Make a Member 
Donation Pledge Online

Headline News

Archive for the ‘Canadian politics’ tag

True Tories reject Harper’s Healthcare Privatization agenda

leave a comment

Special to The Canadian

VAUGHAN  -  Progressive Canadian candidate in the Vaughan federal by-election, the Rev. Dorian Baxter, president of the Progressive Canadian Party, stated his belief, Sunday and again today, that “Canadians want an honest commitment to Medicare, not to be told they need to have an ‘adult conversation’.”

Progressive Canadians fully support the Canada Health Act and its principles of single-payer publicly funded and administered, comprehensive health care that is available to all Canadians equally wherever they live in Canada, in all of Canada. Stephen Harper’s party does not, calling instead, condescendingly, for an “adult conversation” on health care. 

Progressive Canadians make an honest commitment to maintaining and sustaining the principles of the Canada Health Act, Medicare, and public health care as a key part of Canada’s economic strategy, the Canadian advantage.

“We have a duty to all Canadians – it’s the right thing to do – and for those whose concern is mainly about cost, our public health care system is a very attractive reason for investing in Canada.”

Rev. Baxter remarked that as Progressive Conservatives, Progressive Canadians called for “long-term, stable, predictable funding” in order to allow the provinces, as administrators of health care delivery and publicly funded health care, to plan rationally; fund health care research and development of health care information technologies while working with the provinces; address the need for better access to health care in rural Canada; and plan for future homecare and pharmaceutical needs.

Progressive Canadians continue this path and add to it recognition of the need to address issues which were not apparent when the Canada Health Act was written, for example and particularly the need of families confronted by a seeming epidemic of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) now affecting 1 in 110 Canadian children.

As a first step, Progressive Canadians promise an honest commitment to the Canada Health Act and medicare; Progressive Canadians are committed to ensuring sustain- ability of the Canadian Health Care system and protest those who speak condescendingly of a neoconservative “adult conversation.”

“Progressive Canadians, are true Canadian Tories. We continue to champion the national vision of Sir John A. Macdonald who first used the words “progressive Conservative” to describe the Tory party,” Baxter said. “We are dismayed that the Harper party has abandoned the progressive balance of fiscal and social responsibility which Canadians look for in Tory politics.”

Written by admin

November 26th, 2010 at 4:23 am

Harper and Obama collude on North American Healthcare harmonization agenda

leave a comment

Conservatives who are in the majority in the Senate are seeking to push though legislation that would destroy the independence of the Canadian public healthcare system, as well as health and social policy in Canada. 

The name of this privatization bill is C-36, and is linked to the so-called “North American Union” agenda which is being pursued by the Harper government in Canada, and the U.S. President Barack Obama administration:

Special to The Canadian

I want to take this opportunity to introduce myself as one of the hundreds of thousands of investors/voters concerned about my health care choices in Canada. There can only be two types of government in Canada, one where the government owns the people or one where the people own the government. I view myself as a principal investor/voting shareholder in my Canada. I need your immediate assistance, as my government representative, to improve my rights of informed freedom of choice to better access all of the information pertaining to the risk/benefits of the two major health care fields in Canada in order to permit me to make the best decision for my family.

            I strongly support the concept of improved consumer safety, but do not support the past legislative proposals contained in Bills C-51, C-52 and C-6 or the newly introduced on June 9, 2010 Bill C-36 [See Exhibit 60]. Our Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom [see] and Trueman Tuck are my authorized face and voice of freedom in Ottawa on these matters and have been since our massive Health Freedom uprisings in the mid 1990’s. [See Exhibits 1, 2 & 3]

I have had enough of BIG PHARMA and their financial allies attempting to monopolize and control the practice of medicine and the information and supply of products and services to the detriment of my good health and well-being. The allopathic/Big Pharma cartel has been engaged in these practices for centuries [See Exhibit 4].

It is my right to have access to all viable potential options and evidence based truth about the risks and benefits of each of the choices available to me and those I care about. I cannot have “Informed Freedom of Choice” without your immediate assistance to stop Health Canada and CFIA bureaucrats from their current campaign to restrict, censor and keep “Traditional Holistic Health Care options” off the Canadian market while totally failing to protect my good health and well-being from toxic synthetic chemicals and ALLOPATHIC/BIG PHARMA/BIG FOOD/BIG CHEMICAL/BIG OIL business activities.

On June 26, 1997 our Canadian Health Freedom movement filed a historic lawsuit that stopped Health Canada’s determined efforts to change classifying bottled carrot juice, powdered barley greens, vitamins D and C, calcium, magnesium, etc. to the new drugs/drug subclass “Natural Health Products”. [See Exhibits 2 & 3]

We defeated this effort, as did our Health Freedom movement colleagues in the U.S. [See Exhibit 5] in 1994. One would think that given the importance of equivalency between the two countries that “Dietary Food Supplements” as defined in the U.S. DSHEA 1994 should have resolved these issues pushed for by Health Canada.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Health Canada/CFIA bureaucracies have been under attack for serving big business interests at the disadvantage of the rights, freedoms, liberties and good health of American and Canadian voters both in the media and in the courts [See Exhibits 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 & 13].

            As many of you are aware, Trueman Tuck has been a passionate and persistent ‘Voice and Face of Freedom’ on Parliament Hill since 1995 on behalf of our Canadian Health Freedom movement. Trueman encourages all Canadian voters who share the same passions and beliefs to make the mandates of the CCHF and our Health Freedom movement clearly heard in the halls of power in Ottawa and elsewhere. Trueman Tuck is authorized to meet with and speak with you, as my MP, on my behalf concerning our out-of- control federal bureaucrats within Health Canada, the CFIA, the CBC, the CBSA and the CRA.

             It is also important that you understand that contrary to ongoing suggestions from Big Pharma and their related investments, THHC products and services are safe with de minimis risk factors and are essential to my family’s good health and well being [See Exhibits 14, 15, 16, 17, & 18].

