Who’s Pulling Steven Guilbeault’s Strings? (Part 2: Anti-Free Speech, Privacy)

Last year, Steven Guilbeault (rightfully) took a lot of criticism for the recommendation that media outlets be forced to obtain licenses. He later backtracked somewhat, claiming that news outlets would be exempt. Now, he’s back, pushing hate speech laws.

A disclaimer: it’s entirely possible (likely), that there are groups pushing for these laws that are not listed publicly. However, all that is listed is documented information.

Worth noting: the original intent of the bill was on “hate speech”. Sending pornography, or lewd images was just an afterthought. Still, this does raise privacy concerns, not just ones for free speech.

See Part 1 for Guilbeault’s ties to the eco-movement.

To begin with, let’s address the elephant in the room: hate speech laws can, and often are used to silence legitimate concerns and criticisms. Worse, they are applied unevenly. When very different groups with different cultures and value are brought together, how it operates is fair discussion. What will be expected, what compromises will be made, and how to settle differences must be addressed.

Regardless of whether a person prefers a more assimilationist approach, or is more libertarian, hard questions have to be asked. When such questions cannot be asked — because of hate speech laws — it doesn’t erase the concerns, but simply erodes public trust.

Banning valid discussion with false accusations of racism, or false claims of violence, does nothing to advance open discourse. Instead, it’s used to gaslight and prevent necessary discussion.

Is this a call to violence, or to condone violence? Certainly not. But all too often, ideas and violence are wrongly conflated.

1. Hate Crime Hoaxes Undermine Public Trust

Now Toronto Police say the alleged attack on an 11-year-old girl wearing a hijab last week was a hoax. In other words, the hijabi girl and her brother simply made up the story.

We still don’t know enough whether this incident was orchestrated to further entrench the sense of victimhood among Canada’s Muslims or if it was a tale made up by the 11-year-old girl to cover up some other incident.

Khawlah Noman isn’t the first Muslim girl to pull off such a hoax, but she surely must be the youngest to do so.

Another valid question must be asked. Before passing censorship laws to combat hate speech and related crimes, how many incidents actually happened, and how many are hoaxes? Before considering such laws, it’s important to know the full scale of the problem. However, some outlets continue with the narrative, even when hoaxes are exposed.

2. Canadian Parliament On Online Hate

Check this page for information on a Parliamentary study in Canada concerning online hate. Witnesses were called to give more insight into the topic. While there was a lot of reasonable discussion, one problem remains: it’s far too easy to demonize people by CLAIMING that certain topics are hate and violence.

3. National Council Of Canadian Muslims

Subject Matter Details
Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution
Canadian Human Rights Act and Online Hate, respecting the repealed section 13 of the CHRA and opening the Act for legislative review.
.
Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution, Policies or Program, Regulation
Security & Targeted Communities: Advocating for policies to enhance the security and safety of Canadian Muslim communities and other at-risk communities given the rise in hate crimes, including the Security Infrastructure Program; countering white supremacist groups
.
Policies or Program
Anti-racism: Advocating for policy initiatives in the Department of Canadian Heritage related to combating Islamophobia and discrimination, including the updating of Canada’s Action Plan Against Racism (CAPAR); Supporting various programs to promote diversity and inclusion in Canada.
Religion: Advocating for the protection of freedom of religion in Canada and with respect to the reasonable accommodation of religious observances.

One of the groups lobbying Guilbeault is the National Council of Canadian Muslims. They claim that “white supremacists” are causing a hateful environment, and that more diversity and inclusion is needed. Of course, ask how THEY accommodate minorities, and that’s hate speech.

Also noteworthy: Walied Soliman, Erin O’Toole’s Chief of Staff, is a member of the NCCM. He’s on record as supporting their activities.

4. CIJA, Centre For Israel And Jewish Affairs

Subject Matter Details
Grant, Contribution or Other Financial Benefit
Digital Citizen Contribution Program (DCCP): The objective of the project is to combat online disinformation and hate, specifically, antisemitism and antisemitic conspiracy theories related to COVID-19 where it is spreading: online via social media. Antisemitism cannot be allowed to permeate civil discourse and become mainstream.
-Activities include:
•Collect examples of how antisemitism presents itself in the context of COVID19
•Create website landing page lor campaign to highlight the campaign’s purpose and goals
•Prepare social media calendar for the duration of the campaign
Prepare Facebook ads, prepare toolkit to distribute to partner organizations to promote the campaign
•Program content for campaign, run Facebook ads, and ensure participation from various cultural groups; and
•Report to government and stakeholders on the outcome of the campaign. The Digital Citizen Contribution Program (DCCP) supports the priorities of the Digital Citizen Initiative by providing time-limited financial assistance that will support democracy and social cohesion in Canada in a digital world by enhancing and/or supporting efforts to counter online disinformation and other online harms and threats to our country’s democracy and social cohesion.
-Provide economic support for the charitable and not-for-profit sector through a direct granting program. Donations from Canadians should be incentivized through a temporary enhancement of the charitable giving tax credit, or through a donor matching program, whereby the government matches donations from Canadians.
-Public Security threats to the safety and security of the Jewish community of Canada and the extension of funding of capital costs and staff training for security of communities at risk
-The project ‘United Against Online Hate’ aims to develop a national coalition with numerous targeted communities to actively combat online hate, following recommendations from the study conducted by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We have been granted $141,000 for the government’s current fiscal year (ending March 31 2021). We were also awarded $31,800 for the year April 1 2021 to March 31 2022.

