Duffy Kicks Fruitfly Suzuki's Butt!

I would love to see a verbal match between Duffy and Suzuki, Duffy would win hands down, but Suzuki refuses to debate anyone, ever. 

 I bet CTV is still missing this guy:



He seems happier now that he doesn't have to hide the fact that he is a Conservative. Lefties are still in shock that they could have enjoyed watching him all those years, never suspecting that he was a Conservative. That is unbiased reporting, and it hit lefties smack in the face when they realized that Senator Duffy wasn't actually one of them. Heck, I'm a Conservative and I never suspected he was a Conservative. 


It looks like the Conservative Senators are going to discover how badly foreign interests have corrupted our democracy through the use of environmental groups. Revenue Canada had better sit up and take notice, because they are now in the spotlight. 


I know of one tiny little charity that lost it's charitable status because of a minor accounting error, it just about caused them to shut down the real charitable work they were doing. So why doesn't Revenue Canada go after these environmental groups who are clearly lobbyists? Is Revenue Canada as Liberal as Elections Canada? Who holds both of them to account? No one as far as I can figure.


The Senate is showing us that they are relevant and can tackle tough issues. Good for them. My biggest disappointment with the Senate is that a failed Liberal leader from Alberta, who hates the oil sands can not be booted out of the Senate by Albertans. He is an arrogant Liberal who thinks that Albertans opinions don't matter, and he could care less what you want. I know, I've emailed him and just about got sick reading his response to my concerns, try it for yourself. Ask him why an Albertan doesn't support the oil sands, see what response you get.

Grant Mitchell   -   Liberal Party of Canada

Province:

Alberta

Senatorial Designation:

Alberta

Appointed on the advice of:

Martin (Lib.)

Telephone:

613-995-4254 or 1-800-267-7362

Fax:

613-995-4265

Email:

mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca

Charities Or Lobbyists?

Interesting the Suzuki Foundation is a charity, yet he walked down the road, obviously supporting Dalton in the provincial election.

According to Revenue Canada rules, this is a huge violation of their laws.

6.1 What are prohibited activities?
A charity may not take part in an illegal activity or a partisan political activity. A partisan political activity is one that involves direct or indirect support of, or opposition to, any political party or candidate for public office.

When a political party or candidate for public office supports a policy that is also supported by a charity, the charity is not prevented from promoting this policy. However, a charity in this situation must not directly or indirectly support the political party or candidate for public office. This means that a charity may make the public aware of its position on an issue provided:

it does not explicitly connect its views to any political party or candidate for public office;

Well, Suzuki publicly supported Dalton in the last election, this is in clear violation of the Act. Thanks for the video Just Right!

Another funny thing is that balance sheets are supposed to be balanced, but from the information on the government site, that is not the case.
Assets: Cash, bank accounts, and short-term investments 4100 $ 1,007,665 Amounts receivable from non-arm's length parties 4110 $ 600,494 Amounts receivable from all others 4120 Investments in non-arm's length parties 4130 Long-term investments 4140 $ 7,398,963 Inventories 4150 Land and buildings in Canada 4155 Other capital assets in Canada 4160 $ 2,455,012 Capital assets outside Canada 4165 Accumulated amortization of capital assets 4166 $ -940,512 Other assets 4170 $ 299,516 Total assets (add lines 4100 to 4170) 4200 $ 10,821,138 Amount included in lines 4150, 4155, 4160, 4165 and 4170 not used in charitable programs 4250 Liabilities: Accounts payable and accrued liabilities 4300 $ 431,820 Deferred revenue 4310 $ 1,446,197 Amounts owing to non-arm's length parties 4320 Other liabilities 4330 $ 536,483 Total liabilities (add lines 4300 to 4330) 4350 $ 2,414,500 Can any accountants explain this to me? Or does it mean that the missing 8,000,000 is in owner's equity, or maybe check Suzuki's pocket.
From the same resource, I find this interesting:
C4 Did the charity carry on, fund, or provide any resources through employees, volunteers, agents, joint ventures, contractors, or any other individuals, intermediaries, entities, or means (other than qualified donees) for any activity/program/project outside Canada? 2100 No If yes, you must complete and attach Schedule 2, Activities Outside Canada, to your return.
Well this seems to be that someone connected to the Suzuki Foundation was  "carrying on" "outside of Canada"... Don't watch it, I'm just using it as proof that Suzuki was carrying on outside of Canada, yet their return to Revenue Canada said that NO we didn't do any protesting outside of Canada.
Revenue Canada needs to stop all these environmental groups from getting charitable status, they are powerful lobby groups, not charities. What has the Suzuki Foundation ever done to stop real pollution? Are they out planting trees? Nope, the dopes go to Bali by plane, and dress in polar bear costumes so they can pass out in the heat. Why not hold the next conference in Yellowknife in February? Right.....HA!

Game and Set?

It appears that the "charitable" groups are getting some heat about their political activism, and they are starting to get concerned about their funding dollars, and loss of said "charitable" status.

A prominent environmentalist has been fired from an organization that has staunchly protested the Northern Gateway pipeline after he accused the Prime Minister’s Office of resorting to intimidation tactics against the project’s critics.
The dismissal of Andrew Frank, spokesman for anti-oil-sands group ForestEthics, comes amid an increasingly tense atmosphere among environmental groups – especially those registered as charities, whose public advocacy is supposed to be limited – that have come under fire by the federal government for harbouring “radicals” intent on “hijacking” the review process for Gateway.

Keep those letters to Revenue Canada coming people. It's time we started fighting back against all those supposedly "charitable" environmental groups that are trying to hijack our economy and sovereignty.