Canada’s coat of arms, adopted in 1921, stands upon the Latin phrase “A Mari Usque Ad Mare,” which when translated means “from sea to sea” a reference to Psalms 72:8. The present design of the arms of Canada was drawn by Mrs. Cathy Bursey-Sabourin, Fraser Herald at the Canadian Heraldic Authority, office of the Governor General of Canada, and faithfully depicts the arms described in the words of the Royal Proclamation dated November 21, 1921. The present design was approved in 1994 and shows a ribbon behind the shield with the motto of the Order of Canada, “Desiderantes meliorem patriam” which translates “They desire a better country” which stems from Hebrews 11:16. This version replaces a former design drawn by Mr. Alan Beddoe.

Canada’s official motto “A Mari usque ad Mare” meaning “From sea to sea” is based on Psalms 72:8, “He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth.” The first official use of this motto came in 1906 when it was engraved on the head of the mace of the Legislative Assembly of the new Province of Saskatchewan. The wording of the motto came to the attention of Sir Joseph Pope, then Under Secretary of State, who was impressed with its meaning. He later proposed it as motto for the new design of the coat of arms, which was approved by Order in Council on April 21, 1921 and by Royal Proclamation on November 21, 1921.

The Beginnings of Canada

In 1497, when Italian seafarer John Cabot explored Canada's Atlantic coast for England. Then Basque and Portuguese mariners established seasonal whaling and fishing outposts along the Atlantic coast in the early 16th century. In 1534, French explorer Jacques Cartier explored the St. Lawrence River, where, on July 24, he planted a 10-metre (33 ft) cross bearing the words "Long Live the King of France" and took possession of the territory in the name of King Francis I. To commemorate the founding of Montréal, Cartier wrote in his diary “…we all kneeled down in the company of the Indians and with our hands raised toward heaven yielded our thanks to God.”

In 1583, Sir Humphrey Gilbert, by the royal prerogative of Queen Elizabeth I, founded St. John's, Newfoundland, as the first North American English colony. French explorer Samuel de Champlain arrived in 1603 and established the first permanent European settlements at Port Royal (in 1605) and Quebec City (in 1608). The “Father of New France, [Quebec]” Samuel de Champlain, wrote in his diary about the natives, “…(the aborigines are) living without God and without religion…I thereupon concluded in my private judgment that I should be committing a great sin if I did not make it my business to devise some means of bringing them to the knowledge of God.”

The English established additional colonies in Cupids and Ferryland, Newfoundland, beginning in 1610. The Thirteen Colonies to the south were founded soon after. A series of four wars erupted in colonial North America between 1689 and 1763; the later wars of the period constituted the North American theatre of the Seven Years' War. Mainland Nova Scotia came under British rule with the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht and the 1763 Treaty of Paris ceded Canada and most of New France to Britain after the Seven Years' War.

sources:

 "John Cabot's voyage of 1497". Memorial University of Newfoundland. 2000. Retrieved August 15, 2012.
 Hornsby, Stephen J (2005). British Atlantic, American frontier: spaces of power in early modern British America. University Press of New England. pp. 14, 18–19, 22–23. 
Cartier, Jacques; Biggar, Henry Percival; Cook, Ramsay (1993). The Voyages of Jacques Cartier. University of Toronto Press. p. 26.
Rose, George A (October 1, 2007). Cod: The Ecological History of the North Atlantic Fisheries. Breakwater Books. p. 209.
Ninette Kelley; Michael J. Trebilcock (September 30, 2010). The Making of the Mosaic: A History of Canadian Immigration Policy. University of Toronto Press. p. 27.
Howard Roberts LaMar (1977). The Reader's Encyclopedia of the American West. University of Michigan. p. 355.
Tucker, Spencer C; Arnold, James; Wiener, Roberta (September 30, 2011). The Encyclopedia of North American Indian Wars, 1607–1890: A Political, Social, and Military History. ABC-CLIO. p. 394.
Phillip Alfred Buckner; John G. Reid (1994). The Atlantic Region to Confederation: A History. University of Toronto Press. pp. 55–56
Nolan, Cathal J (2008). Wars of the age of Louis XIV, 1650–1715: an encyclopedia of global warfare and civilization. ABC-CLIO. p. 160.
Allaire, Gratien (May 2007). "From "Nouvelle-France" to "Francophonie canadienne": a historical survey". International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2007 (185):

The difference between a colony and Immigrants

One of the major lies being perpetuated today by the left wing politicians and the media is that Canada is a "nation of immigrants." They keep saying the nation was founded by immigrants, but the country was founded by COLONISTS. The colonists (English) who founded Canada were not immigrants. The founding colonists were quintessential Canadians. They created the nation that Immigrants decided to come to. "Colonists bring their own culture, their own language, their own ways to the new land and attempt to adapt it to the new area. In our specific example, the earliest Americans saw themselves as British and tried to expand the British way of life in the New World." (A Nation of Immigrants? Jay Tea).