The page on lobbying information is very long, but well worth a read. A lot of effort has clearly gone into writing and updating this.

5. Friends Of Canadian Broadcasting

Subject Matter Details
.
Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution
Canadian Heritage Committee study of online hate and illegal content and promised legislation
Possible amendment to Section 19 of the Income Tax Act respecting the deductibility of digital advertising on non-Canadian platforms
Review of the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Acts with respect to the promotion of Canadian culture and democracy.
.
Policies or Program, Regulation
Broadcasting policy: regulation, funding, licensing, Canadian programming, media concentration and restrictions on foreign ownership, equal enforcement of the Broadcasting Act, application of the Broadcasting Act to non-traditional media, support for public broadcasting, independence of CBC/Radio Canada and other related governance concerns, protecting Canadian content on air and online.

This lobbying actually covers a number of topics, but online hate is one of them.

6. YWCA, Others Get Federal Grants

October 20, 2020 – Toronto, Ontario
.
The Government of Canada is committed to taking action against online hate and preventing the promotion of racism and violence. Today, the Minister for Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, the Honourable Bill Blair, announced $759,762 to YWCA Canada for their project Block Hate: Building Resilience against Online Hate Speech.

The four-year project will examine hate speech trends across Canada and work with experts to develop online tools and digital literacy training for young Canadians aged 14 to 30 across ten communities.

The YWCA will bring together partners from digital industry, civil society, government, and academia to better understand online hate in Canada, support those targeted by hate speech, inform technical solutions to online hate, hate crime, and radicalization to violence, and increase community resilience.

The YWCA received a grant from the Federal Government, but it is hardly alone in that. Fighting online hate and hate speech appears to be a growth industry.

One also has to ask how such hate speech regulations would be enforced? What information would internet providers, or cell phone companies have to provide? What would the process and limits for that be? What privacy protections would be in place?

7. Vic Toews, Online Privacy, Bill C-30

Since the proposal did mention punishing of sharing images (even as an afterthought), let’s address this. It was in 2012 that “Conservative” Public Safety Minister Vic Toews tried to bring in Bill C-30, which could force online providers to hand over private information without a warrant. Toews gaslighted privacy concerns as people “siding with the child pornographers”. While the Bill died in 1st Reading, could something like this happen again?

8. What Are Impacts On Free Speech? Privacy?

What will this bill look like, and what are the impacts? Until the legislation is tabled, we won’t know for sure. Even then, amendments are quite likely, as are court challenges.

This shouldn’t have to be repeated, but it is. Being critical of “hate speech” for being overreaching does not equate to supporting hate or violence. All too often, false accusations of racism, hate and bigotry are used to silence legitimate concerns and questions.

Vic Toews vilified critics of warrantless searches as “pedophile sympathizers”. Could this iteration lead to critics being smeared as “Nazi supporters”? Will a provision for warrantless searches be slipped in?

It’s also possible that such legislation will be scrapped altogether. After all, Guilbeault supported mandatory media licensing only last year, but backed down under heavy pressure. This is an important story to keep an eye on.

https://twitter.com/s_guilbeault/status/1351219226711912454
https://twitter.com/s_guilbeault/status/1351219225302618117
Office Of The Lobbying Commissioner Of Canada
Canadian Parliament Discusses Online Hate
(Audio) Testimony Into Online Hate
Toronto Sun On Hate Crime Hoax
National Post Shrugs Off Hate Crime Hoax
National Council Of Canadian Muslims Lobbying
Centre For Israel And Jewish Affairs Lobbying
Friends Of Canadian Broadcasting Lobbying
YWCA Receives $760,000 Anti-Hate Grant
Various Initiatives/Grants From Ottawa In Recent Years
Bill C-30, Vic Toews, Online Privacy, Pornography

Who’s Pulling Steven Guilbeault’s Strings? (Part 1: Eco-Movement)

Steven Guilbeault, the new Heritage Minister of Canada, was arrested in 2001 for climbing the CN Tower. While obviously an eco-supporter, there is more to him than meets the eye.

1. Debunking The Climate Change Scam

The entire climate change industry, (and yes, it is an industry) is a hoax perpetrated by the people in power, run by international bankers. Plenty has also been covered on the climate scam, the propaganda machine in action, and some of the court documents in Canada. Carbon taxes are just a small part of the picture, and conservatives are intentionally sabotaging their court cases.

2. Important Links

Office Of The Lobbying Commissioner Of Canada
National Post On Steven Guilbeault
Steven Guilbeault’s Wikipedia Page
Equiterre’s Profile With Canada Revenue Agency
CBC: Guilbeault Steps Down As Director
Cycle Capital Management

3. Guilbeault A Lobbyist For Greenpeace

From 2000 until 2006, Guilbeault was formally registered as a lobbyist for Greenpeace Canada. He was one of many.

