Justin Trudeau

[Pink]

Canada's new and handsome prime minister.

Thoughts?

[Emmym]

Video is not available.

[Pink]

Video is not available.

Oh no Here's another one:

[Emmym]

ILE lol

[xerx]

Best part of his election: we can finally put away the notion that women are uniquely sexually-objectified in politics.

[silke]

Probably SEE sx/sp 3w2. He reminds me of this ILE e3 dude and also of an SLE guy I dated a while ago whose college pics looked a lot like the photos of young Trudeau. Most sure of him being EP sx/sp.




his wife looks to be an extravert and so/sx (LSE?)

[lynn]

[silke]

aw I'm at a loss here as to who is cuter

[wacey]

Yeah he is dreamy.... He also had a famous prime minister for a Father, so lets see how the liberals do. I see him as ESFj/ESFp because why not start there? The SF camp is a good place for him. Otherwise he is an NF over an NT. ST is just out of the question unless its LSE.

[rien]

se_001.jpg
I think he looks striking... ly similar to this Filatova SEI portrait.

[wacey]

Attachment 6769

With wife, Sophie.

[Jack Oliver Aaron]

He is a passionate, animated and idealistic politician, very much a man of the people. Highly charismatic. He focuses on a more progressive message than other liberals, and says that there will be 'great change'. He is dedicated to appearing as a prime minister who all of Canada should get behind (showing he can speak French fluently) and who is unafraid to make radical decisions based on populist political aims, such as his appointment of a 50/50 cabinet.

It is interesting that his enthusiasm often dies down when interviewers ask about more trivial things, such as the size of his office, and whether it felt bigger when it was his father's. He is also shown to be quite restless, feeling the need to get down to important, more meaningful work.

I think that EIE is very clear here.

[lynn]

[ScarlettLux]

Bump!

[Sol]

EN*P

[Beautiful sky]

He look sei

[darya]

EP. Not sure which one - SEE 3w2 sounds good.

[HERO]

Justin Pierre James Trudeau: ESE, LII-Ne, EII-Ne, or EIE

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/11/...l-obamanation/

NOVEMBER 11, 2015

Canada Under Trudeau: Liberal Revival or Liberal Obamanation?
by GREG FELTON

Nothing unifies a divided people quite like a common enemy. Fighting the enemy focuses people’s energies and generates a common frame of reference that delivers moral clarity. However, once the enemy is vanquished the unifying frame of reference vanishes along with it. Suddenly, a new, “peacetime” frame of reference fills the void, and old divisions redevelop, maybe even some new ones. Canadian voters are just now coming to appreciate that while winning a war may be hard, winning the peace is even harder.

After ridding the country of Stephen Harper’s toxic dictatorship, the electorate is now divided over what, exactly, to make of Justin Trudeau’s new Liberal government. Optimists believe that it represents a return to a sane, humane Canada whereas pessimists think it will generally hearken unto the same corporatist cabal that Harper did. To some degree Trudeau’s victory is analogous to Barack Obama’s presidential victory in 2008 after the end of the Bush error… er, era. A short analysis of the expectation, election and fallout of the U.S.’s first black president provides useful insight into what’s in store for Canada.


In 2008, Senator Barack Obama was the Democratic standard bearer for a return to rational government after George W. Bush’s eight-year régime, which was notorious for warmongering, anti-Muslim fear mongering, treason, zionist servility and corporatism, among other things. Although not all of these traits were unique to Bush, they reached such extremes that the political establishment decided that the so-called Republican Party was unfit to remain in power. This belief was confirmed when the party chose Sen. John “Insane” McCain to challenge for the White House.

Endorsements for Obama crossed party and political lines, running the gamut from communists to The Economist and included members of McCain’s own party, like Bush’s one-time Secretary of State Colin Powell. Typical of the establishment view was the New York Times endorsement editorial:

“We believe [Senator Barack Obama] has the will and the ability to forge the broad political consensus that is essential to finding solutions to this nation’s problems. In the same time, Senator John McCain of Arizona has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism. His policies and worldview are mired in the past. His choice of a running mate [Sarah Palin] so evidently unfit for the office was a final act of opportunism and bad judgment that eclipsed the accomplishments of 26 years in Congress. Given the particularly ugly nature of Mr. McCain’s campaign, the urge to choose on the basis of raw emotion is strong. But there is a greater value in looking closely at the facts of life in America today and at the prescriptions the candidates offer. The differences are profound.”

The editorial’s endorsement of promised reforms under Obama was significant because the paper had been the chief cheerleader and disinformant—take a bow, Judith Miller!—for Bush’s military aggressions, economic gangsterism, repression of civil liberties, World Trade Towers/Pentagon attack and passage of the unconstitutional USA PATRIOT Act. Powell, himself, even lied to the UN to justify attacking Afghanistan, and the Times dutifully reported the lie as if it were legitimate news.

For voters, and the international community at large, Barack Obama was the Great Black Hope, and his election was hailed as a victory for civil rights, minority rights, reasoned government and an end to irresponsible military adventurism. However, this near-giddy optimism was not based on any realistic understanding of Obama the politician. For voters, electing the first black president in a racist country and getting rid of the Bush junta mattered far more than any substantive assessment of Obama’s politics.


Any expectation that Obama would be much different from Bush was dashed almost immediately when he announced that he would not launch an investigation into the Sept. 11 attacks to find out who really did it. Obama said he was not going to look backwards; he was going to look forwards, and with that dismissal the whitewash of establishment guilt became government policy, as did the ensuing police-state terrorism.

In addition, as a senator from Illinois, Obama voted for Bush’s $700-plus billion “rescue” package for banks and other financial institutions even though their greed and predatory behaviour were entirely responsible for their misfortune. Once elected Obama’s administration accepted the egregious Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), and even expanded it to cover loans to keep General Motors and Chrysler from going under. The following excerpt is taken from a list of 23 false promises Obama told to get into office… [ https://www.activistpost.com/2013/11...Out-To-Be.html ]

#2 “My administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in government.”

#8 “We reject the use of national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime.”

#10 “We will close the detention camp in Guantánamo Bay, the location of so many of the worst constitutional abuses in recent years.”

#12 “We will revisit the Patriot Act and overturn unconstitutional executive decisions issued during the past eight years.”

#14 “We reject sweeping claims of ‘inherent’ presidential power.”

#16 “We support constitutional protections and judicial oversight on any surveillance program involving Americans.”

#17 “If we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home; we will end this war. You can take that to the bank.”

