@realDonaldTrump Canada NEVER belonged 2 USA-U said u <3 Canada-Forcefully take? We WILL NOT b ur 51st state PLS RT pic.twitter.com/e5cS4pc3T8
— Patricia Moon (@nobledreamer16) July 30, 2016
The Burrard Street Journal is reporting that
DONALD J. Trump believes the U.S. “should never have allowed” Canada to gain independence. The republican candidate for president freely admits to being “a little rusty” on Canadian history, but feels confident that the United States owned Canada “at some point”, and claims giving it back was a “major mistake”.
The former reality tv star was responding to a question about Puerto Rico possibly becoming the 51st of the United States, when he made the statement. “It used to be 51 you know, when we had Canada,” Trump said, pointing to an American flag, “Or 52 if you count Mexico which I never will, no matter how much they beg.”
The interviewer Brian Kilmeade, seemed unmoved by Trump’s remark and asked him to explain his understanding of Canadian/American history, as the Fox host began scribbling notes:
“I personally think it was the biggest mistake in American history, giving Canada back. Look at that place now, it’s falling to pieces. It’s overrun by godless, gunless hippies and it’s such a shame to see.”
As the host nodded along, Trump explained that America got a “terrible deal” with Canada who “stole” the land over a thousand years ago “or something like that”.
“It was a truly awful deal. Canada gets Toronto and Vancouver, which has the hottest women, and what did we get? Alaska? The Florida of Canada? Such a terrible deal.”
“Well what are you going to do if elected?” Kilmeade asked. “Forcefully take Canada and claim it as part of America?”
“I think that’s gotta be an option,” Trump responded. “You know, they’ve got a lot of oil up there, a lot.”
“I’m not sure there is any evidence to support this theory, Donald,” Kilmeade intervened. “I mean wasn’t Canada founded by Britain and France who invaded–” “No, are you kidding me?” Trump interrupted. “You think that either of those guys know the first thing about war? No Canada has belonged to America since Jesus’ time, and that’s a fact.”
Shortly after the controversial interview, Trump reiterated his stance towards Canada with a tweet that was deleted 20 minutes later, not before being retweeted over 6,000 times.
I will also add the comments on the Vancouver Sun comment page criticizing Rocco Galati for using Charter Section 15 on behalf of “dirty Chinese Ponzi money” sound “cough cough” a lot like the comments you see in American newspaper whenever there is a new story about the latest name and shame renunciation list.
I really like “Homelander Canadian” Maggie Sinclair of Sechelt, BC calling Rocco Galati “offensive” for using Section 15 of the Charter this way just Joe Pumduck Homelander American and Miachupacabra Homelander American railing against the “offensiveness” of the ADCS lawsuit.
@Tim
Here’s something from the Vancouver Sun Article you referred to:
“Galati said the law is a violation of section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of, among other things, national origin.”
I’m not for or against the tax at this point. Don’t know that much about the issue. But will definitely be following it to see how case turns out with regard to possible violation of section 15 of the Charter. Interesting point you made.
Tim: Also wished to mention that I live in BC.
What is good about the Rocco Galati lawsuit is he looks to have a lot more money for his case than ADCS has. So if he wins on Section 15 it creates precedence for us to win too. I would argue that Galati just increased the odds of an ADCS win by 25 percent.
The Supreme Court of Canada is really trapped on the one. The BC government can’t use the 30 percent FATCA withholding threat against Galati as a cudgel as it has nothing directly to do with the Galati case. But if SCOC rules for Galati they will be “cornered” in the Arvay/ADCS suit as they will already have precedence from the Galati case on Section 15. The real problem is BC is going to have a hard time defending on section 1 which makes the odds of a Galati victory much higher.
I am actually a little surprised Arvay and Gruber haven’t found there way into the new BC property tax given the charter implications. Perhaps we will hear more in the coming weeks. In fact when I first heard the announcement in Victoria my first though were the charter implications and the second thought was whether Arvay/Gruber would be involved(my third thought was in the absence of Arvay/Gruber involvement Rocco Galati was probably next in line).
Here are the people that should have to pay more to buy real estate in Canada: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/06/30/the-property-of-the-usa-tattoo/
Attacking people’s character, intelligence or other personal attributes whether real, exaggerated or completely inaccurate, particularly when done under the guise of humour, ranks low on ‘Graham’s hierarchy of argument.’