4. Guilbeault A Lobbyist For Équiterre

YEAR GRANTING INSTITUTE AMOUNT
2009 Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) $108,361.00
2009 Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) $23,780.00
2009 Transport Canada $33,107.00
2010 Canadian Heritage (PCH) $2,970.00
2010 Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) $18,654.00
2010 Développement compétence Canada $5,214.00
2010 Industry Canada $49,278.00
2010 Transport Canada (TC) $26,893.00
2011 Canadian Heritage (PCH) $2,970.00
2011 Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA $18,654.00
2011 Développement compétence Canada $5,214.00
2011 Industry Canada $49,278.00
2011 Transport Canada (TC) $26,893.00
2012 Canadian Heritage (PCH) $1,258.00
2011 Human Resources and Skills Development Canada $5,082.00
2013 Employment and Social Development Canada $3,845.00

From 2010 until 2018, Guilbeault was a lobbyist for Équiterre. He oversaw an ever dwindling amount of Government grants come in from Canadian taxpayers.

5. Équiterre A Registered Canadian Charity

Year 2014
Receipted donations $1,136,703.00 (34.14%)
Non-receipted donations $187,277.00 (5.63%)
Gifts from other registered charities $105,088.00 (3.16%)
Government funding $363,750.00 (10.93%)
All other revenue $1,536,304.00 (46.15%)
Total income: $3,329,122.00

Year 2015
Receipted donations $1,511,658.00 (43.31%)
Non-receipted donations $232,393.00 (6.66%)
Gifts from other registered charities $17,508.00 (0.50%)
Government funding $334,028.00 (9.57%)
All other revenue $1,394,949.00 (39.96%)
Total income: $3,490,536.00

Year 2016
Receipted donations $1,860,021.00 (49.27%)
Non-receipted donations $120,156.00 (3.18%)
Gifts from other registered charities $330,213.00 (8.75%)
Government funding $277,160.00 (7.34%)
All other revenue $1,187,945.00 (31.46%)
Total income: $3,775,495.00

Year 2017
Charitable programs $2,968,892.00 (67.96%)
Management and administration $366,635.00 (8.39%)
Fundraising $928,004.00 (21.24%)
Political activities $105,099.00 (2.41%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $4,368,630.00

Year 2018
Charitable programs $3,596,315.00 (70.94%)
Management and administration $358,669.00 (7.07%)
Fundraising $1,114,748.00 (21.99%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $5,069,732.00

In 2018, Équiterre took in some $5 million in revenue. The majority of which went to the group’s employees. Incoming money has been high for quite a while.

Équiterre welcomes the regulatory tightening in the federal government’s new climate plan, but reiterates the need for new and more ambitious targets – an obligation in order to face the climate crisis.

“Will we get it right this time – will we finally meet our targets? Let’s hope! The European Union just unveiled its new target of reducing GHGs by at least 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. For its part, Canada is still working within a scenario of a 30% reduction in emissions by 2030 compared to 2005 levels, despite its intention to improve this target. Today’s announcement is progress in our current scenario, but our current scenario is not adapted to the climate emergency,” says Marc-André Viau, Director of Government Relations at Équiterre.

One has to wonder why Guilbeault was selected as Heritage Minister, instead of Climate Change Minister. This is clearly where his group’s passion is.

6. David Suzuki Foundation Lobbies Guilbeault

The David Suzuki Foundation has lobbied Guilbeault for a “green budget”, and for the 2020, 2050 agendas. Interesting that they also list Implementation of Canada’s Policy for the Conservation of Wild Pacific Salmon in their profile.

7. Climate Action Network Lobbies Guilbeault

Climate Action Network is advocating for the destruction of the oil & gas sector by cutting off potential subsidies and tax breaks. They also are on board with the climate change agenda.

8. Environmental Defence Canada Lobbies

Environmental Defense Canada has also lobbied Guilbeault on a number of environmental initiatives.

9. Cycle Capital Management, Lobbying

Subject Matter Details
.
Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution
Representations made so that orientations are taken in order to possibly authorize a mixed real estate project (residential in condo or rental, convenience store and offices) near the Bonaventure Expressway in the Ville-Marie borough (Bassin Peel sector, between Wellington, Mill and Bridge streets).
.
Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution, Policies or Program
Representations made to the Government of Canada in order to obtain the creation of a program or action plan for its participation in the financing of a fourth investment fund to be formed by Cycle Capital Management and whose mission would be to investments in the clean technology sector.

Guilbeault went to work for Cycle Capital Management, a “green investment” firm. One of their lobbying goals was the funding in the green technology sector, which they wanted taxpayers to finance.

It’s also interesting to note that CCM was lobbying the Prime Minister’s Office as recently as 2019. Guess what? Now, one of their people, Steven Guilbeault, is in Cabinet, and has direct access to the PMO. That is pretty convenient.

10. Did Guilbeault Really Leave The Movement?

Steven Guilbeault, one of the most well-known faces in Quebec’s environmental movement, has announced he is leaving his job, but not abandoning the cause.

“I’ve made the very hard decision to leave Équiterre after being, in a way or another with the organization for 25 years, not because I don’t like working at Équiterre and not because I don’t love the people who are here,” he said during a news conference Friday.

Guilbeault, who co-founded Équiterre and has been a senior director since 2007, says he is stepping down because he wants to explore “new elements of the fight against climate change.”

He is going to work with Cycle capital management, which he called one of the biggest fund managers for clean technology in Canada.

He will also work as a public relations advisor with Copticom, a company specializing in green and social economy issues.

He and Sidney Ribaux co-founded Équiterre in 1993, a citizens’ group that aimed to find solutions to issues such as pollution and large-scale industrialization.

Ribaux said Guilbeault is an incredible communicator, and credited him with making environmental issues more accessible.

