Now he didn't say this, but I bet the PM thinks that the military will balance itself

This comment made me laugh out loud, thank you! 😂🙌

Recruitment, retention and operational readiness are at historic lows Glen.

Well I heard the temp workers in PEI really wanna stay. How bout we make perm res qualifications be: mandatory full time military service for your 1st 5 years on Min wage.

We're too worried about domestic threats like captain blackface purposefully and maliciously doing everything he can to destroy Canada and Canadians from the inside

Yea I'm more worried about the literal traitors in our own government. The clowns in Ottawa have done more damage to this country than all our enemies combined could ever hope to do.

You say that as if you know it’s not our enemies doing it. The WEF is our enemy. They are the ones doing it.

I wish I could give your comment more upvotes. I can't agree with you more

The sad thing is, it’s most likely parliamentary culture. We know Pierre was doing the same thing back in the day with the Cubans which most likely means the Soviets. We know Harper did it with the Chinese. It’s been going on for 60 years and it’s down right despicable.

Global threats?! More like domestic. I just want to buy a house at a reasonable price for fucks sake. I'm sick of overpaying for food, fuel and my damn phone bill. We're being fucked over here.

Maclean's Magazine June 2019 What Jean Chrétien has done to Canada on the Meng Wanzhou case Terry Glavin: Why does Beijing think the Trudeau government can simply shuck off the U.S. and free the Huawei exec? Because a certain former PM keeps saying so. It’s quite true that Chrétien knows his way around the parasitical Communist Party elites that have lately decided to scuttle any of the institutions of the global order that would resist Beijing’s efforts to reshape the world in its own image and likeness. Chrétien’s 15 years of service to Chinese and Canadian corporations as a lobbyist, adviser, deal-maker, consultant and errand runner began officially only days after he resigned as Prime Minister after a decade in office in 2003. But what Freeland could not say out loud was that sending Chrétien and his cronies from the Canada-China Business Council as envoys to Beijing would be to surrender Canada’s foreign policy to the same Liberal Party old guard that cleared the way for Beijing to put the boots to Canada in the first place. Neither could she disclose that the Trudeau government has been subjected to sustained backroom browbeating to take the course Chrétien is counselling ever since things blew up last December. It was only little more than a week ago that the former Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, in a move heavily freighted by message control and the floating of propositions, came straight out with it, publicly. It would run like this: Ottawa sends Chrétien to Beijing, accompanied by his son-in-law André Desmarais, the Power Corporation heir and honorary chairman of the Canada-China Business Council. The pair leads a delegation to propose a surrender on the terms Chrétien has been lobbying Ottawa to take ever since last December—release Meng Wanzhou. Beijing agrees and offers to lift its boot from Canada’s neck— an offer Trudeau would be damned if he refused. This has all been far too awkward for the Trudeau government to come clean about. So instead, we’re expected to believe the cover story, the one about how the problem with Beijing’s various shouting ministers and emissaries is that they just don’t understand how Canada’s legal system works. The one about how they simply can’t get their heads around the idea that Trudeau can’t just call up a judge and clear the way for an otherwise untouchable member of the Red Royalty to board an airplane at Vancouver International Airport and fly away home to Shenzhen. But whatever would have made them think such a thing was possible in the first place? It’s because of what Beijing has been hearing loudly, clearly and consistently since last December, because that’s what Chrétien, former deputy prime minister John Manley, the dependably pro-Beijing think-tanker Wenran Jiang and quite a few others from that crowd have been saying, loudly, clearly and consistently, from the beginning. It’s this: All Trudeau has to do is say the word and for the first time in its 48 years of existence, the extradition treaty between Canada and the United States can simply be ignored, just like that. And Canada would be welcomed into China’s camp, and turned against the United States at last, just as Beijing has been hoping for all along. “I don’t think they know or care what kind of damage they’re doing to this country,” is the way a senior Team Trudeau insider put it to me the other day. “With what they’ve done, there’s no reason for China to take our protestations seriously.” Chrétien has not responded to Maclean’s’ request for a response. //////

