Canada’s Illusion of Security: Carney’s 2035 Pledge Can’t Defend 2025

 

❄️ “We are unarmed and undefended right now.”

— Lt.-Gen. Michel Maisonneuve (Ret’d)

While Ottawa boasts of future spending, Canada remains a glasshouse today—undefended, unprepared, and dangerously dependent.

Canada’s Boutique Military: The Liberal Legacy

Canada is not a fireproof house. It is a glasshouse with no alarms, relying on its neighbour to call 911. What was once a nation of peacekeepers is now a country outsourcing sovereignty while pretending all is well.

This decline was no accident. Since 2015, Justin Trudeau and his advisor Mark Carney treated defence as theatre—obsessed with image and pageantry while the Canadian Forces crumbled.

• NATO ignored: Barely 1.37% of GDP in 2024.
• Procurement chaos: Endless delays, grounded planes, rusting submarines.
• Personnel crisis: Recruitment collapse, scandals, and distrust.
• Arctic neglect: Talk, delay, and hope instead of hard defence.

This was ideology—the illusion that Canada could “opt out” of geopolitics.

The Great Pledge: Reality or Mirage?

Now, under Prime Minister Mark Carney, Canada has joined NATO’s new pledge: 5% of GDP by 2035, with 3.5% for core military and 1.5% for dual-use infrastructure.

The rhetoric is grand. Carney promises modernized forces, new industries, and high-paying jobs. But let’s be clear: this pledge is a decade away. In military terms, that is an eternity—and Canada’s enemies will not wait until 2035.

A review in 2029? That’s four more years of drift before accountability even begins. Carney may be buying time, not security.

A Culture Afraid of Strength

While Liberal elites mocked Thatcher, Reagan, and Trump, it was their resolve and spending that held the line in global crises. Canadians cheered Trudeau’s selfies while U.S. pilots intercepted Russian bombers over our skies.

Now they applaud Carney’s polished speeches, even as today’s military sits in ruins. Canada remains addicted to consensus and allergic to strength.

Delusion or Defence: Canada’s Choice

Canada cannot coast on a decade-long promise. We need urgent action now, not vague targets for 2035.

The Minimum Reset Canada Needs

• Action this year, not 2035: Carney’s 5% GDP pledge sounds bold, but Canada must reach 2% immediately to meet NATO’s minimum standard now.
• Procurement by purchase, not promises: Buy modern off-the-shelf systems—F-35s, drones, Arctic submarines—before another decade of delay.
• A recruitment renaissance: End bureaucracy; rebuild pride, purpose, and trust in service.
• Arctic sovereignty secured: Bases, early-warning systems, drones, and allied integration must be operational before others claim the frontier.
• Purge leadership paralysis: Clear out the culture of delay, denial, and political theatre that has crippled defence for decades.

Wake Up, Canada

A pledge for 2035 does not defend Canada in 2025. Pearson once called Canada a “fireproof house.” Today it is a glasshouse filled with tinder—waiting for someone else to hold the matches.

Gaza, Genocide, and the Propaganda Machine

 Allegations that Israel committed genocide in Gaza (2023–2025) are factually false. They rest on manipulated data, Hamas propaganda, and uncritical amplification by UN agencies, NGOs, and media.

Israel must be judged on facts, not fabrications. The Hamas-UN-NGO propaganda machine spreads falsehoods that delegitimize Israel and undermine international law itself. And the world must recognize the danger of genocide inflation — before it becomes the excuse for the next real genocide.

The Gaza war was brutal. Innocent people died. Israel made mistakes, and Hamas committed crimes against its own civilians. But the charge of genocide? It is a lie, born of Hamas propaganda, legitimized by flawed UN and NGO reporting, and echoed by a lazy global media.

The war between Israel and Hamas from October 7, 2023, through June 2025 was bloody, tragic, and devastating. Tens of thousands were killed, and Gaza’s civilian population endured immense suffering. But the charge that Israel committed genocide is not just false — it is a calculated propaganda weapon. It is designed to delegitimize Israel while cheapening the very meaning of genocide itself.

