Twitter, just like Facebook and Google, has been meeting with public officials in the Federal Government. It would be nice to have more information beyond the blurb on the files.
There is already a lot of information on the free speech series on the site. Free speech, while an important topic, doesn’t stand on its own, and is typically intertwined with other categories. For background information for this, please visit: Digital Cooperation; the IGF, or Internet Governance Forum; ex-Liberal Candidate Richard Lee; the Digital Charter; big tech collusion in coronavirus; Dominic LeBlanc’s proposal, Facebook and Google lobbying.
2. Twitter Lobbying Communications Reports
12 communications reports in the last few years. That means 12 separate meetings, not necessary 12 people who were lobbied. And this is just what’s on the books. There may be a lot more that wasn’t recorded.
3. Twitter Involved In Public Safety?
On May 19, Twitter representatives met with the Office of the Minister of Public Safety (which is Bill Blair’s Office). Interesting. What is the connection between Twitter, and public safety? Do certain ideas or points of view need to be censored?
4. Rempel & Twitter: Privacy, Access To Info
Michelle Rempel met with Twitter on February 5, under the heading of privacy and access to information. Getting some more specifics would have been nice. Also, isn’t this a little weird, given Rempel’s habit of blocking everyone on Twitter?
5. What Exactly Is Twitter’s Agenda?
Subject Matter Details
. Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution
-Broadcasting and Telecommunications Review with regard to proposals to regulate online content.
-Income Tax Act, with regard to digital tax proposals.
-Intellectual property proposals and legislation with regard to copyright and online content.
-National Data Strategy consultations with regard to innovation, trust and privacy.
-Privacy legislation or proposals such the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) with regard to data collection, safety, and use.
. Policies or Program
-Internet advertising policy, specifically the adoption of digital media and advertising by government.
-Working with government agencies to help them understand how to use social media during elections.
It’s quite disturbing to see Twitter meeting with officials over the regulation of online content and social media during elections. A conspiracy theorist might think that these people want to ban or limit certain topics, in order to influence general elections.
Austin spent many years working for various Conservative/Alliance politicians, even in the Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition. From February 2006 to July 2007, Austin was the Chief of Staff in the Industry Minister’s Office. At that time, it was headed by Maxime Bernier, who now “identifies” as a populist. From June 2011 to December 2012, Austin was Chief of Staff of Public Works, Status of Women, Shared Services Canada, Minister’s Office.
The Manning Center refers to the Koch-funded “conservative” think tank headed by former Alliance Leader Preston Manning. It seems that the time in the Official Leader’s Office has paid off.
A longtime political hack is now Twitter’s main lobbyist in Canada (the only one listed who spends 20% or more time lobbying). This is shocking, but not surprising.
From earlier: New Conservative Party of Canada head Erin O’Toole was a lobbyist for Facebook before getting into politics.
Worth noting: His firm, (the now defunct), Heenan Blaikie had both Pierre Trudeau, and Jean Chretien as partners at one time. Heenan Blaikie was also heavily infiltrated by the Desmarais Family.
9. Merger Between Social Media & Politics
Considering the sway that lobbyists hold over politicians, it is rather disturbing to see this happen. Politicians — or political operatives — shouldn’t be lobbying in areas of social media. Similarly, lobbyists for social media companies shouldn’t be getting into politics.
With all of this in mind, it would be nice to have detailed records and accounts of what actually goes on in these meetings. But that’s unlikely to ever happen.
Private Member’s Bill C-219, introduced by John Nater, would have raised the criminal penalties for child sexual exploitation, and sexual exploitation of a child with a disability. This is one of several interesting bills pending before Parliament.
1. Trafficking, Smuggling, Child Exploitation
Serious issues like smuggling or trafficking are routinely avoided in public discourse. Also important are the links between open borders and human smuggling; between ideology and exploitation; between tolerance and exploitation; between abortion and organ trafficking; or between censorship and complicity. Mainstream media will also never get into the organizations who are pushing these agendas, nor the complicit politicians. These topics don’t exist in isolation, and are interconnected.
2. Mandatory Minimums For Child Exploitation
Criminal Code
1 Paragraph 153(1.1)(b) of the Criminal Code is replaced by the following:
(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years less a day and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of one year.
.
2 Paragraphs 153.1(1)(a) and (b) of the Act are replaced by the following:
(a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 14 years and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of one year; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years less a day and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of one year.
.
3 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 286.1:
Aggravating circumstance — person with a disability
286.11 When a court imposes a sentence for an offence referred to in subsection 286.1(1) or (2), it shall consider as an aggravating circumstance the fact that the victim of the offence is a person with a mental or physical disability.
This bill, if passed, would have amended the criminal code, and made sexual exploitation an offence with a mandatory 1 year minimum jail sentence, even if it was tried summarily. Furthermore, it would have added a 1 year minimum to exploitation (summarily or by indictment), if the victim had a disability.
While 1 year is still very lenient, it would at least be a step in the right direction. Bills from Private Members often go nowhere, but this should be an issue everyone can agree on.
Interestingly, this bill was brought up in the last Parliament — Bill C-424 — but never got past first reading. Again, it should be something that everyone can agree is beneficial to society.
3. Property Rights From Expropriation
Expropriation Act
1 Section 10 of the Expropriation Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (11):
Exception
(11.1) Subsection (11) does not apply if the interest or right to which the notice of intention relates is intended to be expropriated by the Crown for the purpose of restoring historical natural habitats or addressing, directly or indirectly, climate variability, regardless of whether or not that purpose is referred to in the notice or described in the notice as the primary purpose of the intended expropriation.
.
2 Section 19 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2):
Exception
(3) Subsection (2) does not apply if the interest or right to which the notice of confirmation relates is intended to be expropriated by the Crown for the purpose of restoring historical natural habitats or addressing, directly or indirectly, climate variability, regardless of whether or not that purpose is referred to in the notice of intention or described in the notice of intention as the primary purpose of the intended expropriation.
Bill C-222 was introduced by Cheryl Gallant, and would prevent the Canadian Government from forcibly taking your land in order to turn it into a heritage site, or in some convoluted effort to fight climate change. It would amend the Expropriation Act to prevent exactly that.
Gallant was also the only MP to vote against the Liberal Motion to formally adopt the Paris Accord. She voted no, while “conservative” either voted for it, or abstained.
