Catalog Page
     
Home Page

About Page

Photo Page

What's New Page

Contact Page

Favorite Links

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MEDICARE AND THE CHARTER

Custom2 Page

Custom3 Page

Custom4 Page

Guest Book Page

Photo2 Page

Catalog Page

 

The Communism in the Canadian Charter of Rights
The Canadian Charter of Rights, which was written by Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Chretien in 1982, is widely published by the Ottawa government as the answer to Canadian prayers even though it was foisted on Canadians without a referendum. It is in fact an international socialist document. In the true international-socialist fashion it was written for ...everyone... in the world ... not just Canadians.
http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Canada/English/ca_1982.html

It is also a communist document because it does not mention that Canadians should have rights to property. Webster's Dictionary defines communism as, "A theory advocating elimination of private property". A communist government rejects the idea of private property rights just as the Canadian Charter of Rights fails to give Canadians property rights. It means that the Canadian Government can do anything it likes with property. It can take it from individual Canadians (ESPECIALLY GUNS) or Canadian provinces and keep it or give it to someone else. A graphic example of this has already occurred in BC where 90% of British Columbia will be given back to the Nisgaa Indians and other Indian tribes. No Canadian can claim property rights (Except the Indians as groups who have been given unequal rights in the Charter but individual Indians still cannot own property even on their own reserves.) because Canadians have no property rights in Canada. Rights to free expression are lost or meaningless if Canadians have no rights to private property.
Canadians comply with government edicts just as the Russians did in Soviet Russia. Canadians turn a blind eye to the socialists in Ottawa and they in turn live by their socialist dogmas From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need."...Karl Marx. This is a beautiful statement. But when it becomes dogma, it is not beautiful. It is called communism. It is called conditioning and Canadians have been conditioned to believe the socialist in Ottawa. Canadians have long been programmed not to protest. It is just not Canadian.

Like communism, socialism also rejects the concept of private property. Socialists believe in the "collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods." Socialists place no value on property rights and manipulate the system so that the government controls everything and individuals control nothing. This is the reason why the socialists in Ottawa constantly trumpet the Charter of Rights. It gives them carte blanche to take property, take guns, give property to Indian tribes, tax and spend on their socialist projects, expanded government bureaucracies and a complete disregard for the national debt of 600 billion. They want to be judged by their good socialist intentions -- not the bottom line.

Not even western Canadians, with all that so called western alienation, have even bothered to protest.

This is the reason why Chretien, who was justice minister at the time and wrote the Charter, has never opened up the Charter so that it could be corrected. This is the reason why he has never invoked the notwithstanding clause for those off-the-wall Supreme Court decisions. Why should he? No one has ever protested and he has just been reelected for the third time as prime minister.

Although section (d) gives everyone the right to associate, the Charter does not give Canadians the right not to associate or not to belong to a union or not to pay union dues. Union members have no say in what happens to union dues. They financed the June 15th 2000 riots in Toronto. It is socialist dogma all the way. This section of the Charter looks like a union boss wrote it.

Even the UN Declaration of Human Rights, on which the Charter was based, has property rights.
http://www.mastifffoundation.org/docs/inter/un/funda/udechr.htm
Sec 17(1)

Only in Canada are Canadians denied property rights thanks to the Charter of Rights. "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries....Winston Churchill


Chretiens visit to Middle East


On a visit to the Middle East this year (2000) Jean Chretien stunned everyone by offering to accept 15,000 refugees to Canada. Canadians, who did not elect their prime minister -- had no say in this decision, nor did his cabinet ministers or his immigration minister. Dictators, especially those not elected by the people, are noted for making strange fast decisions and expecting the whole country to fall in line.

Since then Chretien has been reelected to Ottawa with an even bigger majority. This is probably one of the reasons why he feels infallible and he can make any dictatorial decision he likes. He is not elected by Canadians as a whole so why worry. These incoming 15,000 Palestinian refugees should be housed in the area in and around Shawinigan and the Quebec government should pay their welfare.
The Palestinian Liberation Organization wants these refugees returned to their former homes in Israel and so the PLO rejected Chretiens offer. Israel does not want them because they say it would alter the demographic balance and destroy the Jewish nature of the state. If that is the case, maybe these incoming refugees might upset the demographic balance in and around Shawinigan, Quebec. They might even alter the demographic balance in Quebec. And as Chretien will be relieving a big problem for Israel maybe they should assist Quebec pay for their welfare and medical of these refugees. It’s the right thing to do. And these tax-and-spend Liberals love to be seen doing the right thing. They like to be judged by their good intentions. Not by the bottom line or if their good intentions might change the demographics of Quebec.

Like money going over Niagara Falls
CIDA gave Bangladesh forty million for gender equality in July 2000 + million to improve the health of women and children -- not men “ and transparency (whatever that is) + millions to improve riverbank stability in the Kalni-Kushiyara flood plain + for more transparency.


Do you think that the million for gender equality plus million for childrens rights that Canadian CIDA gave to the Congo in December 2000 will make one iota of difference in gender equality or childrens rights in the Congo?

Do you think the million to Guyana for birth control next April will help population problems?

The millions that CIDA gives out for strange causes goes on for pages and pages.
http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/cidaweb/webcountry.nsf/index.html

Is there any logic to this giving, giving, giving. Is there any logic to why Canadians should be the highest taxed individuals in the world? Is there any logic to why the Canadian dollar should be worth only half the American dollar when it was worth more than the American dollar only 25 years ago. Ask Maria Minna. She is in charge of CIDA. That's her over on the right.

http://www.gc.ca/comments/cform_e.html#email