Leaderboard

The Liberals will raise immigration to 401,000 next year and 423,000 by 2023. They will also allow temporary foreign workers, foreign students and asylum seekers an easier path to citizenship. Basically, we'll take anyone who wants in, regardless of skill or ability. This will raise immigration to beyond 1% of our population per year. In other words, within 25 years, a third of our population will be new immigrants added since 2021. The native born population will sink to well below 50%. This will not leave any real opportunity for newcomers to assimilate, so our culture (and inevitably our laws) will be largely what newcomers decide they should be. Newcomers mainly come from non-democratic countries which are extremely religious, do not believe in tolerance towards religious or sexual minorities or equality for women. Nor do we screen any of them to weed out the most intolerant. There will be no discussion of this expanded immigration allowed, even though it will have a massive impact on the future of Canada. No studies will be made or have been made to justify this or predict the impact. But Trudeau's home province of Quebec will continue to be shielded as they control their own immigration and have lowered it so as to not overwhelm their culture and values. Mr. Trudeau says, however, that English Canada has no culture or values and is not a nation. Therefore there's nothing here worth preserving. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-canada-aims-to-accept-far-more-immigrants-in-next-three-years/

In the USA and perhaps even in Canada people recognize that the media is biased and therefore treat it with suspicion. Unfortunately the same can't be said about the European countries where the trust in the so-called national broadcasters as well as the newspapers is rock-solid. Or that is the case in Finland. Our propaganda-machine declares 95% trustworthy-rates. However, I guess the situation is the same in Britain with the BBC. Its worldwide recognition as some sort of an impartial voice has fooled a lot of people believing what they tell you.

I think your on crack, lets start with numbers from your own source, maybe it is the new math, next year over 400,000 new immigrants will enter Canada, but our major cities only have 175,000 surplus homes.... while your numbers seem huge it is the lack of housing that has driven the prices up. Toronto, Montreal, and most of the other big cities have an infra structure deficit, meaning they don't have the means to take on large numbers with out major construction, road networks, sewage plants, power grids, ... how does taking in more immigrants solve any of these problem help these problems , and while a lot are going to be placed in rural Canada, most will make they're way to these big city centers overwhelming them... Who foots the bill for all of that, I'm sure the major in Toronto just breathed a sigh of relieve because you think it is going to be alright.. And while you big city boys are used to crowded cities , here in the country not so much... The report states 66,000 homes are sitting empty in Toronto, and around 64,000 vacant homes are in Montreal. Calgary, Ottawa and Edmonton each “have more than 20,000 vacant properties,” and Vancouver has around 25,000 vacant homes.

Canada also has a challenge with net immigration, in that a percentage of landed immigrants as permanent residents and naturalized citizens will leave Canada for other countries over time. It is estimated that 10% of Canadians do not live in Canada. Bringing in more immigrants helps to offset the bleeding.

Another beheading in France.. France is now hardening it's stance against radical Islam, but it's bit late isn't it. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-knife-attack-nice-terrorism-officials-say/?intcid=CNI-00-10aaa3b

Interestingly when people who say that there aren't too many immigrants therefore must have some sort of an idea when there are too many immigrants and when asked about it like exact figures they never come up with any accurate answer.

Would you object to all of the provinces having control over their own immigration just as Quebec does? Birth rates are low in Canada so we have to boost our population largely with people who may not now or never share Canadian values? I want people to come to Canada that have the skills we need and are proficient in our official languages . This policy amounts to Liberals importing new voters for themselves. I also think there's something to the argument about taking the best people from poorer countries being harmful to the long term development of said countries.

True...because the population growth Ponzi scheme (through immigration) to fund entitlement programs is far easier to accomplish than higher worker productivity and return on capital. Government acturaries help to bend the narrative to favour political expediency. Access to younger, cheaper labour is irresistible.

Biden looks like someone who you are not sure about if he can make it to next week let alone that he would last four years.

