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

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

1. Debunking The Climate Change Scam

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

2. Important Links

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

3. Guilbeault A Lobbyist For Greenpeace

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

4. Guilbeault A Lobbyist For Équiterre

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

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

5. Équiterre A Registered Canadian Charity

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

6. David Suzuki Foundation Lobbies Guilbeault

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

7. Climate Action Network Lobbies Guilbeault

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

8. Environmental Defence Canada Lobbies

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

9. Cycle Capital Management, Lobbying

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

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

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

10. Did Guilbeault Really Leave The Movement?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1. The Media Is Not Loyal To The Public

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

2. Important Links

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

3. Anti-Disinfo Just Another Gov’t Program

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4. Groups That Are Receiving The Money

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

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

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

5. Emergency Support Fund For Organizations

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

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

6. International Engagement Strategy

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

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

7. Public Policy Forum

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

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

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

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

8. Peter Donolo: Longtime Liberal Strategist

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

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

9. Kathleen Monk: Longtime NDP Operative

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

She is now a Board Member at CIVIX.

10. Robert Asselin: Ex-Trudeau Operative

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

Currently, he is a Board Member of CIVIX.

11. Elizabeth Dubois: Assistant To Liberal MP

>

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

Now, Dubois is a Board Member at CIVIX.

12. Rachel Curran: Harper Operative

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

13. Francis LeBlanc: Ex-Liberal MP

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

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

14. Megan Beretta: Ties To Several Groups

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

15. Giroux, Clifford: Ex-Mulroney Operatives

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

16. News Media Canada On Disinformation

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

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

17. Politics Mixing With Media Fact Checking

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

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

TSCE #13(D): Forums of Parliamentarians on Population and Development, Global Alliance To Kill Babies

New Zealand announced in March 2020 that it was drastically loosening its abortion laws. In the middle of a “pandemic”, the priority is making it easier to kill babies. As horrible and Satanic as Jacinda Ardern is, there are much bigger problems that just her.

1. Trafficking, Smuggling, Child Exploitation

While abortion is trumpeted as a “human right” in Western societies, the obvious questions have to be asked: Why is it a human right? Who are these groups benefiting financially, and why are so they so fiercely against free speech? Will the organs be trafficked afterwards? And aren’t these groups just a little bit too coordinated?

2. Important Links

New Zealand Bill To Water Down Abortion Laws
Parliamentarians Against Human Trafficking
Family Planning New Zealand
NZPPD (Parliamentarians On Population & Dev), New Chair
Australian Parliamentary Group on Population and Development
Australia’s Global Network
Canadian Ass’n Of Parliamentarians On Population & Development
European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual & Reproductive Rights
Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development (AFPPD)
NZPPD’s Facebook Page
Family Planning New Zealand’s Twitter Account
Life News: NZ Pushing Sex-Ed On 5 Year Olds
WHO On Population And Reproductive Rights
1994 Cairo Conference On Population Demoraphics
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem: Protect Down Babies

CLICK HERE, for UN Genocide Prevention/Punishment Convention.
CLICK HERE, for Barcelona Declaration & Kalergi Plan.
CLICK HERE, for UN Kalergi Plan (population replacement).
CLICK HERE, for UN replacement efforts since 1974.
CLICK HERE, for tracing steps of UN replacement agenda.

3. Cognitive Dissonance On Human Trafficking

Have to love the mental gymnastics here: Parliamentarians “claim” that they oppose human trafficking. However, there are also a lot of them who see no issue with promoting mass abortions. After all, those organs are often sold to others. It’s human trafficking, just on a piecemeal basis.

4. Abortion Aids Population Replacement Agenda

One thing to keep in mind, many of the same people pushing for fewer local births are also advocating increased immigration rates. These seemingly contradictory steps seem counterintuitive at first.

[1] Have less children here, more abortions
[2] More migration because of declining birth rate.

In short, this is the population replacement agenda. Get locals having few (or no) children, and then use it as a pretext for bringing more people over. The same group who touts abortion as a “human right” also champions “replacement migration”, to fix declining populations.

5. NZ Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development

New Zealand Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development (NZPPD)
The New Zealand Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development (NZPPD) is open to any New Zealand MP and focuses its work mainly in the Pacific. The group looks at issues around sexual and reproductive health, women’s rights, and development issues.
.
The group was established in 1998 in response to the International Conference on Population and Development and its programme of action.
.
Barbara Kuriger MP is the current Chair of the group, with Family Planning acting as its secretariat.
.
Follow the group’s Facebook page for more information and updates.

