Category: Military/Police

Posted on

CV #25(C): Brian Pallister Hires Intelligence & Detention Firm G4S For “Security” In Manitoba

Manitoba Premier Brian Pallister has publicly floated the idea of a mandatory curfew, which he claims will be “limited”. He has since banned the sale of what he calls “non-essential goods” in stores. However, he is not being forthcoming with residents about G4S, the security firm he brought in.

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; 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.

2. Important Links

(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_G4S#Immigrant-detainee_labour
(2) https://twitter.com/BrianPallister/status/1323638895586779136
(3) https://archive.is/p3MnX
(4) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/covid19-enforcement-update-manitoba-pallister-1.5804774
(5) https://archive.is/8brqz
(6) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-florida-shooting-g4s-idUSKCN0Z02QS
G4S: Services That We Offer
(7) https://archive.is/VnobR
(8) https://www.g4s.com/en-gb/what-we-do/care-and-justice-services/custody-and-detention-services
(9) https://archive.is/LEWya
(10) https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/entertainment/story/2020-09-24/garden-grove-approves-1-8m-contract-outsourcing-jail-security-service-to-g4s
(11) https://archive.is/UhceY
(12) https://www.g4s.com/what-we-do/care-and-justice
(13) https://www.g4s.com/en-us/media/news/2020/04/14/g4s-adds-ai-based-stabilitas-critical-event-intelligence-engine-to-roc-offering
(14) ttps://www.g4s.com/news-and-insights/insights/2018/08/30/the-future-of-drones-in-security
(15) https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/australia-to-deploy-drones-to-photograph-unmasked-faces-drivers-too-far-from-home
(16) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/G4S-Contact-Tracing-Info.pdf
(17) https://www.g4s.com/en-ca/vancouver
(18) https://indianexpress.com/article/business/companies/gates-foundation-sells-stake-in-britains-g4s/
(19) https://www.g4s.com/investors/regulatory-announcements/2016/12/02/agreement-reached-on-sale-of-g4s-israel

3. CBC Article And Video On Hiring G4S

Private security officers will crack down on rule breakers after shoppers crowded into big-box stores, where many bought non-essential goods during the first weekend of the province’s latest lockdown.

The province has hired security firm G4S Canada to boost its enforcement of COVID-19 regulations, and their personnel should be handing out tickets by this weekend, Premier Brian Pallister said Tuesday.

The province is also filing charges in addition to levying fines against those who took part in a rally in Steinbach this past weekend where protesters flouted COVID-19 regulations, Pallister said.

To start with the obvious question: who does Brian Pallister think he is, to determine what is and what isn’t “essential items” to purchase? Aren’t conservatives supposed to support free will and individual choice? And even if this were legitimate, why is it necessary to hire outside sources?

Beyond that, Pallister pitches this as glorified mall cops. However, this is disingenuous when you consider the other skills and resources G4S has. Perhaps this hiring is more about doing overall surveillance on Manitobans overall.

4. Mass Killer Omar Mateen Ex-G4S Employee

Bit of a sidenote: Omar Mateen, who killed 49 people in an Orlando nightclub in 2016, was an employee of G4S for years. They have been criticized for not doing enough to look into his background.

5. G4S Offers Consulting Services As Well

Whether threats are from crime or terrorism, or simply from entering new ventures markets or territories, we work to design and implement effective measures to mitigate or manage these risks. Should the unexpected happen, we can support clients in times of emergency or crisis.
.
We enable our clients to develop resilience to business risk by providing:
.
-Proactive intelligence gathering, analysis and research, using the latest techniques and processes
-World class risk advisory and mitigation services
-Outstanding crisis management and response capability
-Expert advice on risk management technologies.
–Specialist training and capacity building programmes

EVERY SOLUTION STARTS WITH UNDERSTANDING THE THREAT
Our team of 24/7 analysts provide insight and intelligence into the threats that our clients face. By understanding the threat we can use our expertise, global resources and intelligence to work with our clients to develop a solution which matches their exact requirements. With the aim of not only protecting people and assets but improving business efficiency.
.
We work with some of the world leading security consultants with expertise in Crowded Places, Aviation, High-Risk Environments, Secure by Design, Major Events, CNI, Counter-Terrorism, CBRN and Blast Modelling.

The client in this case is the Manitoba Government. What if the threat G4S was supposed to prevent was an informed population rising up tp assert its rights? This is much, MUCH more than simply doing local security for shopping centers. Here is a promotional video in Canada.

6. G4S Operates Private Prisons

G4S has been providing value for money, innovation, and social benefit within the criminal justice sector in the United Kingdom since the first private sector prison in the country was opened in 1992. Since then, expertise from around the business has been used to expand and improve our offering.

One of the services G4S offers is in private prisons. They have existed (at least in the UK), since 1992. In September of this year, Garden Grove switched to G4S. These services are also offered in Australia. It should be noted that G4S is also involved in running immigration detention as well.