Colonists created the nation of Canada, and instituted their British culture, religion, government etc...They were not immigrants. These were "Pioneers" and "Settlers" there is a difference! The New Oxford English Dictionary is very clear. An Immigrant is a "person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country." A Settler however is a " person who settles in an area, typically with no or few previous inhabitants." Pioneer is described as, " a person who is among the first inhabitants to explore or settle a new country or area" Pioneering means, "to be the first to use or apply a new method, area of knowledge, or activity open up a terrain as a pioneer."

Samuel Huntington makes this clear distinction in his book Who are We? He writes, "Settlers and immigrants differ fundamentally. Settlers leave and existing society, usually in a group in order to create a new community...Immigrants, in contrast, do not create a new society. They move from one society to a different society" (p.39)

Immigrants are different. They are not looking to expand their home culture, but become a part of a new one. They might keep some of their old ways, but for the most part they have chosen to set it aside in favor of a new way of life.

The colonies were created by English settlers mainly by the Empire loyalists. These colonized the United States, then losing everything due to the war of Independence deciding to stay loyal to the Mother country left all and settled in Canada.  Do immigrants set up government institutions in the new country that they settle? No! They adopt to the institutions that are already there. The Canadian Empire Loyalists did no such thing. Today historians try to make history politically correct, and make it out that the Loyalist were "multi-cultural" etc...But the fact is, they established British Culture, and wanted to live under the British institutions. The minorities that were with them wanted the same thing. The Majority of these people were British, and wanted British culture to rule and reign, not multi-culturalism. In fact, "The Loyalists, as their name already implies, wished to remain faithful subjects of the Crown and under the legal and legislative institutions that derived from the Crown. They came to Canada so they could continue to live under those same institutions...In Upper Canada, it established a system of land tenure as well as a court system modeled on British Common Law that continues in Ontario to this day." (The Significance of June 19th the Loyalist Day, article by By Alexander Roman Ph.D., emphasis added). Does this sound like multi-culturalism? Sir John A. MacDonald Canada's first Prime Minister said, "As for myself, my course is clear. A British subject I was born — a British subject I will die"

In fact Canada's immigration experience has been overwhelmingly British since the sixteenth century, [not to mention the high birth rates among the colonists as well] and for the first 100 years since Confederation in 1867 until 1967 the colonial policies were ethnically oriented. Everyone in society, the media, schools, political parties, took it for granted that "Canada was a British nation", or "an English-French nation" or simply "a White nation". No one challenged Prime Minister McKenzie King when he said in Parliament in 1947 that Canada should remain a white man's country. Not that he was racists, or that Canadians were racists, "but merely ethnocentric, that is a people with a natural and normal preference for their own ethnic traditions" (Canada in Decay, p.82, emphasis added).Canada was part of the British empire, and the British that were coming into Canada was not immigration, but a British person moving from one place in the empire to another like one moving from Ontario to Alberta; not an immigrant moving from one country to a completely different country altogether with different laws, culture, government etc..."the arrival of immigrants [as today's establishment calls them-the author makes that point] from the British Isles (with the exception of some whites from Germany) should also be identified as movement of internal migrants from the British Isles to other British lands...[the footnote, p.42 'the Oxford Dictionary of Sociology definition of 'internal migrant' as movement between regions [British lands and colonies] as opposed to 'external migration' (between countries)" (ibid, p.40, emphasis added).

Canada was almost totally European (British and French) from the beginning through to the 1970s, when it was still 96% white.

Ricardo Duchense sums it up perfectly, "...the constantly repeated claim that 'Canada is a nation of immigrants' is actually not supported by the historical demographic evidence, but is simply one of the many deceptions our elites have been employing to generate support for what can only be described as 'an experiment of major proportions' to create a Canada of diverse immigrants that never existed in the past. Students are being deceived by our major historians when they are taught that 'from the very beginning, the land that became Canada was a multiracial place, the destination of a constant flow of new immigrants of varying ethnicities.' The facts are amply clear: Canada's immigration experience was not only overwhelmingly European from the beginning until the 1960s/70s, but the Canadians who founded this nation were actually indigenous pioneers and settlers newly born in the hard cold soils of this nation. The Quebecois and the Acadians were a people created through the fecundity of the women, not immigration. The Loyalists, too, were not immigrants but settlers native to the soils of British North America. Before Confederation in 1867...there were only 'two quite limited periods' of substantial arrivals of 'immigrants' and these 'immigrants' were 'overwhelmingly of British origin.'

"...the word "immigrant" has been deviously extended to include actual settlers. Almost all the men and women who came to Canada from the British Isles and elsewhere in Europe before 1914 were settlers seeking survival in a land sparsely populated and devoid of modern development. Equating the indigenous Canadians who pioneered and settled Canada with the immigrants who came to a ready-made nation after 1921/1945 is part and parcel of the ideological effort of our elites on both the right and the left to destroy the national identities and heritages of European peoples in order to create a new global order dominated by corporations and human rights concepts concocted by well-off academics and 'experts' out of touch with their own people. While Amerindians were native to the soils that came to constitute the nation of Canada, they were not the 'first nations' of Canada since they were living in tribal units when Europeans arrived, and once Europeans took over they were gradually marginalized and relegated to reserves. The very act of creating a nation-state is a modern European phenomenon." (Canada in Decay, pp.2-3, emphasis added).