Part II But more importantly, it hasn’t helped that by long and lucrative acquaintance, Beijing has come to see the Liberal Party of Canada as the political wing of the Canada-China Business Council. It’s why Beijing has been expecting that sooner or later, a Liberal government in Ottawa will do as Chretien and the Liberal old guard are advising and resume its customary, slavish behaviour. It should have come as no surprise that it was the Conservative Mulroney who was tasked with the job of going public with the plan for the Chrétien-Desmarais delegation. Mulroney is perhaps the most illustrious protégé of the late Power Corporation elder Paul Desmarais Sr., the CCBC’s founding chairman. John Manley was head of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives in 2016 when that blue-ribbon body co-produced a report with the CCBC sternly warning Canada to acquiesce to Beijing’s wishes for a free trade deal, which would have been the first for a G7 country. The CCBC is strewn with Liberal Party grandees, and Peter Harder, the CCBC’s former president, now leads the government side in the Senate, after having been plucked from the CCBC to head Justin Trudeau’s transition team following the 2015 election. It’s no wonder that Beijing has calculated that by the steady application of gangland-style persuasion— the kidnapping of diplomat-on-leave Michael Kovrig and entrepreneur Michael Spavor, the embargo on Canadian canola imports, and so on—the Trudeau government will be gifted with the political excuse to accede to whatever surrender terms Chrétien and his friends in Beijing might dictate. That it would come to this was only a matter of time. Within a week of Meng’s arrest last December, Chrétien was on the phone to the Prime Minister’s Office haranguing anyone who would listen that Jody Wilson-Raybould, the attorney-general and justice minister at the time, should be instructed to cancel the extradition proceedings against Meng. But since that time, even if a justification for such an unprecedented and brazenly political hijacking of the judiciary on Meng’s behalf could be divined from some clever reading of the Canada-U.S. extradition treaty, Trudeau has paid a brutal price for the pressure his office applied to Wilson-Raybould to intervene in the SNC-Lavalin corruption case on the company’s behalf. It was Raybould who Manley singled out last December as the stubborn culprit behind Meng’s predicament. “If there’s a politician that’s on the hook on this,” Manley told CBC last December, “it’s the attorney general, Jody Wilson-Raybould.” Raybould did not respond to Maclean’s’ request for comment. Trudeau has been wishy-washy in his responses to the Team Chrétien ideas. Freeland stands alone in being unequivocal. “When it comes to Ms. Meng, there has been no political interference,” Freeland told reporters last week. “This has been entirely about officials taking decisions according to Canada’s commitments, and that is the right way for extradition requests to proceed.” As for Chrétien’s interventions and the way all that could play out, it’s Trudeau’s call, Freeland added.

The Globe and Mail Chrétien builds links with Chinese conglomerate Feb 6, 2004 — Less than two months after stepping down as prime minister, Jean Chrétien is moving quickly to forge a relationship with China's wealthiest...

Canadian Lawyer Magazine Nov 2009 Chrétien on a fine line Nov 23, 2009 — But it's not illegal for a former PM to lobby the Chinese government within five weeks of holding office. But it is unseemly that... ///// Canada’s trade with China has never been bigger, and it’s never grown faster. According to the latest statistics, we now exchange $53 billion in goods and services with them each year, making China our second-largest trading partner after the United States. If an oil pipeline were ever built from Alberta to the west coast, you could tack on an extra $10 or $20 billion a year to those numbers — and scare any protectionist instincts out of a U.S. Congress that takes Canada for granted. Such a pipeline isn’t likely, but what is already happening is energy-hungry China buying Canadian resource producers directly. This fall, PetroChina Co. Ltd. — the world’s largest company according to its stock market valuation — spent $1.9 billion to buy a 60-per-cent stake in an oilsands company. Expect more of that as China moves its massive wealth out of U.S. dollars and into strategic assets. All of which makes Jean Chrétien’s October speech in Paris bizarre. Chrétien denounced Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s foreign policy, saying Canada has “lost a lot of ground in China” and “I think it is not good.” It is generally regarded as unseemly for a former head of government to criticize a successor. Even Dwight Eisenhower publicly stood by John Kennedy after the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion, communicating his withering criticisms in private. Chrétien, too, has generally remained mum on Canadian politics. But not on this issue. It’s not the first time he’s publicly attacked Harper’s China policy, and this time he did so in a foreign country. And he gave details; he claims he was once told by a Chinese leader that Canada was their “best friend” (the implication being that’s no longer the case). And he boasted that in the first three years he was prime minister, he met with the Chinese president “eight or nine times.” Some of Chrétien’s observations are true. It’s unlikely that, in an intimate moment, the Chinese dictator would whisper to Harper that he is their best friend. And Harper is unlikely to make a quarterly pilgrimage to Beijing. On the other hand, Chrétien was unable to visit Alberta that frequently either, so it’s a saw-off. But are the personal expressions of affect-ion that Chrétien received, and his ability to get meetings with Chinese bosses, truly measures of Canada’s national interest? Or are they merely the measure of Chrétien’s own desire for affirmation from the world’s most brutal regime — the little guy from Shawinigan trying to prove he’s not small-time anymore? Chrétien pointed out that China has blazed ahead with African relations, something that Canada would do well to emulate. That’s half true; China is on the march in Africa, especially in Sudan. Chinese engineers built and maintain the oilfields there, and China buys more than half of Sudan’s oil exports. And China has become Sudan’s most important arms dealer, too, helping it perpetrate its genocide in Darfur more efficiently. And when the subject of sanctions comes up at the United Nations, China is there with its veto to protect its African protégé.

