Canadian Government is a Zionist and Neocon occupied territory for Good, no matter which party is in power, just like the USA's ZOG....
Canada: Boy Scout exposed at the UN....
By Eric Walberg
Oct , 2010
Canada’s international do-gooder image was shattered when it lost its bid for a UN Security Council seat, amid back-stabbing, maple syrup bribes, and Israeli-dictated cover-ups.
The humiliating withdrawal by Canada from the race with Germany and Portugal for a coveted place on the United Nations Security Council revealed what close observers have long known -- that the current Conservative government in Ottawa has nothing but disdain for the world’s tattered peacekeeper and would most likely just use its seat to serve US and Israel’s agenda. Four years of Stephen Harper’s government was enough for the world to turn its back on a once beloved peacenik.
Dubai’s police chief’s announcement Monday that Canada is covering up its arrest of a suspect in Israel’s assassination of Palestinian leader Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in the UAE in January merely confirms the world’s distrust.
Canada has served on the SC many times in the past, once each decade since the 1950s, and was never refused when it ran for a seat. It carved out a highly respected role: the good cop to its southern neighbour’s bad cop. It refused to break relations with Cuba after the 1959 revolution, refused to send troops to Vietnam (unlike another privileged ex-British colony, Australia), recognised China in 1970, and refused to send troops to Iraq in 2003, despite intense pressure from US President George W. Bush.
One of Canada’s finest moments was Lester Pearson’s Nobel Peace Prize in 1957 for negotiating the withdrawal from Egypt’s Sinai of Israeli troops, replaced by UN peacekeepers, including, yes, Canadians. Israel killed the 14 UN soldiers caught there during its invasion of Sinai in 1967, though that did not prompt Pearson to return his prize for helping create a no-man’s land that proved to be easy prey for the Israelis.
How did the present sorry state of affairs come to pass? Canadian Conservatives from the days of Confederation in 1867 until relatively recently stood for an independent Canada, and old-time Conservatives today are as shocked as anyone. The only arguably great Conservative leader since Confederation, John Diefenbaker, refused to station US nuclear weapons on Canadian soil, defying a furious US President Kennedy.
But the old Progressive Conservative Party was hijacked in 2003 by predominantly small-town right-wingers, boosted by the rising evangelical Christian movement, a repeat of what happened to the US Republican Party in the 1990s. The fiasco at the UN was “the world’s response to a Canadian foreign policy designed to please the most reactionary, short-sighted sectors of the Conservative Party’s base -- evangelical Christian Zionists, extreme right-wing Jews, Islamophobes, the military-industrial-academic-complex, mining and oil executives and old Cold-Warriors,” writes Yves Engler, author of Canada and Israel: Building Apartheid.
In every corner of the world, Ottawa is now following US neocon policies, as if scripted in Bush’s Washington. On environment and the world economy, over the past four years Harper’s government has:
- blocked former British PM Gordon Brown’s global tax on international financial transactions
- refused to recognise the human right to water
- refused to sign the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
- blocked consensus at the Rotterdam Convention to ban the toxin chrysotile asbestos
- supported the environmentally disastrous “tar sands” oil extraction project
- blocked a binding commitment on rich countries to reduce carbon emissions. It even suggested the Kyoto Protocol be scrapped at a UN climate conference session in Bangkok last year, prompting dozens of delegates to walk out in protest.
Over 3,000 Canadian mines operate in Latin America, Africa (especially the Congo), India and other unfortunate Third World venues, and are far and away the world’s worst offenders in terms of environmental destruction and human rights abuses, according to the Canadian Centre for the Study of Resource Conflict, but these companies are the Conservatives’ close friends and supporters. At the G8 in June, the Conservatives used Canada’s prominence as host to call in the G8 to criticise war-wracked Congo for its meagre attempts to gain a greater share of its vast mineral wealth, which is virtually untaxed and has been stolen from under the Congolese for more than a century.
Targetting poor Congo elsewhere, Ottawa obstructed international efforts to reschedule Congo’s foreign debt, the legacy of three decades of US-backed Joseph Mobuto’s dictatorship. Canadian officials “have a problem with what’s happened with a Canadian company,” Congolese Information Minister Lambert Mende said, referring to his government’s move to revoke a Canadian mining concession acquired during the 1998-2003 war. “The Canadian government wants to use the Paris Club [of debtor nations] in order to resolve a particular problem.”
