Category: Free Speech

Posted on

Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, And Some Of Their Holdings

The Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board is responsible for investing the money that gets taken from workers’ pay cheques. Now, what does this group actually invest in? The answers may be surprising, as it speaks to the direction they plan to take the fund.

COMPANY AMOUNT
3M Co. $51,203,000
Acceleron Pharma Inc. $85,000
Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc. $1,017,000
Alexion Pharmaceuticals $33,800,000
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals $1,329,000
Amicus Therapeutics $31,186,000
Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals $69,000
Biogen $3,749,000
Biohaven Pharmaceuticals $31,000
China Biologic Products $242,000
CVS Health Corp. $104,361,000
Cardiovascular Sys Inc. $1,339,000
Checkmate Pharmaceuticals $219,000
Eli Lilly & Co. $134,902,000
Fusion Pharmaceuticals $36,624,000
GW Pharmaceuticals $173,115,000
Gilead Sciences $85,944,000
HCA Healthcare $20,325,000
Healthpeak Properties Inc. $43,159,000
Horizon Therapeutics $688,000
Hutchison China Meditech $3,145,000
Ionis Pharmaceuticals $2,414,000
Johnson & Johnson $479,225,000
Ligand Pharmaceuticals $466,000
Magellan Health $5,683,000
Medifast Inc. $641,000
Medpace Holdings Inc. $15,813,000
Merck & Co. $379,344,000
Mirati Therapeutics $61,000
Moderna $75,193,000
Neurocrine Biosciences $752,000
Novavax Inc. $56,000
Opko Health Inc. (Sold off)
Orthofix Med Inc. $976,000
PTC Therapeutics $13,561,000
Pacira Biosciences $13,925,000
Pfizer Inc. $224,969,000
Phillip Morris $128,347,000
Physicians Realty Trust $5,618,000
Prestige Consumer Healthcare $1,022,000
Procter & Gamble $498,019,000
Quest Diagnostics $130,317,000
Reata Pharmaceuticals $323,000
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals $3,233,000
Royalty Pharma $5,420,000
Sabra Healthcare REIT $6,232,000
Sage Therapeutics $735,000
Sigilon Therapeutics $71,333,000
Starr Surgical Co. $21,247,000
Teladoc Health Inc. $4,796,000
Tenet Healthcare Corp. $14,267,000
Teva Pharmaceuticals $1,723,000
Theravance Biopharma $169,000
Thermo Fisher Scientific $198,939,000
Trevi Therapeutics $36,000
Trillium Therapeutics $1,431,000
Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical $1,000
United Therapeutics Corp. $413,000
Unitedhealth Group Inc. $1,067,720,000
Usans Health Sciences $5,867,000
Viatris Inc. $16,153,000
West Pharmaceutical SVSC $410,000
Zimmer Biomet $19,398

Aside from all of the stocks in pharmaceuticals and health care, the CPPIB has interests in many other organizations that will raise eyebrows. True, the “Great Reset” may be a massive conspiracy theory, but the investments here would suggest otherwise.

COMPANY AMOUNT
Alphabet Inc. $2,188,964,000
Amazon Inc. $779,986
American Express $134,979,000
Apple Inc. $979,811,000
Aramark $19,240,000
Autodesk $19,044,000
Bank of America $372,509
Bank of Montreal $62,350
Bank of Nova Scotia $216,553,000
Best Buy $12,943,000
Blackline Inc. $493,000
Blackrock $230,895,000
Blackstone $53,059,000
Boeing $70,565,000
Citigroup $319,809,000
Comcast Corp. $65,150,000
E-Bay $15,259,000
Equifax $135,602,000
Fox Corp. $4,632,000
Hewlett Packard $121,000
Home Depot $274,181,000
Icici Bank Limited $59,222,000
JP Morgan Chase $876,096,000
Mastercard Incorporated $2,236,387,000
Microsoft Corp $1,143,414,000
Molson Coors Beverage $8,593,000
NASDAQ $5,116,000
Newscorp $470,000
Paycom Software $993,000
Paychex Inc. $19,982,000
PayPal Holdings $228,341,000
Pinterest $611,000
Rogers Communications $1,500,000,000
Royal Bank of Canada $537,548,000
Shaw Communications Inc. $100,269,000
Shopify $244,903,000
Starbucks Corp. $32,580,000
Synchrony Financial $5,553,000
Target Corp. $29,903,000
Tesla Inc. $128,538,000
Toronto Dominion Bank $289,035,000
Transunion $37,293,000
Trip Advisor $1,468,000
Twitter Inc. $57,887,000
Uber Technologies $60,382,000
Verizon Communications $192,559,000
Visa Inc. $135,000
Vonage Holdings Corp $145,000
Walmart Inc. $245,483,000
Zoom Video Communications $5,807,000