One can say the same for the United States, "It's not helping to have liberals patronizing immigrants with manifest nonsense about America being 'a nation of immigrants.'! Is US schools still taught US history [Canada as well], this would not come as an exciting surprise, but America IS NOT A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS. It's a nation of British and Dutch settlers...America is not a 'nation of immigrants,' its not an 'idea' it was never ;diverse,' and 'diversity' is a catastrophe...There was no America until the British and Dutch Arrived. They were not 'immigrants' because there was no established society for them to move to [hence the creation of colonies]..." (Adios America by Ann Coulter, pp.28, 51 emphasis added).

The Empire Loyalists

The Loyalist, were loyal to the crown in England and Empire. These, “Loyalists…emigrated northwards to the British colonies in Canada, which had all remained loyal [to the empire]…[and secured Canada for the empire, thanks to the flood of English speaking loyalist immigrants…” (Empire, p.101).

The Beginnings of Canada as a potential nation had its birth in the primeval forests of Upper Canada in the year1784. The Older English Provinces of Newfoundland and the Maritimes had their own governments. New France or Quebec remained culturally French under British Sovereignty and both building towards confederation which took place in 1867.

The Founding of Upper English Canada as a Royal British Province, in 1783 named later Ontario, can be regarded rightly as one of the momentous epochs in the drama of the Israelitish destiny.

These Loyalists accomplished a feat that probably many people would not do today. Start over! From scratch! One such family, was the family of Sir John Johnson. “He claimed to have been the richest man in the 13 colonies and the largest land owner. He lost it all! His loss is considered to be the largest sacrifice made by anyone person in British history, to remain loyal to the crown” (Jowett, Dominion, p.13). Would anyone in Canada today actually do that to be loyal TO the Throne of David, and the Empire? Would people sacrifice for the greater good the way these people did? Is there that kind of British or American patriotism today?

Now these Loyalists of Upper Canada after arriving in Canada in 1784, “within eight years performed the greatest achievement in political history. At Kingston Ontario, November 1791, they formed, under LT Gov. John Graves Simcoe, by Royal Decree, the first official assembly…in 1792…[in] Neward Niagara, they founded our first constitutional Parliamentary Government…these exiled Loyalists secured more for Great Britain…[and] Canada was the first country to abolish slavery, resolved at the first parliamentary meeting” (ibid, pp.13-14, emphasis added). Getting rid of slavery was unheard of in any part of the world back in those days, yet the British and Americans were the ones, because of the Christian influence, to rid the world of slavery. Another sovereign nation, the nation of Canada, was secured for the throne of Britain, i.e. the throne of David. Reigning under the union flag of Britain, which at confederation consolidated the North American Anglo Saxon people from coast to coast in 1867. Canadians, if you were wondering which year Canada was born.

It is significant, when confederation was founded, Sir John A. MacDonald, the first Prime Minister of Canada, proclaimed Canada, “THE DOMINION” The Dominion of Canada. He dedicated it in the name of the Ephraimite birthright, “To Judah his Sanctuary and Israel His Dominion” (Psalm 114:2). In the time of Confederation, the loyalists were scattered all over the Maritimes, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario. Confederation was to unite all the empire loyalist into one country.

Settlers in Canada

Let's look at the census of Canada during the time of these great settlements, and let's see if it follows the diversity and the pattern that we see today:

1. In 1871, according to the first census after Confederation, of the total population of 3.2 million, 32 percent were of French ancestry, 24 percent Irish, 20 percent English, 16 percent Scottish, and 6 percent German. Notice, therefore, that we should acknowledge the immense importance of the Irish and Scots in the first centuries of "English Canada". The Irish percentage of total immigration was 68.5 percent in 1825-9, 64.2 percent in 1830-9, 64.2 percent in 1840-9, 41.1 percent in 1850-9, and 22.4 percent in 1860-9. There were only 21,500 blacks and 23,000 natives in 1871; by contrast, there were 202,991 persons of German origin.

2.Canada cannot "accurately be portrayed at Confederation as a nation of immigrants". In 1867, 79 percent had been born in Canada. Over the 400 years before Confederation, there were only "two quite limited periods" of substantial arrivals of immigrants: from 1783 to 1812, and from 1830 to 1850. In these two periods, the immigrants were "overwhelmingly of British origin".

3. From 1608 to 1760, immigration to New France consisted of only 10,000 settlers, and thereafter it was "almost non-existent". The French-speaking population numbered about 70,000 in the 1760s, and thereafter, until the late 1800s, the population expanded rapidly with women having 5.6 surviving children on average. By 1950, the Quebec population was almost 4 million. This increase was not a result of immigration but of continuing high fertility rates. It was only in the 1970s that Montreal saw an increasing inflow of non-European immigrants.

4. Between 1896 and 1914, Canada experienced high immigration levels with more than 3 million arriving within this period. However, the ethnic composition of the nation remained 84 percent of British and French origin, while the European component rose to 9 percent. Between 1900 and 1915, the high mark in "Asian immigration" before the 1960s, 50,000 immigrants of Japanese, East Indian and Chinese descent arrived, but this number comprised less than 2 percent of the total immigration flow. In contrast, in 1914, there were nearly 400,000 Germans in Canada, the largest ethnic group apart from the British (which includes the Irish and Scots) and French.