No...this is a simplistic view of what drives economic growth and how GDP is measured. It is certainly possible to grow an economy without population growth through higher worker productivity, higher education, higher return on capital. If population growth alone was the "standard", many developing countries around the world would have robust and growing economies. Population growth is the standard for western governments to fund entitlement programs in the future.

The proof of credible claim deserving of investigation and newsworthiness has already been supplied. Where's your evidence saying it's not credible? We can get into that if you like but right now I've got something that's more fun. It's a conspiracy theory. Unlike the laptop from Hell, and other evidence incriminating the Biden crime family, there is no hard evidence here. It's just a fun thing to think about. The FBI have had the laptop with the incriminating emails and other hard evidence for about a year. There's talk of a money laundering investigation. But nothing has actually been done. The FBI won't publicly announce their intentions. In the meantime the Dems slipped a seemingly harmless, seemingly moderate candidate into the race. But behind that they planted a hard core Prog-Comm in Kamala Harris. Then Nancy Pelosi did this below, which at the time seemed a little irrational: But nothing came of it as far as using the 25th to attack Trump so we forgot about it. See where I'm going? Nancy getting the 25th ready was never about attacking Trump. It's for if Joe gets elected. He was fine as a candidate but the more radical, farther left but unelectable Kamala Harris was who the elite cabal on top wanted for President. If Biden is elected all of a sudden the FBI decides it's time to lay charges and Nancy roles out the 25th amendment. Welcome President Kamala Harris. Hail to the chief.

The actual funny thing is that I can name dozens of bizarre lies told by Biden, the Dems and CNN over just the past 4 years. I mention those things specifically here over and over. Can you name Trump's biggest lies from the past 4 years? Honestly, you've gotta have some good stuff, comparable to "there is no such thing as Antifa" or you're just a complete idiot.

This is why you and I will never see eye to eye on immigration. I use statistics, government reports and facts. For you it's all down to your noble self-appointed duty to protect 'brown people' from anyone casting doubt on their perfection. Facts and logic don't enter into the argument. All you care about are that they're 'brown' and thus they must be protected. Because it's not like they can protect themselves without your help, after all. You should get over your liberal bigotry.

I'm trying to address your point that "Trump has been lining his pockets " since he's been in office courtesy of the Treasury. You put up some link that suggested he's taken over $8 million from the government for various things. I said that his overall net worth has declined since becoming President which apparently is rare . The link I put up had his net worth declining by $1 billion. $1 billion is a much greater sum than $8 million. At this time, Trump is not as wealthy as he was before he took office. Compare this to the Obama's they went from $1.3 million to over $40 million.How about the Clinton's getting extremely wealthy from pay to play as well?

Joe Biden campaign song- Elect this man!

Can you show me any links that actually support what you said, namely that Trump has been lining his pockets daily and presumably increasing his net worth while doing so?

Please let us know when an abandoned laptop with this information turns up to verify what you claim.

How much money did Trump get for his dead mother from We Charity ?

That's the beauty...it is not "embarrassing". No extra virtue signaling burden to carry around in a pit of self-imposed guilt. Quite liberating....

The Governor of Minnesota blocks Trump rally. Forces a cap of 250...tens of thousands left at the airport gates.

Hearing the name Bobby Orr always brings back great memories. He has always been a class act from day one.It takes a lot of courage for anyone to voice their support for Donald Trump but even more so for celebrities. We all know what kind of vicious backlash is now going to be directed at Orr but kudos to him for standing up!