For reference, Alphabet Inc. is the company that owns Google and its subsidiaries, such as YouTube. It seems that being major stakeholders in the business will have great influence over the social media censorship that Governments ask them to play. CPPIB holds over $2 billion. Difficult to say no to your biggest shareholders.

Additionally the CPPIB holds over $50 million in stock in Twitter. This platform has also been brutal when it comes to censoring views that contradict official pandemic or election narratives.

This is certainly quite in the interesting portfolio: pro-big pharma, and pro-Great Reset. However, there is a bigger and more fundamental problem that needs to be addressed: liabilities.

Year Value of Fund Inv Income Rate of Return
2010 $127.6B $22.1B 14.9%
2011 $148.2B $20.6B 11.9%
2012 $161.6B $9.9B 6.6%
2013 $183.3B $16.7B 10.1%
2014 $219.1B $30.1B 16.5%
2015 $264.6B $40.6B 18.3%
2016 $278.9B $9.1 6.8%
2017 $316.7B $33.5B 11.8%
2018 $356.B $36.7B 11.6%
2019 $392B $32B 8.9%

The CPPIB routinely crows about how well its investments do, and how the fund is worth hundreds of billions of dollars. The problem is that it has a screwy accounting system. Instead of taking into account all assets and liabilities, the health is determined by ability to meet current obligations. The fund has been properly accounted, and there is over $1 trillion in unfunded liabilities. This is money taken in an spent, for which it (should have been) paid out.

Most pension systems act as a ponzi scheme, where the only way to meet old obligations is with the infusion of new money. Clearly, such a system is unsustainable in the long term.

But hey, at least our investments in Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, Gilead, Eli Lilley and 3M are doing well. Good thing there is a “pandemic” to drive up demand for these products.

To hell with free speech and open media.
Big pharma is here to stay.

https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/
https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=1283718
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1283718/000110465921024475/xslForm13F_X01/infotable.xml
https://www.cppinvestments.com/the-fund/our-performance
https://canucklaw.ca/pensions-1b-unsustainable-underfunded-takes-money-out-of-canada/

Posted on

Canada Emergencies Act: Tyranny; No Property Rights; Indemnification; Publication Exemption; Parliamentary Secrecy

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-4.5/FullText.html

In case readers here think that the Emergencies Act was a Liberal creation, the answer is no. It came into effect in 1988, under “Conservative” Prime Minster, Brian Mulroney. It looks like the current head, Erin O’Toole, is on board with imposing these types of measures. So much for valuing individual rights.

The actual freedoms that can be stripped away are very similar to the 2005 Quarantine Act, enacted by Liberal Paul Martin. Now, what does this act actually say?

30 (1) While a declaration of an international emergency is in effect, the Governor in Council may make such orders or regulations with respect to the following matters as the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, are necessary for dealing with the emergency:
.
(a) the control or regulation of any specified industry or service, including the use of equipment, facilities and inventory;
.
(b) the appropriation, control, forfeiture, use and disposition of property or services;
.
(c) the authorization and conduct of inquiries in relation to defence contracts or defence supplies as defined in the Defence Production Act or to hoarding, overcharging, black marketing or fraudulent operations in respect of scarce commodities, including the conferment of powers under the Inquiries Act on any person authorized to conduct such an inquiry;
.
(d) the authorization of the entry and search of any dwelling-house, premises, conveyance or place, and the search of any person found therein, for any thing that may be evidence relevant to any matter that is the subject of an inquiry referred to in paragraph (c), and the seizure and detention of any such thing;
.
(e) the authorization of or direction to any person, or any person of a class of persons, to render essential services of a type that that person, or a person of that class, is competent to provide and the provision of reasonable compensation in respect of services so rendered;
.
(f) the designation and securing of protected places;
.
(g) the regulation or prohibition of travel outside Canada by Canadian citizens or permanent residents within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and of admission into Canada of other persons;