4. Quebec Multiculturalism Exemption
Bloc Quebecois MP Luc Theriault introduced Bill C-226, to exempt Quebec from the Multiculturalism Act. Now there is nothing wrong with wanting to protect your own heritage and culture. However, Quebec is rather hypocritical in simultaneously pushing theirs on other people.
5. Addressing Environmental Racism
Bill C-230 is to address environmental racism.
I have no words for this Bill by Lenore Zann.
6. Social Justice In Pension Plan
Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act
1 Section 35 of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act is renumbered as subsection 35(1) and is amended by adding the following:
Considerations
(2) The investment policies, standards and procedures, taking into account environmental, social and governance factors, shall provide that no investment may be made or held in an entity if there are reasons to believe that the entity has performed acts or carried out work contrary to ethical business practices, including
(a) the commission of human, labour or environmental rights violations;
(b) the production of arms, ammunition, implements or munitions of war prohibited under international law; and
(c) the ordering, controlling or otherwise directing of acts of corruption under any of sections 119 to 121 of the Criminal Code or sections 3 or 4 of the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act.
Bill C-231, from Alistair MacGregor, would have cut off CPPIB (the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board), from investing in areas where any of the above are breached. This is a good idea in principle, even if the details are sparse.
Bill C-233, from Cathay Wagantall, would make it illegal to abort children because of sex. In short, this means targeting female babies. However, it isn’t clear how this would work. Article 70 in the policy declaration says there will be no attempt to pass any abortion legislation, and Article 73 says that foreign aid shouldn’t be given to provide for abortion.
So killing children is okay, as long as it’s done in Canada, and the gender of the baby is not a factor. Makes sense to me.
8. Lowered Voting Age, Conversion Therapy
There are currently two bills: C-240, and S-219, which would lower the voting age to 16. Aside from being a bad idea, this seems a little redundant. There is also S-202, to ban conversion therapy. So, we want 16 year olds to be able to vote, and decide what gender they want to be.
9. National School Food Program
If you want the school to become more of a parent, there is Bill C-201 by Don Davies to do exactly that. It was previously Bill C-446. Now, let’s look at some non-Canadian content.
San Francisco – Today, Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) introduced Senate Bill 145 to end blatant discrimination against LGBT young people regarding California’s sex offender registry. Currently, for consensual yet illegal sexual relations between a teenager age 15 and over and a partner within 10 years of age, “sexual intercourse” (i.e., vaginal intercourse) does not require the offender to go onto the sex offender registry; rather, the judge decides based on the facts of the case whether sex offender registration is warranted or unwarranted. By contrast, for other forms of intercourse — specifically, oral and anal intercourse — sex offender registration is mandated under all situations, with no judicial discretion.
This distinction in the law — which is irrational, at best — disproportionately targets LGBT young people for mandatory sex offender registration, since LGBT people usually cannot engage in vaginal intercourse. For example, if an 18 year old straight man has vaginal intercourse with his 17 year old girlfriend, he is guilty of a crime, but he is not automatically required to register as a sex offender; instead, the judge will decide based on the facts of the case whether registration is warranted. By contrast, if an 18 year old gay man has sex with his 17 year old boyfriend, the judge *must* place him on the sex offender registry, no matter what the circumstances.
Until recently, that sex offender registration was for life, even though the sex was consensual. Under 2017 legislation authored by Senator Wiener, registration. Is for a minimum of 10 years, still a harsh repercussion for consensual sex.
SB 145 does not change whether or not particular behavior is a crime and does not change the potential sentence for having sex with an underage person. Rather, the bill simply gives judges the ability to evaluate whether or not to require registration as a sex offender. To be clear, this judicial discretion for sex offender registration is *already* the law for vaginal intercourse between a 15-17 year old and someone up to 10 years older. SB 145 simply extends that discretion to other forms of intercourse. A judge will still be able to place someone on the registry if the behavior at issue was predatory or otherwise egregious. This change will treat straight and LGBT young people equally, end the discrimination against LGBT people, and ensure that California stops stigmatizing LGBT sexual relationships.
California State Senator Scott Wiener, in 2019 introduced Senate Bill SB 145, to stop men who have sex with 15, 16, and 17 year old boys from automatically becoming registered sex offenders. Here is the text of the bill.
The Bill has predictably received plenty of backlash. Criticism of it, however, has been dismissed as homophobia and anti-Semitism. Of course, a better alternative might be to RAISE the age of consent to 18 all around. That would do more to protect children.
If this seems familiar, it should. In 2016, Trudeau introduced Bill C-32, to lower the age of consent for anal sex. Eventually, it was slipped into Bill C-75, which not only reduced the penalties for many child sex crimes, but for terrorism offences as well.
11. New Zealand Loosens Abortion Laws
While New Zealand claimed to be in the middle of a pandemic, Parliament figured now is a good time to have easier access to abortion, even up to the moment of birth. Some really conflicting views on life. See Bill 310-1. Also, their “internet harm” bill seems like a threat to free speech.
Of course, that is not all that New Zealand has been up to lately. There is also taking people to quarantine camps, and denying them leave if they don’t consent to being tested. Yet, the PM thinks that critics are “conspiracy theorists”.
12. Know What Is Really Going On
Yes, this article was a bit scattered, but meant to bring awareness to some of the issues going on behind the scenes. The mainstream media (in most countries) will not cover important issues in any meaningful way. As such, people need to spend the time researching for themselves.
Bill introduced privately can actually be more interesting than what Governments typically put forward. Though they often don’t pass, they are still worth looking at.
In 2013, brothers Doug Ford and Rob Ford voted to officially make Toronto a sanctuary city. This allows people in the city, (but without a legal right to be in Canada), to continue to access social services. It also makes deportations harder to implement, and furthers balkanization of Toronto. However, there is another consequence of doing this: making human trafficking, smuggling, & child exploitation easier.
1. Trafficking, Smuggling, Child Exploitation
There is a lot already covered in the TSCE series. Many of the laws politicians pass absolutely ensure this obscenity will continue. Also, take a look at the Border Security topic for some extra background, and the NGOs who are supporting open borders.
City Council Decision
City Council on February 20 and 21, 2013, adopted the following:
.
1. City Council re-affirm its commitment to ensuring access to services without fear to immigrants without full status or without full status documents.