#19 “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”


The irony is that even if voters had understood Obama’s politics, it would not have made any difference because McCain and Palin were unelectable. Obama’s 2008 victory was, therefore, less an election than a necessity, and any talk of reform must be seen as just an election ploy. The upshot is that electing Obama made not a damned bit of difference. He continued or expanded many of Bush’s repressions, such as warranties wiretaps, surveillance of American citizens, drone strikes, and military commissions. In fact, the U.S. became even more repressive under Obama, who added civil rights abuses, such as prosecution of whistleblowers, criminalization of peaceful political protest, blacklisting, targeted killing of Americans overseas and secretive GPS tracking of individuals.


http://www.icl-fi.org/print/english/...9/trudeau.html

from SPARTACIST CANADA (Summer 2016) [No. 189]:

In the run-up to the 2015 federal election, Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party voted to support the Conservative government’s infamous Bill C-51, essentially a CSIS/RCMP wish list of draconian revisions to the criminal code. Trudeau promised that, once in power, his government would amend “problematic” sections of the law. Half a year later, the Liberal government hasn’t touched a hair on the head of the Tories’ hallmark “anti-terror” legislation. In fact, “sunny ways” Trudeau and his cohorts, with their ostentatious pursuit of no-fly lists, deportation orders and frame-up prosecutions targeting Muslims, just picked up Harper’s repressive agenda where the Tories left off.

C-51 (the Anti-Terrorism Act 2015) gives the RCMP, CSIS and other repressive agencies of the capitalist state a vastly freer hand to go after what can only be called “thought crimes.” Comments that were once merely the exercise of free speech can now be deemed by the police to be “promotion or advocacy” of terrorism, and hence criminal offenses. But even this low bar doesn’t have to be crossed for the cops to ruin your life. In fact, state agents no longer even have to claim an actual crime has been or will be committed in order to make an arrest—they need only assert that a suspect “may” commit an offense.

Before C-51 became law, civil-rights attorneys Clayton Ruby and Nader Hasan sounded the alarm about its sinister intent:

“Six Muslim young adults stand in front of a mosque late at night in heated discussion in some foreign language. They may be talking about video games, or sports, or girls, or advocating the overthrow of the Harper government. Who knows? There is no evidence one way or another. Just stereotypes…. Yesterday, the Muslim men were freely exercising constitutional rights to freedom of expression and assembly. Today, they are arrestable.”

—“Bill C-51: A Legal Primer,” policyalternatives.ca, 17 February 2015

Even more ominously, once the cops arrest you on the basis of “fear of terrorism,” not only are you stripped of the right to a trial, they don’t even need to charge you. Instead, on applying to a judge, they can force you to submit to a take-it-or-leave-it choice between going to jail or signing a so-called “peace bond.” The latter involves a vast array of arbitrary restrictions on personal liberty that can last up to five years. These can include wearing a GPS bracelet, reporting regularly to an RCMP agent, surrendering one’s passport, observing a ban from social media or other internet activity and “keeping the peace and being of good behaviour.” Failure to comply with any one of the imposed conditions is itself a criminal offence.


Punishment Without Crime

Under the Liberals, the police-state powers of C-51 are rapidly expanding the legal twilight zone for the hounding, arrest and prosecution of Muslim youth. And once in the cops’ crosshairs, no matter how innocent of wrongdoing, you can’t protect your name from being splashed across the media as a terrorist.

Police in Montreal made headlines in March by locking down the entire neighbourhood of Pierrefonds, evacuating 200 people from their homes and temporarily closing a train station. The reason? A video posted on Facebook showed, they claimed, “someone apparently handling explosive materials.” The massive evacuation and search turned up nothing. Nonetheless, 20-year-old student Omar Elabi was charged with “inciting fear of terrorism” because his home was allegedly traced as the source of the video.

The same month, the RCMP detained Kevin Mohamed of Toronto under the “fear of terrorism” provisions…for owning a hunting knife. The RCMP eventually dropped its demand for a peace bond and kept Mohamed locked up through a retroactive terrorism charge based on a family trip to Turkey he took with his mother two years earlier.

Another peace bond victim, Aaron Driver of Winnipeg, found himself on the wrong side of the law for using Twitter. A young convert to Islam, he was never charged and will not be tried. Nonetheless, due exclusively to expressing his opinions over the internet, Driver was compelled to sign a peace bond or face jail time. “If I fought it, they would have added even more conditions than I’m already under,” he told the CBC. Among other things, Driver is banned from using social media and cannot possess a phone or computer without written permission from the RCMP.

Another feature of the rulers’ “war on terror” is the use of sting operations. Cops and their agents are free to generate “terrorism” out of thin air by approaching, entrapping and inciting vulnerable individuals to agree to acts they otherwise would never have contemplated, let alone carried out. In one especially egregious case, John Nuttall and Amanda Korody, an impoverished and methadone-dependent couple in B.C., were sensationally convicted of an attempt to blow up the provincial legislature in Victoria. The charges were only laid after months of manipulation, material support and incitement by a police agent posing as an Islamic spiritual guide.


Who Are the Real Terrorists?

The odds of being a victim of an actual terrorist attack in this country are lower than those of being killed by a lightning strike, a fact you’d never guess from the hysteria whipped up every time the media reports the arrest of anyone associated with the “T” word. And that’s exactly the point. We have emphasized repeatedly that the “war on terror” is in fact no war at all, but a political construct aimed at instilling fear, regimenting the population and justifying government repression.

As we wrote in “Canada’s Creeping Police State” (SC No. 184, Spring 2015), C-51 “is a sweeping attack on free speech and other civil liberties. The bill targets publications, web postings and even private conversations sympathetic to causes that the capitalist rulers deem to be ‘terrorism.’ It authorizes the CSIS secret police to go after any activity that ‘undermines the sovereignty, security or territorial integrity of Canada’ or interferes with the country’s ‘economic or financial stability’.”

In other words, behind the camouflage of artificially generated hysteria over terrorism, the capitalists are preparing a vastly broader assault on the rights of workers and the oppressed. Under the provisions of this law, workers’ strikes and picket lines and other acts of self-defense against the bosses can be defined as “terrorist” acts. The same goes for blockades of roads, railways or pipelines by Native people struggling for land rights. The bourgeoisie is literally slapping a “terror” label on whatever might threaten their class rule or the sanctity of private profit.

The phony “war on terror” makes vivid the Marxist understanding of the capitalist state, the core of which consists of repressive institutions—the police, prisons, courts and army—dedicated to upholding bourgeois rule. From the squalid living conditions experienced by Native people on remote reserves to unfettered cop terror against black youth in Toronto, from busted unions and slashed pensions to the growing ranks of minimum-waged and under-/unemployed workers, the dreams of providing a decent life for yourself or your kids under this rotten system become ever more distant. Hence the rulers’ need for an ever larger “stick” of police coercion.