Being allowed to seize or heavily control the means of production basically amounts to socialism. Property rights would end as they can either be entered, or outright seized, without genuine grounds (like getting a warrant). Mobility rights would become non-existent as travel and movement can be stopped almost entirely.

Part (e) comes across as a form of compelled labour. But don’t worry, there will be compensation afterwards.

While this act does mention several different types of emergencies, they are very similar in what freedoms get suspended.

Liability
Marginal note: Protection from personal liability
.
47 (1) No action or other proceeding for damages lies or shall be instituted against a Minister, servant or agent of the Crown, including any person providing services pursuant to an order or regulation made under subsection 8(1), 19(1), 30(1) or 40(1), for or in respect of any thing done or omitted to be done, or purported to be done or omitted to be done, in good faith under any of Parts I to IV or any proclamation, order or regulation issued or made thereunder.
.
Marginal note: Crown not relieved of liability
(2) Subsection (1) does not relieve the Crown of liability for the acts or omissions described therein and the Crown is liable under the Crown Liability Act or any other law as if that subsection had not been enacted.
.
Compensation
Marginal note: Compensation
48 (1) Subject to subsection (2) and the regulations made under section 49, the Minister shall award reasonable compensation to any person who suffers loss, injury or damage as a result of any thing done, or purported to be done, under any of Parts I to IV or any proclamation, order or regulation issued or made thereunder.
.
Marginal note: Release
(2) No compensation shall be paid to a person unless that person, in consideration of the compensation, signs, in a form provided by the Minister, a release of any right of action that the person may have against the Crown as a result of any thing done, or purported to be done, under any of Parts I to IV or any proclamation, order or regulation issued or made thereunder.
.
Marginal note: Subrogation
(3) The Crown is subrogated to all rights of any person to whom compensation is paid to recover damages in respect of the loss, injury or damage for which the compensation is paid and may maintain an action in the name of that person or in the name of the Crown against any person against whom the action lies.

No politician or official shall be held personally liable for anything they have done, as long as they acted, or “claim” to have acted in good faith.

Furthermore, if you want any compensation whatsoever, you will be required to sign a waiver of responsibility for every person who make be responsible.

Orders and Regulations
Marginal note: Tabling in Parliament
.
61 (1) Subject to subsection (2), every order or regulation made by the Governor in Council pursuant to this Act shall be laid before each House of Parliament within two sitting days after it is made.
.
Marginal note: Reference to Committee
(2) Where an order or regulation made pursuant to this Act is exempted from publication in the Canada Gazette by regulations made under the Statutory Instruments Act, the order or regulation, in lieu of being laid before each House of Parliament as required by subsection (1), shall be referred to the Parliamentary Review Committee within two days after it is made or, if the Committee is not then designated or established, within the first two days after it is designated or established.

Typically, orders would have be published, such as in the Canada Gazette. This ensures some transparency, whether or not people agree with the content. However, the Emergencies Act provides an exemption from publication. This is the sort of thing that really demands open discussion.