7. Using AI To Track Covid-19 Hotspots

“The recent COVID-19 outbreak has made evident the need for local intelligence that can be globally communicated, as businesses with people and operations around the world need quick, comprehensive and actionable information to effectively respond to hotspots and make business-critical decisions daily,” said G4S Americas CEO John Kenning. “G4S ROC analysts are able to use the Stabilitas’ AI platform to provide customers with actionable data to help protect their employees, operations and assets. Our strategic partnership with Stabilitas enhances the integrated security service offerings we provide customers under our Security Operations Center (SOC) Practice.”

Stabilitas’ AI-based platform also equips G4S ROC staff to deliver real-time intelligence, travel risk management, asset visualization and mass notifications to clients, employees, travelers and assets to keep their operations secure, a particularly valuable resource in the face of rapidly evolving global threats such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The platform filters more than 17,000 trusted data sources across government, weather and geological, local and international, social media, IoT networks and other external data sources into a single feed that identifies critical events and correlates those on a global scale, far surpassing the capabilities of manual monitoring and analysis processes.

G4S claims to be able to better monitor and track outbreaks in this “pandemic” using artificial intelligence technology. Since they’ll be providing actual security, at least in Manitoba, this will effectively cut out the middleman.

8. G4S Implementing Drone Technology

G4S now has drones in its inventory, allowing it to conduct search and surveillance in places and ways that had not been previously possible. Australia has an application for this technology: catching people who aren’t wearing masks.

9. G4S Offers Tech For Contact Tracing

If you have an existing security access system, you may not realize that it can be used to supplement your contact tracing program. Access systems can track an employee or visitor and determine who else was in the same area at the same time. They provide timely information which is critical for contact protocols. You
can choose the amount of time to track. If an employee or visitor displays virus symptoms, these tools can tell you who that person may have come into contact with, and provide the data to notify other individuals who may have been exposed. Ongoing reports can be generated to maintain compliance and meet everchanging regulations.

G4S offers electronic visitor management systems to assist with contact tracing. These systems can prompt people to answer specific questions related to self-declaration (e.g. have you been in contact with anyone who has displayed symptoms of a fever in the past 14 days?) and can be used to alert personnel to any answers that may require secondary screening. As these systems are designed for employees and visitors to provide basic contact information, they can be used to generate a prescribed report as to who was in the building, when they were there and with whom they met.

Contact tracing benefits come from the basic information a user would enter when prompted, creating a contact list and a record of compliance as to who had entered, when they did and a phone number to reach them

G4S sees the contact tracing industry as an area for significant growth. Given the increase surveillance Governments are demanding, it seems smart from a business perspective.

10. G4S Also Involved In Airport Security

G4S is proud to provide services throughout the province of British Columbia.
.
G4S is Canada’s leading security service provider to the energy sector. G4S specializes in providing service to mining, forestry, retail, special events & property management. G4S provides screening services to airports throughout British Columbia and the Yukon in partnership with the CANADIAN AIR TRANSPORT SECURITY AUTHORITY (CATSA).

Yes, the same group involved with contact tracing, artificial intelligence, drones, and pandemic management also has a foothold in airport security in Canada.

11. Gates Foundation Sells Shares Of G4S Stock

Until the Spring of 2014, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation was actually a co-owner of G4S, holding approximately 3% of the stock. However, it has since been sold off.

12. Sale: G4S Israel To FIMI Opportunity Funds

Effective December 31, 2015, G4S Israel was sold to FIMI Opportunity Funds for the equivalent of about 88 million British Pounds. Despite the change in ownership, G4S would still retain a presence in Israel. It’s denied that the sale had anything to do with BDS (ban, divest, sanction) efforts launched in many countries.

13. Why Is G4S Really In Manitoba?

Premier Brian Pallister made it seem like he was just hiring extra security guards due to a personnel shortage. However, when it’s considered what G4S does, and what they are capable of, what is the purpose of this? This certainly seems like overkill — unless there’s another agenda.

Yes, the company has been used for tickets and commercial security before. However, in light of everything going on, this doesn’t seem right.

If Ottawa or any Provincial Government ever wanted to give the order for G4S to start rounding up and detaining political dissidents, they would have the capability to do it.

Posted on

What’s Really In U.S. Defense Bill S.1790

1. Important Links

CLICK HERE, for Senate Bill S1790, signed Dec 21, 2019.
http://archive.is/81Hbp
CLICK HERE, for the PDF version.

2. Context For This Article

Donald Trump campaigned to become U.S. President in 2015 and 2016. He ran on an openly “America FIRST” platform. That sounded great, but is he living up to that promise?

Well, importing a replacement work force to put your own people out of their jobs isn’t really “America first”. However, it does provide lots of cheap labour, driving down wages.

That aside, what about defense spending? Donald Trump’s recent defense spending bill may provide some insight into how (if at all) that pledge is being kept.

3. Section 214: Affirmative Action Edu Research

SEC. 214. RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES FOR HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND MINORITY-SERVING INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.
Section 2362 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—
(1) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections (e) and (f), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection
(c) the following new subsection: ‘‘
(d) INCENTIVES.—The Secretary of Defense may develop incentives to encourage research and educational collaborations between covered educational institutions and other institutions of higher education.’’.

