Exposed: Justin Trudeau’s Abusive Relationship With Anglophone Canada

How often it is that media report on abusive relationships occurring within society. Cases of physical abuse, psychological abuse, as well as abuse of a sexual nature have been front-and centre within media for decades.

Other forms, not so much. One in particular has nagged at Cultural Action Party for a number of years. Here we are speaking of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s abuse of specific communities within Canada’s pluralist society.

Justin Trudeau is a highly selective national leader. In an act of social inversion, new arrivals to Canada are top priority, while the Canadian-born— often referred to as “Old Stock” citizens— have been transitioned to second class status.

Not that one would discover this inversion by way of establishment media. In a case of extreme irony, media powers fully support Trudeau’s community inversion. How odd this is– seeing as 90% of media power-players in Canada are, in fact, Old Stock Canadians.

Curious, isn’t it? The very reason why the entire dynamic is being hidden from the consciousness of 38 millions citizens. What we have here is a form of organized malevolence– the running down of identifiable communities by government.

There are two in particular, with an overlap between them– Canadians of Anglophone heritage, and Christian-Canadians. This flies directly in the face of accepted social beliefs. Within the world of Liberal-Globalism, it is Anglo-Canadians who are the oppressors, and everyone else is the victim.

CAP say hogwash to this. What is actually occurring is a consolidation of former “outsider” communities into a political powerhouse. Their pied piper is Justin Trudeau.  Together, they are making phenomenal progress.

Old Stock Canadians are racist. “Systemic racism” is their game, and this cannot continue. The question CAP pose at this point is simple in nature:

Is the goal of the anti-Anglo movement one of social equality? Or rather is the unspoken objective to replace these communities as post-modern rulers of society?

For CAP’s money, no finer example of such a phenomenon can be found than  within the pages of writer George Orwell’s novel, “Animal Farm.”

As an allegory for communist takeover, the animals rid the premises of the human master of the farm. Over time, the pigs replace the farmer, participating in all the human-like transgressions the owner previously indulged in.

As they begin to wear clothes, drink alcohol and sleep on beds, the pigs end up replicating the power and control once held by the farmer.

This, folks, is what CAP see in the concept of Canadian multiculturalism. The goal is not equality– the goal is the usurping of power. The underlying theme of Animal Farm deals with communist ideology. Likewise for Justin Trudeau’s agenda for our country. The hidden agenda is one of incremental transition from democracy to dictatorship.

READ MORE: Is Trudeau Facilitating China’s Move To Control Northern Canada’s Economy?

 

In order to accomplish such a task without general society rebelling, two elements must exist. Firstly, as mentioned, it must be incremental in nature. Too much at once time will alarm the Canadian public, and stimulate potential rioting in the streets.

The other essential service is coordination by government and media. This is all sewn up at present. Step-by-step, the Great Reset agenda is unfolding upon Canadian soil.

Universal Basic Income is socialist in nature. As buried by media, immigration policy is resulting in a permanent lock on governance for Trudeau’s Liberals. The examples are, in fact, endless– but only if one looks beyond the presentation of mainstream media.

One commonality among nations which have transitioned to dictatorships on an historical basis must be noted–they all include a targeted nemesis community.

It is here we find the purpose of Justin Trudeau’s alienation of Old Stock Canadians. Based upon his progress, CAP predict Anglophones will transition to a second class community at approximately the same time democracy in Canada comes to an end.

— Brad Salzberg, CAP Founder(est. 2016)

3 thoughts on “Exposed: Justin Trudeau’s Abusive Relationship With Anglophone Canada”

  1. Good morning Brad, I as of yet have not read that novel but will some day soon, yet all of what you said of the book or specifically of Traideau is what I have been saying all along and yes there are many examples if you open your eyes to the scam, the real problem is obvious and that is we need to stop voting because the cards/dice are rigged, we need veto powers for politicians and our justice system and far more, we need our own militia to protect us against the enemy within, I will not continue but will say thank you for your hard work and honsty….!!!!!

    Reply
    • Animal Farm is around 120 pages. Imo it tells the story of Trudeau’s conversion of Canada to a socialist dictatorship-amazing but true–Brad

      Reply
  2. That’s the Charter that Justin Trudeau’s father brought into force in 1982. It seems that before the Charter hit its 40th anniversary, Justin is looking to shred Pierre’s legacy.

    The National Post reports that Liberal MPs voted Friday to shut down debate on a Conservative motion to review whether an amendment to broadcasting Bill C-10 violates charter rights.

    The controversial amendment would allow regulation of social media content and critics say it amounts to an attack on free speech.
    On Friday, a motion by Conservative MP Rachael Harder called for the Heritage committee to send the amended bill back to the justice minister for an updated “charter statement.”

    Charter statements are issued by the justice minister and look at the potential effects a government bill might have under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

    The existing charter statement, which states that C-10 is “carefully tailored” to be consistent with the right to freedom to expression, specifically cited a clause that was removed by the committee last Friday.

    “The removal of Section 4.1 from Bill C-10 fundamentally changes the legislation, and dissolves the ground on which the charter statement stood to justify charter compliance,” Harder said. “The original charter statement should be considered null and void.”

    Section 4.1 had exempted content posted by Canadians to platforms like YouTube from CRTC regulation.
    Conservative MP Scott Aitchison argued that the motion to “ask a Liberal justice minister” to review the bill is a “very reasonable compromise to make sure that as we proceed… that we’re doing so ensuring that we are not in any way infringing on Canadians’ fundamental freedom of expression.”
    Liberal MPs said that the committee is in the process of amending the legislation clause-by-clause, and it wouldn’t make sense to send the legislation for another review in the middle of that process.

    Under the legislation, “charter statements reflect the bill at the time of introduction and are not updated,” Liberal MP Anthony Housefather said. He added that if that charter statement “were to be updated at any point, for whatever reason if that was permissible, it would only make sense to do so at the end of debate of the bill, when all the amendments had been adopted, and one knew what the legislation would look like.”

    Liberal MP Julie Dabrusin proposed a motion to adjourn debate on the bill, effectively stopping the discussion. The five Liberal MPs on the committee and the sole NDP MP voted in favour of stopping the debate. The four Conservative committee members and one Bloc Québécois member voted against.

    On Twitter following the Friday afternoon meeting, Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault accused the Conservatives of delaying work on the bill and “putting the interests of big foreign streamers over those of Canadian creators.”

    The Liberal government has argued that it has no interest in regulating Canadians’ social media content, and that the bill is about supporting the cultural industry by ensuring the CTRC can impose the same Canadian content requirements and contributions on digital services like Netflix as it does on traditional broadcasting.

    A coalition of 40 organizations representing the cultural sector, including the film, TV and music sectors, issued a press release Friday afternoon condemning the Conservative Party for “sacrificing culture on the altar of partisanship.”
    But critics have said giving the federal government regulatory authority over social media content is dangerous, even if the current government doesn’t want to use that power to regulate Canadians’ online videos.

    Aitchison said at committee it’s “very concerning that the CRTC, while maybe [they] wouldn’t do it, would have the ability and the authority to start regulating individual Canadians’ content that they post on social media.”
    He added: “This is the fear that I have. Freedoms aren’t taken away in one fell swoop in societies. They’re chipped away, bit by bit by bit, all under the cover of, you know, some important protection of Canadians from some fear that we should have.”

    Indeed, our freedoms are being taken away in one fell swoop whether we like it or not. And we all know who will be affected most from this legislation, don’t we?

    Reply

Leave a Reply to anthony frizzell Cancel reply

*

code

%d bloggers like this: