The Conspiracy Theory Handbook By Lewandowsky & Cook

Yes, there was an actual conspiracy theory guide published in March 2020. Now, that date shouldn’t raise any suspicions whatsoever. This publication comes across as a form of gaslighting, cloaked in fake empathy and understanding.

At first glance, this small book may be dismissed as trolling or satire. However, the authors are very serious, and have put considerable effort into this publication. It’s also very interesting that such a publication can be put out with little to no concern for the consequences. Can you imagine a skeptic who questioned climate change publishing something similar to this?

Apparently people who feel vulnerable are spreading conspiracy theories. It can also be seen as a way to be contrarian in political circles. Instead of recommending that the truth be investigated, people seeking truth can be dismissed for a variety of reasons.

There is also a good deal of projection here. Many so-called “conspiracy theorists” are in fact searching for truth, and trying to make logical sense of what is going on. In the case of the (alleged) pandemic, it’s public figures and the media who keep shifting the goal posts. Also, this site has covered in great detail the amount of financial subsidies that mainstream outlets receive.

Conspiracy theories aren’t always the result of genuinely held false beliefs. They can be intentionally constructed or amplified for strategic, political reasons. For example, there is evidence that the Russian government recently contributed to the spread of various political conspiracy theories in the West.

Conspiracy theories may be deployed as a rhetorical tool to escape inconvenient conclusions. The rhetoric of climate denial is filled with incoherence, such as the simultaneous claims that temperature cannot be measured accurately but global temperatures have declined. Incoherence is one attribute of conspiratorial thinking, but it does not follow that climate denial is irrational—on the contrary, denialist rhetoric is an effective political strategy to delay climate action by undermining people’s perception of the strength of scientific evidence.

In confirmation, people selectively appeal to a conspiracy among scientists to explain away a scientific consensus when their political ideology compels them to do so—but not when the scientific consensus is of no relevance to their politics.

Prebunking
If people are preemptively made aware that they might be misled, they can develop resilience to conspiratorial messages. This process is known as inoculation or prebunking. There are two elements to an inoculation: an explicit warning of an impending threat of being misled, and refutation of the misinformation’s arguments. Prebunkings of anti-vaccination conspiracy theories have been found to be more effective than debunking.

This is a way to preempt a person from asking logical questions. If you implant the idea in their heads, any doubts that might later occur may seem like conspiracy theories setting in.

Source-based and empathy-based debunking
Source-based debunking attempts to reduce the credibility of conspiracy theorists whereas empathy-based debunkings compassionately call attention to the targets of conspiracy theories. A source-based debunking that ridiculed believers of lizard men was found to be as effective as a fact-based debunking. In contrast, an empathy-based debunking of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories that argued that Jews today face similar persecution as early Christians was unsuccessful

When all else fails, a little emotional manipulation can do the trick. Think of how the targets of your theories may feel. Never mind the truth or accuracy of such suspicions.

Trusted messengers
Counter-messages created by former members of an extremist community (“exiters”) are evaluated more positively and remembered longer than messages from other sources.

Another technique is to recruit people who used to believe (or claim to have believed) in a conspiracy theory before. Apparently they entire thing comes across as more trustworthy this way. This may explain why crisis actors and “reformed” people are all the rage. They can conjure up a good narrative.

Show empathy
Approaches should be empathic and seek to build understanding with the other party. Because the goal is to develop the conspiracy theorist’s open-mindedness, communicators must lead by example.

Have to love the approach here. Let’s pretend to show an understanding with another person, which having already written them off as conspiracy nuts.

An astute reader will notice that these authors don’t really suggest that conspiracy theories get fact checked, and that people work out their accuracy for themselves. Instead, we have a variety of techniques to be employed to plant seeds of doubt in people’s minds

Perhaps we can take something from this. Since we know (in broad strokes) what techniques will be employed, it should become easier to counter them.

(1) https://www.climatechangecommunication.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/ConspiracyTheoryHandbook.pdf
(2) Conspiracy Theory Handbook

The Climate Change Money Pit: Where Is It Really Going?

Ever think that your tax dollars are being wasted on the climate change scam? Well, they are. But at least, one can have a better idea of “where” they are being wasted. Here are some, but not all of the recent amounts in recent years.

Considering how little attention any of this gets in the media, or even in political spheres, it’s fair to ask why. Notice that scandals in Ottawa tend to be over relatively minor things. It’s a great way to divert attention.

Some of the grants contain little to no information, making it impossible to say for certain what’s happening. They could be legitimate, or they could just be slush funds. This list only contains money handed over by Ottawa, not any Provincial or local efforts.