Parliamentary Review Committee
Marginal note: Review by Parliamentary Review Committee
.
62 (1) The exercise of powers and the performance of duties and functions pursuant to a declaration of emergency shall be reviewed by a committee of both Houses of Parliament designated or established for that purpose.
.
Marginal note: Membership
(2) The Parliamentary Review Committee shall include at least one member of the House of Commons from each party that has a recognized membership of twelve or more persons in that House and at least one senator from each party in the Senate that is represented on the committee by a member of the House of Commons.
.
Marginal note: Oath of secrecy
(3) Every member of the Parliamentary Review Committee and every person employed in the work of the Committee shall take the oath of secrecy set out in the schedule.
.
Marginal note: Meetings in private
(4) Every meeting of the Parliamentary Review Committee held to consider an order or regulation referred to it pursuant to subsection 61(2) shall be held in private.
.
Marginal note: Revocation or amendment of order or regulation
(5) If, within thirty days after an order or regulation is referred to the Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to subsection 61(2), the Committee adopts a motion to the effect that the order or regulation be revoked or amended, the order or regulation is revoked or amended in accordance with the motion, effective on the day specified in the motion, which day may not be earlier than the day on which the motion is adopted.

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-4.5/FullText.html

How can there be any accountability, if all of the politicians are sworn to secrecy? Sure, they aren’t really accountable to begin with, but now they have an excuse not to answer.

Now, a report does have to be filed within 1 year of the “emergency” being deemed over. However, that’s cold comfort for those whose livelihoods have been destroyed.

Posted on

Subversion In The Courts: SOGI Activists Implementing Their Agenda By Stealth

According to the publication: Canadian Lawyer, working tirelessly to upend tradition and social norms is worthy of an honourable mention. Never mind the consequences of that work.

An interesting point about the struggle for “equal” rights. The more victories you achieve, only the less and less important issues remain. Here, “Morgane” Oger goes on CBC to talk about removing references involving gender from BC Courts. Yes, that’s where we are. Keep in mind, this person wanted to establish a doxing website, took a Christian to the cleaners for telling the truth, and got Vancouver Rape Relief defunded for not admitting men. Yes, Oger felt the need to push for an ideology at the expense of women.

As bad as Oger is, we need to look at the bigger picture: the SOGI agenda is being implemented into the Courts, with the deliberate aim of corrupting them. The institutional rot is not limited to a few activists seeking attention. Oger is a symptom of a much larger problem.

LEADER. EDUCATOR. ADVOCATE.
The CBA Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Community Section (SOGIC) aims to:
-Address the needs and concerns of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and two-spirited members within the CBA
–Provide a forum for the exchange of information, ideas and action on legal issues relating to sexual orientation and gender identity
-Encourage lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and two-spirited lawyers to actively participate in the CBA’s work
-Develop and provide continuing legal education and other professional development programs on legal issues relating to sexual orientation and gender identity
-Develop member services relevant to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and two-spirited CBA members
.
OUR WORK
SOGIC is a founding member of the International Lesbian and Gay Law Association. We liaise with lesbian and gay law groups in the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel, among others. Our members frequently attend the Nstrong>National Lesbian and Gay Law Association’s (NLGLA) Lavender Law conferences. The NLGLA is affiliated with the American Bar Association.

The Canadian Bar Association (CBA) has its own SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) section within it. Far from being limited, it has Provincial and International partners. Specifically, they list the U.S., U.K. and Israel.

This is far more coordinated than some activists and sympathetic media. The major goal is to get SOGI policies implemented into law. These are people trying to circumvent the legislative process.

One such person is Barbara Findlay, who refuses to spell her name with capital letters as an act of defiance. This spelling wasn’t for any real reason, just to cause friction. The publisher, Canadian Lawyer, did an article which lists several accomplishments she had over the years.

  • Changing definition of marriage
  • Putting 2 women on a birth certificate (2 mothers)
  • Forcing centers to host gay “weddings”
  • Forcing rape centers to accept tran-volunteers
  • Getting sex change surgery for inmates
  • Putting biologically male inmates in women’s prisons

Recently, Findlay was successful in getting a B.C. father‘s rights removed, as he tried to prevent his daughter from transitioning into a boy. Never mind the high regret and suicide rate among trans-children. The agenda had to go ahead.

Forcing the Knights of Columbus Center to host a lesbian “wedding” is an interesting one. Remember: the main rallying cry when changing the definition of marriage was that it wouldn’t impose on others. Turns out, that was a lie. There was every intention of imposing — later on.

Findlay and Oger line up ideologically when it comes to Vancouver Rape Relief. Findlay tried to force it to accept trans-volunteers, and Oger got it defunded for only accepting biological women as victims.