The Conservatives love the mining companies so much they have even stalled a Liberal proposal that the mining companies themselves agreed to at their Mining Association of Canada under pressure from civil society groups “to make diplomatic and financial support for resource companies operating overseas contingent upon socially responsible conduct.” The Conservatives nod and wink that it’s enough to rely on “voluntary standards” to improve Canadian mining companies’ notorious behaviour.
The relations between Harper’s Conservatives and Bush’s Republicans were so close, there was serious speculation that then-foreign Minister Peter MacKay was having a love affair with his US counterpart, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Moving on from his Foreign Affairs, the Canadian Romeo was made minister of defence in 2008, where he resolved to spend $400 billion over 25 years to increase Canada’s armed forces in line with US-NATO demands.
In 2009, the so-called Canadian Afghan detainee abuse scandal erupted, when Canadian diplomat in Afghanistan Richard Colvin, appalled by his own complicity there in the torture of hundreds if not thousands of innocent Afghans, blew the whistle. He submitted documents to a House of Commons Committee proving both Harper and MacKay knew of the torture. Even now, Canadian Joint Task Force 2 commandos regularly take part in illegal night-time assassination raids.
The government’s answer? Declare the documents top secret and dismiss parliament, just as it did in 2008 when the opposition agreed to join forces and replace the minority Conservative government, as is their right in a parliamentary democracy.
“It’s hard to find a country friendlier to Israel than Canada these days,” chirps Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman. Stephen Harper’s Conservatives:
- called Israel’s 2006 invasion of Lebanon a “measured response” (Two Canadian UN peacekeepers were targeted and killed by Israeli in the invasion. Harper refused to protest, asking rhetorically in parliament what they were doing there in the first place.)
- refused to condemn the invasion of Gaza in December 2008 or the siege of Gaza (the only “Nay” at the UN Human Rights Council)
- refused to condemn the Israeli murder of nine members of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla in May
- opposed an attempted IAEA probe of Israel’s nuclear facilities as part of an effort to create a nuclear-weapons-free Middle East.
- cut off UN humanitarian aid to Gaza because it was going through the Hamas government there.
That $15 million for UNRWA-Gaza was not actually cancelled by Harper; it was cleverly transferred to Operation PROTEUS, a plan to train a Palestinian security force “to ensure that the Palestinian Authority maintains control of the West Bank against Hamas,” according to Canadian Ambassador to Israel Jon Allen. Boasts Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of the Americas Peter Kent, this is the country’s “second largest deployment after Afghanistan.”
While Canada trains police to contain Palestinian anger, it is rapidly expanding relations with the Palestinians’ colonial masters. Minister of International Trade Peter Van Loan just held talks in Tel Aviv to further expand the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement. Already robust, Canadian-Israeli trade has more than doubled since its implementation in 1997. Canada even allows goods manufactured in occupied territories by illegal settlers to be labelled “Made in Israel.”
Canada and Israel signed a far-reaching public security cooperation “partnership” in 2008 to “protect their respective countries’ population, assets and interests from common threats.” Israel security agents now officially assist the RCMP and CSIS in profiling Canadians citizens who are Muslims and monitoring individuals and/or organisations in Canada involved in supporting the rights of Palestinians. The barring of British MP George Galloway from entering Canada in 2009 was surely at the behest of now official Mossad advisers.
Not only did Congo get a drubbing at the G8 in Toronto this June, so did Iran. Kent told his confreres, “It’s a matter of timing and it’s a matter of how long we can wait without taking more serious preemptive action.” Read: Off with their heads! “An attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada.” Read: Canada is a province of Israel. Canadian naval vessels are already “exercising” off Iran’s coast, waiting for the fun to begin.
Harper and MacKay have hosted NATO Arctic war games aimed at the “aggressive” Russians, and announced plans to spend $9 billion to buy F-35 joint strike “stealth” fighter jets to “meet the threats of the 21st century.”
The militarisation of Canadian foreign policy extends from the Arctic to earthquake-wracked Haiti, which got 2,000 Canadian troops within hours, bumping several Heavy Urban Search Rescue Teams, which were left behind. Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon later explained that the teams were not needed. Canada was part of the coup that overthrew and exiled Haiti’s elected president Jean-Bertrand Aristide in 2004, and the Conservatives happily support the ban on his political party Fanmi Lavalits in upcoming elections. Similar to its policy in Palestine, Ottawa is spending tens of millions of dollars to train Haitian prison guards and police.
Like its policy in Haiti, Ottawa implicitly supported the coup against left-leaning Honduran president Manuel Zelaya in 2009 and continues to provide aid and train its military. Canada was the only country that did not explicitly call for Zelaya’s return to power -- even Obama did that much.