NAME DATE AMOUNT
African Development Bank Group Mar. 31, 2021 $132,900,000
Agence Française de Développement Mar. 18, 2020 $10,000,000
Alliance agricole international UPA-DI, CECI Mar. 19, 2021 $16,589,517
Asian Development Bank Mar. 23, 2017 $10,000,000
Canadian Co-operative Association Apr. 1, 2019 $14,800,000
Canadian Coop Society for Int’l Development Sep. 25, 2018 $19,177,873
Canadian Coop Society for Int’l Development Mar. 10, 2020 $17,502,828
Canadian Coop Society for Int’l Development Mar. 19, 2020 $8,030,063
Canadian Coop Society for Int’l Development Mar. 1, 2021 $9,829,509
Canadian Foundation For Development Tech Aug. 27, 2018 $399,141,615
Canadian Foundation For Development Tech Apr. 1, 2021 $747,762,060
Canadian Inst. for Clean Growth, Climate Change May 14, 2019 $20,000,000
CARE Canada May 8, 2013 $12,000,000
Caribbean Development Bank Mar. 27, 2012 $20,000,000
Centre for International Studies, Cooperation Mar. 27, 2019 $13,000,000
Centre for International Studies, Cooperation Mar. 29, 2019 $17,993,407
City of Richmond Mar. 4, 2020 $13,780,000
City of Saint John Mar. 11, 2020 $11,916,074
Cuso International Apr. 15, 2020 $49,985,745
Federation of Canadian Municipalities Jan. 31, 2017 $75,000,000
Federation of Canadian Municipalities Green Fund Mar. 19, 2018 $62,500,000
Government of Northwest Territories Sep. 13, 2019 $30,000,000
Government of Nova Scotia Jul. 22, 2019 $90,000,000
Government of Nova Scotia May 25, 2020 $24,997,500
Government of Yukon Sep. 20, 2019 $118,212,428
Green Climate Fund Mar. 25, 2020 $190,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Mar. 24, 2016 $30,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Jan. 12, 2018 $165,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank May 14, 2018 $20,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Sep. 16, 2019 $20,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Feb. 26, 2020 $16,500,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank May 29, 2020 $28,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank May 29, 2020 $410,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Mar. 31, 2021 $35,000,000
IDB – Inter-American Development Bank Mar. 28, 2018 $16,000,000
IDB – Inter-American Development Bank Mar. 19, 2019 $223,500,000
IDB – Inter-American Development Bank Mar. 31, 2021 $190,000,000
IDRC – International Development Research Centre Mar. 24, 2017 $19,600,000
IFAD – International Fund for Agricultural Development Dec. 19, 2019 $150,000,000
IFAD – International Fund for Agricultural Development Mar. 31, 2021 $190,000,000
Oxfam-Quebec Sep. 5, 2019 $13,000,000
Papyrus S.A. (Haiti) Mar. 15, 2019 $13,000,000
Seedchange May 26, 2015 $17,599,059
St. Francis Xavier University Dec. 18, 2019 $9,797,119
Sustainable Development Technologies Canada Dec. 10, 2014 $23,293,000
United Nations Development Programme Mar. 8, 2018 $10,150,000
United Nations Environment Programme Oct. 16, 2013 $15,500,000
United Nations University Jun. 22, 2020 $10,000,000
UPA Développement international Apr. 7, 2020 $12,015,755
World Food Programme Jan. 27, 2020 $20,000,000
WUSC – World University Service of Canada Jan. 5, 2021 $19,487,814

Keep in mind, this is nowhere near the full list of such payments, but does include many of the larger grants. Now, where is any of this going? While some are spent locally, many are handed out to foreign groups. Let’s look at a few of them.

The Green Climate Fund is essentially a large slush fund that countries pay into, so that the money can be doled out to various climate programs, with little to no accountability. Of course, no one ever voted on allowing unelected bureaucrats to do this, but whatever.

4.3 Catalysing private sector finance at scale
21. Contributing to making financial flows managed by the private sector consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate resilient development is key to realizing the scale of resources – in the trillions – needed to implement developing countries’ NDCs, ACs, NAPs, TNAs, TPs , and other climate strategies. The GCF’s 2020-2023 programming will aim to more systematically and fully realize the potential of the GCF to mobilize resources at scale, and support activities to increase the impact of investments, while encouraging a wider alignment of financial flows with countries’ climate plans and strategies.

According to their updated 2020 to 2023 plan, the Green Climate Fund projects that trillions of dollars (with a “T”) will be needed for developing countries to implement their various goals.

The African Development Bank Group is set up to hand out grants to companies that are working to achieve the UNSDA, or the Agenda 2030 goals. This acts as a middleman to write the cheques. Interestingly, in its FAQ section, there isn’t a question about ensuring the accountability of the funds.

The Asian Development Bank, hands out money to finance a variety of projects, with climate change being one of them. It’s interesting, given how nations like China, Japan and South Korea are actually more wealthy than Canada.

The Inter-American Development Bank works in much the same ways as others, acting as a middleman to hand out money for various projects related to the UN Sustainable Development Agenda. This primarily takes effect in South America.

Keep in mind, there is virtually no way to track the money once it’s left the country. This means there is really no way to ensure it goes where it’s supposed to. An astute person will realize how absurd it is for Canada to be borrowing money only to be sending it off overseas, at least the portions sent abroad. We will be charged endless interest for funds that will never benefit Canadians. An even more observant person will take note that the international banking system means private borrowing, and no way to pay it off.

But hey, as long as Canada appears virtuous in the eyes of outsiders, then what else matters?

(1) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(2) https://www.greenclimate.fund/
(3) https://www.greenclimate.fund/document/updated-strategic-plan-green-climate-fund-2020-2023
(4) https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/updated-strategic-plan-green-climate-fund-2020-2023.pdf
(5) Updated Strategic Plan Green Climate Fund 2020-2023
(6) https://www.afdb.org/en/about/mission-strategy
(7) https://www.adb.org/
(8) https://www.iadb.org/

(Charity) University Of Toronto “Institute For Pandemics” Funded By Millers, Merck, Run By Ontario Science Table

Remember those conspiracy nuts saying this was never going to end? The University of Toronto Institute for Pandemics was launched in 2020. It hosts many of the same players from the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, and the Ontario Science Table, such as Adalsteinn Brown, David Fisman and Colin Furness.

Fun fact: University of Toronto has several registered charities tied to its name. Much more on that later.

COVID-19, SARS and other urgent health threats began in animals. It’s time to drop misleading distinctions between human and animal health. Our underpinning “one health” approach considers human, animal and environmental health together.

Read between the lines on this. Not only is this meant to be about human health, but “fighting climate change” could easily be worked into the narrative.

The cause of pandemics is complex; beyond any single government or world body to address. But the opportunities are equally strong, if we can couple technological advances with an intimate knowledge of health systems, economics, the intersectional social determinants of health — and the credibility to influence change amid a historic crisis of trust in governments and the media. Universities must play a central role if we are to mitigate the human suffering and economic devastation caused by pandemics.

This group also promotes the globalist narrative that no country can do this on their own. There is also the implicit declaration that they will try to influence how the media perceives Government. This comes across as pushing propaganda.

The same self-declared “Ontario Science Table” experts who advocate for stripping the rights of Ontarians away will now be doing it directly from the U of T. As shown earlier, there is no real independence, either from Government, or the World Health Organization. It’s quite the rabbit hole.