5. The total intake of immigrants between 1946 and 1962 was 2,151,505. Between 1941 and 1962, during more or less the same period, the population of Canada increased from 11.5 million to 18.5 million, "largely accounted" by Canada's "extremely high domestic birth rates". Ninety percent of all immigrants who came to Canada before 1961 were from Britain.

(source Article: "Canada Is a Nation Created by Diverse Immigrants" — A False Meme by Ricardo Duchesne)

British North America Act

The law passed by the British Parliament in 1867 provided for the unification of the Canadian provinces into the dominion of Canada. Basically this act says, “WHEREAS the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick have expressed their Desire to be federally united into One Dominion under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, with a Constitution similar in Principle to that of the United Kingdom:

“And whereas such a Union would conduce to the Welfare of the Provinces and promote the Interests of the British Empire:” The union was to promote the interests of the British Empire. To influence and benefit all in the Canadas under the banner of the British flag.

In 1866 representatives of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and the Canadas came together in London for final discussions with the Colonial Office. Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island for the moment had withdrawn from the confederation talks. The London Conference led directly to the most important statute in Canadian constitutional history, the British North America Act of 1867. This act, with its subsequent amendments, embodied the written constitution of Canada for more than a century. It was proclaimed on July 1, now celebrated as Canada Day.

The British North America Act provided that there should be four provinces in the new Dominion at the outset—Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia—and that others could join later.

Each province was to have its own seat of government, its own lawmaking body, and its own lieutenant governor to represent the Crown. In addition, the act established a federal government at Ottawa, composed of a House of Commons (elected), a Senate (appointed for life), and a governor general as the Crown’s representative. It set forth the matters on which the provinces could make laws and listed those that were the special concern of the government at Ottawa. Any powers not listed were to belong to the federal government. (The act remained in force until the Constitution Act of 1982.). In 1982, when the Liberals took over government with Pierre Trudeau as its head, began to change the constitution, to make it more “Canadian,” according to the Liberals.

Robert Martin is professor of Law at the University of Western Ontario, in his essay called, “A Lament for British North America” he writes that the change from the British North America Act to the Constitution Act was, “no longer fulfils an essential - perhaps the most essential - function of a constitution. It no longer sets out a unifying national idea.” He argues in his essay, that, “British North America once provided coherence for the Canadian state...[and that] we are a country without a recognized and accepted national idea and with little prospect of creating a fresh one.” That day, in April 1982 he says, “Canada ceased to be British North America.” Even the act of its name change is in the words of Peter Hogg, “rewriting history” (Constitutional Law of Canada, p.8). Truly it is denying the British Origin of Canada and rewriting the history and origins of our nation.

“The sense of being British North America once gave coherence to the Canadian state. It gave Canadians an understanding of why Canada existed.” (R. Martin). To forget and deny ones history is sounding the death knell for its country. The end of British North America was a step closer to that. “British North America was a narrow expression of our colonial, settler origins” (ibid). It shows the sacrifice many of the settlers made and accomplished to make our nation unique in North America. Distinguished from the Americans. To establish the British Empire in the west. “Our democracy was also rooted in the notion of British North America…In the Canadian conception the source of democratic government was the Crown. The Crown in British North America was to function as the instrument of the people which ensured the working of their democratic institutions. The Crown was also the guarantor of the French language and the distinctive culture of Quebec. Democracy was for us an organic expression of our unity” (ibid).

Robert Martin concludes in his essay of our state today in Canada, Nationally, that, “The idea of British North America once provided a purpose and a justification for the Canadian state. That idea has now disappeared. A fresh idea which could take its place has not appeared. And with no such unifying idea it is hard to imagine a future for the Canadian state, or at least for a multi- ethnic, democratic Canadian state.

Confederation and expansion

Following several constitutional conferences, the 1867 Constitution Act officially proclaimed Canadian Confederation on July 1, 1867, initially with four provinces: Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick. Canada assumed control of Rupert's Land and the North-Western Territory to form the Northwest Territories, where the Métis' grievances ignited the Red River Rebellion and the creation of the province of Manitoba in July 1870. British Columbia and Vancouver Island (which had been united in 1866) joined the confederation in 1871, while Prince Edward Island joined in 1873.

The Canadian parliament passed a bill introduced by the Conservative Cabinet that established a National Policy of tariffs to protect the nascent Canadian manufacturing industries. To open the West, parliament also approved sponsoring the construction of three transcontinental railways (including the Canadian Pacific Railway), opening the prairies to settlement with the Dominion Lands Act, and establishing the North-West Mounted Police to assert its authority over this territory. In 1898, during the Klondike Gold Rush in the Northwest Territories, parliament created the Yukon Territory. The Cabinet of Liberal Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier fostered continental European immigrants settling the prairies and Alberta and Saskatchewan became provinces in 1905.

Bishop John Strachan, a leader who helped form our public education system, stated that “the church must continue to play a central role in education. You cannot divorce religion from education because schools will inevitably reflect the philosophical and religious or (irreligious) biases of those who direct them.”

