CV #19(D): About The “Debate” Between Brian Lilley And Anthony Furey….

Postmedia just put out an article detailing a philosophical “debate” between Brian Lilley and Anthony Furey. Here is the video of the exchange. While commentary is provided below, watch this, and make your own decisions.

1. Lilley/Furey Just Putting On An Act

To address the obvious: it looks like Furey and Lilley are simply performing for the cameras. It seems doubtful that either of them (especially Lilley) believe in what they say. It’s not entirely clear if this is grandstanding for the cameras, or an attempt to “appear” to give different ideas. This may be ego-driven, but could just as easily be more controlled opposition.

2. Lilley Focuses On “Selling” The Idea Too Much

Lilley doesn’t take the default position that any restrictions must be clearly justified. Instead, he goes on about how anti-lockdown activists need to “sell” the idea, or to “move the dial”. He offers nothing in the way of evidence to justify martial law. He only claims that the politics support it.

Lilley claims that the so-called experts the Government parades up in press conferences are convincing the public. He omits that these sessions are scripted, controlled, and questions are pre-approved. Genuine opposition is not allowed.

3. Furey Intentionally Weak On The Lies

Furey seems to accept at face value recent “polls” claiming that the public at large supports having their freedoms stripped away in an arbitrary and open-ended manner. He blames this alleged support on the media not doing a good job of convincing the people otherwise.

However, Furey does little to push the hard questions challenging the official narrative.

  • Computer modelling creates predictions, not evidence
  • Various models have proven to be drastically wrong
  • The virus itself hasn’t been isolated
  • The PCR test was not designed to detect active infection, and as a result, is useless and gives many false positives
  • Masks do nothing, and even the World Health Organization says its evidence is conflicted
  • Countless instances of people dying WITH this virus are bein counted as having died FROM it. Real pandemics don’t need lies to keep it going.
  • The overwhelming majority of people who test positive (which doesn’t equate infection), recover on their own, without any vaccine
  • Bipartisan pharma lobbying has been rampant
  • There is lots of money to be made by groups with a vested interest in perpetuating the situation. This includes: vaccine manufacturers, test kit manufacturers, online retailers, AI companies, cell phone and tracing developers, etc…
  • So-called restrictions have been largely arbitrary, and applied unevenly
  • Social media companies openly collude with Governments
  • The GREAT RESET is now out in the open. If this wasn’t planned out, then it was at least very opportunistic

It’s hard to take such a “debate” seriously, when one side has such overwhelming material to use, but chooses not to. Furey had many very valid and legitimate concerns that could have been addressed, but weren’t. It’s a bit like taking about national debt, but not discussing central banking.

Difficult to imagine Furey hasn’t at least heard of any of the above points, but he seems to have no interest in covering any of it. He seems to be working from a script.

4. Anthony Furey Ignores The Smoking Guns

Furey was supposedly debating that lockdowns were unnecessary. But seriously, he couldn’t have mentioned any of the above content? When you can crush your opponent in an argument this easily, why is it not being used? The likely answer, Furey is just going through the motions.

5. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

The rest of the series is here. Many lies, lobbying, conflicts of interest, and various globalist agendas operating behind the scenes, obscuring the vile agenda called the “Great Reset“. The Gates Foundation finances: the WHO, the US CDC, GAVI, ID2020, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the Pirbright Institute, the BBC, and individual pharmaceutical companies. Also: there is little to no science behind what our officials are doing; they promote degenerate behaviour; the Australian Department of Health admits the PCR tests don’t work; the US CDC admits testing is heavily flawed; and The International Health Regulations are legally binding. See here, here, and here. The media is paid off, and our democracy compromised, shown: here, here, here, and here.

For some real journalism, check out the work on this site.

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

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

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

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

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

1. Free Speech Is Under Constant Threat

Check here for the series free speech. It’s a crucial topic, and is typically intertwined with other categories. Topic include: Digital Cooperation; the IGF, or Internet Governance Forum; ex-Liberal Candidate Richard Lee; the Digital Charter; Dominic LeBlanc’s proposal. There is also collusion, done by UNESCO, more UNESCO, Facebook, Google, and Twitter lobbying.