I need you to encourage your colleagues to convene immediate hearings before the Standing Committee on Health and include the following agenda items:

  1. Investigations into allegations of misconduct by Health Canada, CFIA, CBSA, CBC, CRA, by its regulatory officials and staff towards our Health Freedom movements over the last 15 years.
  1. Review and update the Hazardous Products Act.
  1. The implementation of the 1998 Standing Committee on Health Report and Health Canada’s handling of the aforementioned health regulations, which include but are not limited to:
  1. Restrictions of consumer and practitioner access to THHC products and services;
  2. Restrictions and reductions of new and innovative THHC product development;
  3. Unlawful creation of technical barriers to trade;
  4. Increased creation of THHC product hazards to Canadian good health and well being;
  5. Interference of integrative medical options and medicines differing from allopathic approaches.
  1. Investigation into the continuation of the drug subclass Natural Health Product Regulations and the pending revival of Bill C-6 without governmental due diligence of proper, investigative and equal witness appearances of both the THHC and allopathic industries by the Joint Committee on the Scrutiny of Regulations [See Exhibits 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 & 24].
  1. An explanation as to why, when section 23 seizure powers without a warrant, were struck down as unconstitutional in 1987, [See Exhibit 25] Bills C-51, C-52 and C-6 would attempt to create new legislation with this court determined unconstitutional provision.
  1. In light of this court ruling pertaining to section 23 of the FDA and the tremendous support that Dr. James Lunney’s and Colin Carrie’s Private Member’s Bill C-420 received, why have there been no effort to update the 1920, 1927 and 1934 use-based definitions and censorship provisions of the FDA [See Exhibits 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 & 37].
  1. Investigation into the governmental obligations toward federal offenses. Under the heads of power jurisdiction, the federal government administration corporations can create criminal offenses with both criminal and financial sanctions [See Exhibit 38]. Civil offenses and related legal procedures are under the exclusive provincial jurisdiction [See Exhibits 39 & 40].

          The Peoples of Canada need all MPs and senators to clearly recognize that the federal government is a simple administrative Crown Corporation created with very limited powers by the British North America Act, 1867 [See Exhibit 39] and to acknowledge that there is no “Sovereign Supremacy” in the two federal corporate advisory bodies – the House of Commons and Senate.

          The House of Commons and Senate in Canada, prior to the Second World War, fully respected that there was a division of powers between the “Provincial Nations” that compose the confederation of the Dominion of Canada.

          It is clear with Bills C-51, C-52 C-6 and the new introduction on June 9, 2010 of Bill C-36 [See Exhibit 60] that, over the last 25 years or more, most MPs and senators have lost sight of the important fact that in Canada, sovereignty is only vested in the individual Canadian citizen in each of the provinces, and that in most local matters including food, health, property and civil rights and civil law, the provinces are superior in jurisdiction to the massive maze of sole and aggregate corporations that now make up the Canadian federal administrative government [See Exhibit 41 & 42].

There is also a federal government problem with run away federal regulations and I need you to encourage your party to put aside partisan party bickering and to immediately schedule an investigation before the Joint Committee on the Scrutiny of Regulations pertaining to the three health regulations, including but not limited to: (1) Schedule F; (2) Drug Identification Numbers (DIN); and (3) Natural Health Products Regulations (NHPR) [See Exhibits 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 & 25].

As was not the case with Bill C-6, I need you to ensure that equal, full and proper witness appearances are scheduled for the experienced Health Freedom Movement leaders/spokespersons who represent our interests in the THHC field and our ongoing ‘Our healthy medicinal foods are not drugs’ freedom campaign since 1995 [See Exhibits 62 & 63].


         Due to the direct result of Health Freedom movements in Canada pertaining to Bills C-420 [See Exhibit 43], C-51, C-52 and C-6, as well as, the issues pertaining to the NHPR, Schedule F and DIN regulations, Health Canada has been clearly identified as a major health hazard to all Canadians and is systemically getting worse.

             The Canadian government, as our political representatives, need to be focused on nurturing, supporting and protecting the rights of all Canadians and their businesses. Health Canada has been allowed to self-govern with the aid of the Food & Drugs Act and the NHPR. There has been no control, management or focus on their bureaucracy that is there to allegedly protect the good health and well being of all Canadians. Instead, the bureaucracy within Health Canada has been evidenced to show massive bias and prejudice towards the THHC industry relating to its professionals, products, devices and treatments.

             If Parliament had protected our rights found within the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and upheld the limiting powers of the federal and provincial governments found within the Constitution Act, Bill C-6 would not have seen the light of day. A detailed legal and constitutional analysis listing the numerous flaws of Bill C-6 was developed by the Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom (CCHF) to stop this bill from implementation in December 2009 [See Exhibit 44].

             Surprisingly, most MPs had not even read through its entirety before its passing. Bill C-6 was clearly unconstitutional and should never have been passed through Parliament in June 2009. Some constitutional statements include:

    1. Shawn Buckley, a constitutional lawyer in the private sector. Previously, he was a prosecutor for Health Canada. He testified that this bill violated at least eight of our constitutional rights. Instead of his testimony being before the Social Affairs/Science/Technology Committees, it should have been before a Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. [25-11-09]


    1. Senator Joseph Day, a lawyer, proposed a number of amendments limiting Health Canada’s ability to abuse the sweeping powers being granted under Bill C-6 to the Social Affairs Committee. [2-12-09] He stated: “There are sections of this legislation that will not stand up to scrutiny or to court challenge…I found the misrepresentations that were made by the Minister in relation to the amendments to be very disappointing…this legislation is an unnecessary overreach and will cause problems in the future.” These amendments were defeated by the senate by a 44 to 42 vote, with two abstentions and 14 senators absent. [10-12-09]


    1. Senator Elaine McCoy, a lawyer, stated: “At the heart of the amendments was a sincere attempt to balance the power of the state against the rights of citizens, whether they be innocent consumers or innocent entrepreneurs…several of the senators appeared not to have the benefit of intimate familiarity with legal principles of natural justice and other traditional aspects of the common law…What is at stake here is how far the state [read civil servants] should be empowered to impose their will upon citizens.” She further stated: “This legislation does not need to break a tradition that we have had in this country, which is to protect the civil liberties of people the civil liberties of people while we are enforcing the law. When Senator Baker read out the opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada that talked about why we have these protections in our law, it was essentially to show that we not end up in a police state…There will be court challenges on this legislation.”