The society also notes that findlay founded the CBABC Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Community (SOGIC) section and co-founded the CBA National SOGIC federation. In BC, SOGIC is now a community of over 215 LGBTQ2SI+ lawyers, law students and judges.

Findlay isn’t just a bystander. She founded the BC Branch of SOGI lawyers, and co-founded the National Federation. She has been involved in establishing the infrastructure.

The Canadian Bar Association also has an overtly anti-white agenda. They explicitly ask Trudeau to put more “BIPOC” (black, indigenous, people of colour), members onto the bench. Apparently whites can’t be trusted to understand the lived experience of others, especially when non-whites have such high crime rates.

The CBA has also written the Government on a variety of issues, including: conversion therapy, gay blood donation ban, banning intersex surgery decisions by parents, etc… This reads like it was written by EGALE or some other gay rights group.

C. A specific online hate remedy [Page 8]
.
While existing remedies not specifically addressed to the internet – section 12 of the CHRA, for instance – may be available to address online hate, we recommend adding a remedy specific to the internet. This would remove uncertainty and avoid litigation about the meaning of more generic legislation. It could also serve as a warning with an educational and preventive purpose. The government should not miss this opportunity.
.
A revised civil remedy needs to be directed not only against inciters, but also against publishers, including internet platforms. Internet providers should not have civil immunity for the material on their platforms.
.
Rather than removing liability of internet providers from individual defamation suits, we recommend that the Tribunal have legislated power to make legally binding orders on internet providers.
.
The repealed section 13 of the CHRA excluded internet providers from its ambit:
(3) For the purposes of this section, no owner or operator of a telecommunication undertaking communicates or causes to be communicated any matter described in subsection (1) by reason only that the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking owned or operated by that person are used by other persons for the transmission of
that matter.
.
A re-enacted section 13 should expressly say the exact opposite: when an internet provider allows a person to use their services, the provider is communicating what the person posts on the provider’s platform.

The CBA explicitly supports hate speech laws. Typically, lawyers argue that people should have more freedoms and more rights. But here, they are quite okay with stripping away those rights, and putting the screws to internet providers, in the name of fighting hate.

Now, calling for less whites to be put on benches should be seen as an act of hate speech, right? No, there are a few groups it’s perfectly legal to discriminate against.

If the CBA were truly committed to open and honest discussion on controversial topics, that point of view may be understood. However, it functions as an activist group.

These are the people who have infiltrated our legal system, and are covertly (and not covertly) trying to remake society. Equality for all is a great talking point, but that isn’t really the goal.

It’s true that CBA-SOGIC may not speak for all members, and likely doesn’t, but they act as if they do.

Oger Discusses Stripping “Gendered Language” From BC Courts
https://canucklaw.ca/morgane-oger-foundation-wants-to-be-another-doxxing-site/
https://canucklaw.ca/morgane-oger-further-weaponizes-human-rights-codes-55k-ruling/
https://morganeoger.ca/2020/02/20/vancouver-rape-relief-failure-to-meet-vancouver-criteria-for-program-funding-shows-pressing-need-to-update-approach/

https://www.cba.org/Sexual-Orientation-and-Gender-Identity-Community/
Canadian Lawyer Mag On Barbara Findlay
https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/2019bcsc254/2019bcsc254
https://canucklaw.ca/bc-supreme-court-rules-parents-cant-stop-kids-from-getting-sex-changes/
Canadian Bar Association Put More Non Whites On Benches
Canadian Bar Association Trudeau Should Change Laws
Canadian Bar Association Hate Speech Laws

Posted on

Canada 2020, “Independent” Liberal Think Tank; Recovery Summit; Guilbeault Interview On Internet Regulation

Canada 2020 calls itself Canada’s leading, independent progressive think-tank. Keep the term “independent” in mind, as it will become important later on.

In the following sections, the group identifies as an active member of the Global Progress network, with a goal to build a community of progressive ideas and people that will move and shape governments. So, it is independent, or part of a network?

