|
|
||
GOD SAVE CANADA
Montreal, Quebec
Lev (Leon) GUNIN
...to be or not to be... - this is the issue of
approaching elections.
If Stephen Harper's conservatives will form the next government:
bye-bye, Canada . Of course, Harper is
claiming the opposite. According to his point of view, his party is the only
one that has means and will to save Canadian federation in case of Quebec's next
eventual attempt to separate... He's concentrating on federalism because he has
nothing else to add from his non-hidden agenda.
Signs of right-wing quiet "coup d'etat" and
crusade against last values of democracy are everywhere. The very name of the
post-progressive conservative party of Canada
("Alliance")
had carried a hidden message. For "initiated" (pro-Zionists, big business, US
lovers) it simply indicated the alliance with United
States. They advocate not just political, economic,
or cultural alliance with US, but a direct administrative alliance, giving
away Canadian independence. Look, they argue, we have the same language, same
British roots, same habits, and even "same continent". Only
Quebec is a problem. But we'll not ask Quebecers,
if they want to join United States, as we did not ask them in the past (remember
- Canadian Federation), or as we did not ask people of Iraq... or Palestinians back
in 1948...
As a rule, propagandists of the union with
United States are admirers and supporters
of Stephen Harper's party. They pictorially describe big economic and social
advantages "for all Canadians" after entering US union, without mentioning astonishing
homelessness; deprivation of medical, welfare and social services; Stalinist-size
prison population, and grimaces of the capital punishment in United States. They
also forget mentioning non-justified arrests, tortures, "Katrina"-like
slaughters of "underprivileged" population, "extra-judicial" executions, and
arbitrary "state of emergency" rules.
United States'
support for Canadian conservative party is not a secret. Making an unusual
speech "on the eve" of Canadian elections, United States' ambassador to Canada,
David Wilkins, a famous Zionist figure, has made clear that if we, Canadians, will
choose Paul Martin as our next federal Prime-minister, we will face US economic
and trade sanctions. Of course, such a statement must be seen as a vicious
intervention into Canadian internal affairs, or even an "invasion", but let's
concentrates of its appeal and consequences. US ambassador was targeting
primarily the rich citizens, who have experience, resources, and means to "format"
the electorate, working against BQ, NDP, or liberals, in favor of conservative
party.
Stephen Harper's all-round support of the United States is also not a secret. He
backs up literary any Bush administration's 'initiative' - from invasion of Iraq,
unlimited and unbalanced support for Israel, to American military and
international policy. Harper's less delicate and beaters about the bush
comrades (such as Mr. Day) openly associate themselves with the most tedious, thirsty
for open domination, and aggressive Jewish Zionist ideas. But the crucial point
of Harper's anti-Canadian plot is his readiness to join American "anti-missile"
space program. This is not a question of "military escalation in space", threat
to environment (etc.), as any Canadian "politcorrect" public figure has to
state it, but a direct threat to Canadian formal independence from
United States. Provisioning a "joint
military command" for joint "can-am forces", and some other "joint"
administrative tools, this program has a potential of bringing Canada under the
scrutiny and administrative control of US military bureaucracy, and, in
consequence, US political bureaucracy. This is why Jean Chrétien , Paul
Martin, Jack Layton, and even progressive conservatives - all have rejected Canadian
participation in this program, in spite of the warnings that this "will make"
the White House administration "very angry".
Actually, Americans need conservatives'
victory for formalizing and accelerating an already active process of their
military occupation of Canada:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20050616&articleId=174
From American side lobbying Canada-US
"anti-missile" treaty became an obsessive addiction to such a degree that it
de-masks "uncle Sam's" plans far beyond any military build-ups.
Formally Mr. Harper, Mr. Day and other cons
are still using the liberal vocabulary, speaking of the "democratic choice",
"democratic values", etc., but the way they transformed (actually - kidnapped) former
progressive conservative party into conservative party - an
anti-Canadian tool in American-Israeli hands - speaks for itself.
Liberals and other Canadian politicians
also call us to make our "democratic choice", which means to vote for them. Do
we still have any "democratic choice"?
Having a democratic choice is first of all
having a free press. Unfortunately, we do not have such a privilege any more in
this country. Jewish Zionist families of Aspers and Blacks control 99 per cent
of Canadian media. This is not just a question of control. Through owned by
them TV and radio stations, newspapers and magazines they promote pro-Israeli,
pro-American, pro-Zionist, anti-Liberal, anti-Canadian right-wing agenda. LP's,
NDP's, BQ's / PQ's and other views have lost their tribune in Canadian private English
media. Conservatives and their Jewish-Zionist ideological-economic engines
became the only ones who enjoy "the freedom of press". Last fortresses,
independent from conservatives, for some time were "Globe and Mail" and CTV. Not
any more! CTV is now filtering news and political analysis, social and actual
thematic, favoring right-wing extremists. CTV's surveys (like "are you in favor
of capital punishment: yes - 60%, no - 40%"; "...ready to give away "some" of your
freedoms in exchange for stricter security rules?" (near matches) reveal both
company's present anti-Canadian and anti-liberal orientation, and the rapid
shift of its audience to the right. Pro-democratic, liberal, centrist, or
left-wing public is not watching CTV any more. "Globe and Mail" devote
as many efforts to slam and smash liberals, as any right-orienting newspaper,
and both CTV and "G. a' M." present analysis and organize surveys on US
internal issues as if Canada
was already part of the US. In spite
of wide boycott of Aspers' and other dependent media by vast majority of
Canadians, they continue to exist and make profits. How can it be possible? We
should look closer into the flow of money from various Jewish Zionist groups,
and from south of the border, weighting eventual violations of Canadian basic laws.