    1. Senator Celine Hervieux-Payette, a lawyer, stated: “This bill establishes a precedent that has not even been seen by criminals…Once inspectors are given permission to enter a house, they can search the entire house. This is something that we see in political systems other than democracies. We do not do this in democracies.”


    1. Senator George Furey, a lawyer, stated: “As Bill C-6 now stands, consumer safety inspectors enter our homes and seize our property, such as computers and documents, without any judicial supervision…The inspector has to show nothing more than a desire to check compliance or non-compliance with the act. This is not how our law has developed. We would essentially have no freedom and no privacy if that was the state of our law. We would be living in a police state.”


    1. Senator Tommy Banks, a lawyer, stated: “Some of the intrusive powers contained in this act will end up in court, and the court will strike them down because they will be ultra vires…This act does not say that you have been convicted of anything or found to have committed a violation. It says a person named in a notice of violation has no defence by reason of due diligence or by reason of having believed that they were acting with the colour of right…It is undoing 400 years of common law.”


    1. Senator George Baker stated: “This bill actually says one has no privacy rights…An inspector who is carrying out their functions or any person accompanying them may enter on or pass through or over private property…there is no expectation of privacy more reasonable and more demanding of constitutional protection than our right to expect that we will be let alone in the privacy of our homes during the night.”


    1. Senator Sharon Carstairs stated: “Each individual Canadian has a right to privacy. They have a right to the protection of their own home. They have a right to live in peace.”


    1. Senator Romeo Dallaire stated: “No one has the right to infringe on human rights…As legislators; our primary responsibility is to ensure that this legislation corresponds to the rule of law and that people are protected to the full extent of our intellectual, physical and human capacities.”


            As lay rights advocates, the CCHF should not have needed to develop a detailed legal and constitutional analysis of the multiple flaws within the proposed legislature of Bill C-6. The CCHF, along with hundreds of thousands of voters, had to fight very hard from July to December 2009 to stop the implementation of Bill C-6.

          The press coverage was quite revealing as were the witness selections [See Exhibits 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 & 51].

         We need to develop and implement an innovative and improved solution on a non-partisan basis for better legislation, regulations and programs for the good health and well being of myself and all Canadians. Some of these solutions include the following proposals:

  1. Our political representatives becoming intimately informed and more active in the defense of our rights of informed freedom of choice in health care, personally and professionally.
  1. Party loyalties in the Parliament and Senate cannot interfere with a full and proper debate and/or analysis of legislation or regulations which enter the House of Commons and the Senate. There can be no fear of our political representatives breaking ranks for the betterment of their constituents.
  1. The government needs to be proactive when ensuring product safety for Canadians without disrespecting their constituents’ freedom of choice and legal rights.
  1. Witness appearances before the Joint Committee on the Scrutiny of Regulations need to be equally from the THHC and the allopathic industries. There can be no steering of witnesses pre-selected to speak in favor of one viewpoint with a minority speaking against it.
  1. The government needs to move away from the idea that Health Canada ideas and radical changes are the only options available to keep Canada safe from hazardous products. Simpler ways to accomplish product safety can be found without disregarding our individual rights.
  1. Parliament needs to develop and implement a Human Health Safety Act that incorporates evidenced-based systems, including but not limited to: (1) National Poison Control Centers for toxin reporting; (2) Implementation of products generally regarded as safe (GRAS); and (3) Death Registry Act and the recommendations and the points covered above. [See Exhibit 52, 53, 54 55 & 56]
  1. Amending the Hazardous Products Act to include a toxicity rating system on all product and services. These include the following toxins/dangers levels: Schedule A: top 100 (maiming & killing); Schedule B: 101 to 500 (Level 9); and Schedule C: 501 to 1,000 (Level 8) [See Exhibit 14]. Toxic synthetic drugs need to be included in the Hazardous Products Act as well.


  1. Parliament needs to re-evaluate the division of powers between federal and provincial governments found within the Constitution Act and disallow legislation and regulations which combine criminal and administrative elements in the same legislation.
  1. Removal of all criminal offenses for individual Acts and incorporate them into a consolidated Criminal Code of Canada. Fair, objective and timely criminal offenses need to be developed and investigative measures implemented when adulteration, fraud and/or hazardous products are being distributed.
  1. Implementation of Bill C-420 needs to be incorporated into the Food & Drugs Act [See Exhibit 43]. In fact, the original Food & Drugs Act was the Adulteration & Fraud Act [See Exhibits 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 & 37].
  1. Health Canada and CFIA must not be allowed to be the policy maker, investigator, judge and enforcer of the Food & Drugs Act, its regulations and the NHPR. The Act needs to be split. A newly created Synthetic Drug Oversight Agency needs to be implemented which removes empowerment from Health Canada. A secondary Food Oversight Agency needs to be implemented which removes empowerment from the CFIA.
  1. By empowering the Synthetic Drug Oversight Agency and the Food Oversight Agency, along with the essences of the U.S. Dietary Supplemental Health Education Act and Bill C-420, it ensures criminal activities, such as adulteration, fraud and selling of hazardous products does not occur in Canada.

          The THHC industry is the dominant primary health care approach globally for a majority of the world’s population. Unfortunately, in Canada, the vast majority of MPs and senators are unable or unsure of how to effectively help constituents defend their rights to the free flow of THHC products and services for its citizens.