Focusing on pandering to a group, instead of choosing the best people. Affirmative action is a failed concept, and we should be honest about it. Also see section 262 for mandating a study about it.

4. Section 223: Climate Change Policies

SEC. 223. DIRECT AIR CAPTURE AND BLUE CARBON REMOVAL TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.
(a) PROGRAM REQUIRED.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of Energy, and the heads of such other Federal agencies as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate, shall carry out a program on research, development, testing, evaluation, study, and demonstration of technologies related to blue carbon capture and direct air capture. (2) PROGRAM GOALS.—The goals of the program established under paragraph (1) are as follows:
(A) To develop technologies that capture carbon dioxide from seawater and the air to turn such carbon dioxide into clean fuels to enhance fuel and energy security.
(B) To develop and demonstrate technologies that capture carbon dioxide from seawater and the air to reuse such carbon dioxide to create products for military uses.
(C) To develop direct air capture technologies for use—
(i) at military installations or facilities of the Department of Defense; or
(ii) in modes of transportation by the Navy or the Coast Guard.

Spoiler, but Carbon Dioxide is not pollution.

5. Section 229: Racial/Gender Diversity

SEC. 229. DIVERSIFICATION OF THE RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING WORKFORCE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.
(a) ASSESSMENT REQUIRED.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and in consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, shall conduct an assessment of critical skillsets required across, and the diversity of, the research and engineering workforce of the Department of Defense, including the science and technology reinvention laboratories, to support emerging and future warfighter technologies.
(2) ELEMENTS.—The assessment required by paragraph
(1) shall include analysis of the following:
(A) The percentage of women and minorities employed in the research and engineering workforce of the Department of Defense as of the date of the assessment.
(B) Of the individuals hired into the research and engineering workforce of the Department in the five years preceding the date of the assessment, the percentage of such individuals who are women and minorities

Who cares about the melanin and chromosomes of the engineers involved? Simply hire the best and most qualified people to begin with. There shouldn’t be any such considerations.

6. Section 529: Strategy For More Diversity

SEC. 529. STRATEGIC PLAN FOR DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION.
(a) PLAN REQUIRED.—The Secretary of Defense shall design and implement a five-year strategic plan for diversity and inclusion in the Department of Defense.
(b) ELEMENTS.—The strategic plan under this section—
(1) shall incorporate existing efforts to promote diversity and inclusion within the Department; and
(2) may not conflict with the objectives of the 2018 National Military Strategy.
(c) DEADLINE.—The Secretary shall implement the strategic plan under this section not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Whatever happened to simply selecting qualified people?

7. Section 540I: Race & Gender Crime Stats

SEC. 540I. ASSESSMENT OF RACIAL, ETHNIC, AND GENDER DISPARITIES IN THE MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide for the carrying out of the activities described in subsections (b) and (c) in order to improve the ability of the Department of Defense to detect and address racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in the military justice system.
(b) SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES.—The activities described in this subsection are the following, to be commenced or carried out (as applicable) by not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act:
(1) For each court-martial conducted by an Armed Force after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall require the head of the Armed Force concerned—
(A) to record the race, ethnicity, and gender of the victim and the accused, and such other demographic information about the victim and the accused as the Secretary considers appropriate;
(B) to include data based on the information described in subparagraph (A) in the annual military justice reports of the Armed Force.

Here’s a spoiler: 13% do 50%.
That’s according to the FBI.
Probably a true principle here as well.

8. Section 1123: Criminal Record Disclosure

Sure, let’s remove the mandatory advance disclosure about criminal records.

9. Section 1205: Gender Perspectives Req.

SEC. 1205. GENDER PERSPECTIVES AND PARTICIPATION BY WOMEN IN SECURITY COOPERATION ACTIVITIES.
Consistent with the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 (Public Law 115–68), the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, should seek to incorporate gender perspectives and participation by women in security cooperation activities to the maximum extent practicable.

At least Trudeau is open that he promotes this sort of thing. Here, it is slipped into a defense bill that is thousands of pages long.

10. Section 1215: Special Visa Reporting Req.

SEC. 1215. SPECIAL IMMIGRANT VISA PROGRAM REPORTING REQUIREMENT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of the Department of State shall submit a report, which may contain a classified annex, to—
(1) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate; and
(2) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.
(b) CONTENTS.—The report submitted under subsection
(a) shall evaluate the obstacles to effective protection of Afghan and Iraqi allies through the special immigrant visa programs and suggestions for improvements in future programs, including information relating to—
(1) the hiring of locally employed staff and contractors;
(2) documenting the identity and employment of locally employed staff and contractors of the United States Government, including the possibility of establishing a central database of employees of the United States Government and its contractors;
(3) the protection and safety of employees of locally employed staff and contractors;
(4) means of expediting processing at all stages of the process for applicants, including consideration of reducing required forms; (5) appropriate staffing levels for expedited processing domestically and abroad;
(6) the effect of uncertainty of visa availability on visa processing;
(7) the cost and availability of medical examinations; and
(8) means to reduce delays in interagency processing and security checks.

