Poll finds that 82% of Canadians outside of Quebec support ban on niqabs.
National Post headline:
As unbelievable as it seems outside Quebec, it looks like niqabs could become a ballot-fox issue
I can see Canada from the CN tower.
40 Replies to “Our home and native downtown Toronto”
I support a ban on muslims.
Ballot fox?
Related
Justin’s immigration plan will be the final nail in the LPC coffin. Check the comments, I find only 1 in support of JT. The rest are announcing their change of vote. http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/09/25/trudeau-pledges-sweeping-immigration-changes.html
I’m just baffled that JT thought this would bring-in votes.
Best comment…
“The Khadr family is licking their chops”
CPC Majority 2015 and beyond.
Wasn’t it Napoleon who advised his generals
“When you see Justin destroying the Lieberal
Party do not distract him”?
“Ballot-fox issue” is PC insider talk for a gift situation in which an opposing party’s slow
witted top vote whore has caught himself on a “tar baby” without realizing how bad it will get.
An occasional nudge by the “fox” is all that is needed to keep up the “slow train wreck momentum”.
This is the ideal issue for political parties that are trying to cover up themselves.
93% in Quebec support the ban. Do we know something the ROC doesn’t?
“As unbelievable as it seems”?
My, my. Whatever happened to the NP?
What I do love about the media is that they really just don’t get the regular unwashed folks. Not everybody went to journalism school or got a PhD at the University of Communism. In Canada, 80% plus did not obviously, because they still have common sense which is erased in the minds of those that attend by the leftist professors in these hallowed halls of “higher learning”.
Oh, and by the way, who wants to start a petition to severe Toronto from Canada?
Set Toronto free so that it may live in its little socialist rats nest all by itself. That way, the rest of us can live our lives in peace without having to listen to the instructions and condescension that spews from the lips of its downtown.
Good bye, Toronto and good riddance.
Trudeau’s pandering to immigrants might backfire on him.
Seems he wants to double the number of family reunification class immigrants
and repeal elements of C-24 which can strip citizenship from dual nationals accused of serious crimes such as terrorism.
Methinks the 82% won’t be that happy with these ideas either.
The Monk debate will be a dandy.
Pass the popcorn.
[i]repeal elements of C-24 which can strip citizenship from dual nationals accused of serious crimes such as terrorism.[/i]
Well, I have a real problem with any nation being able to “un-person” a citizen. We don’t do that for rapists, drug kingpins, or multiple murderers. A citizen is a citizen, regardless of whether they were born here or immigrated and went through the process. That dual nationals retain an allegiance to a foreign power is a reason to tighten up the citizen requirements and stop allowing Canadians to hold dual citizenship, not a reason to grant the state the right to un-Canadian someone. That’s a dangerous precedent.
The idea that someone would be allowed to cover their face during a citizenship ceremony is so unbelievably asinine, and such a dangerously slippery slope, that any Canadian with even half a brain cell in their head should be on side with the Conservatives.
I have many reasons to vote for Harper in the upcoming election, and this is certainly a big one.
And the fact that the stupid Canadian courts keep siding with Sharia law is another damn good reason to vote for the Conservatives.
The only people surprised about the Niqab being an issue to Canadians everywhere are the out of touch members of the Canadian media elite.
The Niqab is about Canadian and Quebecois nations in conflict with the feelgood multiculturalism of the social justice warriors leading the media.
In fact the only reason they are surprised is because they thought they had convinced us knuckle draggers that we are very wrong to try to impose our views on someone else’s religious beliefs. They aren’t reporting on the issue. They wonder just how the sheeple can have a thought of their own.