Egerton Ryerson, father of public education in Canada, wanted a “common patriotic ground of comprehensiveness and avowed (or maintain) Christian principles.” He wrote the textbook First Lessons in Christian Morals which was published in 1871. Ryerson clearly said that the Ontario school system was to be a “Christian public school system.”

Many of our greatest Canadian universities were founded as denominational seminaries to educate future church leaders:

-King’s College in Nova Scotia, now know as Dalhousie University, was founded by the Anglicans.

-The University of Ottawa, founded by the Roman Catholic Church, and one of Canada’s first bilingual Universities. (Corrected as of December 14, 2010)

-McMaster University, was founded by the Baptists.

The Ontario Public School Act of 1896 stated that “It shall be the duty of every teacher of a public school to teach diligently and faithfully all of the subjects in the public school course of study; to maintain proper order and discipline in his pupils in his school; to encourage his pupils in the pursuit of learning; to include, by precept and example, respect for religion and the principles of Christian morality and the highest regard for truth, justice, love of country, humanity, benevolence, sobriety, industry, frugality, purity, temperance and all other virtues.”

Many British Christian missionaries came with the goal to share with the Natives the TRUE gospel of Jesus Christ. The customs among Native Americans varied from tribe to tribe, but many included ceremonies like the Sun Dance, potlatch and cannibalism. The Sun Dance was observed at the solstice by many of the Plains tribes. This ceremony could involve self-torture, as a skewer of bone would be fastened through a young man’s skin and tied to the sun pole. The object was to break free from the pole, symbolizing breaking free from death. At times, Potlatch was only seen as a ceremony of giving, but sometimes included actual cannibalism. Anthropologist Dr. Leland Donald confirms: “Discussion of cannibalism is very controversial…. It usually occurred in ritual events and the eaters were believed to be temporarily infused with a supernatural spirit that required human flesh. Slaves were usually offered up as the victims. They were also sometimes sacrificed following the death of an important community leader.”

Once example, William Duncan set up the community of Metlakahtla for Indians who converted to Christianity. The shocking atrocities that he witnessed among the Indians themselves would have been enough to send a lesser man packing, however, he fought to banish cannibalism, rampant murder, superstition and witchcraft. The village that he founded for converted Indians was an example of industry, with houses, a school, church, and sawmill, all built by the people (Metlakahtla and the North Pacific Mission by Eugene Stock)

God's laws of cause and effect

In Deuteronomy 28 Almighty God warned that there would be consequences to breaking his laws. If kept, they would be blessed, and if broken, a curse would come upon the nation.

We as a nation have experienced the greatest blessings any nation could ever enjoy. God gave this land to his people Ephraim-Israel, and that they would increase and be blessed, and be a blessing to other nations. God said about Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh), "Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; whose branches [colonies of Ephraim Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc...] run over the wall...Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the Almighty, who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb:

"The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren." (Gen 49:2, 25-26). What a tremendous description of national blessings of good health temperate climates good weather, riches in raw material and resources the minerals of this earth of gold, oil, nickel, silver etc...and we have these blessings here in Canada.

God says if we keep his laws, "And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe and to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth:

"And all these blessings shall come on thee, and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God.

"Blessed shalt thou be in the city, and blessed shalt thou be in the field.

"Blessed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy ground, and the fruit of thy cattle, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.

"Blessed shall be thy basket and thy store.

"Blessed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and blessed shalt thou be when thou goest out.

"The LORD shall cause thine enemies that rise up against thee to be smitten before thy face: they shall come out against thee one way, and flee before thee seven ways.

"The LORD shall command the blessing upon thee in thy storehouses, and in all that thou settest thine hand unto; and he shall bless thee in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee." (Deut 28:1-8). God's laws are set in motion to bless or curse automatically. We as a people have kept many of the precepts of God, and received many of these blessing as a result.

Now that we have totally forsaken the God of Israel, the Christian God, God says, "But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:

"Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field.

"Cursed shall be thy basket and thy store.

"Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.

"Cursed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and cursed shalt thou be when thou goest out.

"The LORD shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me." (Deut 28:15-20). Isn't interesting that everything we try to do to improve the nation never seems to work? God says he will "rebuke" " in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do." Our economy cannot recover, we are never going to the see the boom days of the 1980's which I believe was the last time we saw true economic power of our nations, and its been in decline ever since.

Canada's Diversity is its weakness

Canada pride's itself on its diversity. In fact however it is its weakness. Turkey during the days of the Ottoman Empire had this same policy of Multi-culturalism which is in fact colonialism with in its empire, and the same thing is happening today in Canada. Notice this source, “By 1900, the Ottoman Sultan could claim rule over a domain that stretched from the deserts of Libya in Africa to the snow-covered mountains of Armenia and Kurdistan. This ruler controlled the oil fields and marshes of southern Iraq and the mountain valleys of Bosnia on the Austrian border. The Sultan’s flag flew along the shores of the Adriatic Sea near Italy in Europe and down to the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula in West Asia. Between these geographic extremes, lay a vast and diverse empire containing multiple ethnic and religious groups, many of whom disliked each other more than they disliked Turkish rule. These groups, over the hundred years prior to 1900, had begun to identify themselves as distinct national groups rather than as subjects of the Ottoman Empire." (article, The Fall of Ottoman Empire, Roger Lee )., emphasis added). There was no unity in the empire and therefore by World War One the Turkish empire could not defend itself and fell due to its diversity.

