Top Liberal senator inexplicably leaks European locations of U.S. nukes
The release of a report for the NATO Parliamentary Assembly authored by a Canadian senator is drawing international attention.
Almost casually, the document describes the locations of about 150 nuclear weapons stored by the U.S. throughout Europe.
The bombs are stored at six different U.S. and European bases. There are nuclear weapons in Kleine Brogel (Belgium), Buchel (Germany), Aviano and Ghedi-Torre (Italy), Vokel (The Netherlands) and Incirlik (Turkey).
This revelation came from an article in the Flemish newspaper De Morgan.
Following the publication of the story, the NATO report was pulled.
The review, titled “A new era for nuclear deterrence? Modernization, arms control and allied nuclear forces,” was authored by Canadian senator Joseph Day.
Senator Day contests that the release of the report was not accidental.
Moreover, according to Day, all of this information was already open source.
The politician has gone on GlobalNews stating, “to suggest that there was a mistake or to suggest that somehow we were leaking information that wasn’t public information before is wrong and it’s more sensationalism and false reporting.”
“Look back after the Second World War and the Cold War, that long period of time there were probably 2,700 nuclear bombs in Europe, now we’re down to 150 and moving in the right direction, in my view, but we can’t totally eliminate a deterrence.”
Yet, in an article by the Washington Post, they suggest possible dangers implicit to nuclear arms in Turkey and Germany. Because of regional tensions, these countries present a higher possibility of using these catastrophic explosives.
While the overall story is very interesting, the timing is also notable.
Yesterday—the date of De Morgan‘s report—marked the anniversary of the first atomic bomb explosion in 1945, reminded the Bulletin of the Atomic Sciences, which studies threats to survival and development, managing the famous Doomsday clock.
The Minister of Labour has announced that a $15 minimum wage is part of Canada’s future.
During Question Period on Tuesday, Liberal Minister Filomena Tassi told the House that the government “remains committed” to Canada’s workers, and that a $15 minimum wage is a part of the Liberal Party’s “plan for the future.”
The proposed $15 minimum wage may be an idea inspired by the Wynne government of Ontario, who had planned to raise the wage to $15. The wage was raised to $14, and the newly elected Ford government scrapped plans to raise it to the $15 figure. The sudden raise in the wage led to businesses closing shop, reduced hours for workers, layoffs and increased prices.
the New Democrats also made a $15 minimum wage a cornerstone of their platform in 2019. In a September 2nd Labour Day statement, the NDP stated that “Jagmeet and the NDP are committed to raising the federal minimum wage to $15 right away–and growing that to a living wage.”
It’s a change of tone for the party from back in 2016. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says that they would not follow in provincial footsteps to raise minimum wages, at one point even rejecting that raising the federal minimum wage was apart of his governmen’ts economic strategy.
Rick Peterson is an Edmonton businessman and a Conservative Party of Canada leadership candidate.
The Trump years have not been kind to Canada.
Canada has fallen behind the Americans in terms of our living standards and economic growth. We were forced into a NAFTA renegotiation that bound us even closer to the US and reduced trade opportunities elsewhere. Our Prime Minister has a shaky relationship with President Trump himself and our influence in Washington is likewise on the wane.
The era of Lester Pearson had an outsized role for Canada on the global stage feels very far away. Because it is.
Some will say that this is all we can hope for when dealing with an unpredictable American president. Maybe. Buts simply shrugging our shoulders and moving to a defensive crouch is a failed policy and that is exactly what we have seen from the Trudeau Liberals.
The essence of good public policy and a true test of leadership is to overcome these challenges and deliver on our country’s great promise.
We can see the mounting cost of inadequate and incoherent policy in our national debt levels, in the cost of living, and in the yawning gap between American and Canadian prosperity. We seem stuck in the status quo, unable to imagine and execute new approaches that will turbocharge our economy and restore Canadian vitality.
We need a bold vision for Canada. One that will allow us to not only catch up to the Americans but to beat them at their own game. Trump’s approach to revitalizing the US economy has famously employed tax cuts and deregulation, but the real story has been his impact on consumer and investor confidence. That tangible faith in the future has sent the stock market to new highs, supported by new investments and spending that have overcome the downsides of Trump’s trade policies with China and others.