2. City Council request the Executive Director, Social Development, Finance and Administration to conduct an internal review, with community consultation, of City Divisions, Agencies and Corporations, and to report to the Community Development and Recreation Committee in the 3rd quarter of 2013 on the following:
.
a. a review of opportunities to improve access without fear;
.
b. opportunities for City-funded agencies to improve access without fear;
.
c. providing training for front line staff and managers to ensure that undocumented residents can access services without fear; and
.
d. a complaints protocol and a public education strategy to inform Torontonians of the City’s policy.
3. City Council request the City Manager and the Executive Director, Social Development, Finance and Administration to report to the Community Development and Recreation Committee on current Federal and Provincial arrangements to deliver immigration and settlement programs in Ontario, and options for strengthening intergovernmental collaboration and partnerships with the City of Toronto.
4. City Council request the Federal government to establish a regularization program for undocumented residents, and that a letter be sent to the Government and Opposition parties to this end.
5. City Council request the Federal government to increase Provincial Nominee Program levels so that the Province can bring in workers with specific skills who have left Canada as undocumented workers with Canadian children, and that they be given priority processing by Canadian Citizenship and Immigration.
6. City Council request the Provincial government to review its policies for Provincially-funded services for undocumented residents with a view to ensuring access to health care, emergency services, community housing and supports for such residents within a social determinants of the health framework.
Here is what the final resolution actually says. Despite all attempts to make it sound compassionate and humanitarian in nature, this really is an “amnesty for illegals” piece oflegislation.
#1 is a commitment to fund services for illegal aliens.
#2(c) is to train workers that illegals have access to services.
#2(d) is to convince the public that this is somehow okay.
#4 is asking amnesty for illegal aliens.
#5 is asking the Federal Government to give priority to illegal aliens with anchor baby children in the citizenship line.
#6 is asking the Province of Ontario to review its current decision to NOT directly fund services for illegal aliens.
4. Fords Support Amnesty For Illegal Aliens
One has to marvel at the mental gymnastics the Ford Brothers engage in. They vote FOR creating a sanctuary city, which allows illegal aliens to receive free city benefits. They vote FOR illegals with anchor baby children going to the front of the line in a pathway to citizenship. However, they also vote to REMOVE illegals from Toronto, and push for legal immigration.
How does this work? Give illegals access to public services, then deport them, then bring them back to get expedited for a pathway to citizenship?
Possibly the vote on the amendment to deport illegals was just an attempt to pander to constituents who hadn’t read the entire legislation.
We will work with professional associations and the federal government to streamline the process for foreign credential recognition so that highly-educated immigrants can find meaningful employment in their areas of expertise.
And we’ll take steps to make sure that rights and dignity are respected by calling on the federal government to stop using provincial jails to detain immigrants.
We will declare Ontario a Sanctuary Province.
In the 2018 Ontario election campaign, NDP leader Andrea Horwath took a lot of criticism for a proposal (see page 11) to make Ontario a sanctuary province. Much of that came from the “Conservative” party of Doug Ford. In reality though, Horwath was just proposing to expand what Ford was on record as having voting for.
Amnesty or sanctuary cities/provinces are horrible ideas, certainly. But Doug Ford really has no moral high ground to stand on here.
6. Businesses Support Cheap Labour Pool
This pilot program was covered previously on this site. While it specifies 500 workers and their families (some 2,000 to 3,000 people total), don’t be naive and think that this will be a one time deal. Why do many businesses support the inflow of labour? Because it helps to drive wages down.
Now, certainly the cheap labour and strain on social services are large problems in a sanctuary city. However, there is something much darker, and more evil to worry about.
7. Smuggling/Trafficking & Open Borders Link
2.2 Conceptualization of smuggling of migrants
2.2.1 Smuggling as an illegal migration business
The conceptualization of smuggling as a migration business was formally developed by Salt and Stein in 1997, even if one may find reference to this theory in earlier literature. This new interpretation of the smuggling phenomenon had a great influence on academic circles, and the concept was then borrowed by many academics. In a critical analysis of this concept, Herman stresses that the focus of expert discussions then revolved around the notion of a migration industry and its professionalization, in which migrants are seen as “products” and “people who aid migrants are called ‘smugglers’, and are portrayed as illegal ‘entrepreneurs’”
Salt and Stein suggested treating international migration as a global business that has both legitimate and illegitimate sides. The migration business is conceived as a system of institutionalized networks with complex profit and loss accounts, including a set of institutions, agents and individuals each of which stands to make a commercial gain.
The model conceives trafficking and smuggling as an intermediary part of the global migration business facilitating movement of people between origin and destination countries. The model is divided into three stages: the mobilization and recruitment of migrants; their movement en route; and their insertion and integration into labour markets and host societies in destination countries. Salt and Stein conclude their theory by citing the need to look at immigration controls in a new way, placing sharper focus on the institutions and vested interests involved rather than on the migrants themselves.
This was addressed in Part 9 of the series. Even the United Nations recognizes the connection between illegal entry, and human smuggling & trafficking. While this 2011 study focused on borders, the same idea applies to sanctuary cities. After all, it will be a lot easier for illegals to get by if they can access social services without actually having to be in the country lawfully.
8. Toronto’s Human Trafficking Problem
The City of Toronto condemns the horrific crime of human trafficking and is committed to working collaboratively to support survivors of human trafficking and eradicate human trafficking in Toronto.
Over the last decade, concern regarding human trafficking in Canada has grown. In Toronto, human trafficking for the purposes of forced sexual labour has received significant attention.
Human trafficking is a complex issue for which there is limited data that can be relied upon to fully describe and understand the problem. From the limited data that is available, it is clear that human trafficking occurs throughout Toronto.
The City’s work related to human trafficking falls into the four main categories of the anti-human trafficking lens, where the person being trafficked, or at risk of being trafficked, is put at the centre, and their safety, well-being and human rights are prioritized:
.
(1) identifying people being or at-risk of being trafficked
(2) supporting survivors of human trafficking
(3) preventing human trafficking
(4) avoiding increasing the vulnerability of people engaged in consensual sex work.
On June 18, 2019, Council adopted the report (EC5.4) that outlines a number of actions that the City proposes to take, in collaboration with other agencies, corporations and divisions to support survivors of human trafficking.
Certainly, human trafficking is awful. There is no excuse whatsoever for forcing or coercing someone, or for exploitation of people. This is even more true when minors are involved.