Not claiming innocence that I’ve never done it. We’re all capable of doing better. Leaders are held to higher standards. With power comes responsibility.
Seeing that some participants object to this article, I would suggest that a compromise be that Patricia Moon renames the title, adding a “(From a Satirical Journal)” in parenthesis at the end of the title. This measure will abate some of the “WTF” effect when unwary Brockers who have not yet read the post navigate to IBS.
As a non-canuk Brocker, I had no clue what the Burrard Street Journal is, and did not catch on that the post was satire until I had read enough of the comments to the post.
We all know that Trump says a lot of brash and ignorant-sounding stuff, but quite frankly I was shocked when I read the headline.
Au bon entendeur: salut!
Well, for Heaven’s Sake:
What A Tempest ! A Trump Tempest of all things.
As a full on Donald Trump supporter I wish to state that folks around here sure have their shorts in a knot over Tricia’s post.
As it happened , I had watched the full interview between Brian Kilmeade and Donald Trump on You Tube , so knew the post was not an accurate description of the interview.
Had to be something else.
The posted remarks from the Beacon were so over the top one HAD to know it was satire.Followed by the poll made it certain.
It is agreed that there are such lies going around about Donald Trump that it was taken in a much more serious light than perhaps was intended.
But, seriously, all this talk about taking down the post, chastising Tricia because it was posted… Really… and influencing contributions in future , etc.
This is all a real , full on, overreaction and if we were not all on tenterhooks over our most serious personal situations and waiting most impatiently for the outcome of a case that will not be known for quite some time, we might have taken this with the tongue in cheek and grain of salt it was intended to be.
I just love Tricia. I think she is outstanding, hardworking, empathetic, warm and funny.
We owe her a lot as well as the rest of the team working tirelessly on our behalf.
I am very grateful for it.
Let’s all take a deep breath. It is a long way until November 8th. And an even longer way to our court case, appeals, etc. before we have a definitive answer.
For one thing, the US election is as serious as a heart attack, but it has proven to be highly entertaining.
Who would have thought that Hillary’s moniker would be “crooked Hillary” or that Donald Trump would be imitated by Glenn Beck planting his face in a plate of crushed up Cheesies !
( the man has gone bonkers!)
None of us has any influence over the outcome but it will be profound for the entire world.
So we might as well enjoy the process as much as we can.
Which may have been Tricia’s intent all along. In any case it is a tempest in a very over steeped pot of tea.
Good on ya Tricia. I am not offended in any way and neither should anyone else here.
We do not all agree all the time and sometimes not any of the time but that is not why we are here
.
There is one thing I can be sure of: Tricia meant no harm but she has been hurt by this unfair and unreasonable attack on her decision to post this ‘satire’ , as anyone would with all that has been said.
She does not deserve that.
If Donald Trump, a billionaire who chose to set aside his very comfortable life and pay his own expenses to campaign because of his love of his country, can take all the barbs and hits he has had to take ( with a LOT more coming) with humour and good grace then certainly we all can take a less serious attitude at times about the absurdity of some comments no matter where they come from or whether they have been declared as ‘satire’ or not.
Hope you have a great Sunday, Tricia.
And all here.
@Tim BC could change the law something like need to be a Canadian resident two years (pick a length of time) then that would favour Canadians but not be discriminatory as applies equally to foreigners and Canadians in Canada. (From not knowing anything about the law).
I want to add my vote of confidence in Tricia and my thanks for all the hard work she puts in for both ADCS and ADCT. I agree with FuriousAC that this comment thread is “a tempest in a very over steeped pot of tea.”
It is important to realise that the volunteers who write posts, maintain this site and others, and help run ADCS & ADCT, are just that, VOLUNTEERS. They all do their best, and we should all be grateful for the time and energy they give.
@Karen; “They all do their best, and we should all be grateful for the time and energy they give.”
And this post from an ADCS director has no place IMO at IBS, it belongs at DailyKos. This post has no bearing on the narrow pressure campaign to help expats and former pats in a narrow catagory of interest. The post is very divisive.
I am not grateful when they spend time or energy in a manner which goes against the investment I have made in their organization.
The GOP 2016 platform states the following;
“The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and the Foreign Bank and Asset Reporting Requirements result in government’s warrantless seizure of personal financial information without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Americans overseas should enjoy the same rights as Americans residing in the United States, whose private
financial information is not subject to disclosure to the government except as to interest earned. The requirement for all banks around the world to provide detailed information to the IRS about American account holders outside the United States has resulted in banks refusing service to them. Thus, FATCA not only allows “unreasonable search and
seizures” but also threatens the ability of overseas Americans to lead normal lives. We call for its repeal and for a change to residency-based taxation for U.S. citizens overseas.”