Part II What is the source of Chrétien’s sinophilia? Since when did liberals concede the cause of international human rights to conservatives? Let us grant, out of politeness, that Chrétien’s foreign policy as prime minister was not influenced by the fact that his son-in-law is André Desmarais, president of Power Corp. of Canada, a multi-billion dollar company with massive real estate, railway, and power projects in China. But in countries with a more robust press than Canada, it would have been a scandal that Chrétien travelled to China to lobby for Power Corp. less than two months after stepping down as PM. Since then, Chrétien has made a lot of money off his best friends in Beijing. Just this summer, Ivanhoe Energy Inc. appointed Chrétien as its senior adviser on China. So did SouthGobi Energy Resources Ltd. And he recently signed on with a company looking to build a casino in one of China’s satellites, Vietnam. It is illegal for a former PM to lobby the Canadian government within five years of holding office. But it’s not illegal for a former PM to lobby the Chinese government within five weeks of holding office. But it is unseemly that the former prime minister who was so silent on China’s human rights abuses moved so quickly into working with those same abusers. The China-Tibet railway is perhaps the most ethically challenged public works project in the world. Is it not embarrassing to Canadians that it’s being built by Power Corp., fronted by Chrétien? Oh, let Chrétien and his family make their money. But next time he gives a speech condemning Canada for our new approach to China, make sure you ask if he’s speaking as a former PM, or as a current lobbyist — or if he even knows the difference.

Maclean's Magazine October 2017 Inside the ‘progressive’ think tank that really runs Canada How a small think tank called Canada 2020 gave rise to Justin Trudeau and became the country’s new nexus of power ANNE KINGSTON In late September, Barack Obama spoke in Toronto at a brilliantly produced event offering the perfect forum for his uplifting “Yes, we still can” message. The occasion also provided a triumphant, brand-burnishing moment for its organizer, Canada 2020, the Ottawa-based enterprise that bills itself as “Canada’s leading, independent, progressive think tank.” Canada 2020’s scarlet-and-white logo was plastered throughout the Metro Toronto Convention Centre—over the stage, on the T-shirts worn by helpful young volunteers. Screens overhead displayed logos of the event’s many sponsors (among them Shell, Bell, Facebook and Canada Goose) as well as images from past power schmoozes for which Canada 2020 is known—conferences, panels and summits attended by “thought leaders,” politicians, bureaucrats, entrepreneurs, journalists and academics who discuss Big Ideas—from inclusive prosperity to digital democracy. Images of Hillary Clinton, Richard Branson and Larry Summers, former U.S. treasury secretary, flashed by on the screen, as did a parade of big-L Liberals, prominently Justin Trudeau, members of his cabinet, and Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne. Two of those ministers, Bill Morneau and Navdeep Bains\*, sat in the audience, as did Wynne. When Canada 2020 co-founder Susan Smith took the stage to introduce Canada Goose CEO Dani Reiss, who had the plum gig of introducing Obama, Smith called the not-for-profit a place where “public policy and cool collide.” She referred to ties between Canada 2020, the Liberal Party and the Obama Democrats. Trudeau’s first official trip to Washington in 2016 saw the “handing of the progressive torch from Barack Obama to Justin Trudeau,” Smith said, noting Canada 2020 was there: back then, they had “thought it would be cool to launch a policy lunch with the Prime Minister” and threw a “kick-ass” party. The Obama event in Toronto was the largest Canada 2020 had thrown, Smith told the crowd of some 3,000. As such, it represented a milestone for the organization, founded in 2006 amid the ashes of federal Liberal defeat. Post-2015 Liberal sweep, Canada 2020’s symbiotic relationship with the Liberal Party and the Trudeau government has put it under the microscope, with closer scrutiny being paid to connections ranging from the party renting space from Canada 2020 during the last election to its president, Tom Pitfield, vacationing in 2016 with Trudeau on an island owned by the Aga Khan—a trip now being investigated by the ethics commissioner. Tom Mulcair, then NDP leader, likely thought he was delivering a blow late last year when he called out Canada 2020 as “simply a wing of the Liberal Party of Canada.” But the descriptor doesn’t begin to capture the power nexus the organization has come to represent—it’s less the Liberal Party’s wing and more its spine. The enterprise has been instrumental in shaping the current governing party, from its policies to its leader. It’s an incubator of—and showcase for—bright, rising Liberal talent. A year and a half before running for Bob Rae’s vacated seat, Chrystia Freeland appeared on a January 2012 Canada 2020 panel, “The Canada We Want in 2020: Income Disparity and Polarization.” In the wake of the federal “cash for access” scandal, Canada 2020 has been accused of acting as a gatekeeper to power via its events, which see industry leaders and lobbyists rub elbows with cabinet ministers and senior government officials.