All workers and oppressed people thus have a clear and urgent interest in combatting C-51 and the whole panoply of the bosses’ repressive laws. As communists, we have nothing in common with political Islam or the other forms of religious reaction that some young people have embraced. Such doctrines are an expression of despair amid dismally low levels of class and other social struggle. But we emphatically denounce the witchhunting of Muslim youth, whatever their political views, by the bourgeois state. And it’s worth pointing out that the bearers of Canadian passports volunteering to join the Israeli Defense Forces in their war on the Palestinian people, or the fascistic Azov Batallion affiliated with the far-right NATO-backed regime in Ukraine, will never be targets of C-51.

The main terrorist force in the world today is U.S. imperialism, for which Canada acts as a loyal junior partner. Since September 11, 2001, the “war on terror” has morphed from the bloody occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan into an array of proxy conflicts, civil wars and “targeted killings” that now stretches from Afghanistan to Yemen to Mauritania—at a cost in death, desolation and human suffering that can scarcely be imagined, let alone counted. In all these conflicts, we stand in opposition to the imperialists’ depredations and demand the withdrawal of all U.S., Canadian and other imperialist forces.

The cancerous growth of a police state in the guise of “anti-terror” laws is but the domestic face of this crusade. Arbitrary mass surveillance and rampant racist profiling are now a fact of daily life from bus stations to airports to shopping malls. Through massive data collection via telephones and the internet, the real and virtual tentacles of this apparatus—concentrated in the hands of the “Five Eyes” countries (the U.S., Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand)—now reach to almost every corner of the planet.

Trudeau’s Liberals and Harper’s Tories are but two faces of Canadian capitalism. State repression is intrinsic to this barbaric social system which is rooted in the exploitation of the working people and buttressed by the oppression of minorities. Endless pleas to rein in the cops through inquiries, greater oversight and “accountability” have solved, and can solve, nothing. The road forward lies through social struggle led by the working class, which due to its central position in industry, transport and communications has vast potential social power that can be unleashed on behalf of all the oppressed.

Class struggle today is at a low ebb, thanks in large part to the betrayals of the pro-capitalist labour leaders and their political allies in the NDP. But as the Russian Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917 demonstrated, at some point outrage at the grinding hardships and crimes of capitalism will boil over into workers struggle on a massive scale. At such points, the capitalists will seek to unleash even greater forces of repression to turn back the tsunami of mass struggle. The vital question will be: which class rules?

To sweep aside the capitalist system, the only effective weapon known to history is a workers party standing at the head of all the oppressed. Armed with the program of Marxism, the working class can lead a socialist revolution to overturn the capitalist state, inaugurate its own class rule and establish a rationally planned economy organized in the interests of the vast majority. Extended internationally, this will open the road to an egalitarian communist society in which the state itself, and all other forms of organized coercion are relegated to the museum of antiquities.



http://www.globalresearch.ca/canada-...s-deal/5506886

Canada Sells Weapons to State Sponsor of Terrorism: Class Action Law Suit against Ottawa over $15 Billion Saudi Arms Deal [Feb. 2016]

The Canadian government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is the object of a class action lawsuit in Quebec Superior Court pertaining to the $15 billion sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia. An action in Federal Court is also contemplated.

According to Toronto’s Globe and Mail:

Opponents of Canada’s $15-billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia are taking Ottawa to court in an attempt to block shipments of the combat vehicles, a move that could force the governing Liberals to explain how they justify the sale to a human-rights pariah under weapon-export restrictions.


The action is led by law Professor Daniel Turp together with students of the University of Montreal:

He will announce the legal challenge on Saturday and intends to file it with the Federal Court within three weeks.

Mr. Turp and his group are calling on critics of the deal across the country to rally behind their challenge, which they are calling operation Armoured Rights, pointing to how poorly Saudi Arabia treats its own citizens and the civilian carnage of the Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen. (Globe and Mail)


Amply documented, Saudi Arabia is the state sponsor of Al Qaeda affiliated “opposition groups” in Syria including the Islamic State (ISIS). Riyadh –acting in liaison and on behalf of Washington– plays a central role in the financing of the Islamic State (ISIS) as well as the recruitment, training and religious indoctrination of terrorist mercenary forces deployed in Syria and Iraq.

What this signifies is that Canada is selling weapons to a country which is supporting and sponsoring terrorist organizations. Moreover Saudi Arabia is currently involved in a war of aggression against Yemen in blatant derogation of international law.

The links of Saudi Arabia to the terrorists are amply documented and will no doubt be raised in the class action court hearings.

According to London’s Daily Express “They [the Islamic State terrorists] had money and arms supplied by Qatar and Saudi Arabia.”

“The most important source of ISIS financing to date has been support coming out of the Gulf states, primarily Saudi Arabia but also Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates,” (According to Dr. Günter Meyer, Director of the Center for Research into the Arabic World at University of Mainz, Germany, Deutsche Welle)

According to Robert Fisk, the IS caliphate project “has been bankrolled by Saudi Arabia”:

…[M]eet Saudi Arabia’s latest monstrous contribution to world history: the Islamist Sunni caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, conquerors of Mosul and Tikrit – and Raqqa in Syria – and possibly Baghdad, and the ultimate humiliators of Bush and Obama.

From Aleppo in northern Syria almost to the Iraqi-Iranian border, the jihadists of Isis and sundry other groupuscules paid by the Saudi Wahhabis – and by Kuwaiti oligarchs – now rule thousands of square miles. (Robert Fisk, The Independent, June 12, 2014)

Moreover, in 2013, as part of its recruitment of terrorists, Saudi Arabia took the initiative of releasing prisoners on death row in Saudi jails. A secret memo revealed that the prisoners were being “recruited” to join jihadist militia (including Al Nusrah and ISIS) to fight against government forces in Syria.

The prisoners had reportedly been offered a deal — stay and be executed or fight against Assad in Syria. As part of the deal the prisoners were offered a “pardon and a monthly stipend for their families, who were allowed to stay in the Sunni Arab kingdom”.

Saudi officials apparently gave them a choice: decapitation or jihad? In total, inmates from Yemen, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Jordan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq, and Kuwait chose to go and fight in Syria.(See Global Research, September 11, 2013)


Weapons “Made in Canada”

Ottawa’s deal with Saudi Arabia is coordinated with Washington. It essentially serves the Pentagon’s military agenda in the Middle East, it channels billions of dollars to the US military industrial complex.

The weapons are “Made in Canada” produced by General Dynamics Land Systems, London, Ontario., a subsidiary of US defense contractor General Dynamics.

General Dynamics has subsidiaries in 43 countries including Canada.

Ottawa’s official stance is that these weapons which include “combat vehicles with machine guns and anti-tank cannons” are to be used by Saudi Arabia solely for purposes of national defense. They are not be used against civilians.



http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2015/11/18/...-attacks-paris

Prime Minister advocates against hatred and racism in aftermath of the terrorist attacks on Paris

Manila, Philippines
18 November 2015

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, issued the following statement today advocating against acts of hatred and racism directed at specific Canadians in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Paris:

“Following the terrorist attacks in Paris, I have noted with deep regret a number of highly disturbing acts aimed at certain Canadians, including the fire at the mosque in Peterborough, the smashing of windows at a Hindu temple in Kitchener, and the attack on a Muslim woman in Toronto.

