Note: these are not, by any means, all of the immigrant/refugee groups operating in Canada. Nor are these all of the groups who have an agenda. However, they are the main players waging war against Canadians in our courts.
Amnesty International is a global movement of more than 7 million people who take injustice personally. We are campaigning for a world where human rights are enjoyed by all.
We are funded by members and people like you. We are independent of any political ideology, economic interest or religion. No government is beyond scrutiny. No situation is beyond hope.
Few would have predicted when we started that torturers would become international outlaws. That most countries would abolish the death penalty. And seemingly untouchable dictators would be made to answer for their crimes.
While this all sounds noble, let’s get specific. Let’s address their attitudes towards migrants and refuges (whom they often blur together).
What is Amnesty’s position on migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers?
We campaign for a world where human rights can be enjoyed by everyone, no matter what situation they are in. Amnesty has championed the human rights of refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants for decades.
We campaign to make sure governments honour their shared responsibility to protect the rights of refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants. We condemn any policies and practices that undermine the rights of people on the move.
And in case you thought it was hyperbolic to claim that Amnesty International blurs the line between refugees and migrants, consider the following:
Who is a migrant?
There is no internationally accepted legal definition of a migrant. Like most agencies and organizations, we at Amnesty International understand migrants to be people staying outside their country of origin, who are not asylum-seekers or refugees.
Some migrants leave their country because they want to work, study or join family, for example. Others feel they must leave because of poverty, political unrest, gang violence, natural disasters or other serious circumstances that exist there.
Lots of people don’t fit the legal definition of a refugee but could nevertheless be in danger if they went home. It is important to understand that, just because migrants do not flee persecution, they are still entitled to have all their human rights protected and respected, regardless of the status they have in the country they moved to. Governments must protect all migrants from racist and xenophobic violence, exploitation and forced labour. Migrants should never be detained or forced to return to their countries without a legitimate reason.
Established in 1875, B’nai Brith Canada is Canadian Jewry’s most senior human rights advocacy organization and is the only national, independent voice of Jewish Canadians.
Its dedicated volunteers and professional staff are engaged in strong pro-Israel advocacy, as well as combating anti-Semitism, bigotry, and racism in Canada and abroad. B’nai Brith Canada’s wide-ranging educational and social programming, community and volunteer services, housing, and human rights initiatives span coast to coast and reflect the organization’s commitment to “People Helping People.”
B’nai Brith Canada’s Chief Executive Officer Michael Mostyn has guided the organization since taking over in 2014. In 2007, Embassy Magazine, Canada’s highly acclaimed foreign policy weekly, named B’nai Brith Canada the major Jewish non-governmental organization (NGO) with influence in the foreign policy field.
Just as B’nai Brith Canada has grown and evolved over the years in response to changing needs, so has Canadian Jewry undergone many transformations. Throughout, B’nai Brith Canada has employed its successful advocacy model of strong community and results-oriented grassroots activism.
Yes, there is an entire organization devoted to helping refugees into Canada, and they are lawyers.
Founded in 2011, the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers (CARL) serves as an informed national voice on refugee law and the human rights of refugees and forced migrants, and promotes just and consistent practices in the treatment of refugees in Canada. CARL carries out its work promoting the human rights of refugees in the courts, before parliamentary committees, in the media, among its membership via bi-annual conferences, and elsewhere in the public sphere.
CARL’s membership includes over 300 lawyers, academics and law students from across Canada. Relying on the broad experience of this membership, CARL has a mandate to research, litigate and advocate on refugee rights, forced migrants and related issues. CARL recognizes that climate change is a major contributor to forced migration.
This was covered in previous articles, but is worth an honourable mention. Although working in the political sphere, CIJA has become very influential in Canadian law, including immigration and refugee law.
In the interests of fairness, we cannot also omit the lobbying efforts of various ISLAMIC groups trying to engage in “Hijrah” (conquest by immigration). Plenty of foreign actors who do not have Canadians’ best interests at heart.
9. Know Your Enemies
These are just some of the players in the war to open Canada’s borders and to replace our population, society, culture, and heritage.
While to some, it may seem honourable what they do, don’t dismiss the long term impacts.
