Tag Archives: Dalton McGuinty

The top 20 terrorist ‘targets’ are the bankers?: That was the reason for the tight G20 security?

A report in recent Canadian News had Andre Marin, Ontario’s Ombudsman saying the G20 fiasco in Toronto “amounted to Martial Law”.

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty refused to acknowledge the violation on civil liberties, and explained it this way:

But McGuinty rejected Marin’s assertion that what his government did behind closed doors on June 2 was “illegal” and “likely unconstitutional.”

The Ontario Premier’s allegiances are in dire question already, and the way he handled the G20 security issues is not surprising. McGuinty was seen to be showing great attention to the Queen on her later visit to Canada, and he has pushed for all day kindergarten for children as young as four, a hallmark sign an Orwellian state is being implemented.

Assessing the strategy and planning for the G20 can vary by how one views the big picture. If it were merely to protect the banking representatives it went overboard, but if it were to stir the crowd,  conditioning them for the future the new world order it was right on target. It might best be described as living up to the globalists’ expectations.  There is an obvious pattern at the G20 summits of the past (including Pittsburgh) which  paints a picture of an agenda to condition the people to get used to abuse and violation of their rights. I wouldn’t buy the argument that there were mistakes made in letting people know.

 The bombshell reasoning for such tight security was the police request for assistance, as McGuinty explained:

“The government was acting on a request from police to deal with possible terrorist threats at the G20 summit and even the ombudsman said its motives were good, McGuinty noted.

“He said that we acted with good intentions, that the police came to us and said: ‘We need your help. We’re going to be hosting the G20 and there are possibly the top 20 terrorist targets on the face of this planet coming together in one city,” the premier said.

Apologies are in order. I thought the police were saying the top 20 terrorists would be at the G20 meetings in the crowd. What they meant was that the “targets” were the bank representatives. Well, if they are suggesting the bankers would be terrorist targets, who are they suggesting the terrorists would be?

It would seem that everyone was suspect.

Journalists were mistreated as well as innocent civilians. Known political activists that were attempting to cross the border from the U.S. representing the organization, We are Change were not allowed to enter Canada. The police targeted Charlie Veitch from England, and he was arrested and charged with impersonating an officer.

Veitch was simply doing his usual humorous rants with bullhorn, and calling himself the “Love Police”. When arrested, Veitch explained on video that the police knew who he was, and they commented that they had a real live dissident on their hands.

During the Bilderberg Group meetings in Ottawa in 2006, Alex Jones was similarly mistreated, being detained for several hours, and having his computer system checked.

I think we can see that either the G20 leaders and their handlers are sending a message that is clear that to protest the new world as controlled by bankers you will pay the price. The event was a mere show of power.

To believe a true terrorist would use the G20, and be part of the crowd is laughable. After all, it is often those accused as being public enemy number one that get the best treatment, and are “in on the joke”.  Especially since:

Al-Qaeda terror mastermind Anwar Al-Awlaki, the man who helped plot the aborted Christmas Day bombing, the Fort Hood shooting, the Times Square bombing attempt, and who also preached to the alleged September 11 hijackers, dined at the Pentagon just months after 9/11 documents obtained by Fox News show.

The supposed “real terrorists” are treated like royalty, because this is all just a game. The real terrorists most times are CIA operatives, or patsies drugged out of their heads like the underwear bomber on Christmas day. The real terrorists are an excuse to instigate right-stripping laws like the Patriot Act in the U.S. that now has videos at U.S. Wal-Mart stores urging people to look for anything suspicious.

It has widely been argued by Max Keiser and others that it is the bankers on Wall Street who are the true “financial terrorists”, responsible for the collapse of global economies the world over. A systematic destruction and ponzi scheme of derivative make believe turned real. The banks that are broke, desperately seeking comfort via the IMF and World Bank to go after all real assets including the pension plans of the working citizens of the world.

Thus, real terrorism is being reined on by the governments of the world on its citizens.