This “institute” was started up thanks to a $1 million donation from the Vohra-Miller Foundation. About the couple that heads it:

Sabina Vohra-Miller graduated from the University of Toronto, with both a Bachelors and Masters in the pharmaceutical studies. She then spent several years in that field before starting up the Vohra-Miller Foundation with her husband. She co-founded the South Asian Health Network, which pushes vaccines and anti-racism, and founded Unambiguous Science, a website that pushes vaccines. She’s now on the Advisory Table of the Institute for Pandemics.

It’s a bit disturbing that Sabina either misrepresents (or simply is unaware) that these “vaccines” are not approved. They were given interim authorization for emergency use. But her website does little except shill and promote them.

Craig Miller spent years with Kijiji, which is an eBay company. He then moved on to Shopify, leaving in 2020. A few side notes: (a) eBay was founded by Pierre Omidyar, who was been involved in social change, and a “more informed media”; and (b) Shopify was contracted to make a contact tracing app with the Federal Government.

Craig also publicly pushes the climate change narrative. It will be interesting to see if (or how) the Institute for Pandemics will incorporate that into their agenda.

Both of them seem to have ties to organizations that will benefit from prolonging this “pandemic”.

Merck Canada’s $3-million investment will help the centre’s diverse mix of public health researchers to better understand the decision-making of individuals and communities around whether and when to receive immunizations. With expertise in vaccine science, social and behavioural health, equity and health systems, the centre’s faculty members will produce scientific research to aid the Ontario government, policy-makers and public health advocates around the world in increasing public knowledge of and access to immunizations.

Also consider that Merck Canada (the drug company) donated $3 million to the Institute for Pandemics. From their perspective, it makes sense. More pandemics mean a larger market for more drugs. Of course, with tax rebates from the Canada Revenue Agency, this $3 million gift will cost considerably less. This school has quite a few pharma donors.

It was covered previously how several current Medical Officers of Health are either Professors at U of T, or have other ties to the school. This sets up an obvious conflict of interest.

  • Barbara Yaffe – Ontario Deputy Medical Officer
  • Eileen De Villa – Toronto Chief Medical Officer
  • Vinita Dubey – Toronto Associate Medical Officer of Health
  • Lisa Berger – Toronto Associate Medical Officer of Health
  • Christine Navarro – Toronto Associate Medical Officer of Health
  • Avis Lynn Noseworthy – Medical Officer of Health for the Haliburton, Kawartha, Pine Ridge
  • Vera Etches – Ottawa Deputy Medical Officer of Health
  • Brent Moloughney – Ottawa Associate Medical Officer
  • Lawrence C. Loh – Peel Medical Officer of Health
  • Hamidah Meghani – Halton Region Medical Health Officer
  • Nicola Mercer – Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph Medical Officer (U of T Medical School)
  • Mustafa Hirji – Niagara Acting Medical Officer of Health (U of T graduate)
  • Elizabeth Richardson – Hamilton Medical Officer of Health (U of T graduate)

Adalsteinn Brown is the head of the Ontario Science Table, and the Institute for Pandemics. He also runs the Dalla Lana School for Public Health. This effectively means he is the boss of other Professors in that Department. How will the power dynamics work here, as these MOH are supposed to be independent?

Moreover, there are other U of T Professors on the Science Table and the Institute for Pandemics. Will these create conflicts with the MOH, and their dual roles? Why isn’t all of this publicly discussed?

  • Students’ Alzheimer’s Alliance at the University of Toronto (SAAUT)
  • Scholarship Bursary & Education Committee Medical Alumni Association of University of Toronto
  • Student Christian Movement in the University of Toronto
  • The Encumeical Chaplaincy at the University of Toronto
  • The Governing Council of the University of Toronto
  • Trust Under Will of Reuben W Leonard for University of Toronto
  • University of Toronto International Health Program (UTIHP)
  • University of Toronto Community Radio Inc.
  • University of Toronto Schools

Interesting bit of information: there isn’t just 1 charity tied to U of T. There are 9 of them. However, only a few of them are of concern for this article. The Governing Council of the University is by far the biggest one. In their recent tax filings, this NGO claimed to be financing work and research globally. These include:

-UNITED STATES
-(Other countries in Europe)
-(Other countries in Asia and Oceania)
-UNITED KINGDOM
-FRANCE
-(Other countries in Africa)
-SPAIN
-UGANDA
-KENYA
-THAILAND
-GERMANY
-ZAMBIA
-ITALY
-INDIA
-REPUBLIC OF NORTH MACEDONIA
-BANGLADESH
-KOREA, REPUBLIC OF
-ARGENTINA
-ISRAEL
-JAMAICA
-MEXICO
-BRAZIL
-JAPAN
-UKRAINE
-COLOMBIA
-GUYANA
-CAMBODIA
-GHANA
-EGYPT
-MADAGASCAR

So much for being a Canadian school. Now, how much money are they actually taking in and spending each year?

April 2016 Financial Details
Receipted donations $98,554,359.00 (3.44%)
Non-receipted donations $6,357,259.00 (0.22%)
Gifts from other registered charities $37,404,382.00 (1.31%)
Government funding $992,767,454.00 (34.65%)
All other revenue $1,730,060,546.00 (60.38%)
Total revenue: $2,865,144,000.00

Charitable programs $2,786,557,000.00 (96.35%)
Management and administration $75,834,000.00 (2.62%)
Fundraising $29,755,000.00 (1.03%)
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: $2,892,146,000.00

Professional and consulting fees: $50,151,000.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

April 2017 Financial Details
Receipted donations $76,270,736.00 (2.21%)
Non-receipted donations $21,064,207.00 (0.61%)
Gifts from other registered charities $39,602,057.00 (1.15%)
Government funding $1,026,938,285.00 (29.72%)
All other revenue $2,291,696,715.00 (66.32%)
Total revenue: $3,455,572,000.00

Charitable programs $2,232,398,000.00 (95.10%)
Management and administration $82,954,000.00 (3.53%)
Fundraising $32,057,000.00 (1.37%)
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: $2,347,409,000.00

Professional and consulting fees: $21,059,000.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