The Starvation Myth

For nearly two years, NGOs, UN agencies, and media outlets echoed the claim that Israel intentionally starved Gaza. The “evidence”? The 500 trucks per day figure, supposedly the minimum for survival. In reality, before the war, the daily average was 292 trucks, of which just 73 carried food.

From October 2023 until the January 2025 ceasefire, Israel allowed more food into Gaza than before the war. Famine projections — such as the UN IPC’s claim of 78,582 hunger deaths by January 2025 — never materialized. Life expectancy and infant mortality rates in Gaza were improving until Hamas launched its war.

Israel’s March 2025 halt of aid was a mistake and deserves criticism. But even then, Gaza still had months of food stocks, looted by Hamas and local armed groups. This was not genocide — it was war distorted by propaganda.

Hamas’s Human Shield Strategy

Gaza was the most fortified urban battlefield in modern history: a 500 km tunnel network with 5,700 shafts, deliberately interwoven with homes, schools, hospitals, and mosques. Hamas fighters wore civilian clothes, launched rockets from UN facilities, and booby-trapped entire neighbourhoods.

Civilian deaths were not just collateral to Hamas — they were a deliberate tactic to generate outrage abroad and constrain Israel’s operations. Any serious analysis of Gaza’s casualties must account for Hamas’s strategy. Most NGOs and journalists never did.

The Massacre Narrative

Propaganda painted a picture of Israeli soldiers mowing down civilians, executing children, and slaughtering families. The evidence? Thin to nonexistent. Out of more than 50,000 deaths reported, only 61 cases had any credible forensic backing for deliberate killing by Israeli troops.

There is no evidence of systematic massacres. No videos, no photographs, no mass graves — nothing comparable to Syria’s sectarian killings, ISIS in Mosul, or even Hamas’s own atrocities on October 7.

Some Israeli soldiers may have committed war crimes. Those cases must be investigated and punished. But isolated crimes are not genocide. The narrative of mass executions is a Hamas fabrication eagerly recycled by NGOs hungry for headlines.

The Indiscriminate Bombing Lie

Accusations of “carpet bombing” crumble under scrutiny. The IDF took unprecedented precautions: phone calls, text messages, leaflets, and “roof-knock” warnings to evacuate civilians. Hundreds of operations were vetoed over proportionality concerns.

Fatalities in Israel’s designated “safe zones” were only 2–3.5% of total deaths — proof that these zones, while not immune, were indeed safer. Claims of “civilian death quotas” (e.g., 20 per Hamas fighter) were never substantiated and are flatly false.

Yes, civilians died in horrifying numbers. But this was the nature of a war fought in one of the most densely packed battlefields on Earth — not proof of intent to annihilate.

The Casualty Count Manipulation

For years Hamas’s Gaza Health Ministry has ordered combatants listed as “innocent civilians.” During this war, the pattern repeated. Early claims that 70% of casualties were women and children were false. Updated lists show women and minors made up ≈50.7%, while most adult males were combatants.

Hamas’s figures included natural deaths, inflated child numbers, and quietly deleted thousands of “verified” victims. Yet UN agencies, Western governments, and even some Israeli critics parroted the numbers uncritically.

The UN/NGO Bias Pattern

This is not new. In the 1990s, the UN claimed half a million Iraqi children had died under sanctions. It was a lie — later admitted, but long after it had shaped world opinion. The same pattern repeated in Gaza: alarmist claims amplified; corrections buried.

This “humanitarian bias” — believing the worst, repeating it without verification, and refusing to retract loudly — fuels propaganda and delegitimizes international law.

Genocide Inflation

Throwing the word “genocide” at every bloody urban conflict does not protect victims. It destroys the word’s meaning. Real genocides — the Holocaust, Rwanda, Yazidis under ISIS — involved deliberate campaigns of extermination. Gaza does not.

If every war marked by urban destruction and tragic civilian deaths is labelled genocide, the world will lose the ability to confront actual genocides when they come. Hamas and its enablers are not just lying about Israel — they are weakening the very laws meant to prevent future atrocities.

Conclusion: Truth Without Blinkers

The Gaza war was brutal. Innocent people suffered and died. But genocide? No. That accusation is a propaganda weapon forged by Hamas, fueled by NGOs and UN echo chambers, and spread by a credulous media.

