Morning minute Are Canadians being played? March 30 2017

Saul Alinsky
Saul Alinsky

Screen Shot 2017-03-31 at 3.36.19 PM

RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-­Nots” must build power from flesh and blood.

RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.

RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecu­rity, anxiety and uncert­ainty.

RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrati­onal. It’s infuri­ating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into conces­sions.

RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.

RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news.

RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.

RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagin­ation and ego can dream up many more conseq­uences than any activist.

RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympat­hizes with the underdog.

RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constr­uctive altern­ative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, person­alize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not instit­utions; people hurt faster than instit­utions.


Commentary by Glenn Beck on Rules

RULE 1: These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corpor­ations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclus­ively with economic arguments.

RULE 2: Organi­zations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.

RULE 3: This happens all the time. Watch how many organi­zations under attack are blind-­sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.

RULE 4: This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credib­ility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commit­ments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.

RULE 5: Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.

RULE 6: Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activi­ties, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.

RULE 7: Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.

RULE 8: Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organi­zation a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-str­ate­gize.

RULE 9: Perception is reality. Large organi­zations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organi­zation will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclu­sions. The possib­ilities can easily poison the mind and result in demora­liz­ation.

RULE 10: Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demons­tra­tions during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred manage­ment’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.

RULE 11: Old saw:** If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organi­zations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.

RULE 12: This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, person­alized criticism and ridicule works.


1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people

2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.

3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.

5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).

6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.

7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.

8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.


Bilingualism Racist at it’s core!

Bilingualism the true cost

Here are just a few articles that expose the blatant anti-English Canadian policy put into place by the Trudeau #1 and the French separatists

You try and find these today you will be hard pushed to

And on and on it goes all at the expense over 80% of the Canadian population

How about Canada first that would be a refreshing change …. don’t hold your breath with any of these parties whether they be Federal or provincial

They all have their special interest groups and needest to say it’s NOT you!


Here’s one to look up “The Trouble with Canada Still

Here’s another “Serge Joyal making Canada a French Country

and the list goes on!


Pandering to Qubecers hurts nationSinister French forcesWhat is France up to?

Who is Sgt. Blackman?

Sgt Alexander Blackman ORG
Sgt. Alexander Blackman

Screen Shot 2017-03-22 at 2.17.39 PM

I want to tell you a short story about someone I think should never have been put in jail and I urge you all to look this up I will put links on my site, but what I want to get over in this short piece, is, that the people our soldiers are fighting are barbarians and we play nice and we play stupid ridiculous political games back where we are are suposedly safe and soundd while these heroes are stuck in some rat infested hole somewhere supposedly fighting to keep us safe and  we are more concerned about playing by our marquis of Queensbury rules than winning

Sgt Alexander Blackman: The case for and against the Royal Marine who murdered a wounded, unarmed Taliban fighter

In late May, J Company took its first casualties. They hit Blackman’s troop hard.

In a single bomb blast, his protege Lt Augustin and Marine Sam Alexander, 28, who had won the Military Cross on a previous tour, were killed. Others were maimed.

Horror followed horror. The Taliban displayed in a tree Royal Marine body parts torn off in another explosive blast, to taunt and demoralise the survivors — the kind of medieval barbarity that would surely be enough to test any man’s state of mind.

On another occasion, Blackman and his men had to hunt for a missing soldier who was subsequently found after being horribly tortured, executed and dumped in a watercourse.

Read more: 

Post-traumatic stress

It is hard to imagine the daily pressures faced by Blackman and the 15 men under his command as they performed their duties at Command Post Omar – a remote compound at the very frontline of the UK’s efforts to wrest back Helmand from the tyranny of the Taliban.

Undermanned and overstretched, the Marines lived for six months in a cramped mud-brick enclosure, patrolling for up ten hours a day and living with the constant threat of buried IED bombs and attack. Seven Marines from 42 Commando were killed during this tour and after one IED explosion, soldiers from the unit found body parts of British troops deliberately hung from a tree to taunt them.

On 15 September 2011, Sergeant Alexander Blackman pointed his 9mm pistol at the chest of a wounded Taliban fighter and pulled the trigger with the words: “Shuffle off this mortal coil you c***. It’s nothing you wouldn’t do to us.”

Unbeknown to the Royal Marine, his actions were recorded on the helmet-mounted camera of a comrade. In 2013, he was convicted by a court martial of murdering the unarmed insurgent – the first such conviction of a serving British soldier since the Second World War.

That this hugely experienced serviceman’s actions resulted in the killing of a prisoner is uncontested. But thereafter opinions about the nature of his crime, for which he is serving a minimum term of eight years’ imprisonment, diverge sharply.

To his supporters, Blackman is a “political scapegoat” whose lapse of judgment under pressures that would have crippled the steeliest warrior is being used to cover up the failings of Britain’s top brass in Afghanistan.

A psychiatric report on Blackman, presented only after his conviction, found that he and his men had been under near-intolerable stress. At sentencing, the court martial conceded it was likely the Marine had been suffering “to some degree from combat stress disorder”.

Campaigners argue that had this finding and other evidence been put to the court martial panel a different finding may well have been likely. Had he been found guilty of manslaughter, Blackman could have served around three years imprisonment and now been free.