“Americas” Foreign Minister Kent’s kudos are for Colombia and his criticism is aimed at Venezuela: “Democratic space within Venezuela has been shrinking and in this election year, Canada is very concerned about the rights of all Venezuelans to participate in the democratic process.” Venezuela’s Ambassador to the Organisation of American States Roy Matos was nonplussed: “I am talking of a Canada governed by an ultra right that closed its parliament for months to evade an investigation over the violation of human rights -- I am talking about torture and assassinations by its soldiers in Afghanistan.”
I need not continue this sad litany. If you want to know Harper’s position on any foreign policy issue, just ask: “What would Bush say?” or in the case of MacKay, “What would Condie say?” Of course, even before this neocon rape of Canada’s body politic, Canadian foreign policy never really strayed very far into the woods. The Pearson legacy of “humanitarian imperialism” endures in his Liberal successors Trudeau, Chretien and now Michael Ignatieff, though the latter, as an American scholar and supporter of the Iraq invasion, is surely pushing the limits.
It’s not even clear that Harper gave a hoot about the UNSC seat. Was there any soul-searching after the defeat? Perhaps a belated acknowledgment that Canada has veered just a tad from its purported role as everyone’s favorite peacenik? No. Instead, the Conservatives attacked stuffed-shirt Ignatieff for scuttling the bid with his criticisms of “Canadian” foreign policy, though no one at the UN needed any prompting, and there is absolutely nothing “Canadian” about what Harper’s neocon crew are up to.
Israeli-American analyst Israel Matzav laments, “Canada’s candidacy was voted down because of its close relations with Israel.” Perhaps Matzav, Harper and the like should smell the coffee percolating around the world these days. Israeli colonialism and US neocolonialism/Barbarians and utter Warmongers are increasingly out of favor, at last....
By Dr. William Pierce
"As you may be aware, the mass media in
Canada are as much under Jewish control as in the United States. The
undisputed top media mogul in Canada is Israel Asper, who is commonly
known by his nickname "Izzy." With his sons Leonard and David and
other family members, Izzy Asper owns CanWest Global Communications
A Gentile, Conrad Black, also used to be a major player in the
Canadian media, but a little over a year ago Black's Southam News,
Inc., was bought out by Izzy. CanWest now owns more than 60 per cent
of Canada's newspapers and other media outlets. That's more than 60
per cent of all of Canada's mass media in the hands of one Jew.
Included are 14 metropolitan dailies and 128 local newspapers across
the country, including the Vancouver Sun, the Vancouver Province, the
Calgary Herald, and the Montreal Gazette. CanWest also owns the
National Post, which is distributed throughout Canada. In addition
Izzy owns media in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and
Last month Izzy issued a written directive to his newspapers,
instructing them that from now on they must print nothing critical of
Israel or of Israeli actions or policies. This is a rare thing.
Usually directives of this sort are oral only, and great care is taken
to keep them from coming to the attention of the public. But Izzy,
with even more brass than is customary for his tribe, made his
directive public. He announced that, beginning three weeks ago,
December 12, the editorial content of all of his newspapers would be
homogenized, and they all would be pro-Israel.
Now here's the interesting part: if all of Izzy's Gentile underlings
were simply corrupt-were simply paid mercenaries who wrote what they
were told to write-then there would be no controversy; all of the
local editors and reporters and columnists simply would follow orders.
But there is a controversy. A group of reporters and writers at the
Montreal Gazette have rebelled, at least for the moment. One of them,
Bill Marsden, an investigative reporter, revealed on a Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation radio program called "As It Happens" that his
editor at the Gazette had instructed him never to report anything that
might reflect badly on Israel. Paraphrasing Izzy's directive, Marsden
said, and I quote: "We do not run in our newspaper op-ed pieces that
express criticism of Israel and what it is doing in the Middle East."
Marsden and 54 other reporters at the Montreal Gazette went on strike
in protest at what they describe as undue corporate interference with
freedom of the press.
Their strike has infuriated Izzy. Izzy's son David characterized the
striking reporters as "childish" and "self-righteous." He said, and I
quote: "Why don't they just quit and have the courage of their
convictions? Maybe they should go out and, for the first time in their
lives, take a risk, put their money where their mouth is, and start
their own newspaper."