Apparently, working towards the destruction of the family, and the abortions of girls — who would grow up to become women — is considered women’s rights, empowerment, and feminism. It’s difficult to grasp who such a harmful ideology can be passed off as something beneficial to society.

6. Australian Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development

The Australian Parliamentary Group on Population and Development is part of a regional network of similar groups – the Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development, and works with other similar parliamentary groups around the globe.

The Australian Parliamentary Group on Population and Development, as a cross-party group, has for 25 years worked collaboratively to champion gender equality, and sexual and reproductive health and rights in international development.

The APGPD’s remit is guided by the Sustainable Development Goals and the landmark 1994 International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action, which recognise gender equality and women’s empowerment as global priorities, integral to eradicating deprivation and injustice.

This group’s agenda, which includes a pro-abortion stance, is in line with the UN Sustainable Development Agenda. It’s alarming to see this nonchalant attitude towards the lives of the most vulnerable.

7. Canadian Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development

The Canadian Association of Parliamentarians on Population and Development (CAPPD) provides a forum for the exchange of ideas on population, sexual and reproductive health, human rights and development issues. Formed in 1997, CAPPD is open to all sitting Senators and Members of Parliament.

CAPPD coordinates efforts with several parliamentary associations throughout Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe to encourage governments to keep their commitments to reproductive health and women’s rights, as agreed by 179 countries at the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo, Egypt.

A group of politicians in Canada are also committed to the agenda. Just another branch of the global alliance to promote this depopulation agenda.

  • Pam Damoff
  • Hedy Fry
  • Irene Mathyssen
  • Elizabeth May
  • Marilou McPhedran
  • Raj Saini
  • Anita Vandenbeld

These are sitting Members of Parliament from the Greens, NDP and Liberal Parties. A cross-party commitment to making “reproductive services” available to all.

8. EU Forum for Sexual & Reproductive Rights

We are stronger when we speak with a single voice. Amplifying the unified voice of MPs committed to SRHR is central to our mission. EPF provides a venue for parliamentarians to coordinate common statements on international developments related to SRHR.

Typically, these statements urge action from governments and international organisatons; or call on states to place women’s empowerment at the centre of key international agreements.

Over the years, EPF has built good relations with SRHR champions through the European All-Party Parliamentary Groups, the European Parliament working group MEPs for SRR and the Global Parliamentary Alliance for Health, Rights and Development.

Within the European Union, there are efforts to get pro-abortion politicians together in order to promote what they call “human rights”. A major “right” as they call it, is the right to abortion.

9. Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development

The Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development (AFPPD) is a regional non-governmental organization based in Bangkok, Thailand. AFPPD serves as a coordinating body of 30 National Committees of Parliamentarians on Population and Development.

AFPPD engages with parliamentarians from Asia and the Pacific to champion policies on population and development. AFPPD educates, motivates, involves, and mobilizes parliamentarians on the linkages between increasing population and development issues such as reproductive health, family planning, food security, water resources, sustainable development, environment, ageing, urbanization, migration, HIV/AIDS, and gender equality.

Asian politicians are also being consulted by this “population and development” group, which pushes for more abortion, and easier access to it.

10. Population Summit In Cairo, 1994

Referring to the 1994 Cairo Conference on Population and Development, she said that revolution acknowledged that people –- women and men, mothers and fathers –- and not governments were the best judges of how many children to bring into the world, and where and when. A broader theme that ran through the Conference was the realization that, in talking about curtailing population growth and the complex relationships between population and development, or population and the protection of the environment, women had to be a central factor.

At “Cairo+10” [the 10-year anniversary of Cairo], she said, the same wide range of people and opinions heard in Cairo were beginning to be heard again. Some inside the United Nations system feared that a lobby led by an unlikely combination of conservative Middle Eastern nations, the United States and the Holy See would mount a major drive to dilute or undo the language. Others were more optimistic, as Cairo had been a seismic shift not easily reversed.

The Commission also addressed its agenda item “Programme implementation and future programme of work of the Secretariat in the field of population”. Mr. Chamie, introducing the Secretary-General’s report on “Programme implementation and progress of work in the field of population in 2003: Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs” (document E/CN.9/2004/5), and a note by the Secretary-General on the “Proposed strategic framework for the period 2006-2007” (E/CN.9/2004/6), said demographics were not merely about numbers. It was about development of human society. Development, in turn, related to low mortality, which was an indicator of the well-being of a society.