With as many as 800 FEMA camps reported on shows like Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura, someone should remind the American government who was accused of the events of 9/11. Here’s a hint: It wasn’t the current target – the American population. It seems the lack of memory extended itself not long after 9/11.

Fox News has shown us how the true terrorists are treated:

Conditioning or protection?

Either way, they must think we are completely stupid and terribly uninformed!

The (new) World, according to McGuinty

He's here......

...and all around her!

When the Queen of England came to Canada, apparently Premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty was close at her side. Her every move was monitored closely to ensure she was happy. Sharing the 3D experience, to the Blackberry explanation, it must have been a nauseating vision to watch. I wonder how the Queen felt about the suck up?

The National Post adds this:

This morning’s prayer at the Cathedral Church of St. James, attended by the Queen, Prince Philip, and Premier Dalton McGuinty and his wife, Terry, saw thousands of well-wishers thronging in bright sunshine, fittingly on King Street, to cheer their monarch; the parishoners belted out God Save Our Queen and O Canada with gusto.

Read more: http://news.nationalpost.com/tag/royal-visit/#ixzz14QGZbdQW

We must forgive any view that the Queen has had about the New World. She was in New York not long ago addressing the United Nations, and said the “waging of peace” would be difficult on the leaders of the world. Whatever could she have meant? We have seen the waging of peace as an excuse before. It is similar to the argument of some war supporting Bilderbergers.

Perhaps too, we should forgive Prince Philip for practicing the new world jargon when he said he would, well, let’s let him tell us:

“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.” — Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, in 1988

That’s swell Prince. Glad to have folks of your calibre visit us folks in Canada. Don’t mind me if I choose not to shake your hand.

The mission of the Globalist hobnobbers is to reduce and control the remaining population of the world. There are too many people, and they are out of control would be the argument.

Funny it would be church that the visitors would go to, seeing as how Christianity and Globalism does not seem to jive:

The Christian family represents even more of a threat to the globalist agenda. The Christian’s belief in the authority of the Bible is especially a concern for the internationalist. Christians who believe in God, in sin, in salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone, stand in the way of the globalist plan for a one-world religion, whereas liberal Christianity does not pose such a threat.

The coming world religion or what I refer to as “cosmic humanism,” will bring all faiths together into one central belief system. It will be tolerant of all faiths with the exception of those that absolutize. All the religions of the world will be able to sign off on its basic tenets; however, orthodox Christianity, Judaism, and Islam will not allow absorption.

The article was written in 2003, and it is uncanny as a predictor of what is happening today.

We can look at another aspect that might support the reasoning Premier McGuinty was more than accommodating to the Queen and the Prince. Let’s have a look at the aspects of education in the New World:

The last arena that the globalists have used to bring about their “One World” order is education. They are fully aware that if they are successful in capturing the minds of this generation they will be able to usher in a new global agenda that will change the world as we know it forever.

The traditional family poses a threat to globalism for two reasons. First, it is still the primary socializing unit in our society. Parents pass on social, cultural, and spiritual values to their children. Often, the values of the traditional family are not in harmony with the goals of globalism. Goals such as tolerance for a one-world religion are not acceptable to the Christian.


Second, parental authority in a traditional family clearly supercedes international authority. Children are taught to obey their parents in such families. Parents and not the state have authority over their children. Globalists, therefore, see the traditional family as an enemy and not an ally in meeting their agenda.

Ashley Montagu, a humanist and a globalist, told a group of educators that “the American family structure produces mentally ill children.” From his perspective, the traditional family which teaches such things as loyalty to God and loyalty to country is not producing mentally fit children for the next century.

Globalist educators seek to educate children at an earlier and earlier age in order for them to indoctrinate the young minds of the future. The earlier they can reach children with global ideas the more likely they can break the influence held by the family.

Okay, creepy enough for you?

Wait, check out this video clip of Sir McGuinty explaining how good it will be to take your kids and put them in “state” control as early as possible (no diapers please):

Give us time, I am sure there will be plenty more evidence to surface to suggest the new world advantage McGuinty says we will all have will be “really good” for the people of Ontario, Canada, and the World.