April 2018 Financial Details
Receipted donations $87,273,828.00 (2.51%)
Non-receipted donations $10,522,417.00 (0.30%)
Gifts from other registered charities $69,132,755.00 (1.99%)
Government funding $1,015,747,096.00 (29.20%)
All other revenue $2,295,824,904.00 (66.00%)
Total revenue: $3,478,501,000.00

Charitable programs $2,860,114,000.00 (95.57%)
Management and administration $99,245,000.00 (3.32%)
Fundraising $33,278,000.00 (1.11%)
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: $2,992,637,000.00

Professional and consulting fees: $36,903,000.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

April 2019 Financial Details
Receipted donations $92,734,000.00 (2.53%)
Non-receipted donations $11,603,000.00 (0.32%)
Gifts from other registered charities $37,350,000.00 (1.02%)
Government funding $1,076,131,000.00 (29.34%)
All other revenue $2,449,795,000.00 (66.80%)
Total revenue: $3,667,613,000.00

Charitable programs $3,014,525,000.00 (95.39%)
Management and administration $110,505,000.00 (3.50%)
Fundraising $35,294,000.00 (1.12%)
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: $3,160,324,000.00

Professional and consulting fees: $41,934,000.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

April 2020 Financial Details
Receipted donations $63,712,000.00 (1.80%)
Non-receipted donations $11,664,000.00 (0.33%)
Gifts from other registered charities $44,316,000.00 (1.25%)
Government funding $1,044,854,000.00 (29.51%)
All other revenue $2,375,684,000.00 (67.11%)
Total revenue: $3,540,230,000.00

Charitable programs $3,414,276,000.00 (95.92%)
Management and administration $110,186,000.00 (3.10%)
Fundraising $35,025,000.00 (0.98%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $3,559,487,000.00

Professional and consulting fees: $47,072,000.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

The Governing Council of the University takes in some $3 billion annually. They also pay their Executives very, very well. But it’s easier to do when the donations received are subsidized by the public.

It’s worth pointing out that this “charity” operates plenty of programs abroad. This is likely since many of their donors have interests abroad. A more detailed look at their financials would be appreciated, but here are some of the more generous ones listed by the school.

Is all of this going towards education and research? Or is it to be used to justify draconian measures UNDER THE PRETENSE of education and research?

(1) https://www.dlsph.utoronto.ca/pandemics/
(2) https://www.utoronto.ca/news/u-t-s-dalla-lana-school-public-health-launches-institute-pandemics
(3) https://www.dlsph.utoronto.ca/pandemics/#about
(4) https://www.utoronto.ca/news/u-t-and-merck-canada-partner-advance-and-share-vaccine-knowledge-and-research
(5) https://www.vohramillerfoundation.ca/
(6) https://www.linkedin.com/in/sabinavohramiller/
(7) https://archive.is/0wO5k
(8) https://twitter.com/sabivm
(9) https://www.linkedin.com/in/craigmillertoronto/
(10) https://archive.is/wip/IV3Ha
(11) https://twitter.com/craigmillr
(12) https://www.unambiguous-science.com/
(13) https://www.unambiguous-science.com/jj-approved-by-health-canada/
(14) https://nationalpost.com/pmn/health-pmn/canadas-shopify-blackberry-develop-covid-19-contact-tracing-app-with-local-governments
(15) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-giving/giving-charity-information-donors/claiming-charitable-tax-credits/charitable-donation-tax-credit-rates.html
(16) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/bscSrch
(17) University Of Toronto Governing Council
(18) https://canucklaw.ca/uoft-dlsph-centre-for-vaccine-preventable-diseases-was-prelude-to-ontario-science-table/

Healthcare Of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP) Owns Stock In Vaccines & Masks Being Pushed

The Ontario Science Table lists groups in the health care sector as its partners. Whether or not the individual members support this, and to what extent, the pensions of a lot of people are tied up in promoting their agenda.

HOOPP, the Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan has some interesting medical holdings. This is at least according the SEC, or U.S. Securities and Exchanges Commission. While there is nothing inherently bad in investing in your own field, it will be driven by the way you want it to go.

The fund claims to have over $100 billion in net assets, or equity. Fair enough, let’s take a look at where some of that money is.

COMPANY AMOUNT
1Life Healthcare $540,000
3M Co. $462,000
Alexion Pharmaceuticals $34,891,000
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals $213,000
Alpha Healthcare Acquisition Corp $2,232,000
Amplitude Health Care Acquisition $930,000
Bausch Health Cos $2,366,000
Biogen Inc. $235,000
CVS Health Corp $32,871
Cytomx Therapeutics Inc. $835,000
Deerfield Healthcare Technology Acquisition $2,696,000
DFP Healthcare Acquisition $3,633,000
Gilead Sciences $6,420,000
HCA Healthcare $142,000
Healthcare Merger Corp. $1,019,000
Jazz Pharmaceuticals PLC $3,538,000
Johnson & Johnson $34,401,000
Livongo Health Inc. $6,169,000
Merck & Co. $6,221,000
Pfizer $38,467,000
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals $1,052,000

The individual companies weren’t named in the HOOPP paperwork, so a visit to the SEC was needed for that. For reference, Gilead is the manufacturer of Veklury, also known as Remdesivir, a drug (not a vaccine) to counter Covid-19. It was given interim authorization to be used in Canada. Janssen (which is owned by Johnson & Johnson) also has an authorized “vaccine” in Canada. So does Pfizer, which is partnered with BioNTech. Yes, these are the same companies.

As for the next group, this is on the list of things that will make you go “hmmm”. If health care workers in Ontario were expecting, or wanting, a shutdown of society, these would be the companies to invest in.

A serious question: does it come across as a conflict of interest when health care workers are pushing pharmaceuticals which their pension plans own stock in? And it gets stranger.