But what does any of this have to do with open borders, or with Toronto becoming a sanctuary city? Take a look at some of Toronto’s “measures to combat” trafficking, and it becomes more clear.
Service Access
The City has many services that may be useful to survivors of human trafficking. While some people may be fearful of accessing services because they do not have immigration status, the City’s Access to City Services for Undocumented Torontonians (Access T.O.) ensures access to services to all Torontonians, including those without full status or full status documents.
Yes, letting people into the country illegally, or establishing sanctuary cities are harmless, critics say. However, the City of Toronto is fully aware that trafficking happens to people who aren’t in the country legally. Whether entry comes from illegally entering, or overstaying a legal entry, the result is much the same. People are here — unknown to the Government — who are being exploited.
Did Doug and Rob Ford vote to support human trafficking? No they didn’t. However, by supporting Toronto becoming a “sanctuary city”, they helped ensure that illegals will continue to flood into Toronto, and that identifying people will become that much harder.
(page 9) Service access: The City has many services, as noted above, that may be useful to survivors of human trafficking. However, some people may be fearful of accessing services because they do not have immigration status. The City’s Access Toronto policy is relevant. In February 2013, City Council affirmed its commitment to ensuring access to services to all Torontonians, including those without full status or without full status documents.
(page 11) Access to income: Toronto Employment and Social Services has established several policies to support individuals who are vulnerable and at-risk of exploitation, including human trafficking survivors. For example, within eligibility for Ontario Works, procedures are in place that permit the waiver of documentation requirements on a short term basis when information is not readily available due to circumstances beyond a person’s control.
Individuals without immigration status in Canada can access Toronto Employment and Social Services Employment Centres, and apply for financial support through the Hardship Fund or Emergency Energy Fund that is administered by Toronto Employment and Social Services. Additionally, Toronto Employment and Social Services Service Delivery Guidelines ensure clients are connected to relevant support services and community resources.
The City of Toronto is fully aware that a portion of victims (though it’s not clear how many), are in the country illegally. Open borders, combined with sanctuary status, ensures that this will only get worse.
The Fords may not have explicitly voted for this, but it is the consequence. People involved in human trafficking — both as victims and perpetrators — are now able to live in a major city, and are completely unknown to authorities.
10. Toronto Pays Ethnic Anti-Trafficking NGOs
Not too many convictions since Toronto Police Services began keeping track in 2014. And considering recent calls to defund the police, how will this get any better?
(Appendix F) In September 2017, the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services, Government of Ontario, announced a total of approximately $18.6 million to 44 partners and agencies across the province for projects that aim to prevent human trafficking and support survivors. Grants for Toronto-based partners were allocated the total amount of $3.1 million and the funded period started in 2017.
FCJ Refugee Centre: Identification, intervention and prevention of labour trafficking and exploitation among migrant workers ($369,289)
South Asian Legal Clinic Ontario: Legal education for victims and survivors of human trafficking and front-line service providers in the areas of criminal law, immigration law and employment law, including e-learning tools that can be accessed throughout Ontario ($156,768)
Butterfly (Asian and Migrant Sex Workers Support Network): Butterfly: Asian and Migrant Sex Workers Support Network is managing the Migrant Sex Workers Outreach and Education Project which provides outreach specifically to migrant sex workers across Toronto. Peer workers provide monthly harm reduction workshops at informal gatherings to reduce isolation and increase harm reduction knowledge amongst migrant sex workers. ($199,311)
Native Family Child and Youth Services Toronto: Comprehensive culture-based outreach, prevention, healing, and treatment services for Indigenous survivor ($406,325)
Native Women’s Resource Centre Toronto Facilitation of regional working groups to provide education, evidence-based interventions, holistic individualized supports and wraparound resources that empower survivors. This will include 12 community engagements ($678,641)
Human trafficking seems to be such a widespread problem that groups are choosing to help victims along ethnic lines. Again, how does making Toronto a sanctuary city cause it to be any safer?
11. Sanctuary Cities Shield Predators
Although there is more data available in the United States on illegals being released, the same issue exists in Canada. Predators in Canada are already released after short sentences. If sanctuary cities exist, it becomes easier to disappear. Either the person can hide in such a city, or, if deported, can come back and hide fairly easily.
Think of it from this perspective: if city staff doesn’t care whether its residents are there legally, how seriously will it take the plight of people being exploited?
Distinctions between consensual sex work and human trafficking
A broad range of stakeholders are concerned about the conflation of consensual sex work and human trafficking. While consensual sex work may include some elements of exploitation, as many forms of work do, it is distinct from human trafficking in that the “worker” is not coerced. There is general agreement that anti-human trafficking measures should focus on people who are being coerced and controlled.
When consensual sex work is conflated with human trafficking, there is often increased surveillance of sex work and efforts to “rescue” sex workers. Avoiding conflating consensual sex work and human trafficking is important so that sex workers are not further surveilled, stigmatized, criminalized1, and forced underground, resulting in greater marginalization and isolation. The more socially and physically isolated sex workers are, the more vulnerable they are to violence and exploitation. Relatedly, providing access to services and resources that promote harm reduction to people engaged in consensual sex work both supports sex workers’ well-being and provides opportunities for sex workers to build relationships that may be useful if they choose to leave the sex industry and/or if they experience violence or exploitation.
The Toronto Anti-Trafficking Action Report tries to have it both ways. It repeatedly insists that consensual sex workers are not being exploited. Yet it also says that sex workers can be (and are) exploited to a degree. It seems almost schizophrenic in its reasoning.
13. John Tory Supports Sanctuary Toronto
Toronto Mayor, and former Ontario Conservative Party leader, John Tory, also supports Toronto being a sanctuary city. To think this man almost became Ontario Premier in 2007. Then again, his successors are no better.
Unfortunately, getting a real answer to this question is difficult, as there is little data available. However, the BC Government has some worthwhile information of a general nature. The RCMP does provide some numbers, and international trafficking is addressed.
15. Trudeau Reduced Penalties For Child Sex Crimes
Worth mentioning is this and this earlier articles, the Trudeau Government actually reduced the penalties for child sex crimes. While everyone was outraged about the diluted sentences for terrorism, the break that it gave to pedophiles seemed to slip by. Also, the various parties work together to prevent real border security from taking place.
16. Sanctuary Cities Conceal Problems
While touted as a humanitarian gesture, sanctuary cities can have the exact opposite effect. Making it easier to conceal people illegally in the country ensures they are more likely to be exploited. After all, few know where they are, and officially they don’t exist.