“Diversity is Canada’s strength. These vicious and senseless acts of intolerance have no place in our country and run absolutely contrary to Canadian values of pluralism and acceptance.

“The Government of Canada strongly condemns such actions and, along with law enforcement agencies, will protect the rights of innocent Canadians being subjected to such abuse.

“Canadians understand that religious groups around the world suffer persecution regularly at the hands of violent extremists. Our focus must be on stopping the people responsible for the terror, and continuing to fight hate by embracing Canadian values.”


from "Losing True North" by Candice Malcolm; Pages 50-6:

Consider one case where officials put Canadian security ahead of compassion for a refugee applicant with terrorist associations. The case involved a gay Palestinian Christian convert who fled the West Bank to come to Canada as a teenager. Canadian officials deemed that he was inadmissible because he had been trained as a child to become an agent in the terrorist group Hamas.

The boy’s family was Hamas royalty; his grandfather helped found the group and his uncles were all active terrorists in Israel.

Despite his grooming, however, the boy rejected his family’s wishes, ran away from home and eventually moved to Canada where he asked for asylum. But Canada’s immigration officials said no. They rejected his refugee application and tried to deport this young man because of his prior training, terrorist affiliations and inconsistencies in his story over the years. They put Canada’s national security ahead of everything else.

I believed the young man should be permitted asylum. When CNN reported the story, it contacted his radical Palestinian parents, who threatened to kill their son if he ever returned. Canada has a policy that it does not deport someone to an unsafe place where their life would be threatened, and thus, after a long ordeal, the young man was permitted to stay in Canada.


SELECTION AND INTEGRATION

Our security officials do the best work they can under the circumstances, but they are limited in their capacity. Aside from the risk that Daesh terrorists will thwart our immigration system, infiltrate Canada and carry out a deadly attack, there is an equally menacing threat that comes alongside mass migration from Syria and the Middle East.

Just as some migrants may try to bring their war with them, others carry tribal feuds, ancient hatreds and deep illiberalism to their new home.

This is an ever-present but rarely mentioned threat that comes from resettling populations from regions prone to conflict and war. The risk of Canada’s refugee resettlement program may persist long after the crisis in Syria fades away.

In just 14 months, Canada will have resettled up to 50,000 Syrian refugees. To use the Lebanese cabinet minister’s math, if two per cent of these refugees are Daesh agents, that could mean that 1,000 terrorists will have managed to sneak into Canada. But to use the British public opinion data from the summer of 2015, if 20 per cent of Syria’s population supports Daesh, that also means that 10,000 of the 50,000 refugees may be radicalized or possess a hateful and intolerant worldview.

A good migration policy has two fundamental pillars: first, you select the best people for resettlement. Then, you properly welcome and integrate these people into your society.

Both components are equally important—selection and integration. So far, Trudeau is getting them both wrong.

When it comes to selection, even if Canada’s immigration and security officials could guarantee with certainty that no terrorist will enter Canada disguised as a Syrian refugee, they can’t guarantee the refugees do not possess an illiberal and hateful worldview.

Our immigration officials interview potential refugees—through a translator—but they do not ask questions about a person’s ideology or worldview. A few basic questions about living in a western pluralist society would go a long way toward stopping a potential tide of intolerance from flowing into Canada.

Here are five basic questions that should be asked of all newcomers, before they are accepted and admitted into Canada:

1. Do you think men and women should have equal rights?
2. Do you believe in religious freedom for everyone?
3. Gay marriage is legal in Canada. Are you okay with that?
4. Your neighbour may be African or Chinese. Are you okay with that? Your child may go to school, sit together and play with a Jewish child. Are you okay with that?
5. Will you uphold Canada’s laws and respect Canadian values?

Sure, a newcomer may lie about their beliefs in order to gain entry into Canada, but at least they will know what to expect when they arrive here.

Canadian pluralism should be presented to newcomers before they are invited to migrate here. If newcomers cannot or will not accept our values, they should not be allowed to board their flight to Pearson International.

Canadians are fortunate that, as a society, we have developed a peaceful and pluralistic culture. We have, by and large, pushed bigotry and hatred into the dark, marginal caves and recesses of our society where few dare to venture. It would be a great shame to start importing these views via mass migration.

The Nobel laureate Milton Friedman taught that open border policies are incompatible with the welfare state. If a nation offers a rich smorgasbord of government handouts to all citizens, and also allows open borders, people from all over the world will arrive to take advantage without contributing to the host society, its economy or its public finances.

To combat the free-rider problem, a welfare-state society would soon be forced to draw borders around its benefits and handouts, and create distinctions and various classes of citizenship—which is precisely what Liberal politicians like Justin Trudeau claim to stand against.

But this is what we see in Europe, where open-border policies have led to several generations of migrants living in Switzerland, Sweden and Germany, without ever receiving citizenship. Second-class citizenship for immigrants in these nations is a fact of life.

We are only as strong as our population is educated. If we throw open our doors to hateful and intolerant people, in a generation or two, Canada will regress into a backward country.

A transformed populace could vote away our freedoms and elect tyrants like those who rule the lands these refugees have fled. If we import the bitter attitudes and tribal feuds that led to civil war in Syria, we may well eventually import their war as well.

That is why we must select peace-loving people who want to leave war behind. People who embrace Canada’s culture and values.

This doesn’t mean we should exclude Muslims. It does, however, mean that we must exclude some Muslims.

[HERO]

Justin Pierre James Trudeau: ESE, LII-Ne, EII-Ne, or EIE

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/11/...l-obamanation/

NOVEMBER 11, 2015

Canada Under Trudeau: Liberal Revival or Liberal Obamanation?
by GREG FELTON

Nothing unifies a divided people quite like a common enemy. Fighting the enemy focuses people’s energies and generates a common frame of reference that delivers moral clarity. However, once the enemy is vanquished the unifying frame of reference vanishes along with it. Suddenly, a new, “peacetime” frame of reference fills the void, and old divisions redevelop, maybe even some new ones. Canadian voters are just now coming to appreciate that while winning a war may be hard, winning the peace is even harder.

After ridding the country of Stephen Harper’s toxic dictatorship, the electorate is now divided over what, exactly, to make of Justin Trudeau’s new Liberal government. Optimists believe that it represents a return to a sane, humane Canada whereas pessimists think it will generally hearken unto the same corporatist cabal that Harper did. To some degree Trudeau’s victory is analogous to Barack Obama’s presidential victory in 2008 after the end of the Bush error… er, era. A short analysis of the expectation, election and fallout of the U.S.’s first black president provides useful insight into what’s in store for Canada.