How's that for chutzpah, as the Jews like to call it? One can read in
David Asper's reaction to the reporters the thought, "How dare these
mere Gentiles, these mere goyim, question what we, God's Chosen
People, decide should be the party line for Canada's newspapers! How
dare they!" I mean it's not just that Izzy owns the Montreal Gazette,
and so he is entitled to set the editorial policy, and other
newspapers can set different policies. Izzy thinks that he is entitled
to set the editorial policy for all of Canada's newspapers and
determine what all Canadians think.
The man chosen by the Aspers to write the editorials for all of their
newspapers is Murdoch Davis. When asked by "As It Happens" whether or
not one of CanWest's newspapers would be permitted to buck the party
line on Israel, Davis replied, and I quote: "No. It is clearly the
intent that the newspapers will speak with one voice on certain issues
of overarching national or international importance."-end of quote --
When asked specifically whether or not one of the Asper newspapers
would be permitted to raise the question of Israel's long-standing
violation of international law and its defiance of UN resolutions
calling for withdrawal from illegally occupied Palestinian territory,
Davis again responded in the negative.
So that's the present situation with freedom of the press in Canada:
not really very different from the situation in the United States. So
what about the mentality of journalists? The fact that the reporters
at the Montreal Gazette are protesting Izzy's directive that they can
report nothing negative about Israel indicates that they are not
entirely mercenary. To me, however, it does not indicate that they are
independent thinkers. I believe that they are as much lemmings as the
dullest couch potato or sports fan. What caused their protest was the
arrogant and contemptuous way in which the Aspers went about
reconciling two conflicting elements in the Jewish party line.
On the one hand journalists have been taught that the United Nations
is a splendid and admirable organization, whose resolutions should be
obeyed. They also have been taught that all races and ethnic groups
are equal-in fact, essentially the same-but that racial minorities and
underdogs generally deserve our special sympathy, and that in any
conflict with a ruling group the underdogs are in the right. That's
standard liberal dogma. You have to believe that in order to be a
journalist. On the other hand, journalists have been taught that Jews
are wonderful people who can do no wrong, and that to think otherwise
is anti-Semitism, which is as bad as or worse than racism. It's hard
enough reconciling the elevated status of Jews with the concept of
racial and ethnic equality, but most journalists by working at it are
able to do it-except where the conflict between Jews and Palestinians
is concerned. That requires a special effort and really careful
handling by their Jewish bosses. How do you explain to a journalist
who already believes all of the liberal dogma that if Iraq ignores a
UN resolution it should be bombed into the Stone Age and then starved
into submission with a rigid trade embargo, but if Israel ignores 14
UN resolutions we should respond by sending the Israelis more military
and economic aid?
How do you explain to a journalist who has been taught that when South
Africa used to be a White country and practiced apartheid, and the
South African police sometimes beat information out of captured Black
terrorists, it was a terrible thing and had to be condemned in the
strongest terms, but when Israel practices apartheid, assassinates
Palestinian and Lebanese leaders, and tortures Palestinian and Lebanese
How do you explain to a journalist that it is an intolerable threat to
the security of the world if some Muslim country develops weapons of
mass destruction, and the United States is justified in a preemptive
strike to destroy the weapons production facilities, but when a
psychotic little country like Israel builds an arsenal of chemical,
nuclear, and biological weapons, using materials and technology stolen
from us, it's OK, and we should ignore it?
How do you explain to a journalist steeped in the tenets of feminism
that he shouldn't say anything about Israel's booming slave trade in
girls and women kidnapped from eastern Europe and forced to work as
How do you explain to a journalist who believes wholeheartedly in
egalitarianism that it's perhaps regrettable but certainly excusable
when Jews rocket Palestinian and Lebanese villages and use
Believe me, explaining these things is tricky, but it can be done, if
it's done with patience and care. It can be done, because when it
comes to matters of faith, a lemming really isn't rational. He's quite
capable of believing two mutually contradictory things at the same
time. The problem that brought on the mini-rebellion at the Montreal
Gazette is that Izzy wasn't patient and careful. He was arrogant and
contemptuous of his Gentile reporters. But they'll get over it, I'm
sure. They always do. They're lemmings.
But, as I said, what is happening now in Canada is interesting. It
gives us insight into the workings of journalists' minds, and it also
brings out into the open not only the monopoly Jewish control of the
Canadian mass media but also the way in which that control is used to
slant the news and Canadian public opinion so as to serve Jewish
interests to the detriment of Canadian interests.