Serious question: will there be a pathway to citizenship for these visa holders?

11. Section 1219: Extending Afghan Visas

SEC. 1219. MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION OF THE AFGHAN SPECIAL IMMIGRANT VISA PROGRAM.
(a) PRINCIPAL ALIENS.—Subclause
(I) of section 602(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101 note) is amended to read as follows: ‘‘(I) by, or on behalf of, the United States Government; or’’.
(b) EXTENSION OF AFGHAN SPECIAL IMMIGRANT PROGRAM.— Section 602(b)(3)(F) of the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101 note) is amended—
(1) in the heading, by striking ‘‘2015, 2016, AND 2017’’ and inserting ‘‘2015 THROUGH 2020’’;
(2) in the matter preceding clause
(i), by striking ‘‘18,500’’ and inserting ‘‘22,500’’;
(3) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘December 31, 2020’’ and inserting ‘‘December 31, 2021’’; and
(4) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘December 31, 2020’’ and inserting ‘‘December 31, 2021’’.

Interesting. This defense spending bill includes extending visas for Afghans, and issuing more of them. One might think this would be an immigration matter.

12. Section 1260I: Huawei Not Entirely Banned

SEC. 1260I. LIMITATION ON REMOVAL OF HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO. LTD. FROM ENTITY LIST OF BUREAU OF INDUSTRY AND SECURITY. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Commerce may not remove Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. or any of its affiliates (in this section collectively referred to as ‘‘Huawei’’) from the entity list unless and until the Secretary certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that—
(1) Huawei has sufficiently resolved or settled the charges that were the basis for the addition of Huawei to the entity list in a manner that is consistent with the standards for the removal of an entity from the entity list under the Export Administration Regulations;
(2) Huawei has sufficiently resolved or settled any other charges that Huawei violated sanctions imposed by the United States;
(3) regulations have been implemented that sufficiently restrict exporting to, and importing from, the United States items that would pose a national security threat to telecommunications systems in the United States; and
(4) the Department of Commerce has mitigated, to the maximum extent possible, other threats to the national security of the United States posed by Huawei.

Why not just ban them outright? You do know that China uses it to spy on you and gather intel. Business interests should not override national security concerns.

13. Section 1749: Ban On Confederate Names

SEC. 1749. PROHIBITION ON NAMES RELATED TO THE CONFEDERACY.
(a) PROHIBITION ON NAMES RELATED TO THE CONFEDERACY.— In naming a new asset or renaming an existing asset, the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of a military department may not give a name to an asset that refers to, or includes a term referring to, the Confederate States of America (commonly referred to as the ‘‘Confederacy’’), including any name referring to—
(1) a person who served or held leadership within the Confederacy; or
(2) a Confederate battlefield victory.
(b) ASSET DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘asset’’ includes any base, installation, facility, aircraft, ship, equipment, or any other property owned or controlled by the Department of Defense or a military department.
(c) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this section may be construed as requiring a Secretary concerned to initiate a review of previously named assets.

Way to erase a part of American history.

14. Section 5321: Climate Change Concerns

SEC. 5321. ESTABLISHMENT OF CLIMATE SECURITY ADVISORY COUNCIL.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Title I of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3021 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ‘‘SEC. 120. CLIMATE SECURITY ADVISORY COUNCIL. ‘‘
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Director of National Intelligence shall establish a Climate Security Advisory Council for the purpose of— ‘‘
(1) assisting intelligence analysts of various elements of the intelligence community with respect to analysis of climate security and its impact on the areas of focus of such analysts; ‘‘
(2) facilitating coordination between the elements of the intelligence community and elements of the Federal Government that are not elements of the intelligence community in collecting data on, and conducting analysis of, climate change and climate security; and ‘‘(3) ensuring that the intelligence community is adequately prioritizing climate change in carrying out its activities.

Yes, the military, which is in charge of keeping the nation safe will also have to factor climate change or “climate security” into everything that they do.

15. Section 5712: Chinese Infiltration?

SEC. 5712. REPORT ON BEST PRACTICES TO PROTECT PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OF CHINESE AMERICANS.
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that—
(1) the People’s Republic of China appears to be specifically targeting the Chinese-American community for intelligence purposes;
(2) such targeting carries a substantial risk that the loyalty of such Americans may be generally questioned and lead to unacceptable stereotyping, targeting, and racial profiling;
(3) the United States Government has a duty to warn and protect all Americans including those of Chinese descent from these intelligence efforts by the People’s Republic of China;
(4) the broad stereotyping, targeting, and racial profiling of Americans of Chinese descent is contrary to the values of the United States and reinforces the flawed narrative perpetuated by the People’s Republic of China that ethnically Chinese individuals worldwide have a duty to support the People’s Republic of China; and
(5) the United States efforts to combat the People’s Republic of China’s intelligence activities should actively safeguard and promote the constitutional rights of all Chinese Americans.