         I would like you to meet with Trueman Tuck and give him the opportunity to provide you with our Health Freedom Movements’ evidenced-based examples of bureaucratic tyranny occurring within the aforementioned federal regulatory bodies. Your active intervention is required to correct the issues pertaining to the THHC industry that I depend upon for my good health and well-being and to safeguard my personal rights of informed freedom of choice in health care.

        Also Trueman Tuck has our grassroots created Consumer Health Safety Act that I would like to see implemented in my Canada. Now that Bill C-51, C-52, C-6 has reappeared on Wednesday June 9th as Bill C-36 [See Exhibit 60] we have a unique opportunity to prior to the second reading amend significantly Bill C-36 to protect both my good health and my well-being and my inalienable Written and Unwritten Constitutional rights [See Exhibit 61]

       Please see our spring edition of Health Freedom Update newspaper which is attached. A hard copy will be sent to you [See Exhibit 57], as well as the May edition of the Vitality magazine [See Exhibit 58] and our Friends of Freedom International recent Codex Update [See Exhibit 59].

       I need your written response to this letter. Thank you for your anticipated co-operation in doing the right thing for the majority of your constituents.

 internet site reference:  LINK

Check out:

Free online dating:

Healthcare Privatization: Harper government pursues C-36 backdoor legislation

one comment

by Dr. John Singh

The Harper government is seeking to pursue the privatization not only of Canada’s public healthcare system, but also all matters associated with health, public health, and social policy in Canada.  This agenda was renamed “Bill C-36 respecting the Safety of Consumer Products”.  Sounds benign/friendly doesn’t it? 

We all would like our ‘consumer products’ to be safe.  But, the name of this Bill is an entire apparent public relation deception to pull the woll over the eyes of most Canadians.  The former U.S. George W. Bush administration had perfected this technique with its “no child left behind” policy which worsened child poverty in the U.S. 

Its more accurate name should be “Bill 36 respective the Privatization of the Public Healthcare System, Health, and Social Policy in Canada”.

Herein’s the insightful comments of one blogger:


1. C-36’s “subject to the dictates of foreign authorities” (read, “our international [contractual] obligations”) clauses open the door for ANY of our trade groups to force changes in our health care laws.  These include the WTO/WHO, NAFTA, and most injuriously, CETA, which is currently being negotiated.

2. CETA is the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union.  Note: ECONOMIC AND TRADE.  That means that anything economic, including making US responsible for the debts of others as they have done with the Greek bailout, to match the policies of the EU…. AND, including adopting THEIR FOOD STANDARDS FOR THE SAKE OF “FREE TRADE”. 

3.  While many activists around the world have been focused on fighting off the dreaded “Codex Alimentarius” global standards for food (which would seriously destroy our ability overall to produce healthy and sufficient food, as well as to remediate with proper nutritional supplementation, to the favor of pharmaceutical globocorps, and the Monsantos of this world) the European Union has almost identical standards enforced already.  We call their rulebook ”Codex’s Evil Twin”, and it has been in place for years.  CETA is capable of forcing harmonization with the EU guidelines, long before Codex Alimentarius comes into effect.


5. In essence, what we are seeing is THE END OF DEMOCRACY IN CANADA AND AROUND THE WORLD.  Since democracy is defined as rule by majority concensus, and your vote cannot be counted by a foreign committee, and since international obligations trump domestic law, and Canada has only one vote at these tables versus many others, NO MATTER WHAT CANADIANS WANT, IT CAN BE OVERTURNED BY SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE AT THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL.

6.  Quoth Stephen Harper at the closing press conference of the G20 meeting, when asked about what sort of effects these agreements might have on how Canada governs its economy: ” I know some people don’t like it, and it is a loss of sovereignty [emphasis his], but it’s a fact of life.

7.  Quoth Stephen Harper above the Arctic Circle on August 26th, after whizzing across the tundra on an ATV, and being asked whether or not he was licensed to drive one: “I think I make the rules.”

internet site reference:  LINK

Check out:

Free online dating:

Written by admin

November 25th, 2010 at 9:27 pm

Canada’s new federal political party promises to eradicate homelessness

leave a comment

Special to The Canadian

The newly established Cosmopolitan-Nationalist Progressive Common Front Party of Canada (CNCF) recognizes that Canadians would achieve significant savings by eradicating homelessness within an expedited time frame of two years.

“The corporate elite apparent opposition to such a plan is not because of a financial cost issue.  It isapprently  because underfed and disensfranchised people can be more easily exploited than educated and housed communities,” says Peter Tremblay. 

“It is this same kind of thinking which inspires these corporations to set up in various disenfranchised parts of the Third World, where they can exploit the masses in support of their insatiable pursuit of commercial profits,” says a CNCF conference communiqué.

In 2001, the BC Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women’s Services published a study examining the causes and effects of homelessness in BC. It’s one of the few studies that attempts to put a dollar figure on what it costs taxpayers to support the homeless population. It found the following:


It cost the BC government 33% more to provide health care, criminal justice and social services to a homeless person than to a socially housed unemployed individual ($24,000 a year, compared to $18,000 a year).


  • The combined service and shelter costs of the homeless people ranged from $30,000 to $40,000 on average per person for one year (including the cost of staying in a homeless shelter). In contrast, the combined costs of service and housing for housed individuals ranged from $22,000 to $28,000 per person per year, assuming they stayed in supportive housing.

  • For homeless individuals, the major category of cost that they entail is in the criminal justice system, and averaged $11,410 a year. The average taxpayer spends $362 a year to maintain the Canadian justice system.

  • The cost for providing social services for a homeless person was $7,893 a year. On average, Canadian taxpayers spent $179 a year on social services.

  • The health care costs of homeless person averaged $4,714 a year. An average Canadian citizen uses $2,633 per year in publicly financed health care services.
  • .
    It costs $60-80 to house someone in an emergency shelter and less than $35 in supportive housing.