This post discredits the GOP nominee and by default discredits the GOP platform on FATCA and abolishing CBT. The platform will NOT happen unless Trump wins.
Brexit won in the UK because of UNITY between Labour Leave which I supported on one end and UKIP on the other end of the spectrum. There was focus on the main task, there was “in the essentials unity.”
The above is simply the obvious, the less obvious is that Clinton is supported by the same neocons that were in Bush’s government that created untold carnage. I take personal offense at neocons yet can realise that there may be neocon supporters who wish to get rid of fatca.
Should we have daily political posts at IBS the next 100 days as a post on Clinton who is supported by the Bush neocons would be delightful. I would be delighted to see Canadians that once welcomed young men escaping the flawed Vietnam policy suddenly supporting neocon Clinton who wants more war war with the 2% whilst the 98% go shopping.
Yes war war is so much easier when only 2% are involved and you do not have a pesky draft.
A Director of ADCS on the main public forum for the cause has at a minimum taken a hot political position that should have been left alone.
As a donor I now need to know what is the position of ADCS which I have entrusted a good amount of funds to. Does ADCS support the GOP Platform, reject the GOP Platform or are they neutral. I ask the same in regards to the Democrat platform. That position now needs to be stated in a public platform because of actions taken by an ADCS Director in a public forum.
The platform section I have quoted is in fact relevent to the the ADCS cause. IF ADCS is acting in any way direct or indirect to undermine that platform, I need to know as a donor. If ADCS or its officers are going to be actively engaged in efforts to undermine the GOP platform as stated above, it is pointless for me to render any further contributions to ADCS. Others may feel the same and even a small drop in funding for the next phase on appeal will kill the appeal, thats reality.
As a NON Canadian Citizen/NON American Citizen who has sent many donation envelopes to support a lawsuit in what is in fact a FOREIGN Country to me the result which will have little benefit to me, I think it is very reasonable for me to ascertain what the position of ADCS is on the GOP platform which is intimately tied to the nominee.
I do applaud those who are part of ADCS who have stayed focus on the core issue and sought to create unity on the core issue. Ginny is spot on when she states that she does not have a ballot on weither it be brexit or the US election, that is wisdom and caution, something this post did not have.
An example of focus and unity was the post by Eric called “Why aren’t Democrats Abroad screaming “Patty Judge for Iowa” at the tops of their lungs?”
It was not Republican v Democrat rather it was about one politician who has issues with expats who could get replaced. The focus was on the narrow expat issue which is the heart of ADCS and IBS.
I would think Canadians who SHOULD be proud that they provided refuge for young men fifty years ago would find Clintons neocon positions appalling, FACTS not satire;
“Hillary is the Candidate of the War Machine.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/hillary-is-the-candidate_b_9168938.html
Oh well, just as young Trudeau is not like the father, maybe 21st Century Canadians are not like the Canadians of 1960/1970.
FACTS not Satire.
Democrat 2016 Platform (Clinton)
“And we will make sure that law-abiding Americans living abroad are not unfairly penalized by finding the right solutions for them to the requirements under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR).”
GOP 2016 Platform (Trump)
“FATCA not only allows “unreasonable search and seizures” but also threatens the ability of overseas Americans to lead normal lives. We call for its repeal and for a change to residency-based taxation for U.S. citizens overseas.”
Clinton will find “right solutions” whilst Trump will “repeal.”
George isn’t saying Trish doesn’t deserve a lot of credit for all her hard work as a volunteer wearing many hats – Brock admin, Brock author, ADCS director, ADCT director. But her ADCS directorship puts certain leadership responsibilities on her that overshadow her other roles. Posts like the above are representative of ADCS and will turn off some future donors. There is no point to this post other than to make jokes at others expense (see Graham’s heirarchy of debate/argument). Brock may be a free for all when it comes to posts and commentary(unlike other blogs) but Trish isn’t just another commenter, anonymous volunteer or guest author at Brock.
@George
While I don’t speak officially on behalf of ADCS as a general rule ADCS has NO interest in US politics. They are solely concerned with Canadian politics and the Canadian political and judicial response to FATCA. In fact many longtime ADCS members in fact have made it quite clear to management that they have absolutely no interest at getting involved in US politics in any manner.