I’m not convinced this is just a stereotype. China does send spies under pretenses of being students or being temporary workers. It is not paranoid or discriminatory to wonder about this. Ethnic ties ARE generally much stronger than civil ties.

16. Section 5713: Infiltration In Academia?!

SEC. 5713. OVERSIGHT OF FOREIGN INFLUENCE IN ACADEMIA.
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
(1) COVERED INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.—The term ‘‘covered institution of higher education’’ means an institution described in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002) that receives Federal funds in any amount and for any purpose.
(2) SENSITIVE RESEARCH SUBJECT.—The term ‘‘sensitive research subject’’ means a subject of research that is carried out at a covered institution of higher education that receives funds that were appropriated for—
(A) the National Intelligence Program; or
(B) any Federal agency the Director of National Intelligence deems appropriate.
(b) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and not less frequently than once each year thereafter, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with such elements of the intelligence community as the Director considers appropriate and consistent with the privacy protections afforded to United States persons, shall submit to congressional intelligence committees a report on risks to sensitive research subjects posed by foreign entities in order to provide Congress and covered institutions of higher education with more complete information on these risks and to help ensure academic freedom.
(c) CONTENTS.—The report required by subsection
(b) shall include the following:
(1) A list of sensitive research subjects that could affect national security.
(2) A list of foreign entities, including governments, corporations, nonprofit organizations and for-profit organizations, and any subsidiary or affiliate of such an entity, that the Director determines pose a counterintelligence, espionage (including economic espionage), or other national security threat with respect to sensitive research subjects.
(3) A list of any known or suspected attempts by foreign entities to exert pressure on covered institutions of higher education, including attempts to limit freedom of speech, propagate misinformation or disinformation, or to influence professors, researchers, or students.
(4) Recommendations for collaboration between covered institutions of higher education and the intelligence community to mitigate threats to sensitive research subjects associated with foreign influence in academia, including any necessary legislative or administrative action.

I don’t suppose any of those hordes of foreign students may be complicit in all of this? Foreign students, foreign funding, and U.S. taxpayers pick up the rest of the tab. What could possibly go wrong?

17. Section 6746: “Might” Allow Spies In?

SEC. 6746. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON CONSIDERATION OF ESPIONAGE ACTIVITIES WHEN CONSIDERING WHETHER OR NOT TO PROVIDE VISAS TO FOREIGN INDIVIDUALS TO BE ACCREDITED TO A UNITED NATIONS MISSION IN THE UNITED STATES.
It is the sense of the Congress that the Secretary of State, in considering whether or not to provide a visa to a foreign individual to be accredited to a United Nations mission in the United States, should consider—
(1) known and suspected intelligence activities, espionage activities, including activities constituting precursors to espionage, carried out by the individual against the United States, foreign allies of the United States, or foreign partners of the United States; and
(2) the status of an individual as a known or suspected intelligence officer for a foreign adversary.

Right. Don’t outright block and prohibit the people known or suspected to be involved in espionage. Instead, it should be “considered”.

18. Section 7438: Sunset Clause

SEC. 7438. SUNSET.
This title shall cease to be effective on the date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Okay, it expires in 5 years.

19. Section 7611: Liberian Refugees

SEC. 7611. LIBERIAN REFUGEE IMMIGRATION FAIRNESS.
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise specifically provided, any term used in this Act that is used in the immigration laws shall have the meaning given the term in the immigration laws.
(2) IMMIGRATION LAWS.—The term ‘‘immigration laws’’ has the meaning given the term in section 101(a)(17) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17)).
(3) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of Homeland Security.
(b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (3), the Secretary shall adjust the status of an alien described in subsection (c) to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if the alien—
(A) applies for adjustment not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act; (B) is otherwise eligible to receive an immigrant visa; and (C) subject to paragraph
(2), is admissible to the United States for permanent residence.

Why is an amnesty for Liberians slipped into this “defense spending” bill? How does it have anything to do with defense spending, or military capabilities?

20. Final Thoughts

Yes, there is some money for the wall (or rather, replacing sections of fencing). There’s also a ton of money for various weapons and toys.

But an awful lot of garbage that doesn’t need to be in there. There doesn’t seem to be any sign that Trump is ending, or even scaling down existing U.S. wars and military ventures.

How will all of this be paid for? Just put it on the national credit card of course. Annual deficits, or overall debts, no longer seem to matter to Federal politicians. All of this isn’t really “America first!”

Posted on

UN Security Council: Legalized Aggression


(Then President George W. Bush, arguing for an invasion of Iraq under blatantly false pretenses. The UN Security Council approved the use of force in 2002 by a 15-0 vote. War was launched on March 20, 2003).


(A critique on the problem with veto power)

1. Important Links

CLICK HERE, for UN Security Council home page.
CLICK HERE, for the page on sanctions.
CLICK HERE, the UN Charter.
CLICK HERE, for Article 41 of the UN Charter (Sanctions).
CLICK HERE, for an index of voting records.
CLICK HERE, for Wikipedia page on “Proxy Wars”.