COMPANY AMOUNT
Alibaba Group Holdings $730,000,000
Alphabet Inc. $4,799,000
Amazon $18,848
Beyond Meat Inc. $151,000
Blackline Software $16,000
Blackrock $85,000
Blackstone Group $625,000
Broadcom Inc. $181,000
Coca Cola Co. $58,552,000
Dish Network Corporation $89,000
E-Bay $101,000
Facebook $24,022,000
Goldman Sachs $15,978,000
Grid Dynamics Inc. $4,676,000
Mastercard $427,644,000
Microsoft Corp. $298,081
Netflix $335,000
Nike $2,354
PayPal Holdings $378,000
Salesforce $2,746,000
Shaw Communications $6,386,000
Shopify $50,537,000
Starbucks $11,065,000
Visa $1,802,000
Walmart $13,148,000
Zoom Communications $216,000

HOOPP seems to be investing in everything that we need in order to have a cashless society, working from home, and an abundance of pharmaceuticals. But that’s probably just a coincidence.

While most of the profiles of the HOOPP leadership were privatized, a few were in the open. Some interesting details revealed in them.

Tanya Pereira is the Senior Director of Operations at HOOPP. She is also a Strategic Advisor at Andone Pharmaceuticals, during that same time period.

John Watson is the Director of Operations Support at HOOPP. He has also been charge of other pension plans. Early in his career, he was a records supervisor at Sick Kids Hospital Toronto, which gets significant funding from the Gates Foundation.

HOOPP claims to be pushing the ESG/green agenda pretty hard. So expect that they’ll only be investing in such companies that “appear” to be green, regardless of whether or not they actually are green. They sing the praises about sustainability and climate change. Most people have heard it all before.

As for the HOOPP owning stock in these vaccines and masks, and their members pushing them on the public, that is downright shady, to say the least. True, it’s the doctors and nurses themselves who market it to the lay person, but how does this look?

Is this ancient? According to the SEC, it covers the period up to December 31, 2020, and was filed on March 1, 2021. Now, it’s possible that these shares have since been sold, but the first interim authorizations were coming out before then. Again, how does it look?

IMPORTANT LINKS
(1) https://hoopp.com/
(2) https://hoopp.com/about-hoopp
(3) https://hoopp.com/investments/pension-plan-performance-and-hoopp-annual-report
(4) https://hoopp.com/about-hoopp/pension-leadership
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-industry/drugs-vaccines-treatments/authorization/list-drugs.html
(6) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/veklury/product-details
(7) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/janssen-covid-19-vaccine/product-details
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1535845/000153584520000007/0001535845-20-000007-index.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1535845/000153584520000007/xslForm13F_X01/SEC13F09_2020.xml
https://archive.is/Kqazd

EARLIER IN THIS SERIES
(a) Michael Warner Financially Benefits From Prolonged Lockdowns
(b) Who Is Ontario Deputy Medical Officer, Barbara Yaffe?
(c) OST, Monopoly From The University Of Toronto Connected
(d) OST, University Of Toronto, Look At Their Members And Partners
(e) OST’s Robert Steiner Claims To Be Behind PHAC Canada Creation
(f) OST’s Kwame McKenzie Headed 2017 UBI Pilot Project
(g) OST UofT Prelude Actually Set Out In May 2019
(h) OST’s Murty Has Tech Firm That Benefits From Lockdowns
(i) OST: Como Foundation Gives Trillium Health Partners $5M
(j) OST: Current PHO Officials Also Sitting On As Partners
(k) OST: Canadian Agency For Drugs & Technologies In Health; pCPA
(l) OST: Centre For Effective Practice Gets Money From Lockdown
(m) OST: Cochrane Canada; WHO; McMaster University
(n) OST: SPOR Evidence Alliance Gets Funding From WHO

CCS #7(C): The NGOs & Special Interest Groups Behind The Carbon Tax Challenges

Yes, the Supreme Court of Canada recently declared the Carbon tax to be constitutional. But who exactly were the NGOs pushing for this to be accepted?

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. See the other articles on the 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

https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/18781/index.do
https://scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/af-ma-eng.aspx?cas=39116
Diverge Media On Major Judicial Conflict In Case
Canada Ecofiscal Commission – Main Page
https://www.linkedin.com/in/christopher-ragan-7a595631/
https://rightsofchildren.ca/our-work/
https://www.progressalberta.ca/about
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jimstorrie/
https://institute.smartprosperity.ca/content/green-bonds-canada
https://institute.smartprosperity.ca/about
https://www.youthclimatelab.org/
https://www.youthclimatelab.org/our-board
https://www.youthclimatelab.org/toolbox

3. Diverge Media On Chief Justice Wagner

Diverge Media just reported that Chief Justice Richard Wagner was the opening speaker at the Centre For International Sustainable Development Law (CISDL) in 2020. That certainly sheds things in a new light. Check out their article for much more information.

4. NGOs Intervening In Court Challenges

  • Assembly of First Nations
  • Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation
  • Canada’s Ecofiscal Commission
  • Canadian Public Health Association
  • Canadian Taxpayers Federation
  • Climate Justice et al
  • David Suzuki Foundation
  • Generation Squeeze et al
    1. Generation Squeeze
    2. Public Health Association of BC
    3. Saskatchewan Public Health Association
    4. Canadian Associations of Physicians for the Environment
    5. Canadian Coalition for the Rights of the Child
    6. Youth Climate Lab
  • International Emissions Trading Association
  • Oceans North Conservation Society
  • Progress Alberta Communications Limited
  • Saskatchewan Power Corporation & Saskenergy Inc.
  • Smart Prosperity Institute
  • Thunderchild First Nation

The list of both the Governments and NGOs participating in the Supreme Court challenge are available to all. Likewise, the arguments they submit are all posted publicly. While it’s too extensive to cover everything, let’s dig down anyway.

5. Canada’s Ecofiscal Commission

Canada Ecofiscal Commission recommends raising Canada’s Carbon tax to $210/tonne, and are fully behind the climate agenda. But who exactly is involved with this organization? Who is calling the shots?

Chris Ragan is the Chair of the Canada Ecofiscal Commission. Prior to that, he was: Advisor to the Governor of the Bank of Canada; Advisor to the Finance Minister of Canada; and worked for the C.D. Howe Institute.