It’s expected that liberal globalists will support sanctuary cities. The real disappointment, however, is so-called “conservatives” who go along with it anyway.
Is this the same man? Are they both Justin Trudeau?
The man on the right appears to have a bruise on the left cheek. The bridge of this nose is flatter, and the nostrils are more pronounced. The brow ridge also looks more defined.
1. Media Bias, Lies, Omissions And Corruption
CLICK HERE, for #1: Unifor in bed with Federal Gov’t CLICK HERE, for #2: Global News’ selective truth on TRP granted. CLICK HERE, for #3: Post Media owning most Canadian media. CLICK HERE, for #4: conservative content dominated by Koch/Atlas. CLICK HERE, for #5: origins of Malcolm’s “charity” True North Canada. CLICK HERE, for #6: the people running the Post Millennial. CLICK HERE, for #7: how to do research, investigative journalism. CLICK HERE, for #8: Koch/Atlas both sides, AB court challenge. CLICK HERE, for #9: picking up on predictive programming. CLICK HERE, for #10: Trudeau Foundation & media embeds.
2. “Dave” Movie Released In 1993
Dave Kovic runs a temporary employment agency in Georgetown, Washington, D.C., and has a side job impersonating President Bill Mitchell. He is requested by Secret Service agent Duane Stevensen to make an appearance as the president at a hotel. Dave assumes it is a matter of security, but it is really to cover up Mitchell’s extramarital affair with a White House staffer.
Mitchell suffers a severe stroke during the rendezvous, leaving him in a coma. White House Chief of Staff Bob Alexander and Communications Director Alan Reed convince Dave to continue impersonating the president, telling him that Vice President Gary Nance is mentally unbalanced. Only Bob, Alan, the Secret Service, and the medical staff know of the switch. First Lady Ellen Mitchell leads a separate life, rarely seeing the president, in contrast to their public image of a closely knit couple.
The public is notified that Mitchell has had a “minor circulatory problem of the head”. With Dave established as president, Bob and Alan send Nance on a 12-nation goodwill tour of Africa and implicate him in savings and loan fraud. Once Nance is forced to resign, Bob plans for Dave to nominate him as vice president, whereupon Mitchell will have a more serious stroke and Bob will ascend to the Presidency.
After apologizing to Nance and the country, Dave fakes a stroke and makes a switch with the real Mitchell in an ambulance en route to the hospital. Nance becomes acting president under the terms of the 25th Amendment and is sworn in as president five months later when Mitchell dies. Bob and eight other members of the Mitchell administration are indicted two days after Dave’s jobs initiative passes.
The above is quotes of a plot synopsis that Wikipedia provides. In short, an imposter ascends to the Presidency, and the intent is to have someone take over.
Interestingly, in the movie, there are “conspiracy nuts” who try to raise attention that the President has been swapped out with someone else.
Why is this important? Because it could be an instance of predictive programming. There are rumours circulating that the man occupying 24 Sussex is not Justin Trudeau, but a double. There have also been claims that Chrystia Freeland (now Deputy Prime Minister), is being groomed to take over.
Absurd conspiracy theory? Or is there something more substantive behind it?
As an aside, Kevin Kline looks at lot like the new Melinda Gates, except with a haircut. This is not meant as an insult, but stating an observation. And Melinda doesn’t look anything what we were used to seeing.
3. Recent Changes In Justin Trudeau
The screenshot on the left was taken from the October 2019 election victory speech. The one on the right is from a March 2020 press conference. This Justin Trudeau has a gap between his front teeth, something that hadn’t been noticed before. One interesting trait is that the newer Justin rarely (if ever smiles), which may be a deliberate attempt to make the gap less obvious.
There are virtually no photos available of Trudeau smiling since he returned from his trip to Costa Rica. While he once would flash a smile at any time, the “new” Trudeau has become much more reserved.
The gray on the right was the choice of the publisher, so please ignore. Trudeau looks to have aged a decade between the pictures, but it was really 2 1/2 months. And most of that time, Trudeau was on vacation. The dates are: October 21, 2019, and January 6, 2020.
A lot of media hoopla came out when Trudeau finally returned to Canada, sporting his new beard. Thing is, is isn’t much of a beard, just thick stubble. In his early days in Parliament, Trudeau adopted the Captain Morgan look. Yet all of this is glossed over.
True, wearing the masks is part of the psy-op. That said, there is another benefit: it helps obscure differences in THIS Trudeau’s face. If this is a different person, then it’s wise to avoid drawing attention to it.
It could be argued that these physical differences are circumstantial. Fair enough, except Trudeau seems to have undergone a personality change as well. He is far more measured and controlled, and has lost a lot of his joking side. This may be seen as a sign of maturity, if he didn’t hide from the public 23 1/2 hours per day.
Same man, just aging very badly? Or is it a duplicate, who just wants us to “think” that it’s the real person, but just aging badly?
Look at the tip of his nose, real Justin has a bump, double doesn’t Eye brows and eyes not the same. Ear lobes are different. No teeth in this one, we already know they don’t match.
The double looks like his eye brows are waxed to get that shape.
Comment from YouTuber, Blue Apple
Does it look like the features match? Ears, nose, chin?
4. Staged Affection With Sophie
From the 2020 Canada Day announcement. Considering Justin’s well known boundary issues, this seems incredibly forced and staged. Almost like they weren’t a real couple. Also, are they in front of a green screen?
5. Did “Dave” Become A Reality?
Yes, this comes across as an absurd conspiracy theory. However, this doesn’t at all look like the same man who has been the Prime Minister for the last session.
At a quick glance, this man looks similar enough as to not generate much thought. However, when you look more closely, the differences start showing through.
While the physical differences may not seem like a cause for concern, it’s worth pointing out that Trudeau (at least this version of him), seems to have had his personality removed. His antics and snarkiness have all but vanished. If this isn’t a placeholder, then what is it?
And why hasn’t the media reported on it, or asked questions? It could be that since so many of them belong to the Trudeau Foundation, they have no interest in this issue.
(Political parties registered with Elections Canada)
Yeah…. this needs to be addressed.
The public is lied to constantly about the national debt in Canada. While media figures and politicians whine about “borrowing and overspending”, they intentionally leave a key piece out of the puzzle: the corruption of the monetary system.