2. Stated Mission

Peace and Security

The Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. It has 15 Members, and each Member has one vote. Under the Charter of the United Nations, all Member States are obligated to comply with Council decisions.

The Security Council takes the lead in determining the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression. It calls upon the parties to a dispute to settle it by peaceful means and recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement. In some cases, the Security Council can resort to imposing sanctions or even authorize the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security.

That is correct. 15 nations can decide what is “in the interest of global peace and security”. Hardly seems that other nations get much of a say in international matters. Would your own sovereignty be limited by what these 15 members of the “Global Community” have to say?

Even more undemocratic is the make up of the Security Council. There are 15 members, 5 of which are permanent, and 10 others which are chosen on a rotational basis.

The 5 permanent members are: 1/ the United States; 2/ Russia (formerly the Soviet Union); 3/ Britain; 4/ France; and 5/ China. These were the “winners” of World War II, when the UN was founded. Each of the 5 permanent members has “veto” power, meaning they can unilaterally block any resolution from passing.

In order to pass a Security Council resolution, a majority of members have to approve it. Additionally, none of the “Permanent 5” can veto. They each have to abstain or support.

3. Non Military Options

What if the UN doesn’t opt for military force? There are less direct, but more passive-aggressive measures called “sanctions”. These are essentially punishments the Security Council imposes.

(From Article 41)

“The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations.”

From the page on sanctions:

“Security Council sanctions have taken a number of different forms, in pursuit of a variety of goals. The measures have ranged from comprehensive economic and trade sanctions to more targeted measures such as arms embargoes, travel bans, and financial or commodity restrictions. The Security Council has applied sanctions to support peaceful transitions, deter non-constitutional changes, constrain terrorism, protect human rights and promote non-proliferation.”

The UN Security Council also lists who it has imposed sanctions upon: “Since 1966, the Security Council has established 30 sanctions regimes, in Southern Rhodesia, South Africa, the former Yugoslavia (2), Haiti, Iraq (2), Angola, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia and Eritrea, Eritrea and Ethiopia, Liberia (3), DRC, Côte d’Ivoire, Sudan, Lebanon, DPRK, Iran, Libya (2), Guinea-Bissau, CAR, Yemen, South Sudan and Mali, as well as against ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida and the Taliban.”

4. UN Contributing To World Peace?

Does UN Security Council Create World Peace?
Not really. This is especially true when one of the “Permanent 5” has veto power over any resolution to stop or condemn the aggression. Though the major powers may not directly be involved, they may provide aid to others and fight proxy wars.

Though not always the best site, Wikipedia is great for a quick reference.

Chinese Civil War (1944–1949)
Greek Civil War (1944–1949)
Iran crisis of 1946 (1945–1946)
First Indochina War (1946–1954)
Paraguayan Civil War (1947)
Malayan Emergency (1948–1960)
Internal conflict in Myanmar (1948– )
Balochistan conflict (1948– )
Arab–Israeli conflict (1948–present)
Korean War (1950–1953)
Mau Mau Uprising (1952–1960)
Second Indochina War (First Taiwan Strait Crisis (1953–1975))
Algerian War (1954–1962)
First Sudanese Civil War (1955–1972)
Suez Crisis (1956–1957)
Second Taiwan Strait Crisis (1958)
Lebanon crisis (1958)
Tibetan uprising (1959–1962)
Central American crisis (1960–1996)
Congo Crisis (1960–1965)
Portuguese Colonial War (1960–1974)
Xinjiang conflict (1960s–present)
First Iraqi–Kurdish War (1961–1970)
Eritrean War of Independence (1961-1991)
North Yemen Civil War (1962–1970)
Dhofar Rebellion (1962–1976)
Sarawak Communist Insurgency (1962–1990)
Sand War (1963)
Aden Emergency (1963–1967)
Insurgency in Northeast India (1963–present)
Rhodesian Bush War (1964–1979)
Dominican Civil War (1965)
Communist insurgency in Thailand (1965–1983)
Bolivian Campaign (1966–1967)
Korean DMZ Conflict (1966–1969)
South African Border War (1966–1990)
Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970)
Naxalite–Maoist insurgency (1967–present)
Communist insurgency in Malaysia (1968–1989)
Operation Condor (1968–1989)
Al-Wadiah War (1969-present)
Civil conflict in the Philippines (1969–present)
Yemenite War (1972)
Angolan Civil War (1974–2002)
Ethiopian Civil War (1974–1991)
Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990)
Western Sahara War (1975–1991)
Indonesian occupation of East Timor (1975–1999)
Cabinda War (1975–present)
Insurgency in Laos (1975–present)
Civil conflict in Turkey (1976–present)
Shaba I (1977)
Ogaden War (1977–1978)
Cambodian-Vietnamese War (1977–1991)
Mozambican Civil War (1977–1992)
Chittagong Hill Tracts conflict (1977–1997)
Shaba II (1978)
Uganda–Tanzania War (1978–1979)
NDF Rebellion (1978–1982)
Chadian–Libyan conflict (1978–1987)
Yemenite War of (1979)
Soviet–Afghan War (1979–1989)
Sino-Vietnamese War (1979
Internal conflict in Peru (1980–present)
Ethiopian–Somali Border War (1982)
Sri Lankan Civil War (1983–2009)

This isn’t even a complete list. But when researching conflicts, you will find that it is most often one or more of the “Permanent 5” behind these conflicts. How can the UN actually help world peace when its own Security Council members can flaunt the principles without consequences?