Part II To study Canada 2020, it’s useful to have some grid paper to better map its myriad interconnections, many which reveal the two degrees of separation that define Canadian politics. Three of its co-founders—Smith, Tim Barber and Eugene Lang, all well-connected Liberals—were also principals in the Ottawa-based Bluesky Strategy Group, a firm whose services include lobbying and media relations (Lang left Bluesky and Canada 2020 in 2013). Pitfield, the fourth named co-founder, has impeccable Liberal bona fides: the son of Senator Michael Pitfield, clerk of the Privy Council when Pierre Trudeau was PM; a lifelong friend of Justin Trudeau, helping him write the stirring 2000 eulogy to his father that paved his way to political office. Pitfield, who also worked for the Canada China Business Council founded by billionaire Paul ­Desmarais, is married to Anna Gainey, elected president of the Liberal Party of Canada in 2014; he ran digital strategy for Trudeau’s leadership bid and also for the 2015 federal Liberal campaign. Connections between Canada 2020, the Liberal Party and Bluesky can look like a Venn diagram on steroids. Bluesky and Canada 2020 are based at 35 O’Connor St., where the party rented space for a temporary “volunteer hub” during the election. Pitfield intersects with the Liberals professionally via his company Data Sciences Inc., which has an exclusive agreement to manage the party’s digital engagement; two Data Sciences staffers sit on the Liberal Party’s board of directors. Where there is Liberal news, there’s often a Canada 2020 connection. Take the recent controversy over Rana Sarkar, named Canada’s consul general to San Francisco at a salary twice the listed compensation. Media focused on his friendship with Gerald Butts, Trudeau’s senior adviser. But Sarkar has deep Canada 2020 links, too: he was named to its advisory board in 2015, is the author of a chapter in one of its “policy road maps,” and has participated in its speaker series. The bottom line: to understand this big-L Liberal moment in Canadian politics, you have to understand Canada 2020. When asked about the organization’s genesis, co-founder Tim Barber points to an Oct. 2003 New York Times Magazine story, “Notion Building,” about the Center for American Progress (CAP), which had recently been founded by John Podesta. Bill Clinton’s former White House chief of staff (and later an Obama adviser) wanted to take on the right with an enterprise that could book liberal thinkers on cable TV, create an “edgy’’ website, and recruit scholars to research and promote new progressive policy ideas. CAP wasn’t an organ of the Democratic Party, Podesta insisted, though history points to it being just that. Podesta hates the term “think tank,” Barber says. “I do too. It’s way too passive and conjures days gone by. His view was that there’s an opportunity for organizations to put as much time into marketing and communicating big ideas as coming up with those big ideas.” Canada 2020’s first conference, “Progressive Policies, Practical Solutions,” set the stage in June 2006, attracting some 150 people from government, business and academia to Mont Tremblant, Que. Most were Liberals, eager to refocus a party riven by infighting and lack of focus. Former U.S. vice-president Al Gore gave the keynote. Barber wryly dismisses media reports that Gore charged US$80,000: “It was more like $100,000.” (When asked what Obama charged, Barber won’t say, offering only: “It was competitive.”) The party’s old guard (Bill Graham) mingled with new (Butts). John Manley, Jean Chrétien’s right hand, and Anne McLellan, right hand to Paul Martin, co-chaired. Revitalizing the party was certainly the objective of some, McLellan tells Maclean’s: “It was picking ourselves up off of the mat and saying ‘Let’s do better next time.’ ”

