Happy to be part of the 1%

I wrote a post the other day saying FU to people who voted Liberal. I actually wrote it a while ago, but I reposted it the other day, as once again the Liberal government continues to prove how little they care about Canada and Canadians, but that’s not what this post is about. This post is about the reactions to that post. First, the people who called me angry. Yes, I’m angry. I’m angry that the citizens of this country voted back in a government that has had us on a steady decline for a decade. I’m angry that my fellow Canadians elected a man they knew very little about, who did a horrible job in the UK, and was the economic advisor to the previous PM who ballooned our deficit. But mostly? I’m angry that so many other Canadians don’t even see what they’ve done. Then, there are the people who personally attacked me. The name calling, the vile, the vitriol. Yes, my post was profane (8 f-bombs), but no name calling. I attacked how they voted, not who they are. Then, of course, the blockers. The people who can’t handle to read a differing opinion. Thats ok. They’re allowed. There were a few who engaged in civil discourse, while disagreeing. I have huge respect for those individuals. Our world needs more people able to disagree civilly. Of course there were the people who felt the need to mention I’m a Zionist (a proud one) as if that has any bearing on a conversation about Canadian politics. And the people who called me MAGA - seems the people on the left feel that anyone who doesn’t vote Liberal is MAGA. Not that MAGA is an insult, but I find it funny that the Liberals think it is. I’m not MAGA but also irrelevant. The TDS runs strong within them. Then there were the comments about rigged elections. I believe there were lots of external and multinational influences on the election, and I believe there was voter fraud and ballots not counted. Was there enough to make a material difference in the outcome? Likely not. Enough Canadians voted Liberal. And just because the person I wanted didn’t win, doesn’t mean I’m going to assume the reason was due to cheating. And one of the things I noticed most? How many like-minded Canadians there are out there, who are just as angry at how Canadians voted as I am. But regardless of any of it, I support our democratic process. I believe it’s flawed and easily gamed, but it’s the one we have. An election was called, Canadians went to the polls, and they got the government they voted for. I believe in democracy and freedom, including free speech. I have the right to say just about anything I want, including a rant on how Canadians voted. You have the right to respond as you wish, and to mute or block me. I just hope that the way Canadians voted and seem to be consistently voting, doesn’t take us down a path that will see us stripped of these rights, of these democracies, of these freedoms, because I sincerely believe it will. And that is why I’m so angry with you.

👇👇👇 Since I have been blocked for several years by the unregistered lobby group @PolySeSouvient, I decided to pay them a "tribute" by adding facts and opinions to my website—covering both them and their associates at @CGCguncontrol I’m a thorn in their side. They don’t like the facts I present. I am exposing a scam, and I will keep doing so. Link: firearmswatch.ca/#advocacy #PolyScam

💯

I have no idea what this is about but they march quite well 😉 instagram.com/reel/DdwalBoDA…

Trump threatening tariffs on European nations who oppose U.S. controlling Greenland Carney is considering sending soldiers to Greenland Two senior Canadian officials have told CBC News that a set of contingency plans were drawn up last week and presented to the federal government. Carney went full Retard. cbc.ca/news/politics/carney-…

Tamara Lich can't go to work....

This guy is funny and not afraid to call out liberals! Comedian Ben Bankas. He asks a liberal heckler what's your favorite thing to do? Watch what he tells her what his favorite things are!! 😆💀😆💀😆😬😂💀🤣💀😆🤣💀😆💀

Hey Donald Trump. Word on the street is Mark Carney dared you to come get him. Just him. Not Canadians.

There are solutions to fix this. 1. Get rid of the Carney WEF EU LPC government. 2. Get the trade deal done with the USA 3. Deport the 3rd world freeloaders 4. Declare Canada a Christan country and only Christan values laws 5. Remove the double standard application of laws

This Canadian Woman Has A Message To Carney And His Liberal Squad💥🇨🇦💪🔥 VOTE LIBERALS OUT❗️

How much does it matter? How much does it matter to the US Republican administration that Carney’s chief operating officer running his office is a long-time Democrat campaigner who worked for Kamala Harris, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton? Keep in mind … trade negotiations have collapsed, putting millions of Canadian jobs in jeopardy Does this Democrat-turned-PMO Chief Operating Officer have anything to do with all this? Does Alex Soros meeting with Mark Carney in Toronto behind closed doors matter? Does Alex Soros speaking at an event with Melanie Joly matter? Does Hillary Clinton endorsing the Liberals matter? All in all, does it matter that the Democrats seem to be extremely cozy with the Liberals? Who knows … right … ? Maybe … 🤷‍♂️

Still voting to stay in Canada??? This is the future if you stay. Ugly

💥INCREDIBLE💥MUST WATCH AGAIN🚨Conservative MP Sandra Cobena exposed the Liberal audacity behind the "Powers of a King" clause in Bill C-15. The sweeping provision sought to let ministers bypass 150 years of law, complete outrage over Liberal control and overreach.