    It costs more to house homeless people: When it came to housing, Canadians spend an average of $11,200 a year on their own shelter. In contrast, housing the homeless is calculated on a per diem basis (The BC study showed shelter costs ranged from $6,000 to $16,000 a year). For example, it costs:


  • Per night in a provincial correctional facility – $155-$250

  • Psychiatric hospital – $380 average

  • Emergency homeless shelter, which included meals and services – $60-$85

  • Detox centers $80-$185

  • Mental health residential facilities – $140-$191 In contrast, supportive housing is cheaper:

  • Enhanced self-contained apartment with support on site – $67-$88

  • Self-contained apartment – mini-suite/bachelor – $14-$20

  • Self-contained apartment – no support – $25-$35 It has been estimated that to virtually eradicate homelessness, it would cost all levels of government in Canada $3.5 billion to achieve this, which would go to pay for affordable housing, income support (like welfare) and some support services. 
  • .
  • Read more about the CNCF:

  • .
    Values and Principles of the Cosmopolitan Party of Canada
    Acquire this book.
    Acquire Now!

    The Statement of Values and Principles of the Cosmopolitan Party of Canada

    The Cosmopolitan Party of Canada is Canada’s most articulate human rights, social justice, environmental protection, universal public healthcare, and Canadian sovereignty oriented political party.

    The cited book provides readers with an illimunating framework of a new political party. This contrasts with on-going corruption of the status quo of politcal parties under “market” capitalist and socialist-oriented systems.

  • Written by admin

    November 24th, 2010 at 5:19 pm

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Tagged with

    Canada’s Racist Indian Act must go says leadership of new federal political party

    leave a comment

    Edited by John Stokes

    The leadership of the newly established Cosmopolitan-Nationalist Progressive Common Front Party of Canada (CNCF) says the Indian Act must go.  Both CNCF and the Green Party endorse this position.

    “This is something the Green Party is willing to support,” said Lorraine Rekmans, Aboriginal Affairs Critic for the Green Party of Canada. “The National Chief has outlined a plan that calls on the full support of the Canadian Government. It is inclusive of First Nations citizens directly and it will lead us to much needed change constitutionally and institutionally,” said Rekmans.

    “We can all agree that the Indian Act is an outdated instrument of oppression, control, paternalism and is long past its due date. The imposition of a colonial regime on First Nations has had drastic results including poverty and rampant suicide. It is a shameful instrument and we must eliminate it without delay,” said Rekmans.

    However, CNCF members uniquely endorse the position that aboriginal peoples should themselves decide through a Constitutional convention a self-governing structure within Canada that is then enacted as an official Constitutional Act.

    CNCF members also want all outstanding treaty obligations sorted out with the federal government within one year.  “There is no excuse for the continuation of either the Indian Act or for continiuing negligence on respective treaty rights” says Peter Tremblay.

    “If it was not for aboriginal  peoples, Canada would have been taken over by the United States in the War of 1812,”  Temblay elaborates.

    The former South African apartheid system was modelled on Canada’s Indian Act. 

    You can read more about that in the book entitled National Identity in Canada and Cosmopolitan Community, ISBN: 096819060X.

    National Identity in Canada and Cosmopolitan Community  
    Acquire this book.
    Acquire Now!

    National Identity in Canada and Cosmopolitan Community
    by Raymond Samuels II, ISBN: 0-9681906-0-X, 1997

    General description:
    “The question of national identity in Canada has been an enigma in the experience of Canadians. As a society, the country continues to be hindered by a historical context, evading exposure in the prevailing environment and eroding a vital identity. The term ‘national identity’ expresses a state of societal maturation that Canada appears to critically lack. National Identity in Canada and Cosmopolitan Community explores an ‘enforced state’ of societal immaturity that works against a milieu of national civic unity in Canada.”

    -As quoted from the the Chapters/Globe and Mail National Newspaper internet site.

    Written by admin

    November 24th, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    Harper government’s North American Union agenda traitorous says Progressive Nationalist Party conference


    Special to The Canadian

    The Harper government has pursuing a variety of parliamentary bills in collusion with opposition parties toward fulfilling North American Union agenda.   These include Bills C-36 and C-51 which have been deceptively named in order to cover-up their true agenda.  This technique was arguably perfected by the former U.S. George W. Bush administration.

    The membership of the Progressive Nationalist Party (PNP) voted to reject Harper’s North American Union (NAU).  Some leaders went further to call Ignatieff and Layton, and Bloc leaders traitors in Harper’s cabal to assimilate Canada into a U.S. political-military-industrial complex controlled “NAU”.

    Are you concerned about the NAU agenda? If not, you should be, unless you want to live under an envisioned anti-democratic continentalist Police State, controlled by a political-military-industrial complex. Rest assured, NAU is not an arrangement intended to be consistent with the human, and other rights of either Americans or Canadians. That’s apparently why NAU lobbyists have sought to cover-up this unfolding political arrangement between elites.

    Unfortunately, local and national media, under the common ownership of the very group of “Canadian” elites that has helped lobby for the sell-out of Canada, has sought to limit knowledge about the NAU.

    Nationalists across Canada, inspired by a progressive national vision, must seek to galvanize a nationally viable alternative to the apparent traitors of Canada’s major political parties.

    You think that it is not possible, eh. Typical Canadian naivety. Think again.

    Big Business interests have had enough of wasting money on trying to influence elections, as well as on dealing with labour laws, human rights legislation, environmental protection, public healthcare, and on other quality-of-living issues. After all, isn’t democracy “over-rated”?  Wouldn’t society be better if a Council of the most successful corporate entrepreneurs, and other elites controlled how matters evolve in a “survival of the fittest” oriented “North America”?  This re-born North American inhabitant would be controlled by fear, that developed under a never-ending “terrorist” threat, requiring a perpetuated state of war.