Just one little glitch. We’ll have to give up all of our rights and freedoms and hope we are not the victim of the virus ‘ol Prince Phillip wants to return as.


Orwell’s 1984 coming to Canadian Universities?: UWO Faculty Strike looming

PLEASE NOTE: DON’T MISS THE SECOND INSTALMENT LOCATED HERE…..

If the experience is good, isn't it attributed to freedom?

 

Is it really about what a Professor can or cannot say?

Who will the students get if University Administrators have their way? Will it be the concerned friend, with mutual admiration, like the professor in the movie sharing a toke and some debate? Or will the discipline of higher learning fall to tyranny and fascist rule? And it would seem it’s not just professors that are concerned with keeping their oath of duty!

Orwell wrote that

indifference to objective truth is encouraged by the sealing off of one part of the world from another, which makes it harder and harder to discover what is actually happening. There can often be doubt about the most enormous events… .The calamities that are constantly being reported — battles, massacres, famines, revolutions — tend to inspire in the average person a feeling of unreality. One has no way of verifying the facts, one is not even fully certain that they have happened, and one is always presented with totally different interpretations from different sources. Probably the truth is undiscoverable but the facts will be so dishonestly set forth in that the ordinary reader can be forgiven either for swallowing lies or for failing to form an opinion … 3

And, as the article continued, it noted how history is tainted, perception clouded, and minds conformed:

The popular perception of history is based on brainwashing by the mass media, indoctrination by the education system, peer group pressure, self-censorship and television “docudramas.”

James Compton, the UWO Faculty Association head pinned the argument this way:

People whose jobs are less secure are less willing to speak out, and that, in turn, weakens a central purpose of a university, Compton said.

Academic freedom isn’t a perk or a privilege. It is a core component of what professors do.”

It might just boil down to a battle of good and evil, as in this psychology assignment related to Orwell’s 1984, suitably given to students at Western University in London, Ontario.

The Professor might be scrutinized to administer that or any other assignment in the future as it may not be in line with a growing trend toward censorship and control by administrators, not peers.

That would be like the budgeting department telling the sales team how to sell, and judging how the sales are coming along. With no clue of the issues and importance of the professor’s task, administration represents an ever-growing  obstacle to ensure the job gets done. And one of the biggest issues to hit the higher echelons of learning – freedoms of speech and expression.

Freedom to challenge is the freedom to learn. Examining the world and being free to discuss things openly without fear of repercussion spawns intelligence and growth. Without it, we are lost as a society and a people, and are subject to fascist rule. The places of higher learning in a dictatorship would be fertile ground to get control of the minds that represent the future. The professors may just see the writing on the wall, and are fighting back!

MacLeans Magazine has written this article with the key point being:

At the same time, what is good for faculty is often good for students in the long run. If faculty win higher salaries at the bargaining table, it may mean recruiting better profs in the future. If they get better rules for academic freedom, it may mean better teaching because instructors are not worried about what they can and cannot say. If they get smaller class sizes, you may get more personal attention in your next course.

In another article, this comment by “Zarko” on 29 September 2010:

One of the proposed demands by the UWO administration includes some rather creepy stuff about invading the personal lives of professors. Imagine if your employer had the right to know who you might work for in a second job, or what charities you volunteer for. Now imagine that your employer, armed with this information, could indiscriminately dismiss you just because they don’t like how you spend your free time. The threat is rather clear: the employer wants to know who else you work for, how many hours you work for that other business, and exactly how much you are paid. No employee should be subject to such scrutiny and privacy invasion. It’s a little too 1984 to passively accept. To those who think UWO is stuffed with “fat cat” tenured faculty with sinecure positions, think again. UWO is leaning more towards “flexible workforce” which means part-time faculty who make very little, who have zero job security, and can easily be turfed at any time for reasons that have nothing to do with being inappropriate.

That comment was posted in this article about the pending strike of faculty at Western University, London, Ontario.

A strike by faculty  at Western could be in order as early as November 3rd at 12:01 AM.