In 2008, Senator Barack Obama was the Democratic standard bearer for a return to rational government after George W. Bush’s eight-year régime, which was notorious for warmongering, anti-Muslim fear mongering, treason, zionist servility and corporatism, among other things. Although not all of these traits were unique to Bush, they reached such extremes that the political establishment decided that the so-called Republican Party was unfit to remain in power. This belief was confirmed when the party chose Sen. John “Insane” McCain to challenge for the White House.

Endorsements for Obama crossed party and political lines, running the gamut from communists to The Economist and included members of McCain’s own party, like Bush’s one-time Secretary of State Colin Powell. Typical of the establishment view was the New York Times endorsement editorial:

“We believe [Senator Barack Obama] has the will and the ability to forge the broad political consensus that is essential to finding solutions to this nation’s problems. In the same time, Senator John McCain of Arizona has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism. His policies and worldview are mired in the past. His choice of a running mate [Sarah Palin] so evidently unfit for the office was a final act of opportunism and bad judgment that eclipsed the accomplishments of 26 years in Congress. Given the particularly ugly nature of Mr. McCain’s campaign, the urge to choose on the basis of raw emotion is strong. But there is a greater value in looking closely at the facts of life in America today and at the prescriptions the candidates offer. The differences are profound.”

The editorial’s endorsement of promised reforms under Obama was significant because the paper had been the chief cheerleader and disinformant—take a bow, Judith Miller!—for Bush’s military aggressions, economic gangsterism, repression of civil liberties, World Trade Towers/Pentagon attack and passage of the unconstitutional USA PATRIOT Act. Powell, himself, even lied to the UN to justify attacking Afghanistan, and the Times dutifully reported the lie as if it were legitimate news.

For voters, and the international community at large, Barack Obama was the Great Black Hope, and his election was hailed as a victory for civil rights, minority rights, reasoned government and an end to irresponsible military adventurism. However, this near-giddy optimism was not based on any realistic understanding of Obama the politician. For voters, electing the first black president in a racist country and getting rid of the Bush junta mattered far more than any substantive assessment of Obama’s politics.


Any expectation that Obama would be much different from Bush was dashed almost immediately when he announced that he would not launch an investigation into the Sept. 11 attacks to find out who really did it. Obama said he was not going to look backwards; he was going to look forwards, and with that dismissal the whitewash of establishment guilt became government policy, as did the ensuing police-state terrorism.

In addition, as a senator from Illinois, Obama voted for Bush’s $700-plus billion “rescue” package for banks and other financial institutions even though their greed and predatory behaviour were entirely responsible for their misfortune. Once elected Obama’s administration accepted the egregious Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), and even expanded it to cover loans to keep General Motors and Chrysler from going under. The following excerpt is taken from a list of 23 false promises Obama told to get into office… [ https://www.activistpost.com/2013/11...Out-To-Be.html ]

#2 “My administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in government.”

#8 “We reject the use of national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime.”

#10 “We will close the detention camp in Guantánamo Bay, the location of so many of the worst constitutional abuses in recent years.”

#12 “We will revisit the Patriot Act and overturn unconstitutional executive decisions issued during the past eight years.”

#14 “We reject sweeping claims of ‘inherent’ presidential power.”

#16 “We support constitutional protections and judicial oversight on any surveillance program involving Americans.”

#17 “If we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home; we will end this war. You can take that to the bank.”

#19 “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”


The irony is that even if voters had understood Obama’s politics, it would not have made any difference because McCain and Palin were unelectable. Obama’s 2008 victory was, therefore, less an election than a necessity, and any talk of reform must be seen as just an election ploy. The upshot is that electing Obama made not a damned bit of difference. He continued or expanded many of Bush’s repressions, such as warranties wiretaps, surveillance of American citizens, drone strikes, and military commissions. In fact, the U.S. became even more repressive under Obama, who added civil rights abuses, such as prosecution of whistleblowers, criminalization of peaceful political protest, blacklisting, targeted killing of Americans overseas and secretive GPS tracking of individuals.


http://www.icl-fi.org/print/english/...9/trudeau.html

from SPARTACIST CANADA (Summer 2016) [No. 189]:

In the run-up to the 2015 federal election, Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party voted to support the Conservative government’s infamous Bill C-51, essentially a CSIS/RCMP wish list of draconian revisions to the criminal code. Trudeau promised that, once in power, his government would amend “problematic” sections of the law. Half a year later, the Liberal government hasn’t touched a hair on the head of the Tories’ hallmark “anti-terror” legislation. In fact, “sunny ways” Trudeau and his cohorts, with their ostentatious pursuit of no-fly lists, deportation orders and frame-up prosecutions targeting Muslims, just picked up Harper’s repressive agenda where the Tories left off.

C-51 (the Anti-Terrorism Act 2015) gives the RCMP, CSIS and other repressive agencies of the capitalist state a vastly freer hand to go after what can only be called “thought crimes.” Comments that were once merely the exercise of free speech can now be deemed by the police to be “promotion or advocacy” of terrorism, and hence criminal offenses. But even this low bar doesn’t have to be crossed for the cops to ruin your life. In fact, state agents no longer even have to claim an actual crime has been or will be committed in order to make an arrest—they need only assert that a suspect “may” commit an offense.

Before C-51 became law, civil-rights attorneys Clayton Ruby and Nader Hasan sounded the alarm about its sinister intent:

“Six Muslim young adults stand in front of a mosque late at night in heated discussion in some foreign language. They may be talking about video games, or sports, or girls, or advocating the overthrow of the Harper government. Who knows? There is no evidence one way or another. Just stereotypes…. Yesterday, the Muslim men were freely exercising constitutional rights to freedom of expression and assembly. Today, they are arrestable.”

—“Bill C-51: A Legal Primer,” policyalternatives.ca, 17 February 2015

Even more ominously, once the cops arrest you on the basis of “fear of terrorism,” not only are you stripped of the right to a trial, they don’t even need to charge you. Instead, on applying to a judge, they can force you to submit to a take-it-or-leave-it choice between going to jail or signing a so-called “peace bond.” The latter involves a vast array of arbitrary restrictions on personal liberty that can last up to five years. These can include wearing a GPS bracelet, reporting regularly to an RCMP agent, surrendering one’s passport, observing a ban from social media or other internet activity and “keeping the peace and being of good behaviour.” Failure to comply with any one of the imposed conditions is itself a criminal offence.


Punishment Without Crime

Under the Liberals, the police-state powers of C-51 are rapidly expanding the legal twilight zone for the hounding, arrest and prosecution of Muslim youth. And once in the cops’ crosshairs, no matter how innocent of wrongdoing, you can’t protect your name from being splashed across the media as a terrorist.