In 1974, then Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau (without a mandate), stopped using the Bank of Canada to issue money and started using private banking loans. Money is still artificially created, but at least using the Bank of Canada meant that ownership of the debt remained in Canadian hands. There was no legitimate reason for doing so, yet it is rarely questioned in the media.
Instead of continually drawing attention to this change, politicians and media puppets focus on borrowing itself, not the usurious private loans. They focus on a much lesser issue.
This particularly true among “conservatives” and their parties. While many how about excessive borrowing and debt, few (if any), will discuss the changes to the banking system since 1974. By diverting attention away from the main issue, politicians distract the public, and act as a form of controlled opposition.
This is the current list of registered political parties, according to the Elections Canada website:
Animal Protection Party of Canada
Bloc Québécois
Canada’s Fourth Front
Canadian Nationalist Party
Christian Heritage Party of Canada
Communist Party of Canada
Conservative Party of Canada
Green Party of Canada
Liberal Party of Canada
Libertarian Party of Canada
Marijuana Party
Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada
National Citizens Alliance of Canada
New Democratic Party
Parti pour l’Indépendance du Québec
Parti Rhinocéros Party
People’s Party of Canada
Stop Climate Change
The United Party of Canada
Veterans Coalition Party of Canada
Note: this is not to endorse any one particular candidate or party. This research is just to see who is willing to address the topic of the Banking Cartel in an open and sincere manner.
1. Some Parties “Do” Address Banking Cartel
Before writing off all politicians and political parties as corrupt, it’s worth noting that some of them do address the corruption of the money system in their platforms. Let’s give credit where credit is due.
National Economic Plan
–Restore the Bank of Canada to its purpose as outlined in the Bank Act of 1938.
-Review and potentially repudiate debt incurred by our public institutions.
-Revise the Investment Canada Act so that foreign investment is prohibited in Class A Banks.
–Withdraw ourselves from organizations such as the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) and International Monetary Fund (IMF).
-Increase the reserve ratio of our banking sector from 0%.
-Establish state-owned trusts or funds (GLCs) in major sectors of the economy under a policy of corporatization.
BANK OF CANADA
(a) Canada currently borrows operating and investment capital from other nations and from international bankers and pays interest on the debt incurred—around $70 million every single day!
(b) The CHP would restore the Bank of Canada to its proper function. It would create and provide Canada’s money supply and provide low-interest or interest-free loans to Provinces, crown corporations and municipalities for urgently needed infrastructure.
(c) Current governments, through incorrect use of the Bank of Canada, have created a blight over the futures of our children as they will be forced to repay the debt plus interest.
Central Banking Central banking is essentially legal counterfeiting that enriches a few at the expense of the many, increases wealth inequality, erodes buying power, constitutes a tax on the unborn, incentivizes consumption over production, leads to a harmful business cycle of booms and busts, creates market distortions and creates inefficient resource allocation. The Libertarian Party seeks to end the central banks monopoly on money supply and monetary policy and move back to a system of free banking.
Restore the 1934 Bank of Canada Act along with the 1938 Amendment and our own amendments, and thereby re-institute the true Bank of Canada, people’s bank, which fully belongs to the Canadian people, and thereby end the usury, inflation, and control of Canadians’ wealth by central banks.
There may be other parties that have adopted similar policies. However, there are other parties who are clearly aware of the banking system, even if isn’t reflected in their current platforms.
2. Green Party BoC Motion in 2012
Party Commentary
If adopted, this motion will dramatically change the party’s fiscal policies by introducing the requirement that the federal government borrow from the Bank of Canada.
Preamble
-WHEREAS government debt is reaching such critical proportions that many countries are currently facing financial collapse because of the interest on the debts they owe to banks;
-WHEREAS Section 91 of Canada’s Constitution (classes 1A, 4, 14, 15, 18, 19 & 20) on the Legislative Authority of the Parliament of Canada stipulates that Parliament has full control of the public debt and interest, as well as the right to issue money;
-WHEREAS the interest on money borrowed by the government through the issue of treasury bills and bonds purchased by banks and foreign governments now accounts for about 90% of the total market debt of $596.8 billion (31 March 2011) owed by the people of Canada, and repaying that interest is advantageous to banks but deleterious to the welfare of the country;
-WHEREAS the Bank of Canada issues interest-free currency into circulation for the benefit of the nation, though this is currently only about 5% of the country’s money supply, under the authority of the Bank of Canada Act it is authorized to make interest-free loans to the Government of Canada to make up budget deficits and is currently doing so, by holding approximately $60 billion in Government of Canada bonds and treasury bills;
-WHEREAS the Bank of Canada currently lends the Government of Canada money interest-free through the purchase of government bonds and treasury bills;
Background
The Canadian government has been running deficits since the Trudeau years, except for a few years under Paul Martin when it was finally, painfully, able to move back into a surplus. But even when running a surplus, the government is still paying down the debt accumulated over those decades – debt which is composed of principal, interest, and interest on interest. And interest on interest is by far the largest portion of that debt. A 1993 Auditor General report said that of the accumulated net debt of $423 billion, only $37 billion was principal – the rest was due to the ‘magic’ of compound interest. Thus, a very large portion of all of the painful cutbacks, program cuts, etc. needed to ‘pay down the debt’ are to pay interest on debts owed to bankers. In 2009 (the last year for which data is available on Statcan), Canada paid $28.882 billion in interest charges. Since then, with a return to deficit budgets under the Conservatives, that figure has been rising.
It doesn’t have to be this way. This system of government borrowing is rarely questioned because the people running our banks and central banks have a vested interest to keep the system as it is because it works very well for them – they receive billions in interest payments for the ‘risk’ of lending governments money.
The GPC Shadow Cabinet believes that this is not a fiscally responsible policy. The Bank of Canada already lends at no interest to the government but when it determines that such lending would be inflationary, it requires the government to borrow on private markets. This resolution would undermine the ability of the Bank of Canada to carry out its mandate to control inflation. This approach to government borrowing is essentially the same as was used in Argentina, leading to chronic hyper inflation at great social cost.
It doesn’t appear that this motion was ever adopted into Green Party policy. Nonetheless, it does show that high ranking people in the Green Party (even in 2012), were aware of the scam that is the International Banking Cartel.
Elizabeth May and Jack Layton (then NDP leader), both knew full well about how the banking system worked in Canada. Yet neither would make it a major issue to be decided by Canadians. One really has to wonder how sincere they were, to intentionally leave this out.