On the question of what the courts would do with this if the Ministerial directive not to allow face coverings at citizenship ceremonies is treated as law (which the lower court chose not to do, for reasons that escape everyone) and the issue is squarely whether the Charter’s protection of freedom of religion applies, the Supreme Court of Canada (and CJ McLachlin particularly) may have difficulty getting around their decision supporting Alberta’s requirement of photo ID on drivers’ licences, even over the objections on religious grounds from a Hutterite community. In her decision, McLachlin, CJC, said:
[104] I conclude that the limit on the Colony members’ freedom of religion imposed by the universal photo requirement for holders of driver’s licences has been shown to be justified under s. 1 of the Charter. The goal of minimizing the risk of fraud associated with driver’s licences is pressing and substantial. The limit is rationally connected to the goal. The limit impairs the right as little as reasonably possible in order to achieve the goal; the only alternative proposed would significantly compromise the goal of minimizing the risk. Finally, the measure is proportionate in terms of effects: the positive effects associated with the limit are significant, while the impact on the claimants, while not trivial, does not deprive them of the ability to follow their religious convictions.
Of course, she also wrote a decision about whether face coverings were allowed when giving testimony in court and chose instead a “maybe, maybe not” standard:
[56] This brings me to the final reason for rejecting an approach that would never allow a witness to testify while wearing a religious facial covering. It does not comport with the fundamental premise underlying the Charter that rights should be limited only to the extent that the limits are shown to be justifiable. This principle is set out in s. 1 of the Charter, in relation to laws — laws that limit the rights guaranteed by the Charter are invalid to the extent that the limit is not reasonably justified in a free and democratic society. A total ban on religious face coverings for all evidence given by all witnesses in the courtroom would mean that freedom of religion is being limited in situations where there is no good reason for the limit. As discussed above, uncontested and uncontroversial evidence does not engage the fair trial interest. A total ban that would permit the state to intrude on freedom of religion where it cannot be justified is not consistent with the premise on which the Charter is based — a generous approach to defining the scope of the rights it confers, coupled with the need to justify intrusions on those rights because of conflicting interests or the public good.
So who knows what she’d do………… Saying that requiring photos from a Christian sect, but not face unveiling from a Muslim one doesn’t quite fit with an even-handed approach.
I am worried.
If our immigration practices continue, pretty soon Sharia Law and anti-Semitism will be winning strategies.
While 82% disagree, how many of them will actually vote? Maybe 60%? The 18% who support are much more motivated to vote.
I also agree with separating from Toronto, but let the suburbs (e.g. Mississauga, Oakville, Pickering, Markham) stay.
This is a Liberal pandering issue pure and simple. If a person is allowed to conceal their identity at a citizenship ceremony why shouldn’t they be allowed to wear a motorcycle helmet while making a withdrawal from the bank? I hope this becomes THE wedge issue.
Simply use the notwithstanding clause. Once they used it a bunch of times, it would get to be routine. Quebec uses it all the time with the fascist anti-English crap and nobody blinks. If the Supreme Court can’t figure out the democracy thing, cut them out of the loop.
that’s the first time I have ever seen Kady O malice
she looks like a juvenile orangutan.
Re Trudeau’s Immigration Policy
Why exactly would any rational immigration policy in stressed economic times, be tilted towards family reunification? Immediate family notwithstanding, I see no reason whatever for the government to give priority to fathers, grandparents,uncles and so on, each case should be judged on what they can contribute to Canada. Older immigrants which many of these are, put enormous strains on health and social services;they can never be expected to be net tax contributors. Past experience has been to favour young work ready immigrants with marketable skills.
At a time when travel is easy and relatively cheap, little justification exists for the reunification program.
Last night CTV commentators were lamenting the fact small town Canadians supported the poll in question,giving credence to the
post headline above.
Re Trudeau’s Immigration Policy
Why exactly would any rational immigration policy in stressed economic times, be tilted towards family reunification? Immediate family notwithstanding, I see no reason whatever for the government to give priority to fathers, grandparents,uncles and so on, each case should be judged on what they can contribute to Canada. Older immigrants which many of these are, put enormous strains on health and social services;they can never be expected to be net tax contributors. Past experience has been to favour young work ready immigrants with marketable skills.
At a time when travel is easy and relatively cheap, little justification exists for the reunification program.
Last night CTV commentators were lamenting the fact small town Canadians supported the poll in question,giving credence to the
post headline above.
So it looks like 18% of the Canadian population qualifies as downtown Latte Liberal Champagne Socialist progressive assholes.
The rest of us are normal Canadians.