He then highlighted several activities of the Population Division, including production of a document on world population policies, a report on urbanization and two wall charts –- one on urban agglomerations and one on urban/rural movements. A chart on world contraceptive use was also available, he said, as well as an extensive database on trends in marriage since 1960.

A major idea of the 1994 Conference was to get countries having less children, and artificially drive down the birth rate. Instead, the focus would be on a better quality of life for those who were there. Abortion and contraception were heavily promoted as population control methods.

But remember: the United Nations (and many NGOs), promote a lower birth rate in Developed Nations. They also call for a replacement population to be imported to make up the difference.

This sort of thing should be considered genocide, should it not?

And why the recent focus on allowing later and later abortions? It wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that the organs would be more developed, and thus worth more money, would it?

11. South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem urged state lawmakers Tuesday to protect unborn babies with Down syndrome from discrimination by passing new pro-life legislation.

In her state of the state address, the pro-life Republican governor said legislation to ban abortions on unborn babies based on a Down syndrome diagnosis will be one of her top priorities for the year.

“Children with Down Syndrome are a gift to us all,” she wrote on Twitter. “I am asking the South Dakota legislature to pass a law that bans the abortion of a preborn child, just because that child is diagnosed with Down Syndrome. We must stand for the right to life of every preborn child.”

Prior to her address, Noem appeared on Fox and Friends with Fox News contributor Rachel Campos-Duffy and her husband, former Wisconsin Congressman Sean Duffy, and their daughter Valentina who has Down syndrome.

Let’s end this on a positive note: the Governor of South Dakota recently made a public call to protect babies with Down Syndrome from being targeted for abortion. Someone who actually values life.

IBC #9: BIS, Central Banks On Digital Currency Implementation

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

1. More On The International Banking Cartel

For more on the banking cartel, check this page. The Canadian Government, like so many others, has sold out the independence and sovereignty of its monetary system to foreign interests. BIS, like its central banks, exceed their agenda and try to influence other social agendas. See who is really controlling things, and the common lies that politicians and media figures tell. Now, the bankers work with the climate mafia and pandemic pushers to promote control and debt slavery.

2. Important Links

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

3. BIS Working Our Details Of Digital Currency

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

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

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

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

4. The Fraud Of Private Central Banking

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

5. Digital Currency Openly Discussed

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

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

6. Bank For Int’l Settlements Innovation Hub

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

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

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

7. Privacy Element Missing From Discussion

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

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

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

CV #4(C): Crestview Strategy’s Ashton Arsenault Takes Over Lobbying For GAVI

The Gates Foundation lobbies the Canadian Government, but not directly. It uses proxies. GAVI (the Global Vaccine Alliance), is heavily funded by Gates, and it employs a lobbying firm called Crestview Strategy. Crestview was co-founded by Rob Silver, husband of Katie Telford, and is well connected. Lobbyists are dispatched to Ottawa to try to get more taxpayer money.

The most recent to sign up is Ashton Arsenault.

Keep in mind, lobbying is legal (for the most part), as long as all meetings are documented, and available to the public. Doesn’t make it any less underhanded though.

1. Ashton Arsenault Latest Shill For GAVI

Ashton Arsenault is a senior consultant with Crestview Strategy based out of the Ottawa office.

Prior to joining Crestview, Ashton worked as a political aid on Parliament Hill where he was responsible for parliamentary affairs and issues management for the Minister of National Revenue. Prior to that, he worked as a legislative researcher in the Official Opposition Office in Prince Edward Island. He continues to volunteer in electoral politics at the federal level.

Ashton has been involved in politics for several years, serving as a campaign manager for a Conservative candidate in the 2015 General Election. As well, he served as the University of Prince Edward Island’s Chair of Council from 2011-2012.

Ashton holds a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from the University of Prince Edward Island and a Master of Political Management from Carleton University in Ottawa.

Zakery Blais worked for (Liberal) MP David Lametti, and Jason Clarke volunteered for (Liberal) candidates in Ottawa for the 2015 election. Arsenault has ties to the Conservative Party of Canada, showing that this is not simply a partisan issue.

Make no mistake, lobbying is a very effective way for corporations to get what they want. In total, GAVI has secured over $1 billion in funding, from different administrations.