Glen Hodgson‘s history includes: Conference Board of Canada, where he was Senior Vice-President and Chief Economist for twelve years; the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Washington D.C.; Export Development Canada (EDC); and the Canadian Department of Finance. His affiliations include: Senior Fellow at the C.D. Howe Institute; Chief Economist with International Financial Consulting Ltd (IFCL)

Jason Dion was a project manager and economist at the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), where his work focused on climate change mitigation and adaptation, green public procurement, and sustainable infrastructure. Jason is the author of numerous publications, including environmental fiscal reform studies for the governments of Mauritius and Mozambique, funded by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

Steven Williams is the CEO of Suncor, and is also on the McKinsey & Company Advisory Committee. In 2005 he was appointed to the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy by the Prime Minister, then Paul Martin. He was also part of COP21 in Paris in 2015.

The advisory Board includes:

  • Michael Harcourt, former Vancouver Mayor
  • Gordon Campbell, former Vancouver Mayor, former BC Premier
  • Jean Charest, former Quebec Premier
  • Paul Martin, former Prime Minister

There are more of course, but a lot of interesting connections to the political world. And perhaps a coincidence, but McGill and Simon Fraser Universities keep coming up in their biographies.

6. Canadian Coalition For Rights Of The Child

Our Work

The Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children (CCRC) is a network of Canadian organizations and individuals who promote respect for the rights of children. Its purpose is to: exchange information; provide public education materials about the Convention on the Rights of the Child; monitor implementation of the Convention in Canada; and engage in dialogue with government officials on child rights issues.

The objectives of the Coalition are:

-To uphold human rights in Canada and the world, in accordance with the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child and its related conventions and protocols, by providing relevant public education programs such as workshops and seminars; and
-To monitor and report on the implementation of the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child in Canada and internationally.

What We Do

The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the guiding framework for all activities of the coalition. Those activities include:
-Monitoring and promoting the implementation of children’s rights in Canada, in both domestic policies and international relations.
-Establishing national, provincial, and local links between groups concerned about the well-being of children, to share information and co-operate in the advancement of children’s rights.
-Fostering education and awareness in Canada about the rights of children, especially among young Canadians.
-Promoting Canada’s role in international bodies that foster children’s rights and engaging Canadians in international initiatives to advance respect for children’s rights.

How We Do It

Children’s Rights Monitoring
-The CCRC brings together Canadian children and civil society organizations to participate in the regular five-year reviews of Canada’s implementation of the CRC before the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.
-The CCRC makes submissions on policy proposals before parliament from the perspective of children’s rights.
-The Coalition provides a child-rights analysis of the federal budget and other national policies.
-The CCRC helps children from all parts of Canada participate in consultations on matters that affect them, with the support of coalition members. Canadian children have participated in the World Summit for Children, the Earth Summit, the UN Special Session for Children, and other national and international events.
-The CCRC provided policy recommendations for Canada’s participation in the UN Special Session for Children, and for Canada’s Action Plan, entitled “A Canada Fit for Children.

Presumably, wanting carbon dioxide gone is a children’s rights issue. This group openly admits that its major goals involve seeing through the implementation of a child’s right treaty.

  • Kate Butler, Child Protection Advisor, Save the Children Canada – Chair
  • Hala Mreiwed, Post-doctoral Student, Children’s Rights and Education, McGill University – Secretary
  • Emily Chan, Lawyer, Justice for Children and Youth – Treasurer
  • Robyn Aaron, Child Rights Specialist
  • Daniella Bendo, PhD Candidate in Children’s Rights, Carleton University
  • Terence Hamilton, Child Rights Policy Analyst, UNICEF Canada
  • Helesia Luke, Communications and Development Coordinator, First Call BC Child and Youth Advocacy Coalition
  • Laura Wright, Child Rights Consultant and PhD Candidate in Children’s Rights
  • Candace Blake-Amarante, PhD., Playwright and Children’s Author
  • Michael Saini, Ph.D., M.S.W., R.S.W., Associate Professor, Factor-Inwentash Chair in Law and Social Work. University of Toronto
  • Ashley Vandermorris, MC, FRCPC, Staff Physician, Division of Adolescent Medicine, Sick Kids Hospital. Associate Professor, Department of Paediatrics, University of Toronto
  • Tara Black, PhD, Assistant Professor, Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto

It’s list of Directors is pretty impressive, but this seemingly has nothing to do with the climate change agenda. Nonetheless, they have been granted Intervenor status with the Supreme Court of Canada, along with Generation Squeeze

7. David Suzuki Foundation

This was addressed in considerable detail in another article. Take a deeper look into what exactly is going on, and what their interests really are. It’s a very well funded organization. There’s also details provided on the International Emissions Trading Association, (IETA).

8. Progress Alberta

Progress Alberta describes itself as a progressive leaning advocacy group. To their credit, they don’t claim to be neutral in the policies they call for. One of their members, Jim Storrie, recently worked for the Alberta NDP, which is interesting. There is little information about who their donors actually are.

9. Smart Prosperity Institute, Green Bonds

Smart Prosperity Institute’s annual “Green Bonds – State of the Market in Canada” reports provide unique insight on the role of green bonds in funding environment and climate-related projects in Canada. The annual report is a special supplement to the Bonds and Climate Change: The State of the Market global report and is prepared collaboratively with Climate Bonds Initiative. Commissioned by HSBC, the report marks specific highlights from the current year, emerging trends, and identifies specific opportunities for market development of green bonds in Canada.

The Smart Prosperity Institute is heavily in selling “climate bonds“, and partners with HSBC and the Climate Bonds Initiative. Their financial interest in this enterprise heavily depends on there being continued growth in the bond market.

The Climate Bonds Initiative publicly posts that the market for their climate bonds may eventually top $1 trillion in value. But this can only happen if Governments everywhere continue to push the narrative that climate change is about to cause a worldwide disaster.

Green Bonds have infiltrated Ontario and Quebec, and elsewhere. More and more public money is being sunk into these ventures.