EBD jus Luv your headline – “Our home and native downtown Toronto” eh – so painfully true of the media spin and public policy pimps – center of the universe mentality for a vast diverse nation – we only get a very narrow glimpse of the attitudes and perspectives outside GTA – and of course GTA Journolist agendas become “Canadian values” – no wonder most Canadians don’t see themselves reflected in the centralized corporate media shite stream.
Some maritime poll-watching:
Should women be allowed to wear the Islamic niqab when they swear the citizenship oath? http://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/
(Scroll down)
Results so far:
Yes 12%
No 85%
Dunno 3%
There’s a not so subtle difference between “nudging” the silent majority to a desired end or blatantly pandering to a vocal minority to achieve a political goal.
The big lie is that the ruling class wants to preserve and encourage cultures when in fact they want to destroy them and replace everything unique and beautiful with their own artificial construct of multiculturism disguised as cosmopolitanism.
It is pretty simply for most Canadians, if a lady was wearing a Niqab at work or being served, be it a gov job, or hospital visit or a job at Wendy’s, there will be resistance to do business with that person. I, like most people would like to know who I’m dealing with. Simply contract law. How do you witness a lease signing, how do you make a complaint if something is wrong, it just doesn’t work in public sphere.
It should not be allowed during any business transaction. Maybe where they come from they not allowed to do business so it doesn’t matter.
Sad if this becomes a big election issue and takes away the focus on the current government’s incredible ineptitude. Before you get all excited about that comment, look at the disasterous state of our military. Yes, they inherited problems but the Conservatives have made a bad situation a whole lot worse.
I don’t think anyone’s going to get all excited. You are entitled to your opinion on this site, unlike others I can think of.
You have, however, made a very strong statement about the government’s handling of the military. Could you provide an example or two as to how PMSH has failed in this area? Can you imagine the state of our military if Trudeau or Mulcair was in charge? Personally I would love to see the government redirect the CBC’s entire subsidy to the military but that certainly wouldn’t fly, especially in eastern Canada.
There is no better example of the gulf in understanding that exists between our elites and regular Canadians than the one I saw on CBC last night. Andrew Coyne is one of the few pundits I had any time for. No longer. He says, and I quote directly: “This is not an issue that is germane to the future of this country.”
Well, Andrew, you have finally lost me entirely. If someone wants to become my fellow citizen but is not willing to show her face at the ceremony which accepts her as such; if our courts support an aspirant citizen’s loyalty to alien customs ahead of loyalty to Her Majesty and to Canada, then our country has no future.
It’s here, start it up at 8:30, so you don’t have to watch CBC At Issue any longer than necessary. When Butch is making more sense than Andrew, it’s time to tune these guys right out. http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/TV+Shows/The+National/At+Issue/ID/2676157884/
JT’s fanbase seems to be all FacePlant related. My wife was showing her FB stream last night, and it was pathetic, looked like a high school club of 14 year olds emoting over how sweet, and thoughtful, shiny and squeaky clean positive he was. Was waiting for the panty amd bra throwing to commence. This from a 40-60+ year old set of friends……it was beyond belief, the spaceyness of his fan base.
Anyways, what a dipwad Justina really is. Can’t think, uhhhhhhhhhh, on his, uhhhhhhhhhhhhh feet, uhhhhhhhhh.
Martin,
Its all about bringing Oompa and daDA to Canader, so they can subsist on our health system, in their decline years, despite not having paid a single dime into it, further lengthening the lineups for specialists, ahead of Canadians who have paid their whole lives into this wreck of a system.
The Fiberals are just effin disgusting, pandering to the worst of politics.
The DIps aren’t much better.
Agreed. Its long since time to stuff it in the face of the PROGS that are infesting the SCOC. In fact, it may have been used this year, if it weren’t for the pending election. That would have been enough to incense the HDS staffers in the media and the opposition to set the world on fire.
Its been enough to deal with the ex-media corrupt fatboy and his travails and efforts to suck everyone down the rathole with him.
Yes, its time to use the NOTWITHSTANDING Clause to enforce democratically passed LAWS.