It is with great concern for some of my fellow countrymen, inching precariously toward the edge of utter lunacy, that I write this post. Prime Minister Mark Carney this week, in an interview with the New York Times, went on record saying it would be “irresponsible” not to plan for the possible contingency of a military invasion of Canada by the United States. Unfortunately, Mr. Carney didn’t misspeak or fall victim to a cherry-picked quote taken out of context. His concern was later reiterated by Defence Minister David McGuinty and Artificial Intelligence Minister Evan Soloman. We all know that Donald Trump has a colourful history of spouting off some truly outrageous whoppers from time to time, but even he has never disseminated something as fatuous, dangerous or dishonest as this. And while he seldom backs down from his outrageous claims, whenever he pushes the envelope too far, at least his entourage goes on damage control to walk back some of his excesses – Carney’s guys are doubling down. Despite these idiotic statements, these are intelligent men. The odds that all three of them would simultaneously become afflicted by the same psychotic delusion is infinitesimally small. The only rational conclusion, therefore, is that they believe, or rather their polling data shows, that enough Canadians are so possessed by Trump Derangement that engaging in such asinine demagoguery is politically expedient. Sadly, they may be right. The vast coalition of useful idiots and true believers after effectively having their intelligences insulted by their dear leader, are coming out of the woodwork to express gratitude online for the Prime Minister’s caution in preparing for all, including the most remote, contingencies. Others are retreating slightly to hold the line at the fall-back position articulated by Minister McGuinty that, this kind of paranoid delusion is perfectly normal and, “all militaries in the world spend time analyzing risk scenarios.” I assure you, this is not normal. Back on planet Earth, the situation is tense and acrimonious (and there is plenty of blame to go around for that), but this is not the more than two centuries of peace along the 49th parallel that followed the signing of the Treaty of Ghent in 1815 drawing to an end. Trump has imposed tariffs on $20 billion (or 2% of the $400 billion per year) of Canadian exports to the US. In other words, amid this unnecessary, escalatory, and foolish trade dispute, the United States will still purchase 200% more Canadian goods and services this year than the rest of the world combined. This situation is like a restaurant’s picky regular customer complaining about an overcooked steak to a prideful chef who, fortified in his own mind by the knowledge he cooked the steak perfectly, refuses to comp the entree. This is not the start of World War III. We are so far removed from a military incursion at our southern border that we may as well be strategizing the response to the equally plausible threat of Santa Claus leading an invasion of elves from the north. If we woke up tomorrow in some parallel reality where the United States actually was contemplating a full-scale military campaign against Canada, with all due respect to our brave men and women in uniform, the only preparations to be made would be negotiating the terms of our unconditional surrender. Some brave and patriotic Canadians may refuse to submit and instead choose to conduct, as a matter of principle, a brutal and bloody guerilla warfare campaign against the strongest conventional and nuclear military force in the history of the world. Unfortunately, they would be in the precarious position of having to rely on our miserly European allies, or countries like Russia or China, whose recent actions have been significantly more hostile and provocative challenges to our sovereignty than the US tariffs, to supply us with weapons, and they would not remotely be adequate. It’s all so desperately preposterous. But for the sake of argument, let’s suppose that Donald Trump was indeed the terrifying bogeyman haunting the dreams of the most extreme and hopeless sufferers of Trump Derangement Syndrome and its frightful sister affliction, Andrew Coyneism, a rare and especially acute form of tweet-induced psychotic maladjustment. Even in this scenario, why would Trump use the military to annex Canada? All he would have to do is offer Alberta statehood, liberation from transfer payments, excessive regulation and carbon taxes, carte blanche to exploit its natural resources, a generous welcome bonus in the form of a $100,000 tax credit to every adult Albertan and replace their Canadian dollars with equal amounts of US currency. They would effectively be acquiring Alberta for the knock-down bargain price of roughly 1x annual GDP. Simultaneously, the US (including the newly acquired Alberta) would immediately cut off all trade with the rest of Canada. The net impact to Canada of this manoeuvre would be a cataclysmic economic collapse, while the newly composed United States would take a net GDP hit (loss of all trade with Canada, mostly offset by the acquisition of Alberta) of 0.8%. Next would come a full package of sanctions, a naval blockade, and when the rest of Canada became desperate enough, a Chinese belt-and-road style offtake of all of Canada’s resources at bargain prices, which by then, the Canadians would be desperate for. In the meantime, the US would revamp its immigration policy to recreate the brain-drain of the 1990s on steroids, welcoming the top 20% most productive Canadians to flee what had overnight become the third world. Harvard Alumnus Mark Carney might well be among those at the front of the line seeking this emigration opportunity, rejoining 91 percent of his own investments already located there. There would, no doubt, be a fearsome contingent of Canadians refusing to bend or break in the face of American tyranny, and elbows would be flying up to vertiginous heights with such vigour that the Canadian healthcare system would be overwhelmed by millions of spontaneous emergency room visits of patriotic patients with dislocated shoulders. I suspect many of you reading this are thinking to yourself that this is so completely far-fetched and absurd that, if serious, I must have lost my mind. Allow me to reassure you that while this is all bunk, it remains at least ten times more likely than the United States military executing a boots-on-the-ground invasion of Canada. Anyone who spends more than one second worrying about such an outcome should immediately proceed to the nearest sink to splash some cold water in their face and pull themselves together.