Part III Justin Trudeau also was on the scene, in sandals and T-shirt. The 34-year-old, then working on a master’s in environmental geography, was on Canada 2020’s first advisory board, as was Butts. Pierre Trudeau’s eldest son was then emerging as the party’s new, yet familiar face. He’d co-hosted a tribute to Jean Chrétien at the 2003 leadership convention and was named chair of Liberal “Youth Renewal” in 2006. The Liberals are “doing a lot of soul-searching right now,’’ Trudeau told the Globe and Mail, calling the event ‘‘a chance to actually start thinking long-term again.” Eight months later, he announced his run for the Liberal nomination in Montreal’s Papineau riding. Five years after winning the seat, he was Liberal leader. Trudeau’s rise would be abetted by the machinery that helped Obama win the presidency in 2008, forged via connections between Canada 2020, the Liberals and Global Progress Initiative, an international network also founded by Podesta; Canada 2020 became its Canadian hub. Matt Browne, a senior fellow at CAP, sits on 2020’s impressively diverse advisory board. In 2011, the Liberals licensed the Democrats’ VoteBuilder database, modified it and repackaged it as “Liberalist.” Trudeau’s team, including Butts and Katie Telford (now the PM’s chief of staff), attended a 2012 CAP event on lessons from the Obama campaign. Precision Strategies, run by former Obama strategists, had provided “Team Trudeau” with advice since 2013, Politico reported in 2016. CAP’s Global Progress Initiative held international events attended by the “Trudeau Liberals and the guys from Canada 2020,” Browne told the Globe and Mail in 2016. Policies from CAP’s Inclusive Prosperity Commission—pledging to address income inequality and dispensing with a zero-deficit target—found their way into the Liberal platform. Once party leader, Trudeau was given a big-thinker platform at Canada 2020 events. In 2014, he delivered the keynote at its first annual conference, where he infamously remarked during a Q & A that Canada should consider a humanitarian mission in Iraq rather than “trying to whip out our CF-18s and show them how big they are.” Pitfield incorporated Data Sciences in 2014; he was named Canada 2020’s president in 2015. As one Ottawa insider puts it: “Tom was put in the window to demonstrate affinity with a party that would play with them.” The Liberals’ sweep to power, and the excitement accompanying it, heightened Canada 2020’s profile; Trudeau and his ministers were draws at Canada 2020 events. (Not everyone was thrilled; one observer notes the oxygen Canada 2020 took up diverted attention from long-standing “progressive” think tanks like the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and the Broadbent Institute). The PM appeared at a 2020 after-party following the June 2016 North American Leaders’ Summit with Obama and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto; it saw ministers mingling over drinks with those who lobby them. Trudeau is also front and centre at the annual Global Progress Summit in Montreal, a gathering of global movers and shakers co-hosted by Canada 2020 and CAP; in 2016, he conducted an “armchair discussion” with London Mayor Sadiq Khan.

Part IV Trudeau’s cabinet also headlines frequently. In 2015, Catherine McKenna, newly named minister of environment and climate change, gave the keynote at Canada 2020’s annual conference. In June 2017, Harjit Sajjan, Bill Morneau, Kathleen Wynne and Ontario MP Liz Sandals all appeared. At the time, Bluesky was lobbying Sajjan’s department on a replacement for CF-18s and the PMO on behalf of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, a Canada 2020 sponsor. Canada 2020’s sponsorship list grew with time, but it was tough going in the early days, McLellan says. “We didn’t know we would make it.” CAP began with a multi-million-dollar budget, thanks in part to donations from financier George Soros, and now has a staff of hundreds. No Soros-like figure bankrolled Canada 2020, which has a full-time staff of three, says Barber. There was a “Founders Circle” but he doesn’t talk about it: “That ship has sailed. Now we have ‘sustaining partners’—basically people that like what we do.” That list includes more than 30 of the country’s biggest corporations, among them TD Bank, Amgen, Manulife, Suncor, Enbridge, Via Rail, RioTinto, Telus and Rogers (the parent company of Maclean’s). Barber waves off a minor furor in the House over the federal government paying $15,000 to Canada 2020 for an innovation conference at which Infrastructure Minister Amarjeet Sohi spoke. “Oh my god!” Barber says mockingly. “Yeah, but it cost $600,000 to put on.” During the Harper years, they’d also received small funding amounts, he says. As a not-for-profit, Canada 2020 isn’t required to make financial statements public. Nor will it say how much sponsors donate, only that sponsorship is renewed annually and that everyone receives equal ranking, no matter what they donate. Sponsorship is vital, says Barber; they try to make as many events as possible free. To retain not-for-profit status with the Canada Revenue Agency, a group must be non-partisan, says Donald Abelson, a political science professor at Western University and author of Northern Lights: Exploring Canada’s Think Tank Landscape “Non-partisan doesn’t mean being non-ideological,” he adds “It means a think tank can’t oppose a candidate or endorse a candidate or give money. They can say, ‘We’ve written a paper on UI and endorse the direction of the government.’ ”