The Libs and Dips would redeploy our military to flipping pancakes for the homeless, and fulfilling their bluehat duties in Ireland, or Chicago.
THAT is “disasterous (sic)” for the military…………….now, go back to your tiddlywink match at starbucks, comrade!
I think the niqab issue so resonates in Quebec and in part in the rest of Canada is because the great unwashed have never been allowed to vote on the question do you want more Muslim immigration.
Fun with numbers folks 82% don’t like the face covering scam.
Well seems to me in the last election 80% did not vote Liberano.
I think they have driven of a cliff on this one the clown car steering wheel is being fought over by dual citzen Much-Hair and joke candidate good-hair.
They are picking up speed and will finally make a real impact IMO.
In this upcoming election individuals wearing a face covering can vote if they show 2 pieces of ID and take an oath.
I call BS on that. I would put money up that the civil service are actively sabotaging anything that the Cons wish for the military, or anything else that would be a plus for this country. ‘Cause Cons.
Go nuke with an Isreali delivery system. Buy German Dolphin subs with cruise capability. Buy anything that Isreal makes, drones, anti missile tech & systems. Buy naval ships & coastal vessels rom countries with a continued history of efficiency & design. Cheaper than we can make or design. Get a contract to produce same here, because the clowns we have here are too squat to pee to be manly about it. Have the Russians build our Arctic icebreakers.
If the NDPEE or the LPOC had their way, we wouldn’t even let the police have guns & our military would be in frilly dresses, prancing down Yonge Street on Pride Day.
Actually, I don`t like Starbucks. Tim`s and McDonald`s for me! I am with you as far as the Dips. But I thought that the Conservatives would be so much better than previous (Liberal) governments. Better treatment of our veterans and a much improved procurement system. But instead, they have been worse. Our military in a truly terrible state. Our navy is an embarrassment. Sacrificed in the name of the almighty balanced budget. Stupid!
I can see Canada from the CN tower.
NO. The only thing you see from the CN Tower is s**T, as in the rest of TO.
But the Harper cons are still the least of all the other evils/idiots.
NO…..you can’t. You might see Hamilton through the haze and on a good day New Yawk State. Most days, you’re lucky to see the tower from anywhere else around Tranna.
I support a ban on muslims.
Ballot fox?
Related
Justin’s immigration plan will be the final nail in the LPC coffin. Check the comments, I find only 1 in support of JT. The rest are announcing their change of vote.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/09/25/trudeau-pledges-sweeping-immigration-changes.html
I’m just baffled that JT thought this would bring-in votes.
Best comment…
“The Khadr family is licking their chops”
CPC Majority 2015 and beyond.
Wasn’t it Napoleon who advised his generals
“When you see Justin destroying the Lieberal
Party do not distract him”?
“Ballot-fox issue” is PC insider talk for a gift situation in which an opposing party’s slow
witted top vote whore has caught himself on a “tar baby” without realizing how bad it will get.
An occasional nudge by the “fox” is all that is needed to keep up the “slow train wreck momentum”.
This is the ideal issue for political parties that are trying to cover up themselves.
93% in Quebec support the ban. Do we know something the ROC doesn’t?
“As unbelievable as it seems”?
My, my. Whatever happened to the NP?
What I do love about the media is that they really just don’t get the regular unwashed folks. Not everybody went to journalism school or got a PhD at the University of Communism. In Canada, 80% plus did not obviously, because they still have common sense which is erased in the minds of those that attend by the leftist professors in these hallowed halls of “higher learning”.
Oh, and by the way, who wants to start a petition to severe Toronto from Canada?
Set Toronto free so that it may live in its little socialist rats nest all by itself. That way, the rest of us can live our lives in peace without having to listen to the instructions and condescension that spews from the lips of its downtown.
Good bye, Toronto and good riddance.
Trudeau’s pandering to immigrants might backfire on him.
Seems he wants to double the number of family reunification class immigrants
and repeal elements of C-24 which can strip citizenship from dual nationals accused of serious crimes such as terrorism.
Methinks the 82% won’t be that happy with these ideas either.
The Monk debate will be a dandy.
Pass the popcorn.