From the onset, there issues with this group, especially when the members are looked up. But who is running Canada 2020? From their own profiles:

  • Thomas (Tom) Pitfield is Co-Founder of Canada 2020, Canada’s leading, independent, progressive think-tank. Prior to his appointment, Tom served as the Chief Digital Strategist for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s federal election campaign, as well as his campaign for leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. Previously, Tom served as Senior Policy Advisor to the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Honourable Jack Austin. He also worked in China for the Canada Chinese Business Council and as a business strategy consultant, specializing in Corporate Governance, for IBM Canada. After co-founding IBM’s Toronto Innovation Center, he worked as Policy Advisor to the Director of IBM’s Business Partner Channel.
  • Jennifer Walsh was previously a Professor in International Relations at the University of Oxford, and co-director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict. In 2013, she was appointed by the UN Secretary General to serve as his Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect. Prof. Welsh sits on the editorial boards of the journals Global Responsibility to Protect and Ethics and International Affairs, as well as the editorial board for the Cambridge University Press BISA series in International Relations. She has also served as a consultant to the Government of Canada on international policy, and acts as a frequent commentator in Canadian media on foreign policy and international relations.
  • From 2014-18, Anna Gainey served as President of the Liberal Party of Canada. Her leadership was key to growing and empowering grassroots organizing and innovative campaign technologies, which contributed to the election of the first Liberal majority government in 15 years. After Canada’s 2015 election, Anna led the transformation to open up and modernize the party – including by eliminating all membership fees and redrafting the party’s constitution to better suit 21st century organizing and campaigns. She has also been a leading Canadian advocate in support of more women’s participation and leadership in our democracy, government, and economy. Anna is the founder of the Gainey Foundation, which provides funding for environmental and arts education programs for youth, and has been the Executive Director since 2008. She continues to sit on the national board of directors of the Liberal Party of Canada as Past President, as well as on the Board of WarChild Canada, Pointe-à-Callière Museum and the Montreal Heart Institute Foundation.
  • Matt Browne is a Visiting Fellow at American Progress, working on building trans-Atlantic and international progressive networks and studying trans-Atlantic policy issues. Previously, Matt was director of public affairs in APCO Worldwide’s London office, where he ran the company’s Europe, Middle East, and Africa government relations practice. Matt is also the former director of Policy Network—the international network founded by Tony Blair, Gerhard Schroeder, Goran Persson, and Giuliano Amato—and remains a member of the organization’s governing board and advisory council. During his time at Policy Network, Matt worked closely with a host of progressive leaders, prime ministers’ and presidents’ offices across the globe, and international organizations such as the U.N. and WTO. Matt also ran the international press operation for New Labour’s general election campaigns in 2001 and 2005.
  • Mira Ahmad is Canada 2020’s Director of Communications and Operations. Mira has over six years of experience working as a political strategist and activist. She has served as the President of the Young Liberals of Canada, and currently sits on the Liberal Party of Canada’s National Board of Directors as Vice President. Mira has provided strategic advice and managed campaigns for a number of candidates running for federal office. She has worked for the Jeanne Sauvé Foundation, a non-profit educational and leadership development organization in Montreal, as well as Data Sciences, a data analytics and digital marketing firm. Mira has a Bachelor’s degree in Communication Studies from Concordia University. She has long been active in a number of volunteer causes and leadership initiatives, including the Climate Reality Project Canada, the Austrian Leadership Program and Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada.
  • Kate [Graham] is an active community member and volunteer. She served as the Chair of the Pillar Nonprofit Network Board of Directors, on the Executive of the ReForest London Board of Directors, and as a volunteer for numerous community organizations. She was named one of London’s Top 20 Under 40 in 2015. Kate has also dabbled in politics herself, including running in the 2018 Provincial Election in Ontario.

Far from being “independent” as their website claims, Canada 2020 is run by partisan hacks of the Liberal Party of Canada. They are insiders masquerading as a non-partisan group.

And who is funding Canada 2020? At the bottom of their website, the major donors are listed. Some interesting ones include: Facebook, Mastercard, Power Corporation and Shopify. Maclean’s did a great piece a few years back on the myriad of connections.