  • uOttawa
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
  • The Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change
  • Fulbright Canada
  • Natural Resources Canada
  • The Jarislowsky Foundation
  • Atkinson Foundation
  • Alberta Real Estate Foundation
  • Environment and Climate Change Canada
  • Société de développement économique de la Colombie-Britannique (SDECB)
  • Tides Canada
  • CDEM
  • Echo Foundation
  • The Greenbelt Foundation
  • The Real Estate Foundation of BC
  • The J.W. McConnell Family Foundation
  • Conseil de développement économique de l’Alberta
  • The Salamander Foundation
  • Canadian Water Network
  • Suncor Energy Foundation
  • Vancity
  • Conseil Économique et Coopératif de la Saskatchewan

Steven Williams, CEO of Suncor, is also part of Canada’s Ecofiscal Commission, another Intervenor trying to keep the Carbon tax intact. The Tides Foundation gets some funding from George Soros, head of Open Society. Various branches of Government — relying on taxpayer money — also fund this group. The McConnell Foundation also contributes to Youth Climate Lab.

10. Youth Climate Lab, Infiltration Manual

Dominique Souris, the co-Founder and Executive Director of Youth Climate Lab, is also a member of the World Economic Forum. Both groups are ideologically aligned with the climate change agenda.

Ronny Jumeau was appointed Seychelles’ Permanent Representative to the United Nations and Ambassador to the United States for the first time. He was also Ambassador to Canada, Brazil, Cuba and several Caribbean islands until 2012 when he became his country’s New York-based roving Ambassador for Climate Change and Small Island Developing State Issues. He is the Member of the Board of the Green Climate Fund (GCF), representing Small Island Developing States(SIDS) and a Member of the Executive Council of SIDS DOCK, the global sustainable energy initiative for Small Island Developing States (SIDS). He is also a Director at Youth Climate Lab

Youth Climate Lab — Infiltration Manual

Youth Climate Lab produces an “infiltration manual“, (their words, not mine), to give people step by step instruction on how to insert the climate change agenda into local politics. They are partnered with the climate caucus, and funded by the McConnell Foundation.

11. What Does All This Mean To Canada?

Various Provincial Premiers intentionally sabotaged their court challenges by playing along with the climate change scam. Now, it seems that several NGOs acting as Intervenors had their own agenda in making submissions. Even groups like the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation only opposed it on groups it was wasteful.

It’s also interesting, that piece by Diverge Media, which lists Canada’s Supreme Court Chief Justice speaking at an eco-conference. That alone raises questions about how impartial he is.

In the end, it’s the Canadian public that gets hurt by this politically driven Carbon tax. There wasn’t anyone fighting for the public during those proceedings.

CCS #6(C): Supreme Court Rules Carbon Tax Constitutional, No Real Opposition From “Conservatives”

The Supreme Court of Canada, in a 6-3 decision, confirmed that the Carbon tax is constitutional. This is not surprising in the slightest, considering there was no real opposition. All parties parroted the sentiments that climate change was an urgent threat that needed dealt with. In short, they agreed with the underlying facts, so there wasn’t much to argue.

The “resistance”, pictured above, did nothing but orchestrate a dog-and-pony show. It duped plenty of people into convincing them that these politicians were actually fighting.

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. See the other articles on the 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. The Supreme Court Of Canada Ruling

[7] Global climate change is real, and it is clear that human activities are the primary cause. In simple terms, the combustion of fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases (“GHGs”) into the atmosphere, and those gases trap solar energy from the sun’s incoming radiation in the atmosphere instead of allowing it to escape, thereby warming the planet. Carbon dioxide is the most prevalent and recognizable GHG resulting from human activities. Other common GHGs include methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride and nitrogen trifluoride.

[8] At appropriate levels, GHGs are beneficial, keeping temperatures around the world at levels at which humans, animals, plants and marine life can live in balance. And the level of GHGs in the atmosphere has been relatively stable over the last 400,000 years. Since the 1950s, however, the concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere have increased at an alarming rate, and they continue to rise. As a result, global surface temperatures have already increased by 1.0°C above pre-industrial levels, and that increase is expected to reach 1.5°C by 2040 if the current rate of warming continues.

This appears to be almost cut and paste directly from Ontario’s Factum during their Provincial challenge.

[9] These temperature increases are significant. As a result of the current warming of 1.0°C, the world is already experiencing more extreme weather, rising sea levels and diminishing Arctic sea ice. Should warming reach or exceed 1.5°C, the world could experience even more extreme consequences, including still higher sea levels and greater loss of Arctic sea ice, a 70 percent or greater global decline of coral reefs, the thawing of permafrost, ecosystem fragility and negative effects on human health, including heat-related and ozone-related morbidity and mortality.

[10] The effects of climate change have been and will be particularly severe and devastating in Canada. Temperatures in this country have risen by 1.7°C since 1948, roughly double the global average rate of increase, and are expected to continue to rise faster than that rate. Canada is also expected to continue to be affected by extreme weather events like floods and forest fires, changes in precipitation levels, degradation of soil and water resources, increased frequency and severity of heat waves, sea level rise, and the spread of potentially life-threatening vector-borne diseases like Lyme disease and West Nile virus.

[11] The Canadian Arctic faces a disproportionately high risk from climate change. There, the average temperature has increased at a rate of nearly three times the global average, and that increase is causing significant reductions in sea ice, accelerated permafrost thaw, the loss of glaciers and other ecosystem impacts. Canada’s coastline, the longest in the world, is also being affected disproportionately by climate change, as it experiences changes in relative sea level and rising water temperatures, as well as increased ocean acidity and loss of sea ice and permafrost. Climate change has also had a particularly serious effect on Indigenous peoples, threatening the ability of Indigenous communities in Canada to sustain themselves and maintain their traditional ways of life.

[12] Climate change has three unique characteristics that are worth noting. First, it has no boundaries; the entire country and entire world are experiencing and will continue to experience its effects. Second, the effects of climate change do not have a direct connection to the source of GHG emissions. Provinces and territories with low GHG emissions can experience effects of climate change that are grossly disproportionate to their individual contributions to Canada’s and the world’s total GHG emissions. In 2016, for example, Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan and British Columbia accounted for approximately 90.5 percent of Canada’s total GHG emissions, while the approximate percentages were 9.1 percent for the other five provinces and 0.4 percent for the territories. Yet the effects of climate change are and will continue to be experienced across Canada, with heightened impacts in the Canadian Arctic, coastal regions and Indigenous territories. Third, no one province, territory or country can address the issue of climate change on its own. Addressing climate change requires collective national and international action. This is because the harmful effects of GHGs are, by their very nature, not confined by borders.