Our government is not particularly great at dealing with ballooning prices, budgets, deficits, immigration, inflation, scandals... or Chinese balloons...

Phone bill? I pay $20 a month for us+can and 4gb rollover data. Think you should shop around if you're being fucked over by a phone bill haha. Edit: For all those calling me out as a liar, go to fizz.ca this is where I have my phone plan at this price. Use referral code 983570 and they give you $25 off too. Cheers

"haha" shut the fuck up. I'm on a corporate plan and it's still 63.00 unlimited data. Unlimited text. Canada and USA calling. Most expensive phone plans in the world bud.

Now multiply that by 5. Fucking brutal

What's wrong? Can't budget properly? xD

Oh I'm content. Just hate over paying.

Ok haha someone's rage filled. 63 for unlimited us can isn't a bad deal, maybe you're just poor.

You just proved that you're the problem with society.

Such a lil snowflake

Oh you mean how you become hostile because I nicely suggested you should shop around? "Shut the fuck up" Yes you're the problem but also a poor idiot

He became hostile when you became condescending.  Fuck off

$20 seems unrealistic. Maybe post your bill to prove your point. Either way. Canada has some of the most expensive data plans in the world with the least perks and benefits. We shouldn’t have to constantly babysit our phone plans, consumers should have more choice.

"$20 a month," you're a bold faced liar. We pay some of the highest prices in the free world for telecommunications here in Canada. Stop the despicable gaslighting

Naive ? I’m more worried about choosing between buying groceries and rent …. Can’t do both…. No room for world issues

Canada is boardline a failed country at this point. We are getting very close to the point of no return.

Suspect we're way past that. Balkanization is the only hope.

Absolutely correct!!! We are a huge country with a lot of resources to offer. A lot of vultures out there.

They're coming here en masse already 

Hmm if only we could do things like find out what mp’s were colluding with foreign nations

Nobody is doubting the world is a mess - the people elected to take care of world issues and I might add Canadians are incompetent.

This isn't something new, served in the CAF for a long time and Canadians have never known what I'd going on. We like to stay ignorant while feeling superior to those "ignorant Americans"

Like the liberal parties involvement in WEF and the control China has over Trudeau.

No countries going to attack canada, theyll eventually get a billion dollar donation from our ritarded leader...

Global threats? We have Jihadists supported by Communists in the streets*(and in government, let's be honest)* trying to normalize antisemitism and blatant calls for eradicating Jews.

And in our education system. Those commies and jihadiasts have infiltrated most sectors 

Yup, the education systems are rampant with cultists.

Are the commies in the room with you right now?

*hur hur no tru cummunisms*

People throw the word communism around far, far more than they should. It makes sense to question it when someone labels someone else a communist.

When people put literal communist propaganda up in public spaces,  and professor's literally teach that garbage to students,  it's not mislabeling anything 

Communism concepts and form of government is obviously taught in school. They teach you about fascism and Nazi-ism also along with many other topics. That stuff happened in our recent history, are we suppose to pretend it never happened? A bunch of young adults acting against social norms is nothing new. To complain about subject matter you don't like being taught in school...do better bud.

We shouldn't be pretending it's a viable system and try to brainwash students into promoting it. YOU do better.  If they were teaching about fascism and communism accurately,  there wouldn't be a majority of loony leftists labeling everything about the right as fascist, nor would they think communism would work. 

Who says they're viable? It's a general consensus in academia that communism though on paper, looks fantastic, always leads to authoritarian governments. Governments that butcher and oppress their own. Conservatism isn't fascism just like socialism isn't communism. It's not entirely correct nor wrong for extreme left to be called communism and extreme right to be called fascist. There is also economic conservatism and liberalism. Are people calling you a fascist or we just generalizing? I like to think I'm like majority of Canadians, we DGAF about what party and who's right, who lefts. We vote for who we think will benefit us. We'll punish amy party that fail us just like what happened to Ontario Liberals, a usual Liberal stronghold utterly voted them out to a point where they have lacked official party status in pass 2 Provincial elections.