There is tons of information on these 3 articles. Rather than rehashing or recreating what they have, here are the links to look for yourself.
3. Coronavirus Patent Application in 2015 (Pirbright)
This may come across as a conspiracy theory (and it sounds like one), but let’s take a look into the patent that Pirbright Institute recently obtained.
Patent number: 10130701
Filed: Jul 23, 2015
Date of Patent: Nov 20, 2018
Patent Publication Number: 20170216427 Assignee: THE PIRBRIGHT INSTITUTE (Woking, Pirbright)
Inventors: Erica Bickerton (Woking), Sarah Keep (Woking), Paul Britton (Woking)
Primary Examiner: Bao Q Li
Application Number: 15/328,179
Jul 23, 2015 – THE PIRBRIGHT INSTITUTE
The present invention provides a live, attenuated coronavirus comprising a variant replicase gene encoding polyproteins comprising a mutation in one or more of non-structural protein(s) (nsp)-10, nsp-14, nsp-15 or nsp-16. The coronavirus may be used as a vaccine for treating and/or preventing a disease, such as infectious bronchitis, in a subject.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to an attenuated coronavirus comprising a variant replicase gene, which causes the virus to have reduced pathogenicity. The present invention also relates to the use of such a coronavirus in a vaccine to prevent and/or treat a disease.
Coronaviruses are divided into four groups, as shown below:
Canine coronavirus (CCoV)
Feline coronavirus (FeCoV)
Human coronavirus 229E (HCoV-229E)
Porcine epidemic diarrhoea virus (PEDV)
Transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV)
Human Coronavirus NL63 (NL or New Haven)
Bovine coronavirus (BCoV)
Canine respiratory coronavirus (CRCoV)—Common in SE Asia and Micronesia
Human coronavirus OC43 (HCoV-OC43)
Mouse hepatitis virus (MHV)
Porcine haemagglutinating encephalomyelitis virus (HEV)
Rat coronavirus (Roy). Rat Coronavirus is quite prevalent in Eastern Australia where, as of March/April 2008, it has been found among native and feral rodent colonies.
(No common name as of yet) (HCoV-HKU1)
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)
Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV)
Infectious bronchitis virus (IBV)
Turkey coronavirus (Bluecomb disease virus)
Guinea fowl coronavirus
Bulbul coronavirus (BuCoV)
Thrush coronavirus (ThCoV)
Munia coronavirus (MuCoV)
Porcine coronavirus (PorCov) HKU15
More information is available here, but the point is this: the coronaviruses were (allegedly) modified to help cure other diseases, such as bronchitis.
The variant replicase gene of the coronavirus of the present invention may be derived from an alphacoronavirus such as TGEV; a betacoronavirus such as MHV; or a gammacoronavirus such as IBV.
As used herein the term “derived from” means that the replicase gene comprises substantially the same nucleotide sequence as the wild-type replicase gene of the relevant coronavirus. For example, the variant replicase gene of the present invention may have up to 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 98% or 99% identity with the wild type replicase sequence. The variant coronavirus replicase gene encodes a protein comprising a mutation in one or more of non-structural protein (nsp)-10, nsp-14, nsp-15 or nsp-16 when compared to the wild-type sequence of the non-structural protein.
This new version is apparently a derivative of an alpha, beta, or gamma coronavirus already in existence. I’ve been told this Wuhan coronavirus has nothing to do with Pirbright’s patent or work. Although the patent information states that the patented version may contain 80-99% of the wildtype replicase sequence.
The variant is essentially a mutation in 1 (or more) non-structural proteins.
Still, one heck of a coincidence to be doing so much research into a specific area and then something else emerges. It will become apparent why soon.
4. Pirbright Institute’s Other Patents
Attenuated African swine fever virus vaccine
Patent number: 10507237
Abstract: The present invention provides an attenuated African Swine Fever (ASF) virus which lacks a functional version of the following genes: multigene-family 360 genes 9L, 10L, 11L, 12L, 13L and 14L; and multigene-family 505 genes 1R, 2R, 3R and 4R. The invention further provides an attenuated African Swine Fever (ASF) virus which lacks a functional version of the DP148R gene. The present invention also provides a vaccine comprising such an attenuated virus and its use to prevent ASF. Further, the invention relates to intranasal administration of an attenuated ASF virus.