3. NDP Socialist Caucus In 2018
28. Reforming the Bank of Canada Act
Whereas Canada’s national debt, owed primarily to wealthy bond holders, is the primary motivator behind austerity and the resistance to public spending to grow the Canadian economy,
And whereas well over 90% of Canada’s public/government debt is attributable to accumulated interest payments on Government issued bonds, interest on which no goods or services were ever consumed by the Canadian public;
And whereas it is both possible and preferable for the Government to use, as it has in the past, the Bank of Canada, to hold its public debt;
Therefore Be It Resolved that a Federal NDP Government, in its very first year, amend the Bank of Canada Act and proceed as follows, nullifying any international agreements that stand in the way:
Use the Bank of Canada as the buyer of all future Government of Canada Bonds and hold them interest free,
Expand the Bank of Canada as a full service Commercial and Industrial Bank that would serve Canadians on the same terms as the existing private banks. And host in its public service buildings Bank of Canada operations, including in, but not limited to Canada Post Offices, federally regulated airports, and any hospitals under provincial jurisdiction that accept federal monies through the Canada Health Act and corollary agreements.
The Socialist Caucus of the NDP, in 2018, passed a resolution to have the party revert back to using the Bank of Canada as a source of money creation, instead of the private banks.
In the 2019 election platform, the topic of the Bank of Canada was not mentioned anywhere. Pretty bizarre when the Socialist Caucus is the voice of reason on this issue. NDP.2019.federal.campaign.platform
4. Canada’s Major LibCon Parties
This was addressed in Part 2 of the series, the COMER case. In 2011, COMER (and its lawyer Rocco Galati) filed a lawsuit against the Bank of Canada. Beyond the private loans themselves, COMER challenged the idea that meetings with the Bank for International Settlements could be kept secret — despite the BIS effectively setting monetary policy in Canada.
In 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear an appeal from the Federal Court of Appeal, effectively ending the case. In short, they gave political deference to the government in allowing it to do such a thing.
The Liberal Government of Pierre Trudeau started in process in 1974. Successive administrations (both Liberal and Conservative), have kept the system intact.
Also worth a mention, the People’s party of Canada (while not a real party), is headed by Maxime Bernier. Bernier was in cabinet during the early part of the lawsuit. It’s therefore extremely unlikely that he isn’t aware of the lawsuit. With his nearly 20 years in finance and banking, it’s not credible that he isn’t aware of how the monetary system works. While Bernier goes on and on about the DAIRY cartel, he never mentions the BANKING cartel. A nice way to deflect.
5. Parties Are Aware Of Banking Cartel
From the information compiled above, let’s ask who is fully aware of the scam that is private bank loans? At a minimum, it includes these parties listed below.
Canadian Nationalist Party
Christian Heritage Party of Canada
Conservative Party of Canada
Green Party of Canada
Liberal Party of Canada
Libertarian Party of Canada
National Citizens Alliance of Canada
New Democratic Party
People’s Party of Canada
Of course, it’s likely that most — if not all — of the other parties know about this as well. However, these are the ones where admissions can be directly proven.
While some on this list do openly campaign against the international Banking Cartel, others choose to ignore it. However, the topic isn’t addressed by the media. Politicians talk about a symptom (the debt), while ignoring the disease (the banking cartel).
It’s a sleight-of-hand that goes on all the time. Focus on the debt, without looking at WHO the money is being borrowed from.
Note: a few of the online debt reports have broken links and are not accessible.
The reality is that the Federal Government borrows over $200 billion per year, and the bulk of it is to pay off old debts. If we still used the Bank of Canada as a source of money creation this would not be a problem. However, the money is coming from private sources.
Rather than going through this cycle every year, one has to ask why not just pay off the existing debt (with a Bank of Canada loan), and then cancel the debt. Instead, successive governments seem content to just let the interest grow.
Taxation is only one source of revenue raising. The other big one is a form of “Ponzi borrowing”. It’s where the government issues more and more bonds in order to cover the costs from other bonds which are now due. Obviously this is an unsustainable system.
Instead of constantly shifting the focus with “overspending” or with “excessive borrowing”, politicians and the media should focus on the privatization of money creation (starting in 1974). Almost everything else becomes irrelevant when you realize this change was done in order to create unending debt. However, they won’t focus on the head of the snake.
Justin Trudeau’s election in 2015 was due to a few things: nepotism, foreign money, a cooing media, and decent looks. By any objective measure, he has been a disaster.
To be fair, having a “conservative” in office would have led to most of the same harmful and destructive policies. Trudeau, to his credit, is openly a globalist, while conservatives are more stealthy about it. Nonetheless, we need people asking the right questions before they vote.
1. Previous Solutions Offered
A response that frequently comes up is for people to ask what to do about it. Instead of just constantly pointing out what is wrong, some constructive suggestions should be offered. This section contains a list of proposals that, if implemented, would benefit society. While the details may be difficult to implement, at least they are a starting point.
2. Views/Bias Of The Author
Everyone has their own political slant. To get this out of the way: the views of the author more generally reflect the views and content that are addressed on the site. The site is nationalist leaning, and rejects conservatism and libertarianism, which are really just globalism.
Modern “leftism” (if that if even a proper term) is a globalist ideology. Although not a complete list, here are some of the things they support
Population replacement of Europeans
Erasure of traditional culture and heritage
Languages other than English and French
Identity politics for certain groups
Foreigners in the government
Foreigners in the military
Forced multiculturalism
Replacement of Christianity in the West
Globohomo agenda world wide
Mutilation of trans-children
Abortion becoming normalised and mainstream
Destruction of families
Pro climate change scam, carbon tax
UN and other “multilateral” institutions
Islamification of the West
Foreign aid handed out everywhere
Foreign interventions (but somehow not war)
Won’t discuss cause of foreign debt (Banking Cartel)
Government control over all major aspects of business
Limiting ability to send jobs overseas
Restricting free speech rights
Strong gun control, seizures
Modern conservatism (or “Conservative Inc.”) supports many of the same globalist ideologies and principles as the left, or liberals. Although the tone and rhetoric vary, a lot of the content is the same.