2. Arsenault Also Represents Medicago

Arsenault is also lobbying on behalf of Medicago, which is working with GlaxoSmithKline to develop a plant-based vaccine for the coronavirus.

3. Arsenault Frequently A CPC Talking Head

Ashton Arsenault regularly appears on television in order to sell CPC talking points to a gullible crowd. This is, of course, not unique to Conservatives. All of these “debates” on screen are arranged to address pre-planned scripts for the public.

Arsenault has donated several times to the Conservative Party of Canada, but the amounts aren’t enough to draw much attention.

4. Arsenault Replaces Zakery Blais

Zakery Blais was previously a lobbyist for Crestview Strategy, on behalf of GAVI. He appears to have since left the firm. Blais also worked for David Lametti (yes, the sitting Attorney General), back when he was a Parliamentary Secretary.

5. What Else Crestview Strategy Does

Drive winning arguments.
.
Crestview Strategy effectively represents the interests of corporations, not-for-profits and industry associations to achieve results with governments around the world.
.
No longer is a winning outcome based on ‘who you know’ or the ‘magic meeting’. It is about contributing to the policy process, presenting a case that is supported by authentic community voices, verified impact and compelling insight. And getting in front of the right decision makers and opinion leaders to make that case.

Drive winning engagement.
.
We build and run campaigns that mobilize support and impact change for both political and corporate clients.
.
Mobilization campaigns are premised on the simple fact that for elected officials, the single most influential voice in shaping their decision is that of their local voters, influencers, and community leaders.
.
The benefits of mobilization go beyond just a one-off campaign. The long-term goal of mobilization is to increase engagement potential, provide greater value for members, and to increase the share of voice and influence outcomes.

Keep in mind that firms like Crestview Strategy employ operatives who cover multiple parties. By doing this, it ensures that influence peddling will be effective, regardless of who officially sits in power. It’s important to note that few politicians actually make their own decisions.

(1) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=368098&regId=906375
(2) https://www.crestviewstrategy.ca/ashton-arsenault
(3) https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashton-arsenault-3a241056/
(4) https://archive.is/dQIoW
(5) https://www.linkedin.com/in/zakery-blais-13a76b118/
(6) https://archive.is/tybUn

CV #30(C): AstraZeneca, Another Candidate To Vaccinate Canadians, And The World

AstraZeneca is one of the pharmaceutical companies looking to sell large quantities of vaccines to Canada, for a virus that has a 99% survival rate. One has to wonder what the public isn’t being told.

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. AstraZeneca Lobbied M-132 Cmte Vice-Chair

Motion Text
That the Standing Committee on Health be instructed to undertake a study on ways of increasing benefits to the public resulting from federally funded health research, with the goals of lowering drugs costs and increasing access to medicines, both in Canada and globally; and that the Committee report its findings and recommendations to the House no later than one year from the time this motion is adopted.

Remember Motion M-132? It was the Motion introduced in 2017 to finance drugs and drug research both for Canada and the world. See here and here. Marilyn Gladu was the Vice-Chair on that Committee, and hence, lobbying her would carry significant weight.

3. David Lametti Lobbied By AstraZeneca

During the years of 2016 to 2018, David Lametti was a Parliamentary Secretary the Minister of Innovation, Science, and Economic Development. Since early 2019, however, he has been the Attorney General of Canada.

As addressed here, Zakery Blais was an Assistant to Lametti when he was a Parliamentary Secretary. Now, he works for the lobbying firm, Crestview Strategy, which was co-Founded by Rob Silver, Katie Telford’s husband. Blais has been a lobbyist pushing for public money for his then client, GAVI

4. “Global Leader”, Michelle Rempel-Garner

Michelle holds a degree in economics. Highlights of her many honours include being named one of Canada’s Top 100 Most Powerful Women by the Women’s Executive Network, Calgary’s “Top 40 under 40”, and being named twice by Maclean’s Magazine as their Parliamentarian of the Year – Rising Star calling her “one of the government’s most impressive performers.” Michelle is also a Young Global Leader, invited to be so by the World Economic Forum. The World Economic Forum calls the Forum of Young Global Leaders a “unique and diverse community of the world’s most outstanding, next generation leaders.” Rempel was also recently named one of “Alberta’s 50 Most Influential People”.

Although the link seems disabled, Rempel is held in high regards by the World Economic Forum. She is part of the Young Global leaders. This raises the legitimate question of who she really serves. Information is also available on her website.