B. Canada’s Efforts to Address Climate Change
.
[13] Canada’s history of international commitments to address climate change began in 1992 with its ratification of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, U.N. Doc. A/AC.237/18 (Part II)/Add.1, May 15, 1992 (“UNFCCC”). After failing to meet its commitments under multiple UNFCCC agreements, including the Kyoto Protocol, U.N. Doc. FCCC/CP/1997/L.7/Add.1, December 10, 1997, and the Copenhagen Accord, U.N. Doc. FCCC/CP/2009/11/Add.1, December 18, 2009, Canada agreed to the Paris Agreement in 2015. Recognizing that “climate change represents an urgent and potentially irreversible threat to human societies and the planet and thus requires the widest possible cooperation by all countries”, the participating states agreed to hold the global average temperature increase to well below 2.0°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit that increase to 1.5°C: United Nations, Framework Convention on Climate Change, Report of the Conference of the Parties on its twenty-first session, U.N. Doc. FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1, January 29, 2016, at p. 2; Paris Agreement, art. 2(1)(a). Canada ratified the Paris Agreement in 2016, and the agreement entered into force that same year. Canada committed to reducing its GHG emissions by 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.

This has been a bipartisan effort, to entangle Canada with more and more UN treaties. Each one erodes more sovereignty.

[14] Under the Paris Agreement, states are free to choose their preferred approaches for meeting their nationally determined contributions. In Canada, the provinces and the federal government agreed to work together in order to meet the country’s international commitments. In March 2016, before Canada had ratified the Paris Agreement, all the First Ministers met in Vancouver and adopted the Vancouver Declaration on clean growth and climate change (“Vancouver Declaration”): Canadian Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat, March 3, 2016 (online). In that declaration, the First Ministers recognized the call in the Paris Agreement for significant reductions in GHG emissions and committed to “[i]mplement[ing] GHG mitigation policies in support of meeting or exceeding Canada’s 2030 target of a 30% reduction below 2005 levels of emissions, including specific provincial and territorial targets and objectives”: ibid, at p. 3. In the Vancouver Declaration, the First Ministers also recognized the importance of a collaborative approach between provincial and territorial governments and the federal government to reducing GHG emissions and noted that “the federal government has committed to ensuring that the provinces and territories have the flexibility to design their own policies to meet emission reductions targets”: ibid.

[15] The Vancouver Declaration resulted in the establishment of a federal-provincial-territorial Working Group on Carbon Pricing Mechanisms (“Working Group”) to study the role of carbon pricing mechanisms in meeting Canada’s emissions reduction targets. The Working Group included at least one representative from each provincial and territorial government as well as the federal government. Its final report identified carbon pricing as one of the most efficient policy approaches for reducing GHG emissions and outlined three carbon pricing options: (1) a single form broad-based carbon pricing mechanism that would apply across Canada, an option that would not be supportive of existing or planned provincial or territorial pricing policies; (2) broad-based carbon pricing mechanisms across Canada, an option that would give each province and territory flexibility as to the choice of instruments; and (3) a range of broad-based carbon pricing mechanisms in some jurisdictions, while the remaining jurisdictions would implement other mechanisms or policies designed to meet GHG emissions reduction targets within their borders: Working Group on Carbon Pricing Mechanisms, Final Report, 2016 (online), at pp. 1, 44-47 and 50.

[16] Carbon pricing, or GHG pricing, is a regulatory mechanism that, in simple terms, puts a price on GHG emissions in order to induce behavioural changes that will lead to widespread reductions in emissions. By putting a price on GHG emissions, governments can incentivize individuals and businesses to change their behaviour so as to make more environmentally sustainable purchasing and consumption choices, to redirect their financial investments, and to reduce their GHG emissions by substituting carbon-intensive goods for low-GHG alternatives. Generally speaking, there are two different approaches to GHG pricing: (1) a carbon tax that entails setting a price on GHG emissions directly, but not setting a cap on emissions; and (2) a cap-and-trade system that prices emissions indirectly by placing a cap on GHG emissions, allocating emission permits to businesses and allowing businesses to buy and sell emission permits from and to other businesses. A carbon tax sets an effective price per unit of GHG emissions. In a cap-and-trade system, the market sets an effective price per unit of GHG emissions, but a cap is placed on permitted emissions. Both approaches put a price on GHG emissions. I also find it worthwhile to note that while “carbon tax” is the term used among policy experts to describe GHG pricing approaches that directly price GHG emissions, it has no connection to the concept of taxation as understood in the constitutional context.

Losing the case at the Supreme Court of Canada was not surprising in the least. At no point during this challenge, or the Saskatchewan, Onatario, or Alberta challenges, so these so-called “conservatives” ever deny that climate change is a threat to humanity. They agree almost word for word with the UN agendas. Since there is no real opposition on the “facts”, the Court is only asked to address the case on narrow legal grounds.

Regarding the 1992 framework on climate change, it’s worth pointing out that “Conservative” Brian Mulroney was in power then, and had a large majority government. He didn’tt have to do this.

Also, the 2009 Copenhagen Accord was signed by “Conservative” Stephen Harper. He also signed Agenda 2030 in September 2015. Had he been reelected the following month, he almost certainly would have signed the Paris Agreement as well.

This is the “opposition” Trudeau had to contend with?

3. CPC Still Supports Climate Scam

Does any of this look like Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe actually opposes the agenda? He is fully on board with it, and just has a disagreement over the best way to proceed. Likewise with the other Premiers.

It’s amusing that Moe complains about being double crossed by Trudeau, as that is exactly what he did to his supporters in Saskatchewan.

4. CPC Still Supports Climate Scam

CPC Policy Declaration, August 2018

UN globalist Erin O’Toole seems to be fully on board with the climate agenda. Even if he were Prime Minister, it seems unlikely he would have done anything differently. The Paris Agreement is all about wealth transfer, and it’s disingenuous to claim otherwise.

Also, take a read through this earlier piece on the various Carbon tax challenges. They were doomed from the start.