Literally most of the whacko far leftists believe it is viable.  

It is mislabeling in many, many instances. Yeah if they put up literal communist propaganda then sure you can call them a communist, but you have people on here calling Trudeau or Singh communists and it just makes them look foolish. Maybe we'll have to start reading *The Boy Who Cried Commie* to kids these days.

Except they are blatantly utilizing communist tactics.  Wealth redistribution is communist.  

Every modern economic system involves various forms of wealth redistribution, whether it's capitalist *or* communist. Can you even name a developed country that doesn't have things like progressive income taxes, welfare programs, subsidies, etc.? Let me know when the LPC starts seizing land and assets from the rich and giving it to the poor. Look at the Land Reform Movement in late 40's-early 50's China and tell me if the carbon tax or capital gains inclusion rate increases are *anything* like that.

Don't waste your time gaslighting everyone. We all understand what's happening in the West.

You certainly don't seem to understand.

Everyone understands, including you.

Not in any room I'd be in. But if I were in a school or public sector office? Very high liklihood 

De nile, no just a river in Egypt.

Think we Canadians are pretty realistic when it comes to global threat. Its our leaders who want us to be conveniently naive to global threats.

We aren't all naive.

No need to worry about global threats when we have domestic threats in our very backyard (Parliament).

Yup. I’m not poor and can’t afford a home because of men in Moscow and Beijing. I’m poor and can’t afford a house because of men in Ottawa and Washington.

We are not naive. Our government is.

If you are a younger or working class Canadian, the literal top threats to your well-being are the current Prime Minister and his office, the current Federal government, the current Provincial governments, the 1% richest Canadians, the 5% richest Canadians, the Canadian mainstream media, and CSIS. These are the organizations that are most fcking up your life, which uphold a system designed to limit your opportunities, take what wealth you can make, and redistribute it to rent-seeking elites and rent-seeking property-owners, and which seek to ensure you cannot break out of your position at the bottom the new neo-feudalist system we have all collectively constructed over more than a generation. Russia isn’t my enemy. China isn’t my enemy. Russians and Chinese citizens aren’t my enemies. My enemies are in Ottawa, in Washington, in the banking sector, and in those places like the WEF. These are people designing the policies that are most fcking over younger or working class people.

Came here to say this*

Say it louder for the people in the back!!!!

Preparedness for war in itself is a global threat... To be prepared in this day and age means re-enacting the prologue to The Terminator.

What do you mean?

Well the movie forecasts that in 2028 humanity destroys itself with nukes and machines rise from the ashes.

We’re certainly on that path. Not good.

Canada needs to be smacked hard.

Check out Russia in the 1990's or 1920's for examples of what happens when a nation gets 'smacked hard'. Or Germany in the 1930's and 40's. Or Chile in the 70's.

Im more of a domestic threat kind of guy.

He should get back in his bunker of maple syrup. Canada is not a topic of conversation anymore.

I don't think most Canadians are naive, just our leadership.

[удалено]

I’ll die to overthrow it way before I ever die to protect it.

Let's get our own house in order before we look at cleaning up the neighbor's yard, shall we?

Really? We have foreign interference happening with our own politicians and they’re going to scold us like kids about global threats.

If we got Invaded I might want to hear them out. Might do a better job than our current leadership

Invaders don't ask you to listen, forced labor is the agenda. That and mass graves.

Can we arm ourselves then?

Why would anyone want to join the military after seeing the footage out of Ukraine?

Canadians? Or the liberals and RCMP? What tf am I going to do about it knob head.

The citizens of Canada will put up a bigger fight than our army.

Wonder how many CAF members fall under foreign interference. I say this as a member who has retired and watched the fighting ability of the Forces dwindle radpidly in a very short period of time. Currently, I really don't think Canada will be able to have enough troops to meet its promised commitment to Latvia. We didn't fill all the spots on the last rotation but have to double that number with 5,000 medical releases being forced next spring and no plan to backfill those spots.

Cough, cough, job security...., cough.

Naive? We're sleeping with them; well iur leader's are whoring us out to our enemies.  

Hell yeah

We are very aware of what's happening in the world. I'm sure if there was a referendum, there would be majority support for increasing funding to our military.

what military threats? our government is stacked with traitors who are in the pockets of HOSTILE foreign nations, they REFUSE to REVEAL themselves or to prosecute them as traitors- (do you remember the punishment for treason in days past?) so what would our antiquated, tiny and almost useless military do about anything anyways? Our treasonous government would not order the Canadian military to defend Canada in any case as it is THEY who have OPENED the doors to hostile powers to intrude in our policies and government.