Prime Minister McKenzie King when he said in Parliament in 1947 that Canada should remain a white man's country he knew that diversity would be its weakness. Mackenzie King stated in explicit terms the great value of unity, explaining that to allow immigration by "the races of the Orient", their assimilation into Canada, would bring whites, "face to face at once with the loss of that homogeneity which ought to characterize the people of this country if we are to be a great nation"*

The Canadian Identity much like the USA is Anglo Saxon, "The WASP Character is the American [and Canadian]...It is the mold, the template, the archetype, the set of axes along which the crystal has grown. Without the WASP it would be another country altogether...The British Empire spread Anglo Saxon culture around the globe-Protestant morals, individualism, and the rule of law. Most British colonies rejected those values [and now there is chaos]. Only the ones populated by actual British people-America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand-managed to hold on to them and, as a result, prospered" (Adios America, Coulter, pp.54, 57, emphasis added). Now Canada has an identity crises, and the more diverse it becomes the more Canada will change, and the Canada as we know it will never be the same and strong again.

With these multicultural policies funded by the Tax payers of Canada of $35 billion per year, eventually, "Multiculturalism eventually means a world of no culture, with everyone waiting to be mentally spoon-fed by the government. Without a culture, there is no reference point, no anchor, no defense against tyranny...locals have been brainwashed by Liberal (Cultural Marxist) regimes into thinking that theirs should be 'a nation of immigrants,' where people have been convinced that it's better to be 'multicultural' than to take pride in one's own culture." (Peter Goodchild, Council of European Canadians, May 2014, emphasis added).

Praising diversity is simply part of the PC (Politically Correct) dogma, a mantra being pounded into our heads. But, "Contrary to everything you have heard, never in recorded history has diversity been anything but a disaster...[and] the fact that we have to be incessantly told how wonderful diversity is only proves that is it not" (Adios America, Coulter p.61, emphasis added).

Canada must be united to survive. In fact, "Communities that speak the same language and share a culture together are stronger than those compiled of multiple different ones. Homogeneous nations bond together with a common identity – they do not fall apart and fracture in the same way that heterogeneous countries can do...The new cultures that are being imported into Canada have different core ideological principles to ours; some of their key tenets also go against basic Canadian values, such as the rule of law and equality between men and women...The real strength of Canada is not diversity, but our culture of liberty and the fact that we accept those people who want to embrace or conform to it. I worry that our government no longer concerns itself with properly ensuring that migrants reject their old authoritarian ideas and integrate into liberal western society. I fear that Trudeau’s narrative is more important to him than safety of Canadians and our wonderful history." (Article, Is diversity really our strength? Lauren Southern emphasis added).

Is this racism? One only pulls out the racism card because that is the only argument one has to combat the facts. When facts do not back up one's belief, one then accuses the other of racism. As William D Gairdner in his book the War Against the Family states, "So as an alternative to genuine debate, we tend to rely on an adolescent technique that British philosopher Alasdair Macintyre described as 'emotivism' a sudden reaching for labels and slogans that have an established emotional charge. Instead of focusing with a hard clarity on the principles at hand, on logical inconsistency, on core values, or on the quality of the facts, we attempt to win by emotional intimidation. The winner becomes the one who is the most 'extraordinarily offended' or 'outraged'; or, if that tack doesn't work, he'll be the one who can most successfully label the opponent a 'bigot' or a 'racist' or a 'sexist.' But such labels are always the first sign of  a lazy mind. My habit is to tell those who are offended that they could be no more so than I, and now that we have gotten our emotions out of the way - what is the point they wish to make? My fear for Canada is that this intellectual burrowing behaviour, this national reluctance to grapple with argument and values, is the end of culture." (preface xi, emphasis added).

We are speaking of the death of a nation, and the ones who are leading to that death are whites. These people are the real racist; they are against their own people. Taking away their culture, rewriting their history. Stripping everything that their culture has achieved. If this was done to any other people there would be outrage, but racism against the French and the English is legal and tolerated. If we were speaking of any other non-white country racism would not even be an issue. Today it seems that whites are not allowed to have their own nation, that they must give up everything they have achieved and give it over to everyone else.

^{* (source Ninette Kelley, Michael Trebilcock, The Making of the Mosaic. A History of Canadian Immigration Policy, 1998: 206).}

Stripping of Canada's Colonial Past

It is interesting that every time the Liberal Party of Canada comes into power they strip a little more of Canada's British past.

The Canadian flag got changed by the Liberal Party. The Red Ensign was the flag of Canada, Though intended purely for use at sea, the Canadian Red Ensign was widely flown on land as well and soon came to be regarded as Canada's de facto national flag. In the 1920s the Canadian government authorized it to be flown by the Canadian High Commission in London and the Canadian Embassy in Washington, DC. During World War II, the government directed the Canadian Army overseas to use it as a flag of nationality when appropriate. In 1945, a Canadian order in council authorized the Canadian Red Ensign to be flown on government buildings inside and outside Canada. Then the new Liberal Prime Minister, Lester Pearson, placed the issue before Parliament. Pearson, who had campaigned on the promise of a new flag for Canada and in February 1965 we have the flag that is used today. This was a conscious step to replace the Christian British heritage to a modern man-made United Nations philosophy of diversity and multi-culturalism - a trend that continued especially under Pierre Trudeau (1968-1984) and until today. Christianity now is only one out of many religions. Modern Canada therefore has no other values but “diversity”.