Why are a nation’s well being and sovereignty dependant on the will of 15 nations, 5 of whom appointed themselves as permanent members with a veto.

This is not to say that nations should not be free to enter into military alliances and pacts. However, this arrangement seems stacked against smaller and weaker nations.

5. What Does UN Say About It?

Under the United Nations Charter, the functions and powers of the Security Council are:
.
-to maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations;
-to investigate any dispute or situation which might lead to international friction;
-to recommend methods of adjusting such disputes or the terms of settlement;
-to formulate plans for the establishment of a system to regulate armaments;
-to determine the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression and to recommend what action should be taken;
-to call on Members to apply economic sanctions and other measures not involving the use of force to prevent or stop aggression;
-to take military action against an aggressor;
-to recommend the admission of new Members;
-to exercise the trusteeship functions of the United Nations in “strategic areas”;
-to recommend to the General Assembly the appointment of the Secretary-General and, together with the Assembly, to elect the Judges of the International Court of Justice.

There has been much speculation within Canada that Justin Trudeau is being so “UN compliant” because he is aiming for a seat on the Security Council. Not sure if this is true, though it’s certainly possible.

Military aggression. But “democratically performed” military aggression.”

6. Who’s Behind US Military Aggression?

In a word: Israel.

The State of Israel has been influencing US military policy, particularly in the Middle East, for decades. Western (Christian) nations go to war against Muslim nations. This in turn creates refugees who are forced to take shelter in other countries. Of course Israel won’t take them, but will help ship them off to the West.

Posted on

Diversity 101: RCMP Looking To Drop All Standards For New Recruits

(Another Case Of Diversity Trumping Merit)

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) are facing a personnel shortage, and have come up with an interesting solution: drop all standards, and focus on diversity. No, this is not an exaggeration.

1. Proposed Changes

1/ Criminal record may not be a barrier to entry
2/ Credit problems not to be a barrier to entry
3/ Aptitude testing to be eliminated
4/ Hearing tests to be reduced or eliminated
5/ Vision tests to be reduced or eliminated
6/ Long stints at the acadmeny (training) to be reduced
7/ Focus to be on recruiting women and visible minorities

This CBC article, article is very difficult to parody, as it reads as one. Also, the comments are well worth checking out.

2. Article Quotations

The RCMP are taking a radical look at their recruitment strategy and could ditch credit checks and the ban on recruits with criminal backgrounds to help them rebuild their depleted ranks.

The Mounties have been plagued by staffing challenges in recent years and are looking at how to convince more women and visible minorities to don the red serge.

An internal document, obtained through access to information, suggests credit checks, the criminal background ban, the two-hour aptitude test and long stints at the training depot could all be eliminated from the hiring process as senior ranks try to make a career as a Mountie more attractive.

The document notes that some of the mandatory requirements can create barriers for communities the force wants to attract, including “groups more likely to have contact with the criminal justice system.”
It asks: Are we “tuned-in or tone deaf?”

The review exercise is the brainchild of Vaughn Charlton, the director of gender-based-analysis-plus with the RCMP.
She was brought over from Status of Women Canada in April 2017 at the request of then-commissioner Bob Paulson and tasked with focusing on gender and inclusion within the force.

“We need to stop assuming there’s only one kind of person who belongs in policing,” she said in an interview with CBC News.

“If we’re going to have mandatory requirements, we want to make sure we’re not creating unintended barriers for reasons that really have nothing to do with whether you’d be a great police officer.”

For example, someone coming to the force later in life might not be able to spend 26 weeks at the training depot in Saskatchewan. Credit checks — long part of the RCMP security screening process — can be a barrier for single parents or those who’ve been forced to take long-term leave, said Charlton.

Staffing crunch

The document also flagged hearing and vision tests and long shifts as potential barriers and questioned the value of the aptitude screening assessment — which, among other things, tests memory, logic, judgment and comprehension.
“I can definitely say we are looking at everything really seriously,” Charlton said. “These are questions worth asking and thinking, ‘Are they still relevant criteria in 2019?'”

So far, Charlton said, her questions have gone over well with top brass.
The recruitment review exercise is ongoing with no set deadline, she said. The entrance exam is getting its own fairness review through the Public Service Commission.

“I think the challenge for us going forward is looking at diversity and inclusion as seriously as we look at security,” Charlton said.