Second ADCS members have no interest in activities of the Canadian government outside of FATCA and other extraterritorial legislation upon Canada. For example ADCS members as a general rule have no opinion on Canada being a member of NATO and NORAD or for example on Canadian military intervention abroad.
@tim but ADCS members are also ADCT members and some are also Brock admin. As such said individuals do have interest in US politics. Since the same people wear multiple hats there is bound to be conflict of interest. People such as Ms Moon and the others who represent more than one main interest walk a fine line.
Tim, further, ADCS directors include Americans who identify as American. How can they not be interested in American politics? Do you think they become non-American while wearing their ADCS hat and then become American again in their ADCT role?
One last comment before disappearing back into cyber sphere. In my opinion, the focus on the commentary to this post should be more concerned with understanding why a long time ADCS supporter, generous donor, and consistently articulate, respectful commenter at Brock is so upset – rather than taking a stance of defence
@WhiteKat: I thought it was clearly because he likes Donald Trump.
I am a less-active ADCS director, much less so than the others who do the hard work. I often feel guilty that I cannot do more, but that is the way it is for me right now. I am involved solely because of the way FATCA and US citizenship-based taxation has affected my family and would affect other such Canadian (or other country) families with a family member entrapped into a US-deemed US citizenship without a means to somehow expatriate with or without the help of their parent, guardian or trustee. I am here because of what I feel the absurdity of how those like our ADCS plaintiffs (and so many others) are affected by their purely accidental births in the US but who returned to the country of their parents’ citizenship as infants or children, before age of majority when, I feel, such an informed decision should be made by them (if they have the requisite mental capacity), no one else. And, of course, I am here because of my children and others like them, born in other countries to one or to two US parents (at the time of their birth) are, similarly, affected. They are not in any other way but the absurd US citizens (US taxable because of that) if it is not by their informed choice.
I was born and raised in the US and came to Canada as a young adult, so many decades ago. It was my choice (and that of my then-husband, long deceased) to become a Canadian citizen and raise our children in Canada. I naively believed what I was warned when I became a Canadian citizen — that I would thereby lose my US citizenship. I had had to do something to get my life back on track and emphasize that I am only Canadian when I found out I was duped — having never known about the concept of US citizenship-based taxation and how that affected me and my Canadian-born children (to two US citizens). I would never have brought this curse upon them. The fall-out from all of this has affected my family more than I discuss here. I realized that there was no US liberty and justice for all long before the issues on which this site or the Canadian litigation were born. I watch with amazement and horror what is going on in the US now. I do worry about what happens now in the US will mean for further decisions by the US government and allies regarding never-ending and more dangerous than ever wars. As I am officially a former American, I have no say in what I see will so seriously affect my siblings in the US (glad my parents who are gone will not see this). I feel as acutely for them as what my one sister feels about my Canadian family’s situation.
I can’t laugh at any of the spectacle and deceit that emphasize US exceptionality as these two candidates view their *great* or *need-to-be greater* USA, but I realize that satire of the ridiculous is a way that many can. I have enjoyed as comic relief many satirical posts at Brock — we each time do get back to more seriously discuss the commonality of why we are here. Neither ADCS nor ADCT as organizations have any particular position one or other of the absurd choices of the US people for their next US government — I believe our positions would only be as individuals like everyone else here. All I can say is I have huge regard and am grateful for the contributions of both Patricia Moon and of George. They have both supported and buoyed me over and over. I am (again) sorry to see this post divide all of us who meet here regarding US CBT extra-territoriality enforced by the IGAs our governments signed in becoming arms of the US IRS. I hope we will (again) move on.
I discovered IBS not long ago but depend on the wise advice and experience of others, including Ms Moon, to help get me through the relinquish/renounce saga of my life. I admire her dedication to helping others despite already having closed her chapter on citizenship.
He/ she who does nothing, makes no mistakes.
I have every respect for Tricia, her intelligence, her hard work and dedication to ADCS. I was however surprised at this post. Although I understood it was a spoof, but usually similar humerous ADCS posts make a point of criticism in support of our common goals. I could see no point in this spoof. I was also concerned with its effect on newcomers.
I am in agreement with Alarmed Gringa
“She who does nothing makes no mistakes”
I think we should give Tricia a hug and move
on.