Recovery Project Build Back Better Agenda
Recovery Project Build Back Better Report

In September 2020, Canada 2020 and Global Progress hosted the Recovery Summit, with a goal to “Build Back Better” (the globalist catch phrase). It would also involve remaking society environmentally, socially, and financially. In short, there was an opportunity for a RESET.

In the early days of the pandemic, Canada 2020, Global Progress, and the Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy (IFSD) at the University of Ottawa launched The Recovery Project, an initiative designed to start conversations around social and economic recovery from COVID-19. Built on a foundation of evidence, sustained effort and common purpose, The Recovery Project aims to provide resources, insight and analysis for what comes next.
.
The Recovery Project brings together a large swath of people from a variety of different fields (business, academia, government, and more) to discuss five key themes in the context of recovery: Shared Prosperity, Democratic and Institutions, Sustainability, Global Public Health and Inclusive Societies. These conversations are presented to The Recovery Project’s audience by way of livestream broadcasts, podcasts, research and analysis. The Recovery Project has convened leading international and domestic voices to share ideas on how to achieve global and lasting recovery from the pandemic. Notable contributors include former Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, former Irish President Mary Robinson, President and CEO of the International Rescue Committee David Miliband, Dutch Labour Party leader Lodewijk Asscher, CEO of New America, Dr. Anne-Marie Slaughter, former Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning Schmidt, and Canadian Minister of Natural Resources Seamus O’Regan.

Shared Prosperity ==> Communism
Democratic Institutions ==> World Government
Sustainability ==> Eco-Gods Reign Supreme
Global Public Health –> Medical Tyranny
Inclusive Societies ==> Forced Multiculturalism

Not only is Canada 2020 run by Liberals, but they will by consulting with other Liberals in how to advance their agenda. Strange that “Conservatives” are silent on all of this.

On March 31, 2021, this NGO posted a video which included an interview with Canadian Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault. The topic was around a proposed Bill to protect against online harms. While idea itself sounds well meaning, the details of implementation are still vague, and that’s troubling.

The full video with Canada 2020 is here, and should be watched in full. None of the clips are of people being taken out of context.

Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault admits that Canadians weren’t consulted in the content of this bill, and he’s okay with that. Instead, he points to foreign governments and NGOs with their own agendas as the source material. Strange that the people who would be most impacted aren’t able to submit their concerns.

Under the proposed legislation, the Regulator would be able to tell social media companies what kind of content can be taken down, and in fact order certain things removed. Given the prospect of heavy fines, it seems very unlikely that any outlet will put up a fuss. After all, the users aren’t paying for the service.

Guilbeault mentions that he finds the Australian model the most attractive. The bureaucrat in charge would have the power to enter into agreements with NGOs and social media companies. So while the legislation itself may not be too bad, it’s implementation is open to interpretation.

A positive moment here: Guilbeault admits that adding “misinformation” into things that get blocked would be tricky, and open up all kinds of free speech considerations. That said he brags about using public money to fund groups to promote government talking points. That is already happening here, here, and here. In fact, subsidies are rampant in Canadian media. So while not directly banning certain ideas, he supports funding opposition to those ideas.

Is this group, Canada 2020, really pulling at least some of the strings of the Trudeau Government? At least as far as online freedoms, Guilbeault saw no need to consult with actual Canadians. He would rather get input from non-governmental organizations.

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/inside-the-progressive-think-tank-that-really-runs-canada/
https://canada2020.ca/people/thomas-pitfield/
https://canada2020.ca/people/jennifer-welsh/
https://canada2020.ca/people/anna-gainey/
https://canada2020.ca/people/matt-browne/
https://canada2020.ca/people/mira-ahmad/
https://canada2020.ca/people/kate-graham/
https://recoveryproject.ca/the-recovery-summit/
https://recoveryproject.ca/about/
Misinformation Counters Run By Political Operatives
Grants Given To Groups Fighting “Misinformation”
Ottawa Colluding With Facebook On Permitted Content

Posted on

Facebook Officials Meetings With Canadian Parliament: Still Pretty Cozy

Does nothing seem off about this? Facebook meeting with Parliament to discuss what revenue sharing and terms of service will be allowed? Or Kevin Chan and Rachel Curran both working in the Government previously?