Filed: June 19, 2015
Date of Patent: December 17, 2019
Assignee: The Pirbright Institute
Inventors: Charles Abrams, Ana-Luisa Reis, Chris Netherton, Linda Dixon, Dave Chapman, Pedro Sanchez-Cordon
Stabilised FMDV capsids
Patent number: 10294277
Abstract: The present invention relates to the stabilization of foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) capsids, by specific substitution of amino acids in a specific region of FMDV VP2. The invention provides stabilized FMDV capsids and vaccines against FMD.
Filed: March 25, 2014
Date of Patent: May 21, 2019
Assignee: The Pirbright Institute
Inventors: Abhay Kotecha, David Stuart, Elizabeth Fry, Robert Esnouf
Stabilised FMDV Capsids
Publication number: 20190135874
Abstract: The present invention relates to the stabilisation of foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) capsids, by specific substitution of amino acids in a specific region of FMDV VP2. The invention provides stabilised FMDV capsids and vaccines against FMD.
Filed: January 17, 2019
Publication date: May 9, 2019
Applicant: Pirbright Institute
Inventors: Abhay Kotecha, David Stuart, Elizabeth Fry, Robert Esnouf
Chicken cells for improved virus production
Patent number: 10202578
Abstract: The present Invention provides as avian cell in which the expression or activity of one or more of the following genes, or a homologue thereof: Chicken IFITM 1 (SEQ ID No. 1); Chicken IFITM2 (SEQ ID No. 2) and Chicken IFITM3 (SEQ ID No. 3) is reduced. The invention also provides methods for passaging viruses in avian cells, embryos and/or avian cell lines which have reduced expression of one or more IFITM genes and methods which involve investigating the sequence of one or more of the following genes, or a homologue thereof: Chicken IFITM1 (SEQ ID No. 1); Chicken IFITM2 (SEQ ID No. 2) and Chicken IFITM3 (SEQ ID No. 3).
Filed: June 3, 2014
Date of Patent: February 12, 2019
Assignee: THE PIRBRIGHT INSTITUTE
Inventors: Mark Fife, Mark Gibson
That is just a few patents that The Pirbright Institute has. Now it seems harmless enough. But what happens if or when one of their creations becomes weaponized and turned against the public?
5. Gates Foundation Finances Pirbright Inst.
Researchers from The Pirbright Institute have been awarded US $5.5 million by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to establish a Livestock Antibody Hub aimed at improving animal and human health globally. The ambitious programme of work will see extensive collaboration between multiple UK research organisations in order to utilise research outcomes in livestock disease and immunology to support human health as part of the ‘One Health’ agenda.
Six leading scientists from Pirbright will be involved in the project, including Professor John Hammond, Professor Venugopal Nair, Dr Simon Graham, Dr Elma Tchilian, Professor Munir Iqbal and Dr Erica Bickerton. Their combined expert knowledge will drive the study of cattle, pig and poultry antibody responses at high resolution to expand our understanding of protective immunity in species that can also be used as models for a range of human infectious diseases.
The aim is to use Pirbright’s expertise in livestock viral diseases, cutting-edge technology and unique high-containment facilities to bring antibody discovery, manipulation and testing up to the benchmark already seen in the immunological field for rodents and humans. “New tools have given us the opportunity to utilise these detailed antibody responses to make the next generation of vaccines and therapies” said research lead Professor Hammond.
This highly collaborative work will address the needs of the livestock research community whilst bridging the requirements of the vaccine industry. A number of work programmes will focus on studying B cells and antibodies at multiple scales including gene expression, single cell function and the entire antibody response.
Findings from this research will be used to drive vaccine selection and design and test antibody therapies, “which will improve animal health and ultimately human health, as well as ensuring the security of our food supply”, finished Professor Hammond. Pirbright will ultimately act as a ‘Hub’ able to provide specific methods, access to animal models and the associated expertise to drive antibody research within the ‘One Health’ agenda.