2. The Media Is Not Loyal To The Public

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

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

4. The Downside To “Hate Speech” Laws

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

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

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

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

5. Hate Crime Hoaxes Undermine Public Trust

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

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

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

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

6. Canadian Parliament On Online Hate

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

7. National Council Of Canadian Muslims

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

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

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

8. CIJA, Centre For Israel And Jewish Affairs

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

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

9. Friends Of Canadian Broadcasting

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

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

10. YWCA, Others Get Federal Grants

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

12. What Are Impacts On Free Speech? Privacy?

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

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

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

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

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

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

1. The Media Is Not Loyal To The Public

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

2. Important Links

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

3. Anti-Disinfo Just Another Gov’t Program

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4. Groups That Are Receiving The Money

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

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

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

5. Emergency Support Fund For Organizations

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

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

6. International Engagement Strategy

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

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

7. Public Policy Forum

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

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

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

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

8. Peter Donolo: Longtime Liberal Strategist

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

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

9. Kathleen Monk: Longtime NDP Operative

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

She is now a Board Member at CIVIX.

10. Robert Asselin: Ex-Trudeau Operative

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

Currently, he is a Board Member of CIVIX.

11. Elizabeth Dubois: Assistant To Liberal MP

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

Now, Dubois is a Board Member at CIVIX.

12. Rachel Curran: Harper Operative

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

13. Francis LeBlanc: Ex-Liberal MP

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

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

14. Megan Beretta: Ties To Several Groups

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

15. Giroux, Clifford: Ex-Mulroney Operatives

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

16. News Media Canada On Disinformation

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

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

17. Politics Mixing With Media Fact Checking

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

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

CV #19(C): Brian Lilley Mentions Global Canada Piece On Lockdowns, Omits Group Is Gates Funded

A group called Global Canada is proposing extremely strict lockdowns (a.k.a. martial law), in Canada, for a limited time. At least they claim it will be a limited time. Of course, there is more to this than meets the eye, and we will get to their paper soon enough.

And Brian Lilley, a so-called “journalist” with the Toronto Sun, can’t be bothered to do even a small amount of research on this group.

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

The rest of the series is here. Many lies, lobbying, conflicts of interest, and various globalist agendas operating behind the scenes, obscuring the vile agenda called the “Great Reset“. The Gates Foundation finances: the WHO, the US CDC, GAVI, ID2020, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the Pirbright Institute, the BBC, and individual pharmaceutical companies. Also: there is little to no science behind what our officials are doing; they promote degenerate behaviour; and the International Health Regulations are legally binding. See here, here, and here. The media is paid off, and our democracy compromised, shown: here, here, here, and here.

2. Important Links

Brian Lilley’s Toronto Star Article On Proposed Lockdown
Global Canada Proposes Complete Lockdown
Global Canada Proposes Total Lockdown
Family Planning Initiative Calls For Money

3. Conservative Inc.’s Brian Lilley Reports

While I agree that they have diagnosed several problems with our current system correctly, the prescription isn’t one I can get wholly behind.

The group smartly says we do need effective border controls, including testing of air travelers and proper quarantine methods.

The group even suggests making truckers and other essential workers who cross the Canada-US land border a priority group for vaccinations to prevent them from becoming new infection vectors.

What I have trouble with is the idea of another four-to-six week lockdown.

The plan is to invoke a harsh lockdown for four to six weeks, then gradually relax restrictions as cases fall by 17-25% per week until we reach a benchmark of one new case per day per one million of population.

How long that would take would vary greatly by province.

For Ontario and Alberta, that’s at least four to six months, while in Manitoba the effort would take two months, possibly more.

I don’t expect everything to open back up tomorrow, or for life to get back to normal anytime soon.

Yet I doubt many politicians have the desire to sell the public on this plan, of “just one more short lockdown” — and given the past week and how the political class have acted, I doubt very much the public wants to hear it.

From the looks of the article, Lilley doesn’t seem to take any issue (on principle), of forcibly locking down Canada for months. He just seems mildly skeptical that it would be as effective as needed.

Keep in mind, Lilley takes the perspective that we should be grateful it’s Doug Ford imposing lockdowns in Ontario, as others would surely be worse. Whether by accident or by design, Lilley only provides the most tame and meek efforts at holding the Government accountable. What else is he not reporting about this group that calls for more lockdowns?