Democratically elected political parties in
Canada are loosing the battle...
It looks as a right-wing militant coup directed against the legitimate Canadian
government is gathering its strength. The government is still ruling the
country, but lost the media tribune, economic levers, authority over police and
RCMP, and essential power and rights.
Having a democratic choice is having a free economy. Do we have economy,
independent from United States
and Israel-linked Jewish extremists? We'll not go into this shaky domain, just
try to answer this question sincerely...
Having a democratic choice is to be sure
that the votes have been counted fairly, and there were no illegal manipulations
during and prior to elections. In last couple of years we see the opposite.
Before last provincial elections Charest
and his conservative enclave (just formally called "Liberal Party of Quebec") have
literally disappeared from the political scene. They began their election
campaign non-prepared, having almost no debates with PQ over key issues, and no
support among Quebec's
population. And still they won... Accompanied by the muffled rumors and the
cannonade of police raids against PQ's sponsors, supporters and activists, Charest's
victory did not convince anyone. Regarding Charest's tremendous unpopularity
and permanent spontaneous acts of civil disobedience immediately after the
polls, we can see a grizzly precedent.
And, regarding an international "epidemic"
of the smallest electoral gap between political parties (US, Germany, etc.),
especially when country's political future is decided not by the voters, but by
Federal Court, where brother of one of the candidates plays a key role, we can
consider this epidemic as non-coincidental. The mechanism of bringing down
legitimate governments, putting on their place puppet regimes is very well known
since Biblical times. Recently, in spite of having a reputation of the most
corrupted public figure, lack of support among the majority of population, and
his enormous alliance with Jewish Zionists (his main allies) mayor Gerald Trembley
was re-elected. His rival, Pierre Bourque, immediately denounced wide-spread
trickery and dismissal of the most of pro-Burke ballots by Trembley-"invented" electronic
machines.
To save
Canada THIS time we must vote unanimously
AGAINST conservatives, because a gap in 10 or 15 per cents may well become -15 down
the counting process. We also may see police and RCMP raids against prominent
Liberal party members and sponsors, as we saw it in last
Quebec provincial elections, when Jean
Charest was elected. Mr. Charest is an intruder within the Liberal party, former
conservative, closest friend of Harper and Day, and many Liberal's troubles,
including multiple leaks of information, may lead to him.
Recent Conservative appeal (directed to the supporters of
this party) to vote in Quebec for the liberal candidates shows, up to what
degree this branch of LP is a "filial" of the conservative movement.
So called "sponsorship scandal" is bearing dubious Liberals' guilt. Afraid
of Quebec's separation, Jean
Chrétien used a smart strategy instead of tanks and guns. Of course, his
and his lieutenants' actions raise harsh ethical questions, but definitely not
totally about corruption. If Harper's conservatives would face this dilemma,
they would probably employ such a dark force as "Meir Kohane number 2" Garry Galganov,
in the end (inevitably) sending troops. Both liberals and non-liberals were wrong
about PQ' true intentions. By then province's full separation was a suicide. Quebec
might be immediately consumed by United States, and turned not into an
American state, but an abjected colony. However, if neo-cons win the elections,
the only alternative for Quebecers for saving their ethnic and cultural
identity becomes separation.
Stephen Harper and his Sancho Panza Peter
McKay may be suitable for American-Israeli needs only while aggressively trying
to become rulers of Canada. They
don't want the end of Canada as
a country, and will not sell so easily everything in what they believe. For the
forces that have all reasons to support them right now both are completely
useless in the future. They might soon be "replaced". Why not by... Jean
Charest?
I have objections against Lenin-Style
recipe of "what to do". And will not tell people for whom to vote to prevent
neo-cons' "coup d'etat". I can only share one of my life experiences. Noam
Chomsky, Shakhak, and others critics of the ongoing neo-feudal reaction are
using the term "double loyalty". By this term they show that the Jewish
politicians, media moguls, and bureaucrats have a "conflict of loyalties"
(conflict of interests?): between their loyalty to United
States, and their loyalty to Israel. MY experience tells me that there is no even such a thing as
"double loyalty" in Chomsky's sense. Judaism and its offsprings like Zionism
demand full, complete and only one unshared loyalty. "True Jewishness" is not a
religious or ethnic background. It is always a choice, especially for
40-50-plus-y.olds, who play political games. Heinrich
Heine, Mandelstam or Einstein made one choice. G.
Stein, J. Brodsky, or Arthur Miller made another one. This is why I am not
going to give my voice for a specific political party, but rather against
candidates who can not be loyal to Canada
by definition. And this is why I am not going to vote for
conservatives: as they are fully and unconditionally committed to those who can
not be loyal to Canada by
definition. I still think that there is only one political bloc and only one
party (in Quebec) that can
guarantee social rights and democratic stability. But if in my area they will
nominate a candidate with "double loyalty" I am not going to vote for this
person.
What else? Don't be mistaken by the "Green
Party". It has nothing to do with European Green movement. It is just another
Stephen Harper's secret enclave.
December 27
2005
|