    Neither Canada’s elected Members of Parliament nor unelected Senators who are mandated to specifically protect Canada’s Parliamentary traditions, have sought to speak out against the continued efforts by an elite clique to assimilate Canada into a “New American Union”. It is apparent that Canada’s Parliament is comprised of traitors, without any integrity, commitment to upholding their Parliamentary Oaths as loyal representatives of the diverse people of Canada. or substantive love for Canada. Apparently gone are the days of passionate champions of Canada like Sir John A. Macdonald, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Tommy Douglas and Pierre Elliot Trudeau.

    Deep integration between Canada and the United States is not a theory or a fear – it is a reality. For several years now, government task forces and working groups have been quietly harmonizing Canada-U.S. programs and procedures, without any input from the Canadian public.

    The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), agreed to by the leaders of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico in 2005, is moving Canada quickly toward a continental resource pact, a North American security perimeter, and harmonized military and security policies. Working groups composed of bureaucrats and corporate leaders are quietly putting this “partnership” into action, and to date only industry “stakeholders” have been consulted. SPP is designed to create the New American Union often dubbed the so-called “North American Union” (NAU).

    If you don’t believe that a so-called NAU agenda exists, trying calling your local Member of Parliament. You will like receive an upfront “no comment”, or if you leave a message, don’t expect your call to be returned on the subject. The NAU with little doubt, is the worst scandal in Canadian political history, covered-up, by the mass-media ownership, that is part of a treasonous cabal.

    Cosmopolitan-Nationalist Progressive Common Front (CNCF) website:

    Written by admin

    November 24th, 2010 at 8:05 am

    Canada must cancel NAFTA says Progressive Nationalist Party leader

    leave a comment

    Edited by John Stokes

    Organizers of the new Progressive Nationalist Party (PNP) say that it is vital for Canada to cancel the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). 

    “Canada already had de facto free trade with the United States before NAFTA.  This Agreement was only struck by political elites to sell out our national institutions and resources, ” says Peter Tremblay.

    Tremblay elaborates that, ” NAFTA is an attempt by elites to re-write the Canadian Constitution in the image of elites who would like to dismantle Canada’s one tier universal healthcare system and other Canadian social and cultural policies integral to our national identity.

    We need to shatter the glossed-over reality that our country is being sold out from under our feet. In the words of former Prime Minister Robert Borden, “I am beginning to feel more and more that in the end, and perhaps sooner than later, Canada must assume full sovereignty.

    NAFTA has further mutated into the North Amercian Union agenda which is being executed by neo-fascistic elites.

    PNP says that a vote for their candidates is a vote to cancel NAFTA and to re-affirm Canadian sovereignty.

    Read more about their policies on  




    Traitors among Us is a book for further reading on this subject. Minimum Member Pledge of $60.00 required to get this book as a thank you gift.





     Acquire Now

    Written by admin

    November 23rd, 2010 at 3:42 am

    Investment: U.S. takeovers undermine Canadian culture and rights

    leave a comment

    by Dr. David Stein

    Economists that are featured on national television news, love to portray U.S. take-overs of Canadian enterprises as inherently “beneficial”. But, beneficial to whom? The truth of the matter is that if you read the fine print under the names of these so-called ‘economists’, one might notice one particular thing. These “economists” tend to be employed by Canada’s chartered banks.

    These are the very banks which are financing the short-sighted U.S. corporate take over of Canada. These so-called “economists” are simply acting as appointed public relations spokespersons for the finance profit streams which the chartered banks expect to gain from the takeover of Canada, by foreign elites.

     U.S. takeovers are not simply “balance sheet” issues

    U.S. corporate take-overs of Canadian enterprises are not simply “balance sheet” issues that are related primarily to so-called “investment” initiatives. U.S. corporate take-overs by and large undermine and also subvert Canadian culture and rights. This is exactly what workers in former Canadian industry giant Stelco are finding out.

    Stelco had been taken over by Pennsylvania-based U.S. Steel. This cultural subversion is also what other Canadians have been finding out, in other former Canadian enterprises, which include the venerated Tim Horton’s as documented by Maclean’s Magazine.

    Wal-Mart… a little piece of America in Canada
    Wal-Mart in Canada has also become the beacon of American anti-union and anti-labour values and practices in Canada.
    Canadian values and rights expressed in labour laws
    Canadian cultural values and rights in the workplace are expressed in our various provincial labour laws.  These labour laws are much stronger than their American counterparts. As a result, the typical American workplace is a much harsher environment than the typical Canadian workplace.
    America… a beacon of social Darwinism and capitalistocracy
    American cultural values are expressed in a comparable anti-union environment which reflect a “dog-eat-dog” environment, where workers are expendable and destructible fodder for the generation of corporate commercial profits; and where basic healthcare insurance for workers is treated as a luxury item, as compared to Canada.


    When we, as Canadians, allow Canadian enterprises to be systematically taken over, we are importing a managerial frame of mind that is substantively alien from the Canadian experience.

    Americans, work in a largely overworked nation where people have a lower life expectancy; arguably, as a result of having a lower quality-of-life.

    The screening and the prevention of U.S. take-overs, is not about being anti-American.

    Being pro-Canadian but not anti-American
    As a multi-cultural society, we appreciate the American people, and empathize with Americans who often work in hostile anti-labour environment, AND who are without basic healthcare insurance. We, as Canadians, simply, do not want to import their hostile and pernicious management culture into our society. Furthermore, as Canadians, we have a right to be “masters of our own house” who are not ruled by the business cultures that has been established by elites in foreign lands, and who view our society as a labour market that they can bribe our politicians to exploit, and to destroy.
    Québec’s example
    It was that type of appreciation which inspired francophone Quebecers to re-affirm the vitality of the French culture in Quebec. Without that appreciation, francophones in Quebec would become as assimilated as those francophones, who had settled in Louisiana during the New France’s regime.
    Former Stelco workers fight in affirmation of our Canadian identity
    Former Stelco workers, as a result of a U.S. corporate takeover, were assimilated into the American corporate values of its new foreign owners, and have been fighting to preserve their Canadian cultural values and rights. Their new U.S. employers view the Canadian cultural values of former Stelco workers as threatening to U.S. Steel’s predatory commercial profit-making practices.