We need to restore Canadian pride in our economy, but without the other aberrant American policies like high tariffs and rising debt. The best way to do that is to create wide open horizons for Canadian and global businesses and dramatically reduce the cost of living for all of us.
These are both votes of confidence in ourselves and in our country and its potential.
My plan as Canada’s next Conservative Prime Minister is to dramatically cut costs for all Canadians. I will start by eliminating corporate income tax, thus addressing the needs of investors and global job creators who will see Canada as the very best place in the world to do business and create wealth. And I will reduce the costs of everyday essentials like mortgages, banking, television and the internet by opening those protected sectors to the winds of competition.
Under my plan, our economy will see a burst of growth. This will initially raise our incomes and then become self-sustaining because these bold changes will raise our value of the future. Lower cost investments, cheaper finance, leaner and healthier companies, and better access to the digital world–these are exactly what we need to move our living standards to the next level.
What does this mean to all of us? Lower fees, faster and better service and more choice on everything. Fewer bank fees. Smaller cell phone bills. Quicker access to better and more health care services. High speed rural internet.
As always, there will be Nervous Nellies who will argue that this is impossible. That it will cost too much. That it will be too hard. To them, I say this: just watch us. A Conservative government under my leadership will quickly execute a responsible fiscal plan that will pay for tax cuts and reduce government deficits at the same time.
This will clearly demonstrate to Canada’s businesses that it’s in their interest to work harder, sharpen their pencils, drop prices, give better service and offer more choice. It makes no sense that Canadians should pay more and accept less in today’s globalized markets.
Canada does not need to rely on the US, as we do now, to set our future. What we need instead are new, bold policies and new leadership to set those ideas into play.
We need to get our own house in order. And the first steps to take cannot be small and timid.
My promise to all Canadians is this: I will promote and fight for the policies that are needed to secure this very achievable future. We will emerge from the timid crouch that the Liberal government is in now, and step out onto the world stage with energy, confidence and strength.
We will be winners. We will be bold.
A single clause at the end of the Trump Administration’s Peace Plan released last Monday seems to highlight an unspoken understanding that there is unlikely to ever be long lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
It states, “The State of Israel will maintain the right to dismantle and destroy any facility in the State of Palestine that is used for the production of prohibited weapons or for other hostile purposes… the State of Israel will retain the right to engage in necessary security measures to ensure that the State of Palestine remains demilitarized and non-threatening to the State of Israel, including from terrorist threats.”
If the Trump Administration were certain that this would be the Deal to end all deals, why did his Middle East Envoy add that Israel reserves the right to destroy weapon manufacturing facilities and hostile sites in the future State of Palestine?
The Associated Press has asserted in its coverage that the Peace Deal favors Israel. Putting aside the fact that the Plan is only to serve as a basis for negotiations between the two parties, it is undeniably true that the Plan contains many provisions that would be a nightmare for Israel’s security
For example, in order to connect Palestinian areas in Judea and Samaria to the Gaza Strip, tunnels would be built under Israel Proper. Over the past few years Israel has worked very hard to destroy terror tunnels built by Hamas that ran from Gaza into Israel. Now, the Trump Administration proposes to build a tunnel that runs further into Israeli territory and that could potentially be misused for kidnappings and violence.
Another security issue is that the Plan proposes to open up trade between the future State of Palestine and Lebanon, where Iran’s terrorist proxy Hezbollah dominates the government. Iran would likely use this opening to supply illegal weaponry. That inevitability would seem to clash with the Trump Administration’s vision of a demilitarized State of Palestine.
What is also dangerous about Trump’s Peace Plan is that it carries a connotation that Israel’s empowered position will always be as is, and that Israel can afford to boost their enemies’ political status into statehood and maintain its safety at the same time. But recent history warns that the belief that Israel is invincible or safe and stable is an illusion.