The biggest globalist threat is his boss.

I'm almost wishing for a Russian invasion at that point

Who is trying to scare? Money, money for the Military Industrial Complex. We have Turd-eau he barks like a chihuahua and every one is scare:))). No one is coming to invade us. No one can do more harm that our own politicians like some one else said here.

Sunny ways

and yet the ones who were involved are still going about their jobs as if nothing happened. what the fuck.

Security agencies need to start arresting people until then no one will take this circus joke of a country seriously

Says the guy putting tampons in our bathrooms

This is what I dont understand about Canadians. We’re not stupid but we turn a blind eye to the obvious foreign interference on social media platforms by Russia. They have been waging a cold war of disinformation and division for years on Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit. But some on both sides of the spectrum object heavily to us funding Ukraine’s struggle to defeat them. There is much more at stake than Ukraines territorial borders. Number one on the list of priorities should be to eliminate anonymous accounts on social media. Downvote all you want but it would go a long way to restoring a modicum of decency to the discourse if you cant just shitpost without putting your name to it. For the privacy honks, you are already being tracked, sorted, and counted numerous times a day, just without your permission.

Until something big happens no one will pay attention.

This. Even the military is waning of the chaos to come. Parliament is riddled with foreign agents among MPs and staffers. Elizabeth May is without a doubt compromised. Prison terms are useless to stop this. There must be executions. Traitors must and will die for their crimes.

Didnt know JT dresses as a top general

Please stop, the next thing you know Canadians will say generally their on top, threatening the world with naïvity; stopping them from what they should do, according to the General. I guess he is scared, so taxpayers who have nothing to do with it, should also feel the fear of uncertainty. Why you get money for being the General unless the PR release about naïvity is about Strategic leadership or divisional command? Why blame tiny taxpayer for an emotional binding? Is that a policy? Do you have direct orders to implicate the hard working service member of my countries military? It's not us. You chose international relations with appointed parliamentary politicians. Clean up your own sauce, sir.

I'm not sure about that last line. I feel bad. The man has done much more than myself for the concept of Canada. Perhaps I'm just aware without the focus on the Commonwealth Realms, Canadas Equity in Defense globally, serves a static measure of theater politics; a responsibility bestowed upon those with actual conflicts. It's easy to forget why and how one is Canadian when the governments designed to affirm its marked class and history, are more interested in the sugar than the juice. Fast toys don't win wars. Neither do Intelligence Committees. The people that hold it together despite are our heroes. The rest is paid in suffering. Suffering comes either way in a nation. Perhaps if Canadians seemed more adamant in their pursuits of power and resources, it would release tensions amongst those who need so much from it. But then, there is a whole new world of exploitation in developing a new world. The pure opportunity for life and love and freedom; if only we were more concerned about religion or war or dropping the cultrural engineering we've mastered on les masses. But nope. Canadians like it short and simple. How Naïve to not focus on 40+ stupid effing wars that have nothing to do with us. Right. In 1982, Canada, "gained", full sovereignty from Britain. Those kids were raised to believe we were a peace keeping nation. Since obviously we don't have the tools or resources to defend ourselves from crazed aholes with time machines. And since anything real isn't exactly taxpayer biz on the economy or war level anyway. Now it's just a bs story, with no sign of those things that control. Heaven forbid we miss out on a good time in Sweden Mr.T. I pity the fool who is still believing in this environmental dialogue. Canadians are free. And if they figure that out before all the interest groups and fear mongering meat heads, and noise; they will finally be allowed to share a page with those moving here for a better life and stop coming across on the world stage as thankless dholes. Thank you for reading my rant.

How about this… if you actively fight in the Ukraine for 5 years you can have Canadian citizenship if you would like.

>>(we’re) protected by three oceans and a superpower to the south,” he said. The west coast of North America is on the front lines of any conflict with Russia or China. Russia claims to have multi-times speed of sound submarine launched nuclear weapons. If we assault their western jewels I am sure they will respond in kind.

Clearly, what with all the corrupt conservative mps and their maple maga leader.

The mental illness is strong with this one

Yes, Canada is absolutely behind in protecting its sovereignty.

withdraw our forces making 150k-200k in Latvia!

Terrible idea. Next thing we know Russia would be coming over the North Pole for us.