Soros up to his old Tricks this time in Holland



On his weblog, Dutch investigative journalist Carel Brendel yesterday published an article on the first beneficiary of a subsidy, given out by the Democracy and Media Foundation (SDM). Brendel aimed some criticism at the subsidy earlier, writing that while SDM announced it, it is really paid for by George Soros’ Open Society Foundation (OSF) and led by Maartje Eigeman, who worked for OSF. Brendel also writes that the subsidy is really another attempt by the OSF to influence Dutch elections: the subsidies, ostensibly to fight discrimination of Muslims, offered a ‘fast-track procedure’ for those that were focused on the elections. From this, Brendel concludes that:

projects that are not affected by election issues have much less chance of getting money, because the subsidies will already be partially drained in order to finance political activities against the PVV and Geert Wilders, or against other parties and politicians that are not to the taste of OSF and SDM.

With the first benefactor now known, it seems Brendel’s prediction was right. The winner is the Foundation Platform of Islamic Organisations Rijnmond (SPIOR). They will organise a National Islam debate in the Netherlands’ largest mosque, the Essalam Mosque in Rotterdam, which has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Wilders has been invited, but he already declined. As he has done before, declining to debate with members of the Dutch branch (FION) of the Muslim Brotherhood in Europe (FIOE).

Brendel writes, that this affair seems to confirm his scepticism concerning the subsidies handed out by SDM and OSF.

more at


Muslim Brotherhood embedded into major party?

A shameful day in Canada’s history. Parliament passes an unconstitutional motion on Islam

Could it be that the Muslim brotherhood are well embedded into one of Canada’s major political parties?

Well there is some evidence out there to suggest that

If that is the case then it behooves those in that party who are to expose them whichever party it is, that assumes that it is on the one party!

more to follow!

This page will guide you to a number of links on this subject

The Gatestone Institute

CAIR USA has been repeatedly identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. It was listed as a Muslim Brotherhood front organization and as a terrorism entity by the United Arab Emirates in 2014. CAIR USA employees and former employees have a rather dubious history of criminal activity. Among those CAIR USA employees charged with criminal offences or deported have been Randall Ismail Royer (weapons and explosive charges), Bassam Khafagi (bank and visa fraud), Ghassan Elashi (terrorism financing of Hamas), and Nabil Sadoun (deported for ties to terrorist groups). Other members and fund-raisers for CAIR USA have also been charged.

In Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police investigation (Project Sapphire) into the International Relief Fund for the Afflicted and Needy (IRFAN) continues. IRFAN was one of four Muslim Brotherhood front groups identified during testimony to the Canadian Senate in 2015. The others were Islamic Relief Canada, the Muslim Association of Canada and the National Council of Canadian Muslims, formerly known as CAIR CAN. CAIR CAN, according to the U.S. State Department and a multiplicity of other sources, is the Canadian chapter of CAIR USA.

IRFAN had its charitable status revoked for funding terrorism in 2011 and was subsequently listed as a terrorism entity by the Government of Canada in 2014. It is not clear if the ongoing criminal investigation focuses only on those individuals leading IRFAN at the time of its delisting as a charity and listing as a terrorism entity, or if the investigation also includes those who helped found IRFAN. This may be an important distinction, as the Canada Revenue Agency stated that IRFAN was deliberately created and designed to circumvent Canadian terrorism-funding rules.

Another of the four front groups, the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC), also made the news in 2015. At that point, it was alleged that IRFAN continued to received funding from the Muslim Association of Canada even after IRFAN had its charitable status revoked for funding terrorism in 2011. This information came from an RCMP search warrant that was used to raid IRFAN premises in Mississauga and Montreal. In addition to funding issues, the MAC and IRFAN are connected to each other through common board members and their association to Hamas. IRFAN was funding Hamas and the MAC is one of only two organizations outside of Egypt that openly states it is a Muslim Brotherhood adherent group.

The Islamic Society of North America (Canadian Chapter) has also had its problems. Along with a variety of internal fraud issues, the ISNA Development Fund had the charitable status of its “Development Fund” revoked for terrorism funding. The terrorism-funding money in question was sent to the Relief Organization for Kashmiri Muslims (ROKM) with the ultimate aim of supporting Jamaat-e-Islami, widely known as the Muslim Brotherhood’s sister group in south Asia.

The gateway pundit

The Mosque Attacked In Canada Has Strong Ties To Terrorism

In a shocking report released by the TSEC Network, it has has been revealed that the Mosque that was attacked in Quebec, Canada was founded by followers of the Muslim Brotherhood and donated money to front organizations that directly support terrorists groups like HAMAS.

The article says that the Centre culturel islamique de Québec was originally founded by the Muslim Student Association according to it’s own history.

The National Post

Muslim Brotherhood has a ‘significant presence’ in Canada, says study urging probe into the group

TORONTO — The Muslim Brotherhood has established a “significant presence” in Canada, says a study released Tuesday that asks whether the government should follow the lead of the United Kingdom and launch an investigation into the group.

Calling the Brotherhood the “antithesis” of Canadian laws and values, the study urged Ottawa to deny public support and charity status to organizations aligned with the group, which promotes political Islam as an alternative to Western-style democracy.

The report is “intended to focus public attention on the requirement to have a national level discussion on the Muslim Brotherhood and its role in Canada,” said Tom Quiggin, the former Privy Council intelligence analyst who authored the study.

Mr. Quiggin, a court-recognized expert on terrorism, wrote the study without government or private funding. “Questions need to be raised about the accreditation, public funding and charity status of the organizations involved,” he said.