Israel’s history since its founding in 1948 is not just of progress and victories, but the appearance of same followed by the shattering of naivete. For example, during some points in its early years, especially true after Israel won a war in six days in 1967, the country appeared to be invincible. But when Israel nearly lost the Yom Kippur War of 1973 it correctly remembered how truly vulnerable it is. Moreover, progress seemed to be occurring when Ehud Barak shook Yasser Arafat’s hand at Camp David. No one expected Arafat to end the talks abruptly and then incite his people to blow themselves up in busses, nightclubs, pizza stores, and ice cream parlors in order to kill Israeli civilians. This bloodbath became known as the Second Intifada. Thousands were killed, and thousands more lost body parts, were permanently maimed, and had long lasting psychological trauma.
Following the Intifada, the Israeli government seized on another moment to show itself as a willing partner in peace. In 2005, it sent in its own military to remove thousands of Jews from their homes in the Gaza Strip. It was not known at the time that this move would pave the way for what would ultimately become an expansive missile launch pad in the Gaza Strip that would be frequently used against Israel.
Until the present time, Israel continues to grapple with the consequences stemming from this concession.
For the last 15 years, thousands of rockets with increasing sophistication and range have terrorized Israeli communities. To cope with the madness wrought by an unpredictable rain of war crimes sent its way, Israel has funded bomb shelters in the homes of its citizens living in vulnerable areas. They also developed the Iron Dome, a missile defense system that intercepts rocket fire midair before it can harm people and destroy property.
True, Israel is capable of developing strategies for its defense when new hostilities, but the Jewish State deserves to simply exist without being pushed into more booby traps in which it is forced to find new ways to protect itself.
Palestinians walked away from peace long ago, if not from the very beginning. After all, a two state solution strongly in favor of the Palestinians was offered in 1947, but this partition plan was rejected. Unsatisfied, Palestinians opted to start a war in order to conquer the Jewish portion for themselves. Also rejected were deals in observance of UN Security Council resolutions, that edged close to the Palestinian demands, and those that went so far as to demand the liquidation of Jewish areas so it can be handed over to Palestinians. This policy of rejectionism irked President Bill Clinton during the Camp David peace talks to a point where he apparently said at Camp David, “What the hell is this?”
Indeed, there simply is no peace to be made with the Palestinians simply because their leaders do not want peace.
That is, if peace includes the existence of the State of Israel.
Regardless of this, It’s time that Netanyahu, or whomever the next prime minister of Israel will be, forget about how it is perceived to the world and focus on what is good for Israelis. The historic moment should not be showing support for a deal that endangers Israel, but the turning point when Israel says “enough is enough” and walks away with dignity and pride.
President Donald Trump has released his Middle East peace plan after long months of speculation. The peace plan proposes a two-state solution, whilst not uprooting any Israelis or Palestinians from their homes.
The announcement was made Tuesday in Washington with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump stated that his peace plan “could be the last opportunity” for the Palestinian people.
The proposal has already been rejected by Palestinians, as many took to the Gaza strip early Tuesday after Israel deployed the IDF to the West Bank.
“Today, Israel takes a big step towards peace,” said Trump concerning the deal— labelled the “deal of the century.”
The plan was organized by President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, husband of Ivanka.
“Palestinians are in poverty and violence, exploited by those seeking to use them as pawns to advance terrorism and extremism. They deserve a far better life,” said Mr. Trump of the matter.
Netanyahu praised the deal and Trump, calling the president “the greatest friend that Israel has had in the White House.”
“The deal of the century is the opportunity of a century, and we’re not going to pass it by,” he said.
Netanyahu is penned to travel to Moscow tomorrow to discuss the plan’s proposals with Vladimir Putin.
The plan also received praise from Israel’s official opposition leader Benny Gantz, who met Trump yesterday and called the plan “a significant and historic milestone.”
The “plan of the century” was rejected by Palestinian leaders in advance, as many believed it would permanently leave the West Bank in the hands of Israel.
“The US administration will not find a single Palestinian who supports this project,” the Palestinian foreign ministry said in a statement on Sunday. “Trump’s plan is the plot of the century to liquidate the Palestinian cause.”
An emergency meeting of Palestinian leadership Tuesday.
Palestinian leaders have not been in contact with the Trump White House since the end of 2017, when President Trump made the move to officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, moving the US embassy to there from Tel Aviv.
Trump has also said the plan promises $50 billion for the Palestinian people, and that the US would open a Palestinian embassy in “eastern Jerusalem.”