What’s interesting and at the same time refreshing is it is not about money – it’s about freedoms, rights, and ultimately the quality of education.

As one student understands it, it limits the ability for a professor to state their opinion on a given issue, that must fall in line with university policy. The example cited was, say a University had a corporate arrangement with Apple, and the prof wanted to express concern for low wages in China where computers are made – then the university may try to limit the ability to criticize an affiliate of the university. That student is onboard with the rights of the professor.

Another student agrees:

Lippay is concerned that a condensed semester would sacrifice the quality of education that she will receive. However, she also sympathizes with the faculty’s issues around academic freedom.

“Most of the professors I’ve had are very passionate about what they talk about. They talk very freely about what’s concerning them, and they make an effort for students to get involved in the discussion,” said Lippay.

Lippay believes that a lack of academic freedom could make classes boring and take away from the quality of the educational experience.

Goodbye freedom of speech and expression?

If Western University is one of the best for “student experience”, it can largely be attributed to the faculty of dedicated professors.

Let’s face it – people work, thrive, and live best when free. If there is a power grab from one side that seems unreasonable, then this will undoubtedly be felt in the level of education the students get. The university explains it this way:

Outstanding issues at the table include: a series of linked articles that would institute “performance management” techniques governing Academic Responsibilities, Conflict of Interest and Conflict of Commitment, Annual Performance Evaluation, Sabbatical Leave, and Discipline. Compensation also remains unresolved.

 

If the “agenda” was censorship and control, the above guidelines could be used to manipulate and control, and subjectivity is more likely than objectivity.
Performance management? Who should judge that – administrators or the students the professors serve?
Conflicts of interest? Would this be monitoring and judging extra-curricular activities, interests and group participation that would be subject to approval of the administration of the university? Don’t believe what we want you to believe and it affects your employment?
Need we look at conflict of commitment and discipline? God knows where that could and would lead.

Remember, we are talking about tenured professors that are some of the best in the world. They are used to having freedom to do what needs to be done from a variety of angles. Are we to believe that “moonlighting” at another employer will affect the dedication the prof will have to his responsibilities at Western U?
At York University not long ago, free speech was under fire:

York University President Lorna Marsden is under fire from all directions for her decision to banish student activist and journalist Daniel Freeman-Maloy from campus for three years. Freeman-Maloy’s expulsion was meant to send a message: challenge my administration’s authority, and you will suffer the consequences. Instead, it is demonstrating that crude repression of student activism will always backlash.

Freedom of belief, freedom of assembly, and freedom of association are rights that must be maintained in every society, under every circumstance, and in every setting.
The professors of Western University have a right to maintain the ability to state their opinions in a quest for higher knowledge, and if they succumb to the barrage of pressure to toe the political line and give up rights and freedoms, we are one step closer to having our children “processed” not “growing intellectually”.
Dalton McGuinty was looking for all day kindergarten for children as young as three, because he claimed they would be learning better at older ages as a result. We could easily challenge that and counter that it would be a means of controlling the mind when very young. Agendas that might not be good for the family but the State, and in the wrong hands, could be devastating to the rights and freedoms of mankind.
In the U.S., we are seeing freedom of expression and association under Nazi-style pressure to dissuade those looking to join a group sworn to uphold rights and freedoms:


The issues at Western University may seem small at first glance. But it is part of a bigger picture that is designed to strip people of their rights.

Now take a look again at the comments at the top of this article.  Compare that to the experience of those affiliated with  Oathkeepers . Two examples, but similar theme.

What if a professor was a political activist supporting a cause? If the university had the right to discriminate in this way, they could effectively censor and control the content of higher learning.

Our minds and those around us are meant to be free. Free to learn and free to challenge.

Trying to put us in a box must be met with resistance, and the professors of Western  & Carleton Universities are on the front lines. They see the issues. They deserve our support.

Eloquently put, there is a war on for your mind and the minds of our children, Because if we ever figure it out, they are in trouble.

Let’s not go the way of Harvard! (see the next in the series!)

Where does the Western Faculty Strike stand? Here is a chronological listing.