When Rempel-Garner openly and publicly calls for the entire Canadian population to be vaccinated, who’s really speaking? Is it her, or the drug companies who lobby her?

5. AZ Pushing Canada For GLOBAL Pharma

Canada’s Access to Medicines Regime provides a way for the world’s developing and least-developed countries to import high-quality drugs and medical devices at a lower cost to treat the diseases that bring suffering to their citizens. It is one part of the Government of Canada’s broader strategy to assist countries in their struggle against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other diseases.

Just so we’re clear on what’s going on, AstraZeneca is pushing for Canada to buy vaccines so that they can be provided at little or no cost to the 3rd World. In short, Canadian taxpayers would be on the hook for vaccinating other countries. Of course, this is in addition to getting a domestic supply.

And what about their lobbyists over the years?

Public offices held: Tara Bingham
Executive Assistant and Special Assistant for Parliamentary Affairs & Communications, Hon. Belinda Stronach, M.P., 2004-2005
Parliamentary Assistant, Grant McNally, M.P., 1999-2004
Researcher, Office of the Leader of the Opposition, Preston Manning, M.P., 1997-1999

Public offices held: William Charnetski
Special Advisor, The Honourable Allan Rock, Q.C., P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, 1995-1996
Executive Assistant, William C. Graham, Q.C., Member of Parliament (Rosedale), 1993-1995

Public offices held: Marie-Chantale Lepine
Director of Communications, Rt. Hon. Joe Clark, M.P., 2001-2002

Ties to both the Liberal Party of Canada, and the Conservatives. In this case, it doesn’t seem to matter who is in power.

6. Who Are AstraZeneca’s Lobbyists?

https://archive.is/ypVdu

7. More Lobbying By AstraZeneca

From the Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario Registries.

8. Who Runs AstraZeneca?

  • Pascal Soriot, Executive Director and CEO
  • Marc Dunoyer, Executive Director and CFO
  • Katarina Ageborg, Executive Vice-President, Sustainability and Chief Compliance Officer; President AstraZeneca AB, Sweden
  • José Baselga, Executive Vice-President, Oncology R&D
  • Pam Cheng, Executive Vice-President, Operations and Information Technology
  • Ruud Dobber, Executive Vice-President, BioPharmaceuticals Business Unit
  • David Fredrickson, Executive Vice-President, Oncology Business Unit
  • Menelas (Mene) Pangalos, Executive Vice-President, BioPharmaceuticals R&D
  • Jeff Pott, Executive Vice-President, Human Resources and General Counsel
  • Iskra Reic, Executive Vice-President, Europe and Canada
  • Leon Wang, Executive Vice-President, International

https://www.astrazeneca.com/our-company/leadership.html

9. AstraZeneca Ordered To Pay Money

AstraZeneca LP, a pharmaceutical manufacturer based in Delaware, has agreed to pay the government $7.9 million to settle allegations that it engaged in a kickback scheme in violation of the False Claims Act, the Justice Department announced today. AstraZeneca markets and sells pharmaceutical products in the United States, including a drug sold under the trade name Nexium.

“We will continue to pursue pharmaceutical companies that pay kickbacks to pharmacy benefit managers,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Hidden financial agreements between drug manufacturers and pharmacy benefit managers can improperly influence which drugs are available to patients and the price paid for drugs.”

The settlement resolves allegations that AstraZeneca agreed to provide remuneration to Medco Health Solutions, a pharmacy benefit manager, in exchange for Medco maintaining Nexium’s “sole and exclusive” status on certain Medco formularies and through other marketing activities related to those Medco formularies. The United States alleged that AstraZeneca provided some or all of the remuneration to Medco through price concessions on drugs other than Nexium, namely on Prilosec, Toprol XL and Plendil. The United States contended that this kickback arrangement between AstraZeneca and Medco violated the Federal Anti-Kickback statute, and thereby caused the submission of false or fraudulent claims for Nexium to the Retiree Drug Subsidy Program.

In 2003, AstraZeneca had to pay $355 million to resolve criminal charges and civil liabilities related to marketing practices and drug pricing.

In 2010, AstraZeneca was forced to pay $520 million to for a fraud case that involved allegations of bribery and kickbacks in order to push schizophrenic medications.

In 2015, AstraZeneca was ordered to pay $7.9 million in a kickback scheme. Seems that the finances weren’t exactly on the level.

AstraZeneca has also been in Canadian courts many times, often involving patents and intellectual property disputes.