4. Who Supports This NGO: Global Canada?

  • Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
  • Caisse de Depot et Placement du Quebec
  • CIGI
  • Competia
  • ZED

Yes, the supporters of Global Canada include the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, who is heavily involved in the pharmaceutical push. Caisse de Depot et Placement du Quebec is a large investment firm. So is AIMIA.

It would have been nice if Brian Lilley included this is his article. He linked the original paper.

5. Robert Greenhill Chairs Global Canada

Robert Greenhill
Executive Chairman, Global Canada
With a strong interest in global issues, Robert Greenhill has combined a career in international business with a commitment to public policy.
Robert Greenhill is Executive Chairman of the Global Canada Initiative. Previous roles include Managing Director and Chief Business Officer of the World Economic Forum, Deputy Minister and President of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), and President and Chief Operating Officer of the International Group of Bombardier Inc. Robert started his career with McKinsey & Company.
Robert has a BA from the University of Alberta, MA from the London School of Economics, and MBA from INSEAD

Global Canada is chaired by a former Managing Director and Chief Business Officer of the World Economic Forum, an organization pushing lockdowns, and which our politicians have ties to. Greenhill also has ties to Bombardier and McKinsey & Company.

Surely this is worth mentioning by the Toronto Sun. One of their roles is holding Government accountable for the things that they do, right?

Michael McAdoo Bio
Senior Consultant, The Boston Consulting Group
Michael is a Senior Advisor with the Global Advantage practice area of The Boston Consulting Group (BCG), where he specializes in international trade issues and manufacturing. He brings over twenty-five years of experience at the intersection of business strategy, international geopolitics, public policy, and deep expertise in international trade issues and in cross-cultural operations management.
Prior to his current role, Michael was an Executive Vice president with the Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC). From 2001-2014 he held a series of senior executive positons with Bombardier. Prior to Bombardier, he was a Principal with BCG (Toronto/Monterrey).
Michael holds Masters degrees in International Relations and Journalism from Columbia University, and received his undergraduate education at Queen’s University and Harvard. He has lived and worked in all three NAFTA countries, and is fluent in French and Spanish.

Quite the list of connections here:

  • Bain & Company
  • Bell Canada
  • Bombardier
  • Canadian International Development Agency
  • Boston Consulting Group
  • Business Development Bank of Canada
  • McKinsey & Company
  • Pfizer
  • Privy Council of Canada
  • UN Global Compact
  • World Economic Forum

6. Quotes From The Global Canada Proposal

Canada is relatively well positioned to achieve zero COVID transmission. We are surrounded by ocean on 3 sides with a comparatively small population, engaged citizenry, strong institutions, a federal system of government, mid-sized cities similar to Sydney or Melbourne, and several domestic examples of zero COVID success.

Canada’s situation is essentially the same as Australia’s—with the addition of one major land border. By vaccinating the 200 thousand truckers that regularly cross the border and fully implementing other proven measures, Canada can seal off the U.S.-Canada border to the COVID virus while allowing essential trade to continue unimpeded.

Achieving zero transmission is feasible in Canada. Indeed, Canada may have inadvertently thrown away its shot to get to zero once already this summer.

With rising COVID cases and hospitalizations, difficult decisions have to be made. If the wrong decisions are made, we will face potential shutdowns again in 3 months. The time is right to determine whether going for zero is a superior strategy for Canada. We cannot afford to throw away our shot a second time.

Conclusion: We Have a Choice
Tough decisions will be necessary across Canada over the next few weeks. Canadians will doubtless be asked to make significant additional sacrifices. It is critical that these decisions and sacrifices are made with the right strategy in mind.

The TANZANC strategy of aggressive suppression is a viable option for Canada. Given the critical challenges to our present approach, the TANZANC model should be assessed and debated.

It may be that a cost-benefit analysis demonstrates that the TANZANC model is not a better strategy. If, however, the TANZANC model is right for Canada, or for certain provinces, we should act on it now. We cannot afford to throw away our shot a second time.

The conclusion from this report is that Canada has a choice. Living with COVID in the world is reality. Living with COVID in our communities is a choice.
Is it the right choice?