1. Important Links

Parliamentary Hearing Information
January 29 Parliamentary Meeting (English)
March 29 Parliamentary Hearing (English)
Bill C-10: Changes To Broadcasting Act (Review)
Bill C-11: Digital Charter Implementation Act (Review)
Journalism Trust Initiatives, Related Groups (Review)

2. Facebook Far Too Connected To Politics

As outlined previously, Facebook Canada is far too intertwined with major politicians in Canada. This includes both Liberals and Conservatives, and lots of background is provided here. How there be any real independence?

3. Video Clips From Parliamentary Hearings

March 29, 2021 (Meeting 22)
Facebook Inc.

  • Kevin Chan, Global Director and Head of Public Policy, Facebook Canada
  • Marc Dinsdale, Head, Media Partnerships, Facebook Canada
  • Rachel Curran, Policy Manager, Facebook Canada

January 29, 2021 (Meeting 12)
Department of Canadian Heritage

  • Hélène Laurendeau, Deputy Minister
  • Jean-Stéphen Piché, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs

Facebook Inc.

  • Kevin Chan, Global Director and Head of Public Policy, Facebook Canada
  • Marc Dinsdale, Head, Media Partnerships, Facebook Canada
  • Rachel Curran, Policy Manager, Facebook Canada

House of Commons

  • Hon. Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Canadian Heritage

Bit of a sidenote: Marc Dinsdale worked for Rogers Communications and Bell Media prior to getting involved with Facebook. Very interesting.

Guess we will have to see what changes result from all of this. However, it doesn’t appear that the participants are free speech absolutists in the slightest. So what exactly will they deem as worthy to scrub from the internet?

4. Hearings For Bill C-10 Ongoing

Worth a reminder: the hearings for Bill C-10 are going on at the same time. This has the power to drastically alter the media landscape in Canada. That Bill has cleared Second Reading and is being studied. A followup will need to be done just on this Bill.

Posted on

TSCE #9(I): “Mr. Girl”, Pedo Defending Cuties Film Gets YouTube Channel Restored

Free speech and open discourse are generally extremely beneficial to society. However, the selective censoring of that on platforms like YouTube raise some serious questions. Here, YouTube and Twitter don’t seem to have an issue with disturbing content.

1. “Mr. Girl”, Max Karson, Defends Cuties

The first video is Max Karson (a.k.a. “Mr. Girl”) appearing on the Kill Stream with Ethan Ralph. Ralph frequently hosts discussion on topics like pornography, so this isn’t just a one-off. Karson then made his “Cuties” video the next day. While scrubbed from YouTube, it’s still on his site. Several people made great reviews of it, including Adonis Paul and Brittany Venti.

2. Most Likely Sincere, Not Trolling

The suggestion had been made several times that Karson was trolling, that this whole thing was an act either for attention, or to generate views. While that is possible, the tone and overall content comes across as someone who is serious about this content. While satire and comedy (even raunchy stuff) should be protected as free speech, this doesn’t look like that at all.

3. Karson’s YouTube Channel Gets Restored

Even though the Cuties video was taken from the YouTube channel, it is still available — in full — on the website, https://maxkarson.com/. There’s also a disgusting “apology” video posted. Additionally, Karson is still able to receive donations via Square Space and Patreon.

There wouldn’t be as much of an issue if there were uniform standards, either for or against free speech absolutism. However, there seem to be double standards, depending on the subject.

Again, if this was some strange version of satire or parody, what exactly is the punch line? How does this result in humour or comedy?

YouTube has no problems with removing content that contradicts the Covid-19 narrative. Guess we have to draw the line somewhere. Canuck Law is just one of many accounts who have been threatened with the loss of their channel over that.

Worth pointing out: Twitter is currently being sued for (allegedly) not removing illegal material involving minors on its website. That is still ongoing in Court.

4. 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.