“This is the single biggest investment in the immunology of livestock in the UK from an international funder, and the British Society for Immunology will do all we can to support this collaborative initiative and help maximise its impact for the benefit of human and animal health”, commented Dr Doug Brown, Chief Executive of the British Society for Immunology
A major contributor to Pirbright Institute is the Gates Foundation, headed by Bill and Melinda Gates. Yes, those Gates. But why is that an issue? What’s wrong with a wealthy couple contributing to help prevent infectious diseases?
Let’s put it this way: Bill Gates has some views that are (mildly) controversial. He has gone on record with comments that suggest be supports human depopulation — reducing the number of people on Earth. Could this be a way to accomplish that goal?
6. Cull The Population To Save Planet?
(Bill Gates and depopulation, from 2011, clip from video)
(Bill Gates and depopulation, from 2011, entire video)
(Bill Gates, improved health care, overpopulation)
(Bill Gates: health and population correlation)
(Bill Gates: vaccines and Ebola virus)
Yes, Gates flouts the sales pitch that improving health results in less population. His stated reasoning is that people will simply have less children if they know the kids are more likely to survive into adulthood.
Problem is, that hasn’t fared out. Look at Africa and the Middle East. Improvements in health have lead to an exploding population. Granted, their goal (those who are Muslim) is to outbreed and eventually overrun every nation on Earth. But the population drop Gates claims simply isn’t a reality.
Now, is this simply an attitude that Bill Gates has, or has he taken any steps to estimate how the population could be reduced? Instead of lowering birth rates, perhaps there is a simpler and more direct method.
7. Bill Gates Running “Death Scenario”
A viral pandemic could kill 65 million people
Toner’s simulation imagined a fictional virus called CAPS. The analysis, part of a collaboration with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, looked at what would happen if a pandemic originated in Brazil’s pig farms. (The Wuhan virus originated in a seafood market that sold live animals.)
The virus in Toner’s simulation would be resistant to any modern vaccine. It would be deadlier than SARS, but about as easy to catch as the flu.
The pretend outbreak started small: Farmers began coming down with symptoms that resembled the flu or pneumonia. From there, the virus spread to crowded and impoverished urban neighborhoods in South America.
Flights were canceled, and travel bookings dipped by 45%. People disseminated false information on social media.
After six months, the virus had spread around the globe. A year later, it had killed 65 million people.
Sure, this is all just a simulation. It’s just an academic exercise.
Of course, for people like Bill Gates, who claim that Carbon Dioxide has to be cut to save the planet, one has to wonder what his actual goals are. As outlined extensively in the CLIMATE CHANGE SCAM series, Carbon Dioxide isn’t pollution. This whole “industry” is very much a cash grab.
CLICK HERE, for Part II, the Paris Accord. CLICK HERE, for Part III, Saskatchewan Appeals Court Reference. CLICK HERE, for Part IV, Controlled Opposition to Carbon Tax. CLICK HERE, for Part V, UN New Development Funding. CLICK HERE, for Part VI, Disruptive Innovation Framework. CLICK HERE, for Part VII, Blaming Arson On Climate Change. CLICK HERE, for Part VIII, Review Of Green New Deal. CLICK HERE, for Part VIII(II), Sunrise Movement & Green New Deal. CLICK HERE, for Part IX, Propaganda Techniques, Max Boykoff. CLICK HERE, for Part X, GG Pollution Pricing Act & Bill C-97. CLICK HERE, for Part XI, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai’s explanation of CCS. CLICK HERE, for Part XII, Joel Wood and Carbon tax “option”. CLICK HERE, for Part XIII, controlled opposition going to SCC. CLICK HERE, for Part XIV, Mark Carney’s new UN role. CLICK HERE, for Part XIV(II), Carney, CCX, Goldman, Central Banking. CLICK HERE, for UN global taxation efforts.
So why is Gates pushing an obviously false narrative? Why claim that improving the health of people in Africa and the Middle East will result in a reduced birthrate and lower population? Why claim that Carbon Dioxide is a pollution that will harm the planet?
Is it just a coincidence this “simulation” happened just months before the real thing? Or was this a calculated test run?