This is the banker they sold as the adult. He took $94 billion that every other country would call spending and stamped it “investment.” Not a rounding error. A new dictionary. Then he used that dictionary to tell you the books were cleaner than they are. The old PBO called it. The IMF side called it. The new PBO just said the definitions are not even applied the same way twice and nobody outside the PMO can reproduce the math. That is not a spreadsheet debate. That is a government that will not let you audit the story it is telling you. Carney ran on credentials. Credentials are supposed to mean you can read a balance sheet without moving the labels. He moved the labels. Then he asked for trust. If the numbers only work after you invent a word, the numbers do not work. Canadians are paying the interest. He is paying himself with the vocabulary. #cdnpoli

In response to MP Dean Allison’s question about why so many Western countries experienced enormous increases in immigration at roughly the same time, I decided to do a little digging. And there’s something I think Canadians should read for themselves. In 2018, 152 countries adopted the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. Canada was one of them. It contains 23 objectives. Objective 5 calls for enhancing pathways for regular migration, including adapting those pathways with a view to “expanding and diversifying” them. Canada later described itself as a “champion country” of the Compact and has continued participating in its implementation and review. But Dean asked a very good question. When governments across multiple countries begin moving in similar directions at roughly the same time, surely one of the first places we should look is at the international frameworks they agreed to. No speculation required. It’s public. Read it. UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration A/RES/73/195 documents.un.org/doc/undoc/g…

‼️The Prime Minister sold Canadians on his financial credentials, and then, when they weren’t looking, took advantage of that trust by inventing financial definitions that are not used anywhere else in the world. He relabeled $94 billion of expenses as investments. The former PBO and IMF has called them out, and now the new PBO has gone even further by saying that these invented definitions aren’t even being used consistently and can't be independently replicated. Why is this government destroying the integrity of Canada’s books? #cdnpoli