A legitimate question needs to be asked: has Steven Guilbeault actually left the movement? Or is he using his position as a Cabinet Minister to implement policies that he couldn’t otherwise have done? Is he really a public servant, or an operative who’s infiltrated the Government?

Stay tuned for Part 2. There is even more to Guilbeault than what we are being told publicly.

CCS #22: European Environmental Agency Relies On UNIPCC For Its Climate Change Data

The following exchange came from a reader who has had dealings with the EEA, or European Environmental Agency. In short, the EEA doesn’t prove climate change is real. Instead, it relies on the United Nations to provide such data.

1. Email Exchange Between Researcher And EEA

An interesting discovery. The EEA doesn’t actually do anything to prove that climate change exists as its advertised. Instead, it relies on the UN to TELL THEM that it happens.

2. Debunking The Climate Change Scam

The entire climate change industry, (and yes, it is an industry) is a hoax perpetrated by the people in power, run by international bankers. Plenty has also been covered on the climate scam, the propaganda machine in action, and some of the court documents in Canada. Carbon taxes are just a small part of the picture, and conservatives are intentionally sabotaging their court cases.

Media Subsidies To Counter Online “Misinformation”, Groups Led By Political Operatives

In July 2019, the Federal Government announced it would be funding many initiatives to counter “online disinformation”. This is 6 months PRIOR to the alleged pandemic that took place. Again, this was set up IN ADVANCE of 2020. And it’s strange just how many of the leaders of these groups have political connections.

1. The Media Is Not Loyal To The Public

Truth is essential in society, but the situation in Canada is worse than people imagine. MSM in Canada (and elsewhere), has been largely obedient to the official stories since they are subsidized to do so, though they deny it. Post Media controls most outlets in Canada, and many “independents” have ties to Koch/Atlas. Real investigative journalism is needed, and some pointers are provided.

2. Important Links

Press Release: Gov’t Funds “Online Disinformation” Initiatives In 2019
https://archive.is/cVTQ0
Groups Receiving Tax Dollars In “Disinfo” Initiatives
https://archive.is/VS3Fm
Emergency Funds Available $500M (CV Funds)
https://archive.is/F9P5F
Canada’s International Engagement Strategy
https://archive.is/zR6yp
Public Policy Forum (Democracy)
https://archive.is/lQw4j
Peter Donolo’s LinkedIn Profile
https://archive.is/DXsbT
Kathleen Monk’s LinkedIn Profile
Robert Asselin’s LinkedIn Page
Elizabeth Dubois’ LinkedIn Page
Rachel Curran’s LinkedIn Page
Francis LeBlanc’s LinkedIn Page
Megan Beretta’s LinkedIn Page
Amy Giroux’s LinkedIn Page
Terrence Clifford’s LinkedIn Page
News Media Canada Governance

3. Anti-Disinfo Just Another Gov’t Program

News release
GATINEAU, July 2, 2019
.
A strong democracy relies on Canadians having access to diverse and reliable sources of news and information so that they can form opinions, hold governments and individuals to account, and participate in public conversations.

The Honourable Karina Gould, Minister of Democratic Institutions, today announced several citizen-focused activities that will build citizens’ critical thinking and preparedness against online disinformation, and other online harms. She made this announcement on behalf of the Honourable Pablo Rodriguez, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Multiculturalism. This announcement is part of the Government of Canada’s plan to safeguard our democratic processes from threats of interference as we approach the 2019 General Election.

On January 30, Minister Gould announced funding of $7 million for citizen-focused activities under Canadian Heritage’s Digital Citizen Initiative to support eligible organizations using four existing programs: the Canada History Fund, Youth Take Charge, Exchanges Canada and the Canada Periodical Fund. The Initiative promotes civic, news and digital media literacy through third-party educational activities and programming to help citizens become resilient against online harms.

Strengthening Canadians’ resilience to online disinformation
.
Canadian Heritage will also invest $19.4 million over four years in a new Digital Citizen Research Program to help Canadians understand online disinformation and its impact on Canadian society, and to build the evidence base that will be used to identify possible actions and future policy-making in this space. This investment will also enable Canada to take part in international multi-stakeholder engagement aimed at building consensus and developing guiding principles on diversity of content online to strengthen citizen resilience to online disinformation.

Officially, this program against “disinformation” was set in place with the 2019 election in mind. However, that seems strange, given the election itself was just 4 months away.

That said, the timing lines up pretty well if, let’s say, a pandemic were to break out, and Canadians started questioning how real it was.

It’s worth pointing out that this is by no means the first act of financial support the Government (or, really, taxpayers), had shelled out for.

4. Groups That Are Receiving The Money

GROUP YEAR AMOUNT
Agence Science-Presse 2019-2020 $129,345
Apathy is Boring 2018-2019 $100,000
Apathy is Boring 2019-2020 $340,000
Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada 2019-2020 $460,000
Canadian News Media Association 2019-2020 $484,300
CIVIX 2018-2019 $275,000
CIVIX 2019-2020 $400,000
Encounters with Canada 2018-2019 $100,000
Quebec Professional Journalists 2019-2020 $202,570
Global Vision 2019-2020 $260,000
Historica Canada 2019-2020 $250,000
Institute for Canadian Citizenship 2019-2020 $250,000
Journalists for Human Rights 2019-2020 $250,691
Magazines Canada 2019-2020 $63,000
McGill University 2019-2020 $1,196,205
MediaSmarts 2019-2020 $650,000
New Canadian Media 2019-2020 $66,517
Ryerson University 2019-2020 $290,250
Samara Centre for Democracy 2019-2020 $59,200
Sask Weekly Newspapers Ass’n 2019-2020 $70,055
Simon Fraser University 2019-2020 $175,000
Vubble Inc. Unboxed project 2019-2020 $299,000

So, who’s actually getting the money. Here are some of the groups listed by the Canadian Government, whose goals are to counter online “disinformation”.