8. CBC: Nothing To See Here, People
Public Health Agency of Canada describes it as a possible ‘policy breach,’ no risk to Canadian public
Sure, just a policy breach. Just some minor bureaucratic error that went on. Surely nothing that the peons have to concern themselves with.
“All of this is unproven, but even microbiology, sometimes especially microbiology, can have issues that involve national security.”
It’s something the Canadian Security Intelligence Service has already warned about, said Leah West, who teaches national security law at Carleton’s Norman Paterson School of International Affairs.
“Canada is facing threats from foreign governments seeking to steal intellectual property and that could include state-funded research,” she said.
“The two big things I want to see is whether or not these individuals are charged with crimes by the RCMP …that will give us a lot of information about what is really at stake here.”
West is also interested in seeing how this plays out politically between Canada and the Chinese government.
Sure there’s nothing to worry about. China is a hostile country who kidnapped 2 of our citizens after we locked up one of their spies (Meng). But why should this, or anything else, prohibit the Chinese from getting such clearance into Canadian facilities?
Let’s be clear: diversity is a lie. The vast majority of people’s strongest ties are with those who they share an ethnic (racial) bond with. Letting Chinese nationals into confidential Canadian labs under the guise of “cooperation and diversity”, is coming national suicide.
One has to wonder if the Canadian Government is really trying to kill us with what they allow to happen
9. Depopulation The Real Goal?
This could all be an extremely wild and unlikely coincidence, but it’s difficult to take on the surface. Too much money at stake, and other nations have an agenda.
For people who (claim to) believe that there are too many people on the planet, and that climate change is inevitable, we must ask a question: what would they be willing to do to stop it?
Is potentially killing millions (or billions) of people a way to save the planet by cutting emissions? Even though the climate change scam is based on lies? There is more here than what the public is being told.
And while you’re at it, go check out Civilian Intelligence Network.
On a semi-serious ending, doesn’t the outbreak of Wuhan Coronavirus come across like this (fictional) movie series of Resident Evil?
It doesn’t really need much of an explanation. People should know who is really behind their media and how independent these organizations really are.
Taking Canada as an example: a lot of the “conservative” or right-leaning outfits are owned and controlled by Post Media. Yes, it is a virtual monopoly.
Also worth noting: many of the “right-leaning” think tanks are controlled by one organization, Atlas Network. The same people just resurface under different names. These groups help influence globalist policies such as mass migration and globalized trade.
And in going through the names, one ethnic group seemed to appear an awful lot, much more than its percentage of the population would suggest.
3. Post Media Owns A Lot
Here’s a quick rundown of some of the more mainstream media outlets in Canada. Most of these names should be familiar to people.
London Free Press
Of course, this doesn’t cover countless smaller publications that this media giant owns. Scary, just how many “voices” are controlled by one source. Now, let’s show the Postmedia “communities”. A much longer list, and many have their websites included.
Bow Valley Crag & Canyon (Banff)
The Cold Lake Sun
The Drayton Valley Western Review
The Fairview Post
Fort McMurray Today
The Grove Examiner (Spruce Grove)
The Hanna Herald
The High River Times
La Nouvelle Beaumont News (Beaumont)
The Leduc-Wetaskiwin County Market
The Mayerthorpe Freelancer
The Nanton News
The Peace Country Sun (Grande Prairie)
Peace River Record-Gazette
Pincher Creek Echo
The Record (Fort Saskatchewan)
The Sherwood Park News
The Stony Plain Reporter
The Vulcan Advocate
The Whitecourt Star
The Graphic (Portage la Prairie)
Herald Leader (Portage la Prairie)
The Interlake Spectator (Gimli)
The Morden Times
The Red River Valley Echo (Altona)
The Selkirk Journal
The Stonewall Argus & Teulon Times
The Valley Leader (Carman)
Brockville & Prescott This Week
Chatham-Kent This Week
The Complimentary (Cornwall)
Community Press (Belleville)
The County Weekly News (Picton)
The Courier Press (Wallaceburg)
The Delhi News-Record
The Elgin County Market (St. Thomas)
Exeter Lakeshore Times-Advance
Frontenac This Week
Goderich Super Saver
Grey Bruce This Week (Owen Sound)
Kenora Miner & News
The Kincardine News
Kingston This Week
Lakeshore Shopper (Simcoe-Tillsonburg)
The Mid-North Monitor (Espanola)
The Nugget Extra
Northern News (Kirkland Lake)
Northern News This Week(Kirkland Lake)
Oxford Review (Woodstock)
The Post (Hanover)
Sarnia & Lambton County This Week
Sault This Week (Sault Ste. Marie)
Seaforth Huron Expositor
Shoreline Beacon (Port Elgin)
Simcoe Reformer (TMC)
The Standard (Elliot Lake)
Strathroy Age Dispatch
Tecumseh Shoreline Week
The Standard Extra
The Tillsonburg News
The Timmins Times
The Trentonian (Trenton)
Weekender Times-Advance (Exeter)
West Elgin Chronicle
Windsor Star Review
Again, all of this is just what Post Media lists as owning. Not only the major news outlets, but many smaller “community” organizations as well. All of it is owned by one conglomerate. Speaks volumes for the independence and choice that exists in Canada.