Germany was unable to carry on with the collapse in the fall of 1918. The myth of the "stab in the back" grew out of a dinner conversation between Ludendorff and a British officer after the armistice. The British officer asked Ludendorff why Germany surrendered when it did. Ludendorff struggled to come up with a face saving explanation and the Brit offered something like "Were you stabbed in the back?" Ludendorff siezed on the phrase and the myth was born. The reality was Germany was broke and could no longer provide for the civil population. Mutinies and riots broke out and civil authority began to crumble. Hindinburg and Ludendorf decided that an Armistice before the allies crossed into Germany was preferable to total defeat. They saw the armistice as a pause while the allies saw it as a surrender. However, Germany collapsed at that point. During the latter part of the war, the emphasis was on support for the troops at the expence of the civil population. That led to the bewilderment of the troops at the front who could not understand why the generals surrendered. They had no idea what conditions were like back home. Defeat in war carries serious psychological consequences for the losers. It is emasculating. That leads to an unwillingness to face the reality that you were overwhelmed by superior force or tactics and the need to find a scapegoat, whether it is the jews, the generals or the democrats. Churchill was the one who recognized this problem and in 1945, he and General Marshall settled on a plan. "In defeat, resolution; in victory, magnanimy." They rebuilt the enemy nations rather than punish them. One more bit of trivia before I have my coffee. There is a myth that Germans flocked to the colours at the outbreak in 1914. The famous photo of the crowd in which Hitler was spotted years later was doctored. Hitler was ther, but the crowd wasn't that large. Many Germans were not happy with going to war. Life was pretty good at the time and a war wasn't viewed as a good idea.

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ Nuf said

You are wrong. I live very close to nature , right beside those fish and animals. All I need is to walk to the river and pull out my fish. The billionaires can go to the bank and then to the empty grocery store , drive themselves home and die peacefully. Nothing is under their control. They only ride the tide and hope it goes on forever, but tough chance :-)

Your crazy, you think Bill Gates Oprah Winfrey are going to go broke, they'll be sitting back eating the last of your fish while you and me have turned to dust... money is power, and power is control of the masses.... hence why the world runs on money and wealth....

So the "Muslim world" is up in arms yet again (are they ever not?). This time over French president Macron talking about how he's going to deal with foreign influence on France's Muslims and attack Islamists. It's worth noting that much of the Muslim world has spent the last year licking the feet of China's leader and praising him for his human rights record while ignoring that he's put a million Muslims into concentration camps to get them to abandon Islam. Turkey's would-be new Sultan has led the charge, as he's hoping to take up the mantle of great defender of Islam. He's certainly well on his way to establishing an Islamic state given he's destroyed all democratic freedoms in his country and thrown tens of thousands into prison and murdered hundreds of people. Now Muslims in places like Jordan and Egypt and Syria are boycotting French goods and making threats against France and Frenchmen, and no doubt soon there'll be more Muslim terrorism in France. Which, it seems to me, is just going to further harden France towards Islam and Muslims. I wonder if there will ever be a respectable Muslim government during my lifetime. I mean, there's fifty of them. You'd think one or two might be democratic, care a little about human rights, be competent and honest. But so far in the history of the world, nope. Every Muslim country continues to be bastions of intolerance, violence, and governmental corruption. https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20201028-turkey-blasts-charlie-hebdo-s-immoral-caricature-of-erdogan

The challenges plastic poses are only beginning to be understood, e.g. microplastics.

The Crusades were a response to Islamic aggression.

It's important to Islam to keep women as virtual slaves owned by the men in their lives. Putting them in bags and behind masks is part of that slavery.

Like what? Their right to behead people?

The Quran states exactly what Muslims are to believe. There is no moderate Quran. Screen all you like...the answer is the same.

Maybe the French should learn to screen their would-be refugees better, especially the Muslims. Canada should do the same. Any would-be asylum claimant or immigrant should be carefully screened to see what century they're living in. And people with attitudes like yours kept out.

What an incredibly inhumane comment. Maybe you should learn that its wrong to kill people who think or believe differently than you. We need fewer Muslims who think like you and that kid, and more like my brother-in-law and my neighbor, who don't support the death penalty against non-believers. What an ugly person you are.

He was incredibly foolish to think that followers of Islam are peaceful and would not respond to said accusation of "indecency" by committing bloody murder. And to think that other followers of Islam would excuse that.

Titan II's "Whoop"