In later sections, let’s take a look at who is actually running some of these organizations. The results, and the connections, may be quite surprising.

5. Emergency Support Fund For Organizations

On May 8, 2020, the Minister of Canadian Heritage announced the details of a new COVID-19 Emergency Support Fund for Cultural, Heritage and Sport Organizations. The $500 million Emergency Support Fund provides additional temporary relief to support cultural, heritage and sport organizations and help them plan for the future. The Fund will help maintain jobs and support business continuity for organizations whose viability has been negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ottawa announced in the Spring of 2020 that it would help fund media outlets that had been harmed by this “pandemic”. That’s nice: crash the economy, and then hand out money with the expectation of favourable coverage.

6. International Engagement Strategy

  • International meeting at Stanford University, California
  • Canada-France joint declaration
  • International meeting in Ottawa

The Canadian Government’s strategy to control the media is not limited to being within the borders. There are a number of international initiatives that are going on as well.

7. Public Policy Forum

The Digital Democracy Project is a multi-year project to analyze and respond to the increasing amounts of disinformation and hate in the digital public sphere. It will monitor digital and social media in real time, coordinate with international research and policy development projects, and develop public policy responses to counter these threats to democratic institutions and social cohesion.

Public Policy Forum President & CEO Edward Greenspon and recently appointed Max Bell School of Public Policy professor Taylor Owen announced the launch of a multi-year project to analyze and respond to the increasing amounts of disinformation and hate in the digital public sphere.

The Digital Democracy Project (DDP) will commission research and journalism to gain a greater understanding of how disinformation is growing in the digital ecosystem. It will monitor digital and social media in real time, coordinate with international research and policy development projects, and develop public policy responses to counter these threats to democratic institutions and social cohesion.

Interesting how subjective the terms “hate” and “misinformation” can be. In fact, the meanings of these words can — and often are — misconstrued in order to shut down legitimate discussion on important topics. Will this research just be more research into how to go about doing it?

8. Peter Donolo: Longtime Liberal Strategist

Peter Donolo is a longtime Liberal operative. He was Chretien’s Communications Director, he worked in the Office of the Official Opposition for Michael Ignatieff, and other political roles. Ignatieff, incidently, is now a Vice-President of Soros’ Open Society Group.

Donolo is also now a Board Member at CIVIX and Journalists for Human Rights. He has ties to the Liberals, who are also funding various initiatives to counter misinformation.

9. Kathleen Monk: Longtime NDP Operative

Kathleen Monk was involved with the Federal NDP (under Jack Layton), and is part of the Broadbent Institute – named after ex-NDP Leader Ed Broadbent.

She is now a Board Member at CIVIX.

10. Robert Asselin: Ex-Trudeau Operative

Robert Asselin worked in the Ministry of Finance from November 2015 to November 2017, under Justin Trudeau and Bill Morneau. He also worked at Blackberry.

Currently, he is a Board Member of CIVIX.

11. Elizabeth Dubois: Assistant To Liberal MP

>

Elizabeth Dubois was an assistant for Diane Hall Findley, who was a Member of Parliament. She also worked as a climate change program manager.

Now, Dubois is a Board Member at CIVIX.

12. Rachel Curran: Harper Operative

Rachel Curran is a public policy manager at Facebook Canada. She also spent years in the Office of the Prime Minister, when Harper was in office. She’s part of CIVIX now.

13. Francis LeBlanc: Ex-Liberal MP

Francis LeBlanc is a former Liberal M.P., and held various Government roles after that. He is now Board Member at CIVIX.

By the way, and relation to Dominic LeBlanc, head of the Privy Council? He previously proposed passing laws to combat “misinformation” related to coronavirus.

14. Megan Beretta: Ties To Several Groups

Megan Beretta has worked for CIVIX, Institute for Canadian Citizenship, Canadian Digital Service, and studied at Oxford Internet Institute.

15. Giroux, Clifford: Ex-Mulroney Operatives

Amy Giroux, who is now a Director Global Vision, was a political attache for Brian Mulroney’s Government from 1988 until 1993. Terrence Clifford, the Founder, was a Member of Parliament for Mulroney.

16. News Media Canada On Disinformation

News Media Canada will design, develop and promote a public awareness program entitled “SPOT Fake News Online”. The project will provide Canadians of all ages with straightforward tools to encourage them to critically assess digital media and identify misleading or defamatory disinformation

News Media Canada is supposed to be developing a program to combat misinformation online. Problem is, the Directors all come from mainstream outlets, who are heavily subsidized by the Government, or rather, taxpayers. There is a conflict of interest in claiming to be the leader in truth seeking.

17. Politics Mixing With Media Fact Checking

The examples above are not exhaustive, but they do show an interesting pattern: many of these taxpayer funded groups who are supposed to fight “misinformation” are run by people with political ties. This seems to be an obvious conflict of interest.