LEGAL population replacement of Europeans
LEGAL erasure of traditional culture and heritage
Languages other than English and French
Identity politics for certain groups
Foreigners in the government
Foreigners in the military
Globohomo agenda world wide
Mutilation of trans-ADULTS
LEGAL forced multiculturalism
Abortion becoming normalised and mainstream
Destruction of families
Pro climate change scam, but against carbon tax
UN, while claiming it won’t erode sovereignty
Islamification of the West (just not radicals)
Foreign aid for some places (like Israel)
Foreign wars that aren’t in Canadians’ interests
Won’t discuss cause of foreign debt (Banking Cartel)
Business interests topping interests of people
Offshoring/Outsourcing jobs overseas
“Monitoring” the situation of free speech violations
Sometimes stand on the side of gun owners
From the listings, it doesn’t seem like Liberalism or Conservative Inc. are all that different. Now that the views and biases are disclosed, let’s look at ways you can help make informed choices about who to vote for
3. Candidates Asking The Right Questions?
To be an effective representative, candidates must be addressing the right topics, and asking the right questions. However, far too many deflect. Here are some examples of topics that serious candidates should discuss if they really represent the interests of Canadians.
(a) Illegal border crossings into Canada: This should be a no-brainer to be against illegal aliens entering the country, but it’s not for many. Even those who call for closing the loophole in the Safe Third Country Agreement are in favour of work permits for illegals. There is tepid opposition to using taxpayer funded social services. If a candidate is serious about stopping illegal crossings, why wouldn’t they support stripping away the financial benefits for doing so? And why aren’t they talking about the people fighting in court to rewrite laws, and those facilitating the illegal entries into Canada?
(b) True scale of immigration into Canada: Politicians typically mislead about the true scale of people entering the country LEGALLY. They mention the number of permanent residencies handed out (if that is even accurate), but deflect from the true scale of people entering. They don’t discuss the problems that multiculturalism and population replacement bring, nor the balkanization of communities.
(c) Outsourcing/offshoring Canadian industries: There is a lot of talk about the benefits of free trade (also called globalization or offshoring), but little about the harmful effects. Who cares about corporate profits when entire communities are gutted, when it becomes cheaper to ship their jobs and industries overseas? Sure, it lowers prices at Walmart, but there are larger social costs. These costs involve: trade deficits; job losses; outsourcing; wage stagnation; wage depression; increased foreign competition; higher unemployment; loss of control for critical industries, and more. Immigration and free trade (think CANZUK), are linked, in that it creates an INCREASED demand for work, but with a REDUCED supply of jobs available. Candidates who care about their people should address this openly and honestly
(d) International Banking Cartel: Politicians often play a sleight-of-hand with deficit/debt. They will talk about “eliminating the deficit”, without mentioning that it still doesn’t deal with the already accumulated debt. Even worse, if that they won’t address the banking cartel, which Canada has been part of since 1974. Yes, money is artificially created, but instead of borrowing from the Bank of Canada (borrowing from ourselves), subsequent governments borrow artificially created money from private banks, meaning we have to pay for it. Even left-wing politicians act as controlled opposition in avoiding the topic.
(e) Corruption behind corporate welfare: While some politicians lament the fact that Provincially and Federally, we still hand out tax-payer subsidies (corporate welfare), few will address the fraud, corruption, and cronyism that is essential to these handouts. The focus is on a symptom, not the disease. Theft is a crime, and it shouldn’t be considered less of one just because one of the thieves is an elected official.
(f) Climate Change Scam: Talk among major politicians seems to be over whether a carbon tax is needed, or what type or pricing is needed. What’s missing from the discussion is that the Paris Accord is a total hoax, a fraud meant to enrich a few. Talk about controlled opposition. No one mentions the climate bonds industry, or the predatory loans which carbon taxes finance. In relation to point “D”, we are going into debt — to private companies — to borrow money which we then give away, yet this isn’t addressed. And how does paying taxes improve the weather anyway?
This is by no means a complete list, just a few major points that potential voters need to think about when asking their candidates for information.
4. Arguing Over Trivial Matters
People running for various offices will disagree on many things. Often they will argue over DIFFERENT POLICIES. However, when one argues over different ways to implement the SAME POLICIES, it becomes a fair question as to how different they really are. Fierce debate over essentially the same positions is a dog-and-pony show, which doesn’t offer a real alternative to voters.
5. Opposition By Scandal
Don’t get the wrong idea. Governments in power do often have scandals, such as corruption, gross incompetence. While holding a government to account is important, it should not be the MAIN SOURCE of opposition. If someone seeks office, and their main points all have to do with pointing out current administration incompetence, then they likely have little to offer as a platform.
6. Check Who Really Funds Candidates
There are several ways to do this. Check them out to see if they have rich relatives. Check work history to see if there is a particular company or industry they will be pushing. See who lobbies them or donates to their campaign accounts. Effectively, do a background check on your candidates. At times, the candidate will shove it in your face. Take note.
To be fair however, Canadian politicians are influenced by a variety of foreign interests. The Prime Minister is (allegedly) the bastard son of the late Cuban dictator, Fidel Castro. The Deputy Prime Minister is the granddaughter of a Nazi collaborator. The Defence Minister is an Indian National, so is our Industry Minister. The former Immigration Minister is a Somali refugee who funnels tax payer money there. The Status-Of-Women Minister is a fake refugee and illegal alien from Iran. M103 was passed by a Pakistani Muslim who hates free speech. The Conservative Leader and (just departed) Green Party Leader are both Americans. The Bloc is a party that opposes Canada, and the People’s Party is headed by a former Quebec separatist. The NDP leader is a Khalistani separatist banned from entering India. There are plenty more.
Beyond national and ethnic loyalties, it’s also worth inquiring who finances their campaigns, and who is donating gifts. It will tell you far more than any brochure of platform.
7. Deflect With Personal Attacks
A person serious about running for office should be able to defend their ideas from criticism. However, when the person resorts to name calling, or continuously brings up the record of others — instead of answering direct questions — ask yourself if the person really believes in what they say. Also be aware of strawman arguments
8. Take The Time To Self-Educate
Unfortunately, it is true that the bulk of successful politicians are working for someone other than their constituents. It’s not fair, and it’s not something to be condoned. It’s quite understandable, the sentiment that voting is a waste.
There are a host of serious issues that either get downplayed, or ignored altogether. The media is complicit in helping this happen, and the public gets screwed.
However, this is (for now) the system of government we have. Learning more about the people who want to rule over you gives power. It creates awareness.