Israel should be judged on facts, not fabrications. And the world must wake up to the danger of genocide inflation before it becomes a license for the next real genocide.

SOURCE:

https://besacenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/213-2.9.2025-Edited.pdf

Mandatory Public Health and Substance Testing for Candidates: A Democratic Imperative

 1. The Nature of Democratic Power Demands Maximum Transparency

In a transparent democracy, elected officials are entrusted with authority by the people. This authority includes decisions over war and peace, life and death, economics, public safety, and civil rights. For such a sacred trust to be legitimately conferred, votersy must have complete and equal access to all material information that affects a candidate’s fitness to serve.

To conceal potentially disqualifying health or addiction issues under the veil of “privacy” is to subvert the electorate’s right to make an informed choice. This is not just imprudent—it’s undemocratic.

---

2. Office Seekers Are Not Private Citizens

There is a fundamental difference between a private citizen and a candidate for office. The former has a right to privacy; the latter voluntarily enters a contract with the public, where transparency becomes a condition of entry.

This contract must include:

• A full public health test, including cognitive, neurological, and physical assessments.

• A substance use screening, covering both recent and habitual usage patterns.

• Public disclosure of results, without redactions, sanitized summaries, or politically massaged reports.

If teachers, pilots, soldiers, and commercial drivers must meet clear medical and drug standards to ensure the public’s safety, how much more so should those who seek to govern?

---

3. No Elitist Exceptions in a Real Democracy

To argue that the public cannot handle a candidate’s medical truth is to infantilize the electorate. To say that disclosure may “stigmatize” is to prioritize personal reputation over democratic legitimacy.

Health issues that do not affect performance will be judged fairly. Those that do should be known. Truth cannot harm democracy—only its concealment can.

---

4. Proposed Standard

A democratic reform bill should include:

• Mandatory health and substance tests for all candidates seeking public office, regardless of level (municipal, state, federal).

• Independent public agencies (not political appointees) to administer and publish results.

• Annual re-testing for incumbents seeking re-election or holding executive office.

This would set a global gold standard for integrity in democratic elections.

---

Closing Thought

A democracy that shields its most powerful aspirants from scrutiny—while surveilling and judging ordinary citizens—is not a democracy at all. It is a hypocrisy.

If you want the people’s vote, you must submit to the people’s test.

Iran and the Death of Civility: A Factual Examination of a Regime at Odds with Peace

 

The World Must Open Its Eyes

For more than four decades, the Islamic Republic of Iran has projected itself as a victim of Western aggression. But history paints a starkly different picture. From the moment the Ayatollahs seized power in 1979, the regime has waged a campaign of hatred, violence, and repression—not only against its own people but across borders. Its slogan, "Death to America," has not been symbolic: it has translated into hundreds of American lives lost, thousands of civilians terrorized, and a population held hostage by fear.

If the world truly seeks peace, then it must recognize that Iran has consistently acted outside the bounds of civil society. This article lays out the facts.

1. “Death to America” Is Not a Metaphor

The slogan “Death to America” (Marg bar Āmrikā) has been a foundational rallying cry since 1979. It is chanted weekly at state-sponsored rallies and endorsed by top leadership:

• Ayatollah Khomeini (1979): Called the U.S. the “Great Satan.”

• Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei (2015): “When we say death to America, we mean death to U.S. policies. We have no problem with the American people.”

• Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati (2014): “We are the enemies of America… Death to America is our number one slogan.”

These are not fringe voices — they are the regime’s top authorities. Imagine any Western government broadcasting weekly chants calling for the destruction of another country and being treated as a legitimate member of the international community. The UN condones and accepts such hatred rhetoric.

2. Killings of Americans: Blood on the Regime’s Hands

Iran has directly or indirectly been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans:

Beirut, 1983

A truck bomb orchestrated by Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy in Lebanon, killed 241 U.S. Marines.

Iraq War, 2003–2011

Iranian-manufactured Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFPs) were responsible for the deaths of at least 603 American service members, according to the Pentagon.

Baghdad, 2022

Stephen Troell, an American aid worker, was assassinated by Iranian intelligence-linked operatives. In 2024, the U.S. Justice Department charged IRGC captain Mohammad Reza Nouri with orchestrating the murder.