Yes, it’s an overused cliche, but this is a case of putting the fox in charge of monitoring the hen house.

Canada Condemns China’s Human Rights Abuses, But Still Does Trade


Testimony at Parliament is available to watch. China’s human rights abuses are detailed in the House of Commons.

1. Trafficking, Smuggling, Child Exploitation

Serious issues like smuggling or trafficking are routinely avoided in public discourse. Also important are the links between open borders and human smuggling; between ideology and exploitation; between tolerance and exploitation; between abortion and organ trafficking; or between censorship and complicity. Mainstream media will also never get into the organizations who are pushing these agendas, nor the complicit politicians. These topics don’t exist in isolation, and are interconnected.

2. Important Links

1948 UN Convention Genocide Prevention Punishing
Canadian Gov’t Condemns Treatment Of Uyghurs In China
House Of Commons Study
Testimony From Dominic Barton
Business Council Of Canada
Dominic Barton’s Century Initiative Profile
Canada-China Business Council
CBC Article By John Paul Tasker
CBC Article On New Canadian Measures For China

uyghur.01.letter
uyghur.02.another.letter
uyghur.03.prisoner.testimony
uyghur.04.situation.of.the.camps
uyghur.05.testimonial
uyghur.06.CSRDN.plea.for.help
uyghur.07.global.affairs.canada

December 8 Testimony

3. UN On Preventing/Punishing Genocide

Hereby agree as hereinafter provided :
Article I
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article III
The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.

This is how the United Nations defines genocide, and how it seeks to punish it. Keep this in mind for later.

4. Canada Condemns Abuses By China

Building on the important testimony of seven witnesses over five sessions before the Subcommittee in 2018, on 20–21 July 2020 the Subcommittee convened urgent meetings to understand the latest developments in the plight of the Uyghurs. Over two days and 12 hours of testimony, the Subcommittee heard from academics, civil society as well as many survivors of the Government of China’s atrocities in the region. The subcommittee wishes to make clear that the condemnations in this statement are directed towards the Government of China, as represented by the Chinese Communist Party, and not the Chinese people, who the Subcommittee support wholeheartedly and hope that one day will benefit from the peace, freedom and security enjoyed by many others in this world.

The Subcommittee was profoundly disturbed by what it heard and is convinced of the need for a strong response. The Subcommittee heard that the Government of China has been employing various strategies to persecute Muslim groups living in Xinjiang, including mass detentions, forced labour, pervasive state surveillance and population control. Witnesses were clear that the Government of China’s actions are a clear attempt to eradicate Uyghur culture and religion. Some witnesses stated that the Government of China’s actions meet the definition of genocide as set out in Article II of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention).

The Subcommittee unequivocally condemns the persecution of Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang by the Government of China. Based on the evidence put forward during the Subcommittee hearings, both in 2018 and 2020, the Subcommittee is persuaded that the actions of the Chinese Communist Party constitute genocide as laid out in the Genocide Convention.

The Government of Canada should also impose sanctions on entities and individuals that benefit from the use of forced labour. Furthermore, recognizing the impact that government and corporate corruption play in allowing the practice of forced labour to continue throughout the world, the Government of Canada must condemn corruption in all its forms and take firm actions to combat it.

The Government of Canada should empower the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise with independence and the power to investigate human rights abuse allegations and enact a comprehensive human rights due diligence law that compels businesses to respect the most current international human rights standards across their global operations and supply chains and be held accountable for harms caused or on behalf of their operations.

The Government of Canada should conduct a review of its procurement practices to ensure it is not purchasing products manufactured through forced labour. It should also create legislation with respect to federal government procurement practices to strengthen transparency and oversight mechanisms, such as reporting to parliament, particularly as it relates to product origins, production and manufacturing.

The Subcommittee was informed that the Government of China’s repressive measures against Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang are part of a broader strategy to control the region. Xinjiang is a resource-rich area with important oil deposits. It also borders several Central Asian countries that the Government of China considers strategically important for its Belt and Road Initiative and its pursuit of expansionism. Because some Uyghurs desire more autonomy or independence from China, the Government of China considers them a threat to its economic development and prosperity. The Subcommittee was informed that its solution is the elimination of Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in the region.

The Canadian Government has declared that what is going on in China amounts to genocide. These measures seem designed and calculated to bring about the destruction of these groups as a whole.

5. Open Borders Policies Are Genocide

Yes, displacing or eliminating a group is a human rights violation. To address the elephant in the room: current policies in Canada amount to open borders, and to erosion of distinct groups. These are things the public never voted for. Such a replacement would be considered genocide under the UN’s own definition here. But to speak up against the Kalergi Plan is considered racism.

6. Such Measures Now Used In “Pandemic”

Considering that many nations are at least considering mandatory vaccinations, would this not lead to mass sterilization? After all, that could easily happen. Given the “isolation centers” being built, and the increase in surveillance, is this not a roundabout way of imposing these conditions? Perhaps this “pandemic” is a method to get the public to accept this as normal.

7. Dominic Barton Supports Trade With China

Canada’s Ambassador to China, Dominic Barton, supports continued trade with China. It’s worth pointing out, however, he is a co-Founder, and former Board Member of Century Initiative, an NGO committed to growing Canada’s population 100 million people. Considering the economic focus of the group, Barton likely sees little real issue with China, or large scale Chinese immigration.