[i]repeal elements of C-24 which can strip citizenship from dual nationals accused of serious crimes such as terrorism.[/i]
Well, I have a real problem with any nation being able to “un-person” a citizen. We don’t do that for rapists, drug kingpins, or multiple murderers. A citizen is a citizen, regardless of whether they were born here or immigrated and went through the process. That dual nationals retain an allegiance to a foreign power is a reason to tighten up the citizen requirements and stop allowing Canadians to hold dual citizenship, not a reason to grant the state the right to un-Canadian someone. That’s a dangerous precedent.
The idea that someone would be allowed to cover their face during a citizenship ceremony is so unbelievably asinine, and such a dangerously slippery slope, that any Canadian with even half a brain cell in their head should be on side with the Conservatives.
I have many reasons to vote for Harper in the upcoming election, and this is certainly a big one.
And the fact that the stupid Canadian courts keep siding with Sharia law is another damn good reason to vote for the Conservatives.
The only people surprised about the Niqab being an issue to Canadians everywhere are the out of touch members of the Canadian media elite.
The Niqab is about Canadian and Quebecois nations in conflict with the feelgood multiculturalism of the social justice warriors leading the media.
In fact the only reason they are surprised is because they thought they had convinced us knuckle draggers that we are very wrong to try to impose our views on someone else’s religious beliefs. They aren’t reporting on the issue. They wonder just how the sheeple can have a thought of their own.
On the question of what the courts would do with this if the Ministerial directive not to allow face coverings at citizenship ceremonies is treated as law (which the lower court chose not to do, for reasons that escape everyone) and the issue is squarely whether the Charter’s protection of freedom of religion applies, the Supreme Court of Canada (and CJ McLachlin particularly) may have difficulty getting around their decision supporting Alberta’s requirement of photo ID on drivers’ licences, even over the objections on religious grounds from a Hutterite community. In her decision, McLachlin, CJC, said:
[104] I conclude that the limit on the Colony members’ freedom of religion imposed by the universal photo requirement for holders of driver’s licences has been shown to be justified under s. 1 of the Charter. The goal of minimizing the risk of fraud associated with driver’s licences is pressing and substantial. The limit is rationally connected to the goal. The limit impairs the right as little as reasonably possible in order to achieve the goal; the only alternative proposed would significantly compromise the goal of minimizing the risk. Finally, the measure is proportionate in terms of effects: the positive effects associated with the limit are significant, while the impact on the claimants, while not trivial, does not deprive them of the ability to follow their religious convictions.
Of course, she also wrote a decision about whether face coverings were allowed when giving testimony in court and chose instead a “maybe, maybe not” standard:
[56] This brings me to the final reason for rejecting an approach that would never allow a witness to testify while wearing a religious facial covering. It does not comport with the fundamental premise underlying the Charter that rights should be limited only to the extent that the limits are shown to be justifiable. This principle is set out in s. 1 of the Charter, in relation to laws — laws that limit the rights guaranteed by the Charter are invalid to the extent that the limit is not reasonably justified in a free and democratic society. A total ban on religious face coverings for all evidence given by all witnesses in the courtroom would mean that freedom of religion is being limited in situations where there is no good reason for the limit. As discussed above, uncontested and uncontroversial evidence does not engage the fair trial interest. A total ban that would permit the state to intrude on freedom of religion where it cannot be justified is not consistent with the premise on which the Charter is based — a generous approach to defining the scope of the rights it confers, coupled with the need to justify intrusions on those rights because of conflicting interests or the public good.
So who knows what she’d do………… Saying that requiring photos from a Christian sect, but not face unveiling from a Muslim one doesn’t quite fit with an even-handed approach.
I am worried.
If our immigration practices continue, pretty soon Sharia Law and anti-Semitism will be winning strategies.
While 82% disagree, how many of them will actually vote? Maybe 60%? The 18% who support are much more motivated to vote.
I also agree with separating from Toronto, but let the suburbs (e.g. Mississauga, Oakville, Pickering, Markham) stay.
This is a Liberal pandering issue pure and simple. If a person is allowed to conceal their identity at a citizenship ceremony why shouldn’t they be allowed to wear a motorcycle helmet while making a withdrawal from the bank? I hope this becomes THE wedge issue.
Simply use the notwithstanding clause. Once they used it a bunch of times, it would get to be routine. Quebec uses it all the time with the fascist anti-English crap and nobody blinks. If the Supreme Court can’t figure out the democracy thing, cut them out of the loop.
that’s the first time I have ever seen Kady O malice
she looks like a juvenile orangutan.
Re Trudeau’s Immigration Policy
Why exactly would any rational immigration policy in stressed economic times, be tilted towards family reunification? Immediate family notwithstanding, I see no reason whatever for the government to give priority to fathers, grandparents,uncles and so on, each case should be judged on what they can contribute to Canada. Older immigrants which many of these are, put enormous strains on health and social services;they can never be expected to be net tax contributors. Past experience has been to favour young work ready immigrants with marketable skills.
At a time when travel is easy and relatively cheap, little justification exists for the reunification program.
Last night CTV commentators were lamenting the fact small town Canadians supported the poll in question,giving credence to the
post headline above.
Re Trudeau’s Immigration Policy
Why exactly would any rational immigration policy in stressed economic times, be tilted towards family reunification? Immediate family notwithstanding, I see no reason whatever for the government to give priority to fathers, grandparents,uncles and so on, each case should be judged on what they can contribute to Canada. Older immigrants which many of these are, put enormous strains on health and social services;they can never be expected to be net tax contributors. Past experience has been to favour young work ready immigrants with marketable skills.
At a time when travel is easy and relatively cheap, little justification exists for the reunification program.
Last night CTV commentators were lamenting the fact small town Canadians supported the poll in question,giving credence to the
post headline above.
So it looks like 18% of the Canadian population qualifies as downtown Latte Liberal Champagne Socialist progressive assholes.
The rest of us are normal Canadians.
EBD jus Luv your headline – “Our home and native downtown Toronto” eh – so painfully true of the media spin and public policy pimps – center of the universe mentality for a vast diverse nation – we only get a very narrow glimpse of the attitudes and perspectives outside GTA – and of course GTA Journolist agendas become “Canadian values” – no wonder most Canadians don’t see themselves reflected in the centralized corporate media shite stream.
Some maritime poll-watching:
Should women be allowed to wear the Islamic niqab when they swear the citizenship oath?
http://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/
(Scroll down)
Results so far:
Yes 12%
No 85%
Dunno 3%
There’s a not so subtle difference between “nudging” the silent majority to a desired end or blatantly pandering to a vocal minority to achieve a political goal.
The big lie is that the ruling class wants to preserve and encourage cultures when in fact they want to destroy them and replace everything unique and beautiful with their own artificial construct of multiculturism disguised as cosmopolitanism.
It is pretty simply for most Canadians, if a lady was wearing a Niqab at work or being served, be it a gov job, or hospital visit or a job at Wendy’s, there will be resistance to do business with that person. I, like most people would like to know who I’m dealing with. Simply contract law. How do you witness a lease signing, how do you make a complaint if something is wrong, it just doesn’t work in public sphere.
It should not be allowed during any business transaction. Maybe where they come from they not allowed to do business so it doesn’t matter.
Sad if this becomes a big election issue and takes away the focus on the current government’s incredible ineptitude. Before you get all excited about that comment, look at the disasterous state of our military. Yes, they inherited problems but the Conservatives have made a bad situation a whole lot worse.
I don’t think anyone’s going to get all excited. You are entitled to your opinion on this site, unlike others I can think of.
You have, however, made a very strong statement about the government’s handling of the military. Could you provide an example or two as to how PMSH has failed in this area? Can you imagine the state of our military if Trudeau or Mulcair was in charge? Personally I would love to see the government redirect the CBC’s entire subsidy to the military but that certainly wouldn’t fly, especially in eastern Canada.
There is no better example of the gulf in understanding that exists between our elites and regular Canadians than the one I saw on CBC last night. Andrew Coyne is one of the few pundits I had any time for. No longer. He says, and I quote directly: “This is not an issue that is germane to the future of this country.”