Police in Montreal made headlines in March by locking down the entire neighbourhood of Pierrefonds, evacuating 200 people from their homes and temporarily closing a train station. The reason? A video posted on Facebook showed, they claimed, “someone apparently handling explosive materials.” The massive evacuation and search turned up nothing. Nonetheless, 20-year-old student Omar Elabi was charged with “inciting fear of terrorism” because his home was allegedly traced as the source of the video.

The same month, the RCMP detained Kevin Mohamed of Toronto under the “fear of terrorism” provisions…for owning a hunting knife. The RCMP eventually dropped its demand for a peace bond and kept Mohamed locked up through a retroactive terrorism charge based on a family trip to Turkey he took with his mother two years earlier.

Another peace bond victim, Aaron Driver of Winnipeg, found himself on the wrong side of the law for using Twitter. A young convert to Islam, he was never charged and will not be tried. Nonetheless, due exclusively to expressing his opinions over the internet, Driver was compelled to sign a peace bond or face jail time. “If I fought it, they would have added even more conditions than I’m already under,” he told the CBC. Among other things, Driver is banned from using social media and cannot possess a phone or computer without written permission from the RCMP.

Another feature of the rulers’ “war on terror” is the use of sting operations. Cops and their agents are free to generate “terrorism” out of thin air by approaching, entrapping and inciting vulnerable individuals to agree to acts they otherwise would never have contemplated, let alone carried out. In one especially egregious case, John Nuttall and Amanda Korody, an impoverished and methadone-dependent couple in B.C., were sensationally convicted of an attempt to blow up the provincial legislature in Victoria. The charges were only laid after months of manipulation, material support and incitement by a police agent posing as an Islamic spiritual guide.


Who Are the Real Terrorists?

The odds of being a victim of an actual terrorist attack in this country are lower than those of being killed by a lightning strike, a fact you’d never guess from the hysteria whipped up every time the media reports the arrest of anyone associated with the “T” word. And that’s exactly the point. We have emphasized repeatedly that the “war on terror” is in fact no war at all, but a political construct aimed at instilling fear, regimenting the population and justifying government repression.

As we wrote in “Canada’s Creeping Police State” (SC No. 184, Spring 2015), C-51 “is a sweeping attack on free speech and other civil liberties. The bill targets publications, web postings and even private conversations sympathetic to causes that the capitalist rulers deem to be ‘terrorism.’ It authorizes the CSIS secret police to go after any activity that ‘undermines the sovereignty, security or territorial integrity of Canada’ or interferes with the country’s ‘economic or financial stability’.”

In other words, behind the camouflage of artificially generated hysteria over terrorism, the capitalists are preparing a vastly broader assault on the rights of workers and the oppressed. Under the provisions of this law, workers’ strikes and picket lines and other acts of self-defense against the bosses can be defined as “terrorist” acts. The same goes for blockades of roads, railways or pipelines by Native people struggling for land rights. The bourgeoisie is literally slapping a “terror” label on whatever might threaten their class rule or the sanctity of private profit.

The phony “war on terror” makes vivid the Marxist understanding of the capitalist state, the core of which consists of repressive institutions—the police, prisons, courts and army—dedicated to upholding bourgeois rule. From the squalid living conditions experienced by Native people on remote reserves to unfettered cop terror against black youth in Toronto, from busted unions and slashed pensions to the growing ranks of minimum-waged and under-/unemployed workers, the dreams of providing a decent life for yourself or your kids under this rotten system become ever more distant. Hence the rulers’ need for an ever larger “stick” of police coercion.

All workers and oppressed people thus have a clear and urgent interest in combatting C-51 and the whole panoply of the bosses’ repressive laws. As communists, we have nothing in common with political Islam or the other forms of religious reaction that some young people have embraced. Such doctrines are an expression of despair amid dismally low levels of class and other social struggle. But we emphatically denounce the witchhunting of Muslim youth, whatever their political views, by the bourgeois state. And it’s worth pointing out that the bearers of Canadian passports volunteering to join the Israeli Defense Forces in their war on the Palestinian people, or the fascistic Azov Batallion affiliated with the far-right NATO-backed regime in Ukraine, will never be targets of C-51.

The main terrorist force in the world today is U.S. imperialism, for which Canada acts as a loyal junior partner. Since September 11, 2001, the “war on terror” has morphed from the bloody occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan into an array of proxy conflicts, civil wars and “targeted killings” that now stretches from Afghanistan to Yemen to Mauritania—at a cost in death, desolation and human suffering that can scarcely be imagined, let alone counted. In all these conflicts, we stand in opposition to the imperialists’ depredations and demand the withdrawal of all U.S., Canadian and other imperialist forces.

The cancerous growth of a police state in the guise of “anti-terror” laws is but the domestic face of this crusade. Arbitrary mass surveillance and rampant racist profiling are now a fact of daily life from bus stations to airports to shopping malls. Through massive data collection via telephones and the internet, the real and virtual tentacles of this apparatus—concentrated in the hands of the “Five Eyes” countries (the U.S., Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand)—now reach to almost every corner of the planet.

Trudeau’s Liberals and Harper’s Tories are but two faces of Canadian capitalism. State repression is intrinsic to this barbaric social system which is rooted in the exploitation of the working people and buttressed by the oppression of minorities. Endless pleas to rein in the cops through inquiries, greater oversight and “accountability” have solved, and can solve, nothing. The road forward lies through social struggle led by the working class, which due to its central position in industry, transport and communications has vast potential social power that can be unleashed on behalf of all the oppressed.

Class struggle today is at a low ebb, thanks in large part to the betrayals of the pro-capitalist labour leaders and their political allies in the NDP. But as the Russian Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917 demonstrated, at some point outrage at the grinding hardships and crimes of capitalism will boil over into workers struggle on a massive scale. At such points, the capitalists will seek to unleash even greater forces of repression to turn back the tsunami of mass struggle. The vital question will be: which class rules?

To sweep aside the capitalist system, the only effective weapon known to history is a workers party standing at the head of all the oppressed. Armed with the program of Marxism, the working class can lead a socialist revolution to overturn the capitalist state, inaugurate its own class rule and establish a rationally planned economy organized in the interests of the vast majority. Extended internationally, this will open the road to an egalitarian communist society in which the state itself, and all other forms of organized coercion are relegated to the museum of antiquities....



http://www.globalresearch.ca/canada-...s-deal/5506886

Canada Sells Weapons to State Sponsor of Terrorism: Class Action Law Suit against Ottawa over $15 Billion Saudi Arms Deal [Feb. 2016]

The Canadian government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is the object of a class action lawsuit in Quebec Superior Court pertaining to the $15 billion sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia. An action in Federal Court is also contemplated.

According to Toronto’s Globe and Mail:

Opponents of Canada’s $15-billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia are taking Ottawa to court in an attempt to block shipments of the combat vehicles, a move that could force the governing Liberals to explain how they justify the sale to a human-rights pariah under weapon-export restrictions.