This paper brings up the same old talking points about lockdowns (martial law) being necessary in order to stop people from getting infected. In short, we still have problems because restrictions haven’t been harsh enough.

No mention of the bogus science behind this, such as the virus not isolated, or PCR tests not designed for this. No mention that people overwhelmingly recover, or that restrictions have been applied in an arbitrary and inconsistent matter.

The group regularly talks about borders. But instead of closing the borders off completely, the proposal is to vaccinate everyone coming in. What could possibly go wrong.

7. Global Canada And 18MillionWomen

One area that was identified in our brainstorming with Canadian leaders was renewed Canadian leadership on family planning and reproductive health and rights. Over the past year Global Canada worked with other Canadian civil society actors to convene a gathering of global experts on reproductive health. The recommendations from this gathering (summarized at played an important role in Canada’s 650M announcement to support women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights announced in March, 2017. Global Canada will be exploring other “proof point” opportunities with the potential of significant global impact.

The Family Planning Initiative has put out a call for Canada to spend at least $500 million each year for 10 years on what it calls sexual and reproductive health and rights. Yes, this would amount to Canada helping to finance genocide abroad by paying for abortions in the 3rd World. Global Canada is one of the groups that is involved in helping push that along.

Nothing says a commitment to saving lives quite like ensuring that there are a lot less of them around.

How Conservative Inc. Media Provides Cover For Hoax Being Perpetrated

This is Brian Lilley, who works for the Toronto Sun. Rather than do any in depth reporting on the fraud and hoax that this “pandemic” is, Lilley prefers to run interference for Doug Ford. Instead of holding the Ontario Government to account, his response is: “well, the other guys would have been worse”.

Lilley wants people to look at a symptom (how this is managed), and not the disease (creeping Communist takeover). He’s far from alone.

1. Strategic Uselessness Of Con Inc. Media

Liberal position: More lockdowns, more restrictions, more freedoms taken away. Don’t be selfish and act in individual interest.

Conservative position: Maybe these measures are a bit harsh, but people shouldn’t go around flaunting the rules. They should follow the directions of Public Health.

The effect this has is one of limiting of Overton Window so that public discourse is extremely narrow. An honest discussion of what’s going on is not encouraged by either side. And Conservative Inc. media plays their part in freezing and neutralizing any real opposition.

Very few argue that these measures — which are effectively martial law — are completely wrong, or that the “pandemic” is a manufactured crisis. What they do is criticize details of how it’s implemented.

This is intentional, of course. The goal is not holding Governments accountable for the things they do, but the “illusion” of holding them accountable. This is something completely different.

2. Con Inc. 2-Faced On Media Subsidies

Lorrie Goldstein, in that one tweet, sums up what is wrong with “conservative” outlets in Canada. He feigns outrage at Trudeau for using taxpayer money to prop up unprofitable media. In the next breath, he shrugs it off as necessary to save jobs.

Perhaps their tepid opposition is one of pragmatism: in order to keep the subsidies rolling in, it’s best not to rock the boat too much. The odd shot at Trudeau is allowed, but no serious threats to the status quo are premitted.

Of course, an honourable mention goes to the “charity” of True North Centre for Public Policy. This is what Candice Malcolm, (Jason Kenney’s ex-Staffer), took over and claims to have founded. It was originally the Independent Immigration Aid Association. Even while Malcolm rails against media subsidies, she profits from repurposing an actual charity for tax benefits.

3. More Examples Of Controlled Media

People should follow the rules and obey Public Health guidelines. But at least Hillier is open about his position. Really?

What second wave?

Or take this piece by Spencer Fernando. He calls for Rod Phillips to be fired for taking a trip abroad in December, but Ford apparently gets a pass, despite covering it up. Such hypocrisy. Then again, what can one expect from the National Citizen’s Coalition?

There’s also this juvenile clip from Andrew Lawton. He proposes removing any restriction that a politician gets caught breaking. While amusing, he avoids any real coverage on the deception at the heart of the scam.

These examples are just a tiny bit of what is available online.