Barton has also been lobbied by the Business Council of Council, which Goldy Hyer is President and CEO. Hyer also is on the Board of Century Initiative.

As a bit of an aside, Century Initiative is chaired by Mark Wiseman. He was the Senior Managing Director of Blackrock, which owns SNC Lavalin.

8. Canada-China Business Council

There is Ambassador Barton, featured prominently.
Who else runs the group?

  • Paul Desmarais Sr. — former head of Power Corp (deceased)
  • Andre Desmarais — son-in-law of Jean Chretien
  • Oliver Desmarais — Vice President of Power Corp
  • Sam Boutziouvis — VP (Government Relations) of SNC Lavalin
  • Morgan Elliott — VP (Government Affairs) of Huawei
  • Tim McGuire — Executive VP, China Construction Bank
  • Martin Cauchon — was in Jean Chretien’s Cabinet
  • James Moore — was in Stephen Harper’s Cabinet
  • Stockwell Day — was in Stephen Harper’s Cabinet
  • Scott Brison — was in Justin Trudeau’s Cabinet

Do you think that these connections might have something to do with the fact that Canada is still doing business with China? Perhaps these things are related.

9. Canada (Not Really) Stops China Trade

The federal government announced a suite of new regulations today meant to ensure that Canadian companies are not complicit in human rights abuses or the use of forced labour in China’s Xinjiang province.

The measures include new requirements for firms that do business in the region and a pledge to ban the export of products from Canada to China if there is a chance they could be used by Chinese authorities for surveillance, repression, arbitrary detention or forced labour.

“Canada is deeply concerned regarding the mass arbitrary detention and mistreatment of Uighurs and other ethnic minorities by Chinese authorities,” Foreign Affairs Minister François-Philippe Champagne said in a news release shortly before leaving the department to become the new minister of Innovation, Science and Industry.

“Nobody should face mistreatment on the basis of their religion or ethnicity,” Champagne added.

To be clear on this, the Canadian Government has no issue with doing business with China, in spite the human rights abuses they allege. Instead, the requirement is that there be no exports if the goods themselves can be used to aid in those abuses.

This is a bit of tortured logic. If trading with China enriches the Government, then couldn’t ANY trade potentially be used to finance such abuses?

So, do human rights abroad mean anything? Or is the “illusion” of caring about human rights what matters? Seems that the Government’s actions are all just for show.

Bank For International Settlements, Others On Digital Currency Implementation

BIS, the Bank for International Settlements, is working towards implementing a digital currency that would replace cash. There doesn’t appear to be any ideological concerns against this. Instead, it becomes a matter of details.

1. BIS Working Our Details Of Digital Currency

Yet the world is changing. Even before Covid-19, cash use in payments was declining in some advanced economies. Commercially provided, fast and convenient digital payments have grown enormously in volume and diversity. To evolve and pursue their public policy objectives in a digital world, central banks are actively researching the pros and cons of offering a digital currency to the public (a “general purpose” central bank digital currency (CBDC)). Understanding of CBDCs has advanced significantly in the last few years. Published research, policy work and proofs-of-concept from central banks have gone a long way towards establishing the potential benefits and risks.

For the central banks contributing to this report, the common motivation for exploring a general purpose CBDC is its use as a means of payment. Providing cash to the public is a core responsibility of central banks and a public good. All the contributing central banks commit to continue providing cash as long as there is public demand. Yet a CBDC could provide a complementary central bank money to the public, supporting a more resilient and diverse domestic payment system. It might also offer opportunities not possible with cash while supporting innovation.

2.1 Payment motivations and challenges
2.1.1 Continued access to central bank money
In jurisdictions where access to cash is in decline, there is a danger that households and businesses will no longer have access to risk-free central bank money. Some central banks consider it an obligation to provide public access and that this access could be crucial for confidence in a currency. A CBDC could act like a “digital banknote” and could fulfil this obligation.

2.1.2 Resilience
Cash serves as a backup payment method to electronic systems if those networks cease to function. However, if access to cash is marginalised, it will be less useful as a backup method if the need arises. A CBDC system could act as an additional payment method, improving operational resilience. Compared to cash, a CBDC system might provide a better means to distribute and use funds in geographically remote locations or during natural disasters.

However, significant offline capabilities would need to be developed, both for the CBDC system and any dependencies (eg some availability of electricity for mobile devices). Counterfeiting and cyber risk present a challenge. Cash has sophisticated anti-counterfeiting features and large-scale issues rarely occur. Theoretically, a successful cyber attack on a digital CBDC system could quickly threaten a significant number of users and their confidence in the wider system (as it could for a large bank or payment service provider). Defending against cyber attacks will be made more difficult as the number of endpoints in a general purpose CBDC system will be significantly larger than those of current wholesale central bank systems.