The action is led by law Professor Daniel Turp together with students of the University of Montreal:

He will announce the legal challenge on Saturday and intends to file it with the Federal Court within three weeks.

Mr. Turp and his group are calling on critics of the deal across the country to rally behind their challenge, which they are calling operation Armoured Rights, pointing to how poorly Saudi Arabia treats its own citizens and the civilian carnage of the Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen. (Globe and Mail)


Amply documented, Saudi Arabia is the state sponsor of Al Qaeda affiliated “opposition groups” in Syria including the Islamic State (ISIS). Riyadh –acting in liaison and on behalf of Washington– plays a central role in the financing of the Islamic State (ISIS) as well as the recruitment, training and religious indoctrination of terrorist mercenary forces deployed in Syria and Iraq.

What this signifies is that Canada is selling weapons to a country which is supporting and sponsoring terrorist organizations. Moreover Saudi Arabia is currently involved in a war of aggression against Yemen in blatant derogation of international law.

The links of Saudi Arabia to the terrorists are amply documented and will no doubt be raised in the class action court hearings.

According to London’s Daily Express “They [the Islamic State terrorists] had money and arms supplied by Qatar and Saudi Arabia.”

“The most important source of ISIS financing to date has been support coming out of the Gulf states, primarily Saudi Arabia but also Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates,” (According to Dr. Günter Meyer, Director of the Center for Research into the Arabic World at University of Mainz, Germany, Deutsche Welle)

According to Robert Fisk, the IS caliphate project “has been bankrolled by Saudi Arabia”:

…[M]eet Saudi Arabia’s latest monstrous contribution to world history: the Islamist Sunni caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, conquerors of Mosul and Tikrit – and Raqqa in Syria – and possibly Baghdad, and the ultimate humiliators of Bush and Obama.

From Aleppo in northern Syria almost to the Iraqi-Iranian border, the jihadists of Isis and sundry other groupuscules paid by the Saudi Wahhabis – and by Kuwaiti oligarchs – now rule thousands of square miles. (Robert Fisk, The Independent, June 12, 2014)

Moreover, in 2013, as part of its recruitment of terrorists, Saudi Arabia took the initiative of releasing prisoners on death row in Saudi jails. A secret memo revealed that the prisoners were being “recruited” to join jihadist militia (including Al Nusrah and ISIS) to fight against government forces in Syria.

The prisoners had reportedly been offered a deal — stay and be executed or fight against Assad in Syria. As part of the deal the prisoners were offered a “pardon and a monthly stipend for their families, who were allowed to stay in the Sunni Arab kingdom”.

Saudi officials apparently gave them a choice: decapitation or jihad? In total, inmates from Yemen, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Jordan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq, and Kuwait chose to go and fight in Syria.(See Global Research, September 11, 2013)


Weapons “Made in Canada”

Ottawa’s deal with Saudi Arabia is coordinated with Washington. It essentially serves the Pentagon’s military agenda in the Middle East, it channels billions of dollars to the US military industrial complex.

The weapons are “Made in Canada” produced by General Dynamics Land Systems, London, Ontario., a subsidiary of US defense contractor General Dynamics.

General Dynamics has subsidiaries in 43 countries including Canada.

Ottawa’s official stance is that these weapons which include “combat vehicles with machine guns and anti-tank cannons” are to be used by Saudi Arabia solely for purposes of national defense. They are not be used against civilians.



http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2015/11/18/...-attacks-paris

Prime Minister advocates against hatred and racism in aftermath of the terrorist attacks on Paris

Manila, Philippines
18 November 2015

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, issued the following statement today advocating against acts of hatred and racism directed at specific Canadians in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Paris:

“Following the terrorist attacks in Paris, I have noted with deep regret a number of highly disturbing acts aimed at certain Canadians, including the fire at the mosque in Peterborough, the smashing of windows at a Hindu temple in Kitchener, and the attack on a Muslim woman in Toronto.

“Diversity is Canada’s strength. These vicious and senseless acts of intolerance have no place in our country and run absolutely contrary to Canadian values of pluralism and acceptance.

“The Government of Canada strongly condemns such actions and, along with law enforcement agencies, will protect the rights of innocent Canadians being subjected to such abuse.

“Canadians understand that religious groups around the world suffer persecution regularly at the hands of violent extremists. Our focus must be on stopping the people responsible for the terror, and continuing to fight hate by embracing Canadian values.”



from Losing True North: Justin Trudeau’s Assault on Canadian Citizenship [2016] by Candice Malcolm; Pages 50-6:

Consider one case where officials put Canadian security ahead of compassion for a refugee applicant with terrorist associations. The case involved a gay Palestinian Christian convert who fled the West Bank to come to Canada as a teenager. Canadian officials deemed that he was inadmissible because he had been trained as a child to become an agent in the terrorist group Hamas.

The boy’s family was Hamas royalty; his grandfather helped found the group and his uncles were all active terrorists in Israel.

Despite his grooming, however, the boy rejected his family’s wishes, ran away from home and eventually moved to Canada where he asked for asylum. But Canada’s immigration officials said no. They rejected his refugee application and tried to deport this young man because of his prior training, terrorist affiliations and inconsistencies in his story over the years. They put Canada’s national security ahead of everything else.

I believed the young man should be permitted asylum. When CNN reported the story, it contacted his radical Palestinian parents, who threatened to kill their son if he ever returned. Canada has a policy that it does not deport someone to an unsafe place where their life would be threatened, and thus, after a long ordeal, the young man was permitted to stay in Canada.


SELECTION AND INTEGRATION

Our security officials do the best work they can under the circumstances, but they are limited in their capacity. Aside from the risk that Daesh terrorists will thwart our immigration system, infiltrate Canada and carry out a deadly attack, there is an equally menacing threat that comes alongside mass migration from Syria and the Middle East.

Just as some migrants may try to bring their war with them, others carry tribal feuds, ancient hatreds and deep illiberalism to their new home.

This is an ever-present but rarely mentioned threat that comes from resettling populations from regions prone to conflict and war. The risk of Canada’s refugee resettlement program may persist long after the crisis in Syria fades away.

In just 14 months, Canada will have resettled up to 50,000 Syrian refugees. To use the Lebanese cabinet minister’s math, if two per cent of these refugees are Daesh agents, that could mean that 1,000 terrorists will have managed to sneak into Canada. But to use the British public opinion data from the summer of 2015, if 20 per cent of Syria’s population supports Daesh, that also means that 10,000 of the 50,000 refugees may be radicalized or possess a hateful and intolerant worldview.

A good migration policy has two fundamental pillars: first, you select the best people for resettlement. Then, you properly welcome and integrate these people into your society.

Both components are equally important—selection and integration. So far, Trudeau is getting them both wrong.