These aren’t accidents of war. They are part of a deliberate strategy of asymmetrical warfare: kill Americans through proxies, deny responsibility, and manipulate diplomacy.

3. Exporting Violence Through Proxies

Iran’s foreign policy is built on exporting the revolution through terror:

• Hezbollah (Lebanon): Funded and armed by Iran; responsible for attacks in Argentina (1994) and Syria.

• Hamas (Gaza): Regular recipient of Iranian support; uses civilian shields while attacking Israel.

• Kata’ib Hezbollah (Iraq): Engaged American forces with lethal precision weaponry.

• Houthis (Yemen): Launching drone and missile attacks at civilian infrastructure and U.S. naval vessels.

Through these proxies, Iran has killed Americans, Israelis, Saudis, Yemenis, Lebanese, Syrians, and others, while masquerading as a “resistance” force.

4. Brutal Control at Home: A Regime Built on Fear

Iran’s greatest victims are often its own citizens:

• 2009 Green Movement: Protesters were beaten, imprisoned, and tortured after contesting fraudulent elections.

• 2022 Mahsa Amini Protests: After the death of 22-year-old Amini in morality police custody, protests erupted across Iran. The regime responded with mass shootings, arrests of minors, rapes in detention, and public executions.

• Censorship & Surveillance: Iran ranks among the worst global violators of press and internet freedom. The regime blocks, filters, and punishes dissent at every level.

The regime’s morality police enforce dress codes and gender norms with violence. Iran executes more people per capita than any other country. Girls as young as 13 can be married. LGBT citizens are routinely tortured or executed.

5. A Nuclear ProgramWrapped in Lies

Despite claiming peaceful intentions, Iran has repeatedly deceived the world:

• It concealed nuclear facilities at Fordow and Natanz.

• It has enriched uranium to 60% purity, alarmingly close to weapons-grade.

• It has denied access to international inspectors and conducted secret ballistic missile tests.

Iran’s nuclear strategy has always been deception, delay, and defiance—a strategy meant to buy time while building leverage.

6. A Dangerous Double Standard

One of the most alarming realities is not only what the Iranian regime does, but how the global community enables it:

• Russia and China provide Iran with arms, money, and political cover.

• European leaders, while condemning Israeli defensive actions, pursue deals with Tehran, even after terror plots on their soil.

• UN institutions, ostensibly neutral, repeatedly fail to hold Iran accountable—yet obsess over liberal democracies.

This moral inconsistency emboldens Iran. When the world rewards aggression with negotiation, the regime learns that terror pays.

7. Iran Is Not Its People

A key truth: Iran’s regime is not the Iranian people.

Millions of Iranians—especially women, students, artists, and exiled voices—despise the regime. They yearn for freedom and modernity. Many chant "Death to the Dictator" at personal risk. Protests have erupted in dozens of cities despite brutal crackdowns.

Any strategy to confront Iran must also support the democratic aspirations of its people. They are not the enemy—they are the first and longest-suffering victims of the regime.

8. From Condemnation to Policy: What Must Be Done

Words are no longer enough. The free world must act with clarity and resolve. That includes:

• Designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization globally.

• Freezing regime assets and funding channels, including those funneled through cultural centers or fake charities.

• Supporting Persian-language free media and online anonymity tools for dissidents.

• Rejecting any new nuclear deals unless verifiably tied to complete military de-escalation.

• Publicizing and documenting Iran’s domestic and international crimes without fear of diplomatic discomfort.

  Conclusion: Iran Must Be Dealt With — Decisively

  The world cannot plead ignorance. It cannot pretend Iran is misunderstood, or that appeasement will moderate its violence.

  Iran's leadership chants death to the West. It funds terror, kills innocents, tortures children, oppresses women, and builds nuclear weapons—all while demanding international respect.

  This is not a country seeking peace. It is a regime committed to confrontation with civilization itself.

  For the world to have peace, Iran must be dealt with—not by war alone, but through uncompromising truth, unified policy, and moral courage. Anything less is complicity.