👇👇👇👀👀👀 Analysis and opinion/facts Source: polysesouvient.ca/Documents_… The September 9, 2026 open letter from Dawson Families for Gun Control is not a narrow, evidence-driven plea to close a few technical gaps. It is another chapter in a decades-long campaign—closely aligned with PolySeSouvient—that treats every remaining legal firearm, magazine, and exemption as an unfinished “loophole.” The pattern is consistent: after each prohibition, the definition of the problem expands and the demands escalate. Satisfaction only arrives when civilian ownership of semi-automatics, handguns, and anything that can be rhetorically labelled “military-style” is driven as close to zero as politically possible. The letter itself is explicit. Twenty years after the Dawson College attack, the signatories still frame legally acquired firearms as the core enabler of mass casualty events and demand three immediate actions: finish the assault-style ban (including the SKS) and physically remove the guns from circulation; prohibit “modifiable” magazines; and impose tighter national controls on the already-narrow Olympic/Paralympic handgun exemption so it cannot become “a back door around the handgun freeze.” They close by insisting Canadian law must put “public safety first by banning weapons and accessories that enable mass shootings.” That language is not limited to the specific models used in 2006. It is an open-ended brief for further prohibition. PolySeSouvient and allied groups have never treated any single measure as sufficient. They welcomed the 2020, 2024 and 2025 Orders in Council that prohibited thousands of models, the handgun freeze, and the buyback. They then immediately declared the ban “incomplete” because the SKS remains legal, because some magazines can be unpinned, and because a sliver of elite sport shooters can still acquire pistols. In their own documents they have described a total handgun ban as an “integral part” of the project and have repeatedly said that leaving any semi-automatic centrefire rifle in civilian hands undermines the entire exercise. The Dawson letter simply continues that trajectory. The public-safety payoff of these successive restrictions is modest at best. Statistics Canada’s latest data (2024) show firearm-related violent crime accounts for only 2.6 percent of all police-reported violent crime. The rate actually fell 4.2 percent that year. In firearm homicides where the accused was identified, 80 percent of those accused did not hold a valid licence for the class of firearm used. Handguns dominate the remaining firearm crime, and a large share of crime guns are either smuggled, stolen, or never legally owned in Canada. Targeting the last legal SKS rifles, pinned magazines, and a handful of Olympic pistols does not change the behaviour of the unlicensed 80 percent. It mainly inconveniences the licensed 2.4 million PAL holders who already pass background checks, storage rules, and continuous eligibility screening. The Dawson incident itself illustrates the limits of the magazine argument. The gunman used a legal 10-round magazine in a restricted Beretta CX4 Storm that would otherwise have been limited to five rounds. Coroner Jacques Ramsay (now a Liberal MP) wrote that a five-round limit “would have meant fewer victims.” That is a theoretical claim about one event. It does not demonstrate that closing the “modifiable magazine” loophole two decades later would measurably reduce overall homicide or even mass-shooting deaths in a country where such events remain rare and where criminals already ignore capacity limits. Pinned magazines can be restored with a drill; 3-D printed or smuggled magazines exist. The regulation mainly creates paper criminals among law-abiding owners. The SKS demand exposes the same mismatch. The rifle is a 1940s Soviet design, cheap, reliable, and widely used for hunting—especially subsistence hunting in Indigenous communities. Estimates of the number in Canada run from several hundred thousand to around a million; the government itself cannot even produce a reliable count. It has been used in a handful of high-profile attacks, including the 2018 Fredericton shootings and the June 2026 Côte-des-Neiges incident. Those cases are real. They do not prove that removing a ubiquitous, non-restricted hunting rifle from the rest of the population would have prevented them, any more than previous bans prevented the next shooting. Hundreds of thousands of identical rifles remain in circulation regardless of a new sales ban. Here the double standard becomes impossible to ignore. PolySeSouvient has explicitly proposed an Indigenous exemption for the SKS: ban new sales and modern variants for everyone else, but allow First Nations, Inuit and Métis hunters to keep using the rifle for subsistence. That is framed as respect for constitutional rights and practical reality. At the same time the Dawson letter and PolySeSouvient’s earlier submissions treat the already-tiny Olympic/Paralympic handgun exemption as a dangerous “back door” that requires “rigorous, nationally consistent regulatory rules,” “clear eligibility requirements and meaningful verification.” Practical shooting (IPSC) athletes receive no exemption at all. One group of Canadians is offered a carve-out for a semi-automatic rifle the advocates themselves call a “military weapon.” Another group of licensed, vetted, range-supervised athletes is told their sport must be squeezed harder because someone might abuse the paperwork. That is not a coherent public-safety principle. It is two weights and two measures. The letter’s closing line—“action, not further consultations, delays or excuses”—is the tell. After six years of prohibitions, a handgun freeze, an ongoing buyback, and yet another classification review announced in late 2025, the demand is still for more lists, more confiscations, and fewer remaining exceptions. Groups that began by targeting “assault weapons” after Polytechnique and Dawson now treat a 1950s hunting rifle and a handful of target pistols as the unfinished business of public safety. History suggests the next letter will find the next remaining category. The data on who actually commits firearm homicides suggest that category will still not be the one driving the body count. @CCFR_CCDAF @CanadasNFA @TWilsonOttawa @CivilAdvantage1 @Feral999 @Calibremag @TheGunBlog @GunnieMadcat @FirearmsInCDA #PolyScam

I guess videos like this are just the new normal in Canada. 🇨🇦 After videos like this came out last year and nobody was charged, they obviously have no fear of repercussions.