References

  • Adrian, T and T Mancini Griffoli (2019): “The rise of digital money”, IMF FinTech Notes, no 19/001, July.
  • Auer, R and R Böhme (2020): “The technology of retail central bank digital currency”, BIS Quarterly Review,
    March, pp 85–100.
  • Auer, R, G Cornelli and J Frost (2020): Rise of the central bank digital currencies: drivers, approaches and
    technologies”, BIS Working Papers, no 880, August.
  • Auer, R, P Haene and H Holden (2020): Multi CBDC arrangements and the future of cross-border payments,
    BIS papers, forthcoming.
  • Bank of Canada (2020): Contingency planning for a central bank digital currency, February.
  • Bank of Canada and Monetary Authority of Singapore (2019): Enabling cross-border high value transfer
    using distributed ledger technologies, May.
  • Bank of England (2020): Central bank digital currency: opportunities, challenges and design, March.
  • Bank of Thailand and Hong Kong Monetary Authority (2020): Inthanon-LionRock: leveraging distributed
    ledger technology to increase efficiency in cross-border payments, January.
  • Bech, M and R Garratt (2017): “Central bank cryptocurrencies”, BIS Quarterly Review, September, pp 55–
    70.
  • Bindseil, U (2020): “Tiered CBDC and the financial system”, ECB Working Paper Series, no 2351, January.
  • Boar, C, H Holden and A Wadsworth (2020): “Impending arrival – a sequel to the survey on central bank
    digital currency”, BIS Papers, no 107, January.
  • Bossone, B (2001): “Should banks be narrowed?”, IMF Working Papers, WP/01/159, October.
  • Brunnermeier, M, H James and J-P Landau (2019): “The digitalization of money”, NBER Working Papers, no
    26300, September.
  • Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (2018): Cross-border retail payments, February.
    ——— (2020): Enhancing cross-border payments: building blocks of a global roadmap, July.
  • Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures and Markets Committee (2018): Central bank digital
    currencies, March.
  • Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures and World Bank Group (2020): Payment aspects of
    financial inclusion in the fintech era, April.
  • Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems (2003): The role of central bank money in payment
    systems, August.
  • European Central Bank and Bank of Japan (2019): Synchronised cross-border payments, June.
  • European Central Bank and Bank of Japan (2020): Balancing confidentiality and auditability in a distributed
    ledger environment, February.
  • Ferrari, M, A Mehl and L Stracca (2020): Central bank digital currency in the open economy, forthcoming.
    G7 Working Group on Stablecoins (2019): Investigating the impact of global stablecoins, October.
  • Kahn, C, F Rivadeneyra and R Wong (2018): “Should the central bank issue e-money?”, Bank of Canada Staff Working Paper, 2018-58, December.
  • Sveriges Riksbank (2018): The Riksbank’s e-krona project, report 2, October

This goes far beyond some academic theory. There has been serious research and study into issuing digital currency, and it has gone on for quite some time. The “pandemic” seems to be a pretext to push it further along.

Nice to see that some of the major risks are addressed, such as hacking, or system malfunction erasing financial information.

Also, this must be pointed out: most central banks are privately owned and/or controlled. This means that countries must borrow (at interest) in order to get money for day to day operations. Such a system is not necessary, but is enacted for the purposes of creating endless debt slavery. Politicians go along with this because they have no interest in the well being of their people.

2. The Fraud Of Private Central Banking

One of the reasons that digital currency is touted is supposedly to combat money laundering. Interesting, because private central banking (money borrowed at interest), is arguably the greatest financial fraud ever perpetuated. In this scheme, the only way countries can get money — created from nothing — is to borrow it at interest.

3. Digital Currency Openly Discussed

This discussion is hardly limited to BIS. Banks and financial institutions across the planet are talking about how to implement such a system, and have been doing so for many years.

A curious point: things like Bitcoin are promoted as a decentralized way to make transactions, yet banks talk about ways to centrally manage these.

4. Bank For Int’l Settlements Innovation Hub

Hub projects and topics will evolve over time, and the BIS has been working to identify areas of work for the Hub that reflect the innovation priorities of the central bank community and which could be scaled up through international cooperation. Topics under consideration for the work agenda include central bank digital currencies, global stablecoins, payment innovations, the impact of big tech on financial intermediation, regtech and suptech, fast-paced electronic markets, and digitalisation of trade finance.

What does the BIS Innovation Hub do?
The mandate of the BIS Innovation Hub is to identify and develop in-depth insights into critical trends in financial technology of relevance to central banks, to explore the development of public goods to enhance the functioning of the global financial system, and to serve as a focal point for a network of central bank experts on innovation. It complements the already well established cooperation within the BIS-hosted committees.

Digital currency is just one of the things that BIS is working on. The group wants to be at the forefront of the trends that are emerging in financing and payment processing.

5. Privacy Element Missing From Discussion

What about people who want to make business transactions without there being a record for many years? Not everyone is okay with every food or minor purchase being a record available for others to see. Although a growing population seems unconcerned with such things, there is the inherent loss of privacy.

And what about the loss of anonymity or choice when it comes to association, or viewpoints? Is it not easier to connect a person (and their public statements), to their finances? If they happen to hold “incorrect” views, what’s to stop there digital currency from being erased? What’s to prevent institutions from refusing to do business with them? For a concrete example, banks these days are promoting forced diversity and globalism, although many are opposed to it.

Although this sounds farfetched, what’s to stop a Chinese style “social credit” system from making someone’s life impossible to live? Such a thing is possible then finance and identity cannot be separated.

https://www.bis.org/press/p201009.htm
https://www.bis.org/publ/othp33.pdf
BIS Digital Currency Paper
BIS Video Promoting Digital Currency
Citi On Digital Currency (Video)
Digital Currency Discussion, India(Video)
Various Digital Currency Options
World Affairs Council On Digital Currency (Video)
Bank For International Settlements Innovation Hub
BIS on digital innovation options