Mass Immigration from Other parts of the world and multi-culturalism began because of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, the Liberal Party leader. The implementation of multiculturalism and mass immigration in the 1970s was intended to be, as Prime Minister Trudeau said openly, "an experiment of major proportions", an effort to undermine the historic British and French character of Canada by transforming the nation into a multiethnic place in which old ethnic nationalisms would be discredited.

 In 1982, when the Liberals took over government with Pierre Trudeau as its head, began to change the constitution, to make it more “Canadian,” according to the Liberals. The British North America Act, statute enacted 29 March 1867 by the British Parliament providing for CONFEDERATION. In April 1982 it was renamed the CONSTITUTION ACT, 1867, as part of the movement toward "patriation" of the Constitution. A political process that led to Canadian sovereignty, culminating in 1982. Until that date, Canada was governed by a constitution composed of British laws that could be changed only by acts of the British parliament, albeit only with the consent of the Canadian government. The patriation process saw the provinces granted influence in constitutional matters and resulted in the constitution being amendable by Canada only and according to the Canadian amending formula, with no role for the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

Now with the new Liberal party in Power, they are at it again. The first thing that happen when Justin Trudeau the Liberal Leader became Prime Minister was the removal of the portrait of the Queen that hung in the "Global Affairs" office in Ottawa. The portrait was replaced by the French-Canadian artwork of Alfred Pellan that had hung in the building previously. Removing the Queen’s portrait is only the first step in the planned remaking of Canada in the image of the Liberal Party. There is already a left-wing movement to change our national anthem.

Also the Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on his twitter account, "That's why we're changing the very institution that was established to implement colonial laws."

Why the Liberal Party? It is no secret that the Liberal Party has been taken over by Left wing socialist that want to reshape Canada in their image, a sort of utopian socialist society. To do that they must strip Canada of its past, and label anyone who is a Patriot-love of God, country and Queen as a racist and a bigot that way they can reshape Canada the way they want.

It is even taught in the schools, “…in Canada…the extinguishing by omission, of much of our core British history on which the nation was constructed….of the one hundred and twenty books approved as history texts…names like Britain, British, and England are conspicuously absent.’ There is NO PRIDE taught in our historic British connections; rather we are taught SHAME for our alleged colonial deeds…barely a dozen of …hundreds of college students have ever heard of the Magna Carta or the Plains of Abraham, or were aware of the British Origins of the Common Law, or those of our political institutions. A number of students even vehemently deny these things…much of what our students are taught today amounts to a one sided brainwashing by teachers and textbook writers…” (War Against the Family, pp.235-36, emphasis added). The teachers these days have a left wing socialist agenda, and are spreading it to our children. Also notice as Gairdner put it, “alleged colonial deeds.” R. Spencer agrees, he says this usually is “assumed not demonstrated.”

God said that the "Pride of your Power" would be "broken" Lev 26:19. This is exactly what is happen today!

Notice what the effects are to a people who forget their past and where they came from: "Lord Macaulay...he said: 'A people which takes no pride in the noble achievements of remote ancestors will never achieve anything worthy to be remembered with pride by remote descendants.'

"Today, when we see everything which has come to us from the past, including pride in the achievements of our ancestors, being denigrated or discarded, perhaps we should also note a sobering thought voiced by the American poet, Carl Sandburg: 'When a nation goes down. .. [or] a society perishes, one condition may always be found. They forgot where they came from.'

"Could it be that this is the underlying cause of the ever-increasing troubles and confusion now plaguing the peoples of Celto-Saxondom? Have we forgotten where we came from, and have we thereby lost all sense of direction and of where we are going?

"If so, should we not take some warning from the words of the philosopher George Santayana when he said: 'Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.''' (Symbols of Our Celto-Saxon Heritage, by W.H. Bennett, p.1, emphasis added).

Canada in Prophecy

What is coming for Canada? The Bible says that a great tribulation is coming upon the people of Jacob (Jer 30:7). Canada is part of the nations of Ephraim who inherited the name Israel-Jacob (Gen 48).

Also speaking of the great tribulation, Daniel wrote of this time and the angel told him, "And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished." (Daniel 12:7). The latter end of the verse should read, "and when the scattering of the power of the holy people shall be accomplished," That the end does not result in the scattering of power of Israel, but that the scattering of the power of Israel leads to the end of all things. The tribulation period will be for 3 1/2 years, but before that time our power will be "scattered." (Read our booklet the Scattering of the Power of the Holy People for more details).

As another prophecy says, "To me belongeth vengeance, and recompense; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste...For the LORD shall judge his people, and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that their power is gone, and there is none shut up, or left." (Deut 32:35-36). Notice God says he will take vengeance on Israel when he sees their power is gone. This power is "the eminence or pride of strength, includes everything upon which a nation rests its might;" (K&D Commentary). The nations might comes from its economic strength as well as its military strength.

