a majority, racist expressions are equally as harmful. Logic would seem to dictate that the degree of harm caused is greater in amount due to the size of the group that the negative attributes are ascribed to and not vice-versa as theorists propound. Take a very human example of a person infected with a common cold. The damage of physical, emotional and mental well being that catching a cold may cause is greatly magnified among a larger societal grouping than a smaller community. One simply should not cough hate/bias into the midst of any unprotected group.

For certain, racist expressions do cause harm and hate speech is employed by racists as a mechanism of subordinating others. But the effects of such are as equally damaging whether employed by ‘niggers, honkies, religious bigots, sexists or queers’; and it appears that too frequently all such groups are employing them to achieve their own pernicious or cultural ends. This does not make the maintenance of law and order among the unrighteous herd an easy task for any law enforcement agency.

And what compounds difficulty for all, is that sometimes a very self-centered, bigoted group such as that led by the activist Soraya Chemaly can evoke an impact upon the international media community that has potential terminal media effects. Following a campaign against publishing media content that promoted domestic and sexual violence against women, Chemaly led a media assault by Women like that of the Everyday Sexism Project.  Personally, I believe that digging out the roots of domestic and sexual violence is a noble goal, as did the mass of supporters for Chemaly. Such people are to be lauded for taking on ‘the big boys’ but I am not certain that all were driven by noble ideals and desire for ‘the greatest common good’.

Whatever, by May 29, 2013 Facebook had been forced to state it had “become clear that our systems to identify and remove hate speech have failed to work as effectively as we would like, particularly around issues of gender-based hate.” Ultimately on May 31, 2016, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter jointly agreed to a European Union code of conduct obligating them to review “the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech” posted on their services within 24 hours. So, we are left with a media system somewhat obligated to enact the directives of the European Political Union.  And what a disintegrating, unbalanced Political Union it is proving to be, eh? So where does this noble cause truly leave us Canadians? We are just left floating in an even deeper sewage of blah, blah, blah and necessity of determining what truly does classify as hate/bias crime that should be enforced in Canada. And, to what degree should we allow any ‘off shore agency of any kind’ to dictate our national terms of legal reference? And, just whom should we punish and in what manner if they do not comply with our currently designated laws? Yep, just more of the old blah, blah, blah when the present laws we have on the books can rectify 90% of all societal disruptive forces we face from both within and without the nation.

But, “since signing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, the Canadian Government has attempted to make universal human rights a part of Canadian Law. There are currently four key mechanisms in Canada to protect human rights: the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and provincial human rights laws and commissions.

But generally, international hate law regulations can be divided into two types: those that are designed for public order which appear to be somewhat ineffective because they are rarely enforced. And those meant to protect human dignity, like those in Canada, Denmark, France, Germany and the Netherlands which seem to be frequently enforced.  From such a base let us get on with cleaning up our own frozen backyards before we pull anymore inane Trudeau tactics of self-aggrandizement claiming we are the modeling patterns for the world to follow.  It is stated most Canadians believe the country to be a strong proponent and positive model of human rights for the rest of the world. Touting for example the enactment of the Civil Marriage Act of 2005 legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide. This in no manner made it morally right and reality is that the enactment was the manipulation by perverted sexual interest groups.  

Marc-André Blanchard will become the country’s new ambassador to the United Nations in April, as stated by Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion.  You can expect Trudeau’s foreign policies to continue to be ‘frequently flying in the face of sanity’ regarding the well-being of our nation.

You know how long this Bumbling Bozo lasted, eh?

Trudeau’s Crew of Rabid Islamists openly embrace UN Initiatives to ensure that Blood Shall Flow In Canada as posted on February 11, 2018   It is the Treasonous Liberal initiatives that must be torn from the Canadian political venue.

It is a righteous action with God that this take place.

Phinehas

Galatians 4:16    Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

 

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.