Well, Andrew, you have finally lost me entirely. If someone wants to become my fellow citizen but is not willing to show her face at the ceremony which accepts her as such; if our courts support an aspirant citizen’s loyalty to alien customs ahead of loyalty to Her Majesty and to Canada, then our country has no future.
It’s here, start it up at 8:30, so you don’t have to watch CBC At Issue any longer than necessary. When Butch is making more sense than Andrew, it’s time to tune these guys right out.
http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/TV+Shows/The+National/At+Issue/ID/2676157884/
JT’s fanbase seems to be all FacePlant related. My wife was showing her FB stream last night, and it was pathetic, looked like a high school club of 14 year olds emoting over how sweet, and thoughtful, shiny and squeaky clean positive he was. Was waiting for the panty amd bra throwing to commence. This from a 40-60+ year old set of friends……it was beyond belief, the spaceyness of his fan base.
Anyways, what a dipwad Justina really is. Can’t think, uhhhhhhhhhh, on his, uhhhhhhhhhhhhh feet, uhhhhhhhhh.
Martin,
Its all about bringing Oompa and daDA to Canader, so they can subsist on our health system, in their decline years, despite not having paid a single dime into it, further lengthening the lineups for specialists, ahead of Canadians who have paid their whole lives into this wreck of a system.
The Fiberals are just effin disgusting, pandering to the worst of politics.
The DIps aren’t much better.
Agreed. Its long since time to stuff it in the face of the PROGS that are infesting the SCOC. In fact, it may have been used this year, if it weren’t for the pending election. That would have been enough to incense the HDS staffers in the media and the opposition to set the world on fire.
Its been enough to deal with the ex-media corrupt fatboy and his travails and efforts to suck everyone down the rathole with him.
Yes, its time to use the NOTWITHSTANDING Clause to enforce democratically passed LAWS.
The Libs and Dips would redeploy our military to flipping pancakes for the homeless, and fulfilling their bluehat duties in Ireland, or Chicago.
THAT is “disasterous (sic)” for the military…………….now, go back to your tiddlywink match at starbucks, comrade!
I think the niqab issue so resonates in Quebec and in part in the rest of Canada is because the great unwashed have never been allowed to vote on the question do you want more Muslim immigration.
Fun with numbers folks 82% don’t like the face covering scam.
Well seems to me in the last election 80% did not vote Liberano.
I think they have driven of a cliff on this one the clown car steering wheel is being fought over by dual citzen Much-Hair and joke candidate good-hair.
They are picking up speed and will finally make a real impact IMO.
In this upcoming election individuals wearing a face covering can vote if they show 2 pieces of ID and take an oath.
I call BS on that. I would put money up that the civil service are actively sabotaging anything that the Cons wish for the military, or anything else that would be a plus for this country. ‘Cause Cons.
Go nuke with an Isreali delivery system. Buy German Dolphin subs with cruise capability. Buy anything that Isreal makes, drones, anti missile tech & systems. Buy naval ships & coastal vessels rom countries with a continued history of efficiency & design. Cheaper than we can make or design. Get a contract to produce same here, because the clowns we have here are too squat to pee to be manly about it. Have the Russians build our Arctic icebreakers.
If the NDPEE or the LPOC had their way, we wouldn’t even let the police have guns & our military would be in frilly dresses, prancing down Yonge Street on Pride Day.
Actually, I don`t like Starbucks. Tim`s and McDonald`s for me! I am with you as far as the Dips. But I thought that the Conservatives would be so much better than previous (Liberal) governments. Better treatment of our veterans and a much improved procurement system. But instead, they have been worse. Our military in a truly terrible state. Our navy is an embarrassment. Sacrificed in the name of the almighty balanced budget. Stupid!
I can see Canada from the CN tower.
NO. The only thing you see from the CN Tower is s**T, as in the rest of TO.
But the Harper cons are still the least of all the other evils/idiots.
78% in this poll, with 90% in Quebec
http://www.therebel.media/showyourface
NO…..you can’t. You might see Hamilton through the haze and on a good day New Yawk State. Most days, you’re lucky to see the tower from anywhere else around Tranna.