    Harper government legitimates Canadian assimilation and control by corporate America
    When the Government of Canada approved the take-over deal, it legitimated and accommodated U.S. Steel’s American practices, into Canada.

    American corporate culture threatens Canada’s way of life

    Some say, Canadian corporations/American corporations… “same difference”. This is a grotesque over simplication of corporate takeover as a vital issue in Canada’s cultural survival as a sovereign nation.

    PHOTO:  “Tent City” area in Los Angeles
    Canadian enterprises reflect Canada’s vital socialization context
    What must be borne in mind is that Canadian enterprises have evolved to appreciate and to recognize Canadian labour codes as an axiomatic part of doing business in Canada. Furthermore, Canadian managers of these enterprises have often grown up in Canada, and have gone through the Canadian educational systems. In the process, these managers tend to share a love of Canada. The behaviours of managers in Canadian enterprises are therefore conditioned, in part, from their Canadian cultural experience, and that awareness of labour code areas.
    American management comes out of the American cultural experience
    Correspondingly, the American managers’ experience, is a product of the harshness of their “survival of the fittest society”. As a result, it is that mentality which is responsible for large U.S. corporations doing everything that they can to sabotage workers rights. Such bellicose action, includes sabotaging the ability of American workers, to access healthcare rights.
    The cultural consequences of U.S. take overs of Canadian enterprisers under the Harper government’s continentalist agenda
    The end-result of the continual unchecked process of U.S. and other foreign take-overs would inevitably lead to a Canada, that exists little more than, as at most, a geographic place on a map at the most, if at all.

    U.S. and other foreign elites, regard Canadian cultural values as expressed in Canadian labour codes, and in other areas (like our comprehensive and inclusive one-tier universal public healthcare system) as a “drag” on their “successful” greed-driven ethos.


    Arguably, therefore, anyone who declares that U.S. and other foreign corporate take-overs are inherently “beneficial” to Canada, is speaking either out of ignorance, or in behalf off the economic predatory elites who run the banks and the large foreign corporations.

    …The Premier of Saskatchewan leadership on protecting and defending Canadian potash resources
    The Premier of Saskatchewan appreciated the vital threat of foreign takeovers on Canadian sovereignty, when he championed the thwarting of a hostile take over bid by Australian transnational elites. Unfortunately, the many thousands of largely U.S. foreign corporate takeovers of Canadian enterprises have received no such a voice in Canadian government.
    NDP and Liberals along with the Bloc collude with the Harper government
    Federal political parties like the NDP and Liberals (which had once been very strong advocates of Canadian economic nationalism) have largely sold themselves out to the so-called “North American Free Trade Agreement” or NAFTA, and to the Security and Prosperity Partnership’s and to the “North American Union” agenda, which former Prime Minister Paul Martin signed with then President George W. Bush in 2005 (without any parliamentary debate or public hearings in Canada, as required by Canadian public law.)

    Abrogating NAFTA vital to defending Canadian democracy and sovereignty from neo-fascistic control by a clique of wealthy foreign elites
    Canadians who wish to protect what remains of Canadian culture and nationhood, must appreciate NAFTA’s pivotal role in legitimating the sale of Canada to foreign predatory interests. The abolishment of NAFTA is vital to any re-affirmation of our vital Canadian nationhood.

    NAFTA surrenders to backroom deals among elites and political interests our ability to be “masters of our own house” (who seek to commercially profit from the sell-out of Canada) and that is being done contrary to our cultural and democratic rights.

    … From Stelco, to Tim Horton’s and much more
    The U.S. and other foreign elites like those who took over Stelco, Inco, Tim Horton’s and thousands of other Canadian enterprises, were not seeking to “invest” in Canada. Rather, those elites were seeking to ‘exploit’ Canada for their own personal commercial gain, irrespective of social and economic costs in Canada. This emphasis is also notable in U.S. led corporate ventures in Canada which include the Alberta Tar Sands.
    How foreign elites seek to infiltrate Canadian governance
    Once foreign economic predators take over Canadian enterprises, they (elites through appointed local operatives who are given money to spend as “political donors”) then seek to use their new found economic clout within our society to buy out federal and other politicians (through campaign financing) to destroy labour and domestic laws which we as Canadians support to protect our quality-of-life. Such corporations have been practicing this form of ‘neo-colonialism’ for many years throughout the so-called Third World, where people have been enslaved to its respective agendas.

    Protecting Canada from American economic disparity, economic injustice and malaise

    The outcome of U.S. predatory economic practices in America, has been a culture of crime and social destitution in American cities.

    PHOTO: Bronx exemplies economic despair and social destitution in America’s innner cities as a result of American public policy decision-making to divert money into U.S. political-military-industrial complex oriented spending.

    Representative elites of the U.S. political-military-industrial complex, as it operates through NAFTA, have been upset that we, as Canadians, have been putting money into our public healthcare system and other social policies rather than on the kind of “investments” which directly support military and other such spending.

    … The U.S. political-military-industrial complex’s greed
    The Harper government in response to the increased pattern of U.S. economic control in Canada, has been pressurized to increase spending in support of the U.S. political-military-complex under the mantra of supporting the “War against Terrorism”. We as Canadians observe this effect of greater U.S. economic control. This includes less public expenditures into supporting vital community infrastructure in Canada, and more public expenditures being diverted into billion dollar Afghanistan War and in destined military-industrial infrastructures, to help perpetuate the “war economy”.
    The demonization of protectionism by greed-driven elites and their confederates who work in the mass media
    “Protectionism” has long been demonized by representatives of foreign Big Business interests. “Protectionists” seek to screen and defend national enterprises, from local businesses to crown/public corporations, from hostile foreign take-overs. But, who would not appreciate, for example, the right of family members to protect themselves from hostile foreign intruders and other such organized schemes?