When it comes to selection, even if Canada’s immigration and security officials could guarantee with certainty that no terrorist will enter Canada disguised as a Syrian refugee, they can’t guarantee the refugees do not possess an illiberal and hateful worldview.

Our immigration officials interview potential refugees—through a translator—but they do not ask questions about a person’s ideology or worldview. A few basic questions about living in a western pluralist society would go a long way toward stopping a potential tide of intolerance from flowing into Canada.

Here are five basic questions that should be asked of all newcomers, before they are accepted and admitted into Canada:

1. Do you think men and women should have equal rights?
2. Do you believe in religious freedom for everyone?
3. Gay marriage is legal in Canada. Are you okay with that?
4. Your neighbour may be African or Chinese. Are you okay with that? Your child may go to school, sit together and play with a Jewish child. Are you okay with that?
5. Will you uphold Canada’s laws and respect Canadian values?

Sure, a newcomer may lie about their beliefs in order to gain entry into Canada, but at least they will know what to expect when they arrive here.

Canadian pluralism should be presented to newcomers before they are invited to migrate here. If newcomers cannot or will not accept our values, they should not be allowed to board their flight to Pearson International.

Canadians are fortunate that, as a society, we have developed a peaceful and pluralistic culture. We have, by and large, pushed bigotry and hatred into the dark, marginal caves and recesses of our society where few dare to venture. It would be a great shame to start importing these views via mass migration.

The Nobel laureate Milton Friedman taught that open border policies are incompatible with the welfare state. If a nation offers a rich smorgasbord of government handouts to all citizens, and also allows open borders, people from all over the world will arrive to take advantage without contributing to the host society, its economy or its public finances.

To combat the free-rider problem, a welfare-state society would soon be forced to draw borders around its benefits and handouts, and create distinctions and various classes of citizenship—which is precisely what Liberal politicians like Justin Trudeau claim to stand against.

But this is what we see in Europe, where open-border policies have led to several generations of migrants living in Switzerland, Sweden and Germany, without ever receiving citizenship. Second-class citizenship for immigrants in these nations is a fact of life.

We are only as strong as our population is educated. If we throw open our doors to hateful and intolerant people, in a generation or two, Canada will regress into a backward country.

A transformed populace could vote away our freedoms and elect tyrants like those who rule the lands these refugees have fled. If we import the bitter attitudes and tribal feuds that led to civil war in Syria, we may well eventually import their war as well.

That is why we must select peace-loving people who want to leave war behind. People who embrace Canada’s culture and values.

This doesn’t mean we should exclude Muslims. It does, however, mean that we must exclude some Muslims.









https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trud...ship-1.1535116

LII V.jpg

Justin Trudeau.jpg

Justin Trudeau basic-bro-trudeau.jpg

[WVBRY]

Maybe IEE

[VenusRose]

ESE?

Based off of very superficial impressions, he gives off that Si 'caregiver' vibes (it's possible I could be confusing this with Fe though, my second thought for his type would be Beta NF). Energy also seems calm and collected instead of Se which tends to spill forth and push through in the environment. Fe because the charisma he has seems quite Fe to me, as opposed to Te, which would simply be more straightforward.

[waddup]

ESE?

Based off of very superficial impressions, he gives off that Si 'caregiver' vibes (it's possible I could be confusing this with Fe though, my second thought for his type would be Beta NF). Energy also seems clam and collected instead of Se which tends to spill forth and push through in the environment. Fe because the charisma he has seems quite Fe to me, as opposed to Te, which would simply be more straightforward.

I’ve come to the same conclusion.

His consistent push for diversity and inclusion also seems philosophicaly a democratic quadra habit. *We are stronger the more diverse we become. * *Everyone should be given fair and equal opportunities * *Be kind to each other and respect differences*

He comes across as diplomatic, non-committal to any one value besides fairness, never answers with a straight non-scripted answer (kind of a ‘ah shucks’ responses), something Ive observed many times over with ESEs. Strong control of Fe.

Any thoughts on his wife?

[Starvish]

Don't know shit about VI but his face reminds me of this girl I know and I'm pretty sure she's SEE.

[Marep]

EIE-Fe

[khcs]

Justin Trudeau - ESFJ - Hugo

[mightylizard]

I like him well enough. He seems like a nice guy, but I cannot help shake the impression that he is very naive in some way. Either ESFp or ESFj, but I am not sure which. ESFj makes more sense at first glance, because he doesn't have an Se edge, but that could just be the product of being brought up in the midst of politics.

[kingslayer]

Justin Trudeau - ESFJ - Hugo

I think ESE as well

[sbbds]

He’s EIE af. Not 4D Se. He has a derpy NF presence, and is ungrounded from reality. Wears retarded socks.

[kingslayer]

He’s EIE af. Not 4D Se. He has a derpy NF presence, and is ungrounded from reality. Wears retarded socks.

Maybe.. Fe base is dam sure

[khcs]

... Wears retarded socks.

You are impressed again baby bear with flower.

[sbbds]

Maybe.. Fe base is dam sure

I say this as a Canadian who’s watched several of his interviews and follows his behaviors lol. One of my best friends selfied with him in irl too.

[sbbds]

You are impressed again baby bear with flower.

Yeah I am quite unimpressed by some aspects of him, but he’s really not bad at all compared to the majority of the leaders. Google “Trudeau visits India” or “Trudeau blackface” lol, what a disaster.

[khcs]

Yeah I am quite unimpressed by some aspects of him, but he’s really not bad at all compared to the majority of the leaders.

The enthusiasts believe that every story has a happy end. Disappointment is guaranteed of course.

[sbbds]

The enthusiasts believe that every story has a happy end. Disappointment is guaranteed of course.

You’re the deepest starfish in the whole ocean.

[khcs]

You’re the deepest starfish in the whole ocean.

You have the luckiest flower from the meadows.

[Marep]

EIE

[Beautiful sky]

ESTP

[MissDucki]

ELECTION TIMEEEEEEEEEE! It’s getting fun over hereeeew! We shall see if he will continue to be Prime minister in the next coming weeks

He is a Fe Dom for sure. I was watching him as a teenager a little while ago and damn. He has that Fe manipulation on point *chef kiss* Jk. He was actually really genuine in the video I watched and I was actually kind of touched by it. He really doesn’t seem to be very Se like a ESE after learning more about the other 4D functions. I thought ESE possibly before but I can’t now. I see that Ni feel with him and not Si.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I thought EIE at first. I think Exxj temperment...

His nose is very sexy. As well as his eyes/eyebrows. His chin is on the average side and could be Chadlier. His bottom lip is also much thicker than his upper lip and it's a little distracting. Still a handsome guy though- I'm just being nitpicky. With better more proportional lips and a slightly better chin- he'd be even more handsome.

[roger557]

Seems delta (same as canada). LSE-Si ?