The strength of our nations is unity. 50 United States. Our 10 provinces and 3 territories united into one nation. Working together we have great economic, military and resource power. But God says this will be gone, scattered. Already Quebec tried to break away, will they try it again? Rumblings about Alberta wanting to go it alone. In January 2004, Premier Ralph Klein told the Canadian edition of Readers Digest that one in four Albertans were in support of separation. An August 2005 poll commissioned by the Western Standard pegged support for the idea that "Western Canadians should begin to explore the idea of forming their own country." at 42% in Alberta and 35.6% across the four Western provinces. According to the Media Western Separation is dead but peoples feelings and ideas are still there and this can ferment at any time and rear its ugly head once again. 

source:

Kevin Steel, "A nation torn apart: An exclusive Western Standard poll shows more than a third of westerners are thinking of separating from Canada. What's dividing the country--and can anything be done to save it?," Western Standard August 22, 2005

In The United States, many times many states want secession from the Union.  In fact One in four Americans want their state to secede from the U.S., (Reuters Sept 19, 2014).

Scotland just came off an election vote to stay in the United Kingdom, but now they are saying David Cameron did not come through with his promises and the independent movement is acting again.

The great power of NATO will also come apart. This global military that has kept the peace and stability in the world will collapse, God says, "All thy lovers ["Allies" Moffatt transl] have forgotten thee; they seek thee not; for I have wounded thee with the wound of an enemy, with the chastisement of a cruel one, for the multitude of thine iniquity; because thy sins were increased." (Jer 30:14). The scattering of our power will be great. 

China and Canada

Almighty God says that the tribulation will be a time of war, slavery and captivity. That God will allow a foreign power to take control of the Israelitish nations of the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. This nation will be China. Ezekiel 38 and 39 reveals this great power (Read our booklet China in prophecy for details).

The Watchmen of Ephraim

In the last days God promised before he acts, "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." (Amos 3:7). The prophets of God in turn "Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins." (Isa 58:1). God has watchmen in Israel (Ezekiel 33:7). He always leaves a warning to his people. God in Hosea says, "Blow ye the cornet in Gibeah, and the trumpet in Ramah: cry aloud at Beth-aven, after thee, O Benjamin....Ephraim shall be desolate in the day of rebuke: among the tribes of Israel have I made known that which shall surely be...When they shall go, I will spread my net upon them; I will bring them down as the fowls of the heaven; I will chastise them, as their congregation hath heard." (Hosea 5:8-9; 7:12). No one will shake their fist at God and say, "But you never told me!"

God has watchmen to do his work, this is the work of the church of God! And the church will be a continuing force to be a watchman to Israel as God says, "I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold their peace day nor night: ye that make mention of the LORD, keep not silence, " (Isaiah 62:6).

At this moment Israel as a whole is not listening to its watchmen, God says, "Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.

"Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken.

"Therefore hear, ye nations, and know, O congregation, what is among them.

"Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it." (Jer 6:16-19). They have rejected the message of the watchmen of Israel. Therefore the time of "Jacob's trouble" (Jer 30:7) is approaching. But the time will come, when they will listen to the watchman once again. This will be the time when we repent and return to Almighty God, "For there shall be a day, that the watchmen upon the mount Ephraim shall cry, Arise ye, and let us go up to Zion unto the LORD our God" (Jer 31:6). It's amazing how God has to take it to the point of warfare, slavery and captivity for us to repent, when we can do it right now!

The Second Exodus

At the second coming of Jesus, He will save Israel, and bring them back to the promised land. "And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.

"And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

"The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim." (Isaiah 11:10-13). Notice Judah and Ephraim, two separate peoples and nations being brought back to the promise land from the places that they were scattered. And there will be no more animosity between them anymore.

Ezekiel writes, "The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,

"Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:

"And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

"And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?

"Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

"And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes.

"And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:

"And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:

"Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.

"And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.

"And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.

"Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.

"My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

"And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore." (37:15-28 ). This is revealing. First its shows that Judah and Israel are separate nations right up till the time of the second coming.

Second, as revealed in Isaiah, they will be one nation in Palestine once again.

And Third, David will be resurrected and be the king over them all. He will serve under Christ. Jesus will be their God, and his tabernacle shall dwell with them.

Obadiah reveals the taking of the promised land by the Israelites from Edom, who are the Palestinians in the West Bank today. "But upon mount Zion shall be deliverance [see Rev 14:1], and there shall be holiness; and the house of Jacob shall possess their possessions.

"And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for the LORD hath spoken it.

"And they of the south shall possess the mount of Esau; and they of the plain the Philistines: and they shall possess the fields of Ephraim, and the fields of Samaria: and Benjamin shall possess Gilead.

"And the captivity of this host of the children of Israel shall possess that of the Canaanites, even unto Zarephath; and the captivity of Jerusalem, which is in Sepharad, shall possess the cities of the south.

"And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the LORD'S." (vv.17-21).  One of the "saviors" will be the resurrected king David, and he will judge the people of Israel, being their king!

Ephraim has terrible times ahead of itself unless they repent. But the good news is, Jesus will save his people, and Israel once again will be the great people that they once were!

If you wish to donate to the BICOG Please click here