In recent days, 2 noticeable themes have emerged:
[1] Criticizing politicians for leaving the country
[2] Borders remain open during “pandemic”

A focus lately is how countless politicians have been caught breaking the rules they insist on for other people.

Interestingly, many in the media don’t take this as an opportunity to reevaluate how dangerous the whole situation is (or isn’t). Instead, the anger is directed at the people not being subjected to the same erosions of their freedoms. Nice trick.

Similarly with the flights coming in. Media in Canada are finally talking about the absurdity of keeping the borders open in a “pandemic”, and not asking why borders should be open at all. The focus becomes on asking if it is safe to allow travellers in.

These tactics are great are directing anger towards people breaking the rules, rather than getting the public to question why those rules exist in the first place. Conservative outlets don’t seem to have much of an issue with stripping our rights away in general. They just argue over the minor details of how to do it. It’s a way to narrow the focus on debate, and limit real discussion.

4. Goal Is To Limit Public Discussion

There isn’t any real opposition in the MSM to Governments imposing martial law, no matter where on the political spectrum they are. Instead,

Putting the spotlight on people like Rod Phillips, breaking his own rules, is a deliberate move. It is done to focus anger on those who are not following along. This is an appeal to emotion, deflecting from having a logical discussion.

A very common tactic is played out here: get people focused on a symptom (hypocritical politicians), and not on the disease (erosion of basic rights). Too many in Canada will spend their time covering the symptoms exclusively.

Keep in mind that Con Inc. media has very low regard for the growing resistance to these power grabs. These people are not allies, and cannot be trusted. Legitimate voices are ignored, or dismissed as conspiracy theorists.

5. Questions That Need To Be Asked

Here some difficult questions that must always be in the public eye. Before accepting the official narrative at face value, they have to be answered. Unfortunately, we aren’t getting this from the media giants.

  • Has this virus ever been isolated?
  • What’s the real fatality rate?
  • How many people have it, and have recovered?
  • Why use PCR tests, when its creator says this isn’t their purpose?
  • What’s the error rate of PCR tests?
  • What’s the error rate of antibody tests?
  • Why bother with rapid-tests if the test itself is flawed?
  • Do masks actually work?
  • How are group sizes (or bubbles) determined?
  • Where did the 2m distancing requirement come from?
  • Why are hospitals really being emptied out?
  • Why are other causes of death being downplayed?
  • Why are deaths mis-labelled to drive up the CV count?
  • How do you determine “non-essential” businesses?
  • Why are Governments so eager to shut businesses down?
  • Is this all just an excuse to implement social changes?
  • Was the “Great Reset” laid out in advance?
  • Why are laws written to give health officers dictator powers?
  • Are we legally obligated to follow WHO’s IHR?
  • Did the WHO actually write the 2005 Quarantine Act?
  • How many politicians actually oppose what is going on?
  • Have politicians been bribed or threatened into compliance?
  • Was all of this planned out?

6. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

The rest of the series is here. Many lies, lobbying, conflicts of interest, and various globalist agendas operating behind the scenes, obscuring the vile agenda called the “Great Reset“. The Gates Foundation finances: the WHO, the US CDC, GAVI, ID2020, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the Pirbright Institute, the BBC, and individual pharmaceutical companies. Also: there is little to no science behind what our officials are doing; they promote degenerate behaviour; and the International Health Regulations are legally binding. See here, here, and here. The media is paid off, and our democracy compromised, shown: here, here, here, and here.

This is what a small site can come up with, given enough time and hard work. Yet the mainstream media Canada in can’t provide proof that this “pandemic” is entirely manufactured?

CV #46(B): So-Called “Journalist” Mark Slapinski Wants Person He Doesn’t Agree With Jailed

Canada has reached a new low. A self-identified “independent journalist” named Mark Slapinski has called for someone to be imprisoned for having different views. But don’t worry, it’s only in the name of safety.

1. Not A Personal Defense Of Saccoccia

To add in a disclaimer: this article is not about personally defending Chris Saccoccia (a.k.a. Chris Sky). He is obnoxious, looks goofy, and overall, is difficult to take seriously. And he may very well be attempting to co-opt real resistance. Nonetheless, he does have his free speech rights. These rights are especially important in light of blatant lies, gaslighting, and lawfare that we experience.