It’s Time to Let Go: Why Canadians Would Be Better Off Privatizing Canada Post

Why Canada Should Privatize Canada Post: A Case for Urgent Reform

Once a cornerstone of national communication, Canada Post is now a financial black hole. The Crown corporation has lost over $3 billion since 2017, including $748 million in 2023 alone. Its model, designed for a world of handwritten letters and in-person bill payments, is no longer viable in the digital age. Canadians need to ask themselves an urgent, practical question: Should taxpayers continue bankrolling a failing 20th-century operation in the 21st century? 

The answer is no. Canada would be better off selling or privatizing Canada Post.

1. A Business Built for a Bygone Era

Canada Post was designed to deliver 5.5 billion letters annually. Today, it delivers fewer than 2.2 billion, and that number is still declining. This collapse of letter mail is not a temporary trend — it’s structural. Digitally native generations have moved on, and this legacy infrastructure no longer serves its original purpose.

Yet, taxpayers are still subsidizing a model built for a time when email didn’t exist.

2. Losses Piling Up — With No End in Sight

According to its audited reports:

• 2023: $748 million lost

• 2022: $548 million lost

• No profit since 2017

This pattern is not cyclical. It’s systemic. The organization is underpricing its services and offering them at unsustainable levels. As Lee bluntly states, “Canada Post is underpricing every service it offers because it’s losing billions.”

3. Labour Costs and Strike Culture

With over 55,000 unionized employees, Canada Post faces perpetual labour unrest. The Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) has threatened another strike, upset over weekend delivery changes, pay, benefits, and pensions. The last strike lasted 32 days and caused widespread disruption, especially for small businesses.

Instead of modernizing, CUPW is doubling down on a broken model. Strikes won’t solve a business crisis-reform will.

4. Inefficiency by Design

Canada Post’s current delivery model is not just outdated — it’s inefficient. Letter carriers go to 17 million addresses five days a week, whether there’s mail or not. In contrast, parcel delivery companies operate on a demand-driven model — they only deliver when there’s something to deliver.

No private sector company could survive this level of redundancy, and taxpayers shouldn’t be forced to foot the bill.

5. Pivot to Parcels: Too Little, Too Late?

While parcel delivery is growing, Canada Post isn’t competitive in that space either. Private-sector players like FedEx, UPS, and Amazon Logistics dominate in speed, tracking technology, and customer service. The public postal service remains sluggish and technologically dated.

Lee notes that private parcel companies operate efficiently with 5,000 to 10,000 employees — a fraction of Canada Post’s workforce.

6. Let the Market Lead

Privatization is not a radical idea. It’s a logical step. By removing political interference and entrenched union controls, a privatized Canada Post could:

• Operate with market-driven accountability

• Invest in innovation and logistics

• Adjust prices to reflect true delivery costs

• Expand parcel competitiveness

• Franchise or partner with retail outlets for post office access

7. The European Model: Proof Privatization Works

Canada would not be alone in reforming its postal system. In fact, it’s behind the curve.

Since 2013, the European Union has mandated the elimination of postal monopolies across all member states, opening the door for full competition. While the EU did not require privatization, several countries took the next logical step — and have reaped the benefits.

• Germany privatized Deutsche Post beginning in the late 1990s. It is now a global logistics leader under the DHL brand — efficient, profitable, and internationally competitive.

• Austria and the Netherlands followed suit, transitioning to privatized models that preserved universal service while drastically improving innovation and cost-efficiency.

• These countries maintained postal access in rural areas by leveraging franchise models and flexible service options, rather than relying on outdated, taxpayer-funded infrastructure.

The result? Better service, leaner costs, no ongoing public bailouts, and postal companies that are now global competitors, not public liabilities.

If the EU’s most bureaucratically cautious governments can modernize their systems, why can’t Canada?

Conclusion: A Future Beyond the Mailbox

Canada Post was once an essential public utility. But times have changed. The service has not kept pace with digital disruption, labour realities, or technological innovation. Instead of clinging to nostalgia, Canada should follow the example of countries that have successfully modernized through privatization and liberalization.

The cost of inaction is clear: more losses, more bailouts, more disruption.

It’s time to deliver real reform — and finally put the red-and-white mailbox back in the hands of the people it was meant to serve.