‘Race to the bottom’

When Commissioner Brenda Lucki took over as top Mountie earlier this year, she was warned in a briefing binder that “the RCMP has a growing vacancy rate that exceeds its present ability to produce regular members at a rate that keeps pace with projected future demands.”

The briefing note says that in the last five years, there has been a “dramatic” increase in the number of new recruits required to fill operational vacancies and evolving program requirements.

The RCMP says that in 2018, 21.6 per cent of regular members self-identified as women and 20.8 per cent of members above the inspector level were women. According to a 2017 report, about 10 per cent of the force identify as visible minority and eight per cent are Indigenous.

Time for civilian governance at RCMP, watchdog says in harassment report

Analysis: Toxic culture, harassment issues overshadow RCMP commissioner’s tenure
Christian Leuprecht, a Royal Military College professor who has written about the RCMP’s structure, said public service organizations like police forces are plagued by cumbersome hiring processes and low pay. On top of that, the RCMP have been plagued in recent years by allegations of sexual harassment, bullying and intimidation within the ranks.

“What this all points to is that the RCMP is going to have to change the way they do business, both as an organization and in particular in the way they recruit,” he said.

But Leuprecht cautioned against dropping too many of the mandatory requirements simply to raise the number of applicants. In an age of complex cybercrime investigations, terrorist threats and sophisticated organized crime operations, he said the force needs to ask itself how it can bring in more of the country’s top minds.
“The discussion is always about, ‘Well what can we do to kind of eliminate some barriers to this race to the bottom?'” he said.

“The RCMP is the largest police organization in the country and it is also our federal police force. This needs to be the force that shows the greatest professionalism, the greatest competence and that needs to position itself as an employer of choice and an employer that affords equality of opportunity to all Canadians.”

With files from the CBC’s Kathleen Harris

3. Thoughts On The Proposal

(1) Dropping the prohibition against people with a criminal record is non-sensical. Having a “pardoned” criminal record is one thing, but letting actual criminals in to do the policing?

Additionally, there are way too many questions here:
(a) Which offences will be grounds for exclusion?
(b) Will there be any specific cut-off, or is it case by case?
(c) Will there be a waiting period before a person can enter?
(d) Will people on parole or probation be allowed to enter?
(e) If an ex-con has a firearms ban, will that be waived?
(f) If an ex-con has a driving prohibition, will that be waived?

(2) Credit checks are used in places like banks. When putting someone is a position of trust, it is important to have some knowledge that they can manage finances, and will be less likely to abuse that trust.

Furthermore, ”employment credit checks” do not show anywhere near as much information as say, getting a check for a loan or credit card. These ones are severely restricted in the information disclosed, as it is to measure trustworthiness, not the balance on your cards or mortgage.

(3) Dropping the aptitude test? Do we not want some intellectual standards for RCMP recruits? If a person cannot meet a basic entry level exam, then excluding that person, or people, is in the best interest of the organization. It does raise the question though: is this an attempt to gain more ESL recruits?

(4) Hearing and vision tests are useful, since your physical health and sense are essential to one’s ability to do the job. Further, given how dangerous and gruelling policing can be, physical strength and stamina are needed.

(5)Yes, being away from the family for 6 months can be a burden, but training to be a police officer is a serious commitment. It cannot simply be gutted.

(6) Who cares how many people are women (or trannies identifying as women), or how many people are of a particular background? The focus should be on creating a strong force of intelligent, fit people with good moral character. The rest is just pandering to identity politics.

(7) “”….If we’re going to have mandatory requirements, we want to make sure we’re not creating unintended barriers for reasons that really have nothing to do with whether you’d be a great police officer.””

If we’re going to have mandatory requirements? These people seem uncertain about that. Also, the above criteria are VERY important in selecting police recruits.

(8) Assuming the claims of a culture of harassment are true — fire any and all people engaging in behaviour and focus on building a force with better decency. Don’t eliminate standards. This is sort of like having Problem “A”, and coming up with Solution “B”.

(9) Why change the way you do business? Again, terminate the bad apples, but don’t make it open-recruitment under the guide of ”inclusiveness”.

(10) An interesting point is made: in an era where technology and crime is becoming more sophisticated, do we want to be LOWERING our IQ entry requirements?

(11) Regarding the obsession with Gender-Based Analysis: no one is saying that women should not be police officers. Rather, their abilities should be valued more, and the focus on being women should be stopped. This is a frequent straw-man lefties use: assume any difference in stats is due to discrimination, and not due to personal choices.

4. Moronic To The Extreme

This quote says it all:


“We need to stop assuming there’s only one kind of person who belongs in policing,” she said in an interview with CBC News.

The challenge for us going forward is looking at diversity and inclusion as seriously as we look at security.

– Vaughn Charlton

Yes, we need to focusing on diversity and inclusion as much as security. So, people with criminal records, poor credit, low IQ, lack of commitment, poor hearing/vision, etc…. are just “another form of diversity”?

Enough of the endless pandering. Simply hire good quality recruits. If needed, make the compensation and benefits package more attractive. Offer flexibility in work locations. Don’t water down the standards.

Again, pretty difficult to parody this article.