2. Mark Slapinski Started Actual Petition

Chris Sky has become infamous for leading the anti-mask movement in Toronto, as well as spreading inaccurate and anti-scientific information about COVID19 on Social Media.

Chris Sky was recently seen breaking into Adamson BBQ as an act of “united non-compliance” with a group of followers. This escalation in tactics from Mr. Sky is a danger to public health, and needs to be dealt with accordingly.

Chris Sky has been charged by police before, but it appears those charges have not deterred him from spreading disinformation and putting people’s lives in danger.

If Sky continues this behaviour, COVID rates will likely continue to rise, and extend the length of the lockdown. His anti-vaccine rhetoric will likely delay a lifting of COVID restrictions, due to him contributing to “vaccine hesitancy”.

The best way to send a message to anti-maskers is to put their leader in jail.
Sign the petition. Let’s put Chris Sky behind bars!
Started by Toronto Today

Now, who is Mark Slapinski?
Here is some information he provides on his LinkedIn page.

At first, it’s difficult to believe this is real. Mark Slapinski is a journalist, or at least he “identifies” as one. However, he openly calls for someone with a different opinion to be locked up. Aside from the obvious cognitive dissonance, Slapinski seems oblivious to the idea that it is exactly that mentality that could one day see HIM shut down and jailed.

It’s unclear whether Slapinski is a plant being used by the government to promote censorship, or if he is just a useful idiot. Either way, this needs to be called out.

In the petition, Slapinski drops his real goal. He wants to silence the “anti-maskers” by putting Chris Saccoccia/Sky in jail. This is a deliberate attempt to shut down views he disagrees with. Never mind that Sky doesn’t speak for the people as a whole — most find him distasteful.

Interesting that Slapinsky uses the phrase “vaccine hesitancy”. Outside of Government and NGO circles, it’s rarely heard. It refers to people’s reluctance (for whatever reason), to be vaccinated. And Slapinski makes it clear he wants people to get it.

Never mind that this “pandemic” is grossly overblown, and is being used to implement a larger social agenda. Slapinski is either completely ignorant of all of this (and has done no research), or is willfully complicit in deceiving the public.

Slapinski would do a far greater public service if he spent his time researching and fact checking the claims and predictions the Government makes. The official story falls apart under any real scrutiny.

3. Soros Funded Change.Org Petitions

It seems Slapinski has filed several petitions with And while he calls for Black Lives Matter people to be freed, he wants to lock up people who aren’t violent. Pick a lane. Also, it’s oddly amusing the never ending attempts to gaslight whites by using the “Nazi” logo.

At least these are theoretically possible, unlike the current petition to have someone jailed. Someone needs to tell him that’s not how the law works. Police respond to complaints filed, not petitions.

4. Censorship, Social Media Collusion Here Now

See 2:30 in the Tam/Trudeau video. Tam openly admits that there is social media collusion to: (a) take down media that contradicts the narrative; (b) direct people to “trusted” sites; (c) demonetize accounts that don’t play along; and (d) manipulate search algorithms to make them harder to find. The Canadian media doesn’t call this out.

Social media outlets already collude with governments to promote the pro-vaccine narrative, and it’s no accident so many outlets in Canada are subsidized. Governments also have floated the idea of “misinformation” laws to criminally penalize people who contradict the official stories.

At best, Slapinski seems to be aware of none of this, and is blindly parroting back Government talking points. At worst, he is actively trying to censor, shut down (and jail) critics.

Again, none of this is to defend Saccoccia/Sky himself — who does more harm than good to the resistance — but to defend the principle of free speech.

5. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

The rest of the series is here. Many lies, lobbying, conflicts of interest, and various globalist agendas operating behind the scenes, obscuring the vile agenda called the “Great Reset“. The Gates Foundation finances: the WHO, the US CDC, GAVI, ID2020, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the Pirbright Institute, the BBC, and individual pharmaceutical companies. Also: there is little to no science behind what our officials are doing; they promote degenerate behaviour; the Australian Department of Health admits the PCR tests don’t work; the US CDC admits testing is heavily flawed; and The International Health Regulations are legally binding. See here, here, and here. The media is paid off, and our democracy compromised, shown: here, here, here, and here.