    We, as Canadians, have a right to be ‘masters in our own house’ free of NAFTA as an attempt by transnational elites to destroy Canadian democracy.

    As Canadians who are members of a ‘nation’ that is a democratic community, don’t we have a right to elect to protect ourselves from those interests that seek to destroy or to subvert our community?

    ….Green Party and Canadian Action Party provide alternatives
    Elizabeth May’s Green Party and the Canadian Action Party are the only registered political parties in Canada which have sought to defend Canada in any systematized way, on the issue of Canadian sovereignty. Unfortunately, none of these political parties are represented in Canada’s Parliament, that now operates under a NAFTA/NAU oriented corporate dominion, that is resulting in Canada’s declining quality-of-living as confirmed in the United Nation’s Human Development Index.


    Recommended books:

    Quality of Living and Human Development, ISBN: 1897036353; Capitalism is Not Democracy, Part I, 1894934636.

    Capitalism is Not Democracy

    Acquire this book.

    Acquire Now!
    Quality-of-Living and Human Development  

    Acquire this book.

    Acquire Now!

    Quality-of-Living and Human Development as the Outcome from Economic Progress
    by Horace Carby-Samuels
    ISBN: 1897036353, 2006

    Capitalism is Not Democracy
    by Raymond Samuels II

    Part I: ISBN 1894934636 , 2005
    Part II: ISBN 1897036477, 2005
    Part III: ISBN 1897036906, 2005

    Book reveals Capitalism is about “capital” and not people.



    Written by admin

    November 22nd, 2010 at 10:14 am

    Canadian politics: Sovereignty and Food linked to each other

    leave a comment

    Where does your food come from? Do you know? Do you care? Should you?

    by Doris Foster 

    Today I heard that wheat prices have soared. Harvests in two of the world’s major production areas, Russia and the Canadian prairies, are seriously threatened this year. It is too wet on our prairies, and too hot and dry in Russia. For those depending on global suppliers, the prices and availability of other grains and related products may also be affected by these and other large scale agricultural disasters.

    What do you consider when you answer the daily question, “What am I going to eat?” We might base our choices on enjoyment, convenience, cost, quality, or nutritional value. For some, health or allergy concerns are limiting factors. But do any of us ask, “How is this meal going to enhance or limit the sovereignty of our nation?”

    National sovereignty and food sovereignty are closely related. Stephen Harper declared at the G20 in Toronto that there is no longer a Canadian economy. He sees us as merely one cog in the machine of the global economy. This will mean a loss of Canadian sovereignty, he admits, but “…it is a simple reality.” It is not a simple reality for me, and I don’t think it should be a simple reality for any Canadian. What can we do to change it?

    I think we can counter the desire by global corporations to dominate the world’s economy, and the governments and citizens of all nations, by developing and ensuring our own food sovereignty. Food is even more important than money, to protect our national sovereignty. Nothing can bring a nation to its knees quicker than starvation. The half dozen global mega corporations who control most of the world’s food supply do not have our best interests at heart. They have one bottom line, and that is profit. Their own profits. Our health and well-being, our self-determination and employment, our food safety and food security, are not on their radar. The protection of our soil, our water quality and availability, and our agricultural land base, are all better served by developing food sovereignty than by allowing ourselves to be tricked into accepting dependence on a mere half dozen mega corporations, including Monsanto and Cargill, for our food.

    Our daily food choices add up across the country to determine whether our food will be under our own control, or under the control of the global economy and international corporations. The more we seek out and purchase locally grown vegetables and fruits, grain, breads, meat, poultry, eggs, dairy, fish, and Canadian processed food products, the stronger and more diversified our local, Canadian suppliers will become and the more encouraged our potential young farmers and food processors will be. Those local farms and businesses, in our own communities, are desperately needed to provide incomes, employment, and food for Canadians. Diversity, and having many small producers everywhere in Canada, is the real key to food security for Canada.

    No country should be ashamed of making decisions that support its own production and distribution, as locally as possible, of its food and other essential goods and services. Canadians need to supply the demands of their own domestic market and meet the needs of their own communities as much as possible. Make the choices you can to encourage this, and pay attention to the choices being made for you by your municipal, provincial, and federal representatives. Let them know that you want a “climate” that facilitates local, not foreign investment. Ask the various levels of government and members of the community to support our citizens to own and operate their own farms and food processing and distribution businesses. Our potential for food sovereignty in Canada is enormous, but we must encourage millions of small producers. That is where real efficiency, stability, and security can be created.

    For more information on food sovereignty and related issues, check out The Ram’s Horn, by Brewster and Cathleen Kneen, at

    About the writer: 

    Doris Foster has gardened most of her adult life, and supports her local organic farmers and community grain mill. She also supports the Canadian Action Party, which is working to develop policies that will help Canadians to enhance our food sovereignty, save the Canadian small mixed family farm, and make food safety and food sovereignty local community issues all across Canada. For details please visit:

    Written by admin

    August 9th, 2010 at 7:13 am

    U.S. army refugee in Canada warns Canadians about NAU agenda

    leave a comment

    by Captain Jack, Former American Military Officer


    The SPP-NAU cited in the article “Canada’s political parties stake their positions on North American Union” is nothing more than a way to undermine the Canadian economy and the safety of the citizens of Canada.

    If you accept SPP-NAU, you are accepting the troubles that plagues the U.S. will be committing Canada’s resources to perpetuated problems in the U.S. that will only grow under the prevailing greed-driven leadership of that country.

    I, myself am an American living as a refugee here in Canada and have been since 2002

    I had a good job/trade in the United States.

    I had a… [CONTINUED.. see comment below]

    [BECOME A MEMBER, and get the rest of this article emailed to you. E-mail to find out how you can become a member of The Canadian.]

    Written by thecanadianheadlines

    December 29th, 2009 at 12:53 am

    Featured Advertisers