Do you think that any of these revelations will be of benefit to
Canadians? Will the average Canadian say, "Oh, my goodness! I didn't
realize that one man, and a Jew at that, controls more than 60 per
cent of all the mass media in Canada and is using that control to
deceive Canadians as to what is happening in the Middle East. That's
terrible! We'd better have our lawmakers do something to break up this
media monopoly, so that we will have a better chance to learn the
truth about what's happening in the world when we read a newspaper or
watch a television news program."
What do you think? I think that about 98 per cent of Canadians won't
even look up from their ball games. I think that there's not a
politician in Canada who will dare go up against Izzy Asper. This
whole tempest at the Montreal Gazette will blow over in a few days,
and all of Izzy's newspapers and other media will toe the party line
as if nothing had happened.
And now I'm talking only to the two or three or four per cent of
Canadians-and also to the two or three or four per cent of
Americans-who aren't so absorbed in their ball games that they don't
notice things like this and don't really care either. I'm talking to
the small portion of the White population in both countries -- and in
fact, in countries around the world-who do notice and do care. I want
you to understand that this is the way nations lose their freedom.
More than that, this is the way races become extinct.
The majority of the population in Canada and the United States and in
every country in Europe consists of lemmings, who always have been
manipulated by whoever is in power. For approximately the last 100
years the power to manipulate the thinking of the lemmings-of the
masses, if you prefer-has been shifting from the authority figures in
the government and in the churches to the people who control the mass
media. These days the people who control the media also control the
government for all practical purposes, and the churches have become
irrelevant, which is why the Canadian government won't try to break up
Izzy's media monopoly and why the politicians in the United States
will never go beyond pretending to be concerned about too much sex and
violence on television when they have a mock fight with the media.
Controlling a country's mass media doesn't mean just being able to
exert a decisive influence on a country's foreign policy, as Izzy
Asper is doing in Canada, and as his fellow Jews long have done in the
United States. It doesn't mean just getting a country involved in
unnecessary wars and subjecting its citizens to retaliatory terrorist
attacks. It means influencing immigration policy. It means influencing
educational policy. It means influencing social policy. It means being
able to control the way most of a country's people think about
everything: about race and morality and lifestyles and other countries
and freedom and the meaning of life. Most of the degenerative changes
that have taken place in America and in Canada since the Second World
War have been consequences of Jewish media influence. As that
influence continues to grow, the chances of our people being able to
throw off the yoke and regain control of our own destiny become
smaller and smaller.
In Canada at the moment, Izzy Asper's surfeit of chutzpah has brought
to the attention of the public-that is to the attention of that small
portion of the public that cares about such things-his monopoly
control of Canada's mass media and his intent to use those media for
Jewish propaganda purposes. Light has been cast on this grave
situation because most journalists are lemmings, and a few of them are
chattering excitedly now about things such as "freedom of the press."
Really, the whole debate is silly. Canada had no freedom of the press
even before Izzy got his greedy hands on most of Canada's newspapers.
For years it has been illegal in Canada to publish anything considered
"racist" or "anti-Semitic" or even Politically Incorrect. When a
Canadian buys copies of any of my books and they are mailed to him,
the Canadian secret police confiscate them at the border. Publicly
challenging the details of the Jewish "Holocaust" story can result in
a prison term for a Canadian. Canada's journalists thought all of
that-stopping "hate," as they called it-was just fine. Pretty soon
they will realize that requiring all mass media to say only nice
things about what the Jews are doing to the Lebanese and Palestinians
We can't change the nature of lemmings. Someone always will manipulate
them. What is of the utmost importance is who it is that manipulates
them, because whoever that is will determine the course taken by the
whole society, by the nation, by the race. In the past, when it was a
king or a pope or a dictator who set the party line, many mistakes
were made, sometimes due to selfishness or irresponsibility, sometimes
due to ignorance or carelessness or stupidity or prejudice. But at
least the people setting the party line for the masses were our
people, members of our own race. Now, increasingly, the arbiters of
the party line are Jews or people wholly under Jewish influence. And
the Jews, as always, are looking out only for their own interests, not
for ours. To them we are merely tools to be used in advancing their
And that's at best. At worst they are pursuing policies intended not
only to advance their interests, but also to destroy us. Don't try to
debate this matter with the Jews; they will, of course, deny it. Just
look at the policies they have been pushing for the past 50 years and
where those policies have been taking us. Just consider the facts, not
their specious arguments designed to keep you demoralized and
My fellow Americans and my fellow Canadians: we are in a bad
situation. Let us stop ignoring it. Let us begin deciding what we're
going to do about it. I'm doing what I can do in speaking out about it
and getting others to speak out. You must decide what you are able and
willing to do and then begin doing it.
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org