4. Post Media Board Of Directors
Paul Godfrey (Executive Chair)
Mr. Godfrey is the Executive Chair of Postmedia. Previously Mr. Godfrey has served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Postmedia, President and Chief Executive Officer of National Post Inc., President and Chief Executive Officer of the Toronto Blue Jays Baseball Club, and spent 16 years with Sun Media Corporation, eventually taking the role of President and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Godfrey has a proud record of public service including a record four terms (11 years) as the Chairman of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto. He served as the Chairman of the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation from 2010 until 2013. He is Chairman of the board of RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust. He also serves on the board of Cargojet Inc. and serves as Vice Chairman of Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care.
Peter Sharpe (Lead Director)
Mr. Sharpe retired as President and Chief Executive Officer of Cadillac Fairview Corporation in 2010, having served with the company for over 25 years. Mr. Sharpe is currently a director of Morguard Corporation, First Industrial REIT (US), and Allied Property REIT. Mr. Sharpe is also a past Chairman and current Trustee of the International Council of Shopping Centers.
Andrew MacLeod (Director)
Mr. MacLeod is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Postmedia Network Inc. He joined Postmedia in 2014 as EVP and Chief Commercial Officer and served as President and Chief Operating Officer in 2017. Prior to joining Postmedia, Mr. MacLeod held a number of senior executive positions in the technology sector, including serving as the Senior Vice President & Regional Managing Director of North America at BlackBerry. Mr. MacLeod also currently serves as a Director on the board for Waterfront Toronto and Communitech. Mr. MacLeod is a graduate of Western University (BA).
John Bode (Director)
Mr. Bode is currently Chief Operating Officer at ReaderLink Distribution Services. Previously, Mr. Bode owned and operated a strategic consultancy practice focused on working with companies, primarily legacy print media companies, undertaking major transformation initiatives and transactions. Prior to his consultancy practice, Mr. Bode was Chief Financial Officer at Tribune Publishing.
Janet Ecker (Director)
Janet Ecker recently retired from the role of President and CEO of Toronto Financial Services Alliance, having served in the role for nearly 13 years. Ms. Ecker served as a member of provincial parliament in Ontario from 1995 to 2003 and held the portfolios of Minister of Finance, Minister of Education, Minister of Community and Social Services and Government House Leader. In 2002 she was the first woman to deliver a budget in Ontario.
In November 2016, Ms. Ecker was named a Member of the Order of Canada for being a leader in the financial industry.
Wendy Henkelman (Director)
Ms. Henkelman is a corporate director with extensive experience in all aspects of the finance function including accounting, treasury, taxation, information systems, internal controls and risk management. She has held executive positions in major oil and gas companies including the VP, Treasury and Compliance with Penn West Exploration and Country Tax Manager at Shell Canada Limited. She began her career with KPMG LLP, progressing from the audit function to manager in the income tax group. Ms. Henkelman is a member of the board and is Treasurer for the Cochrane and Area Humane Society and has chaired major pension trusts of public corporations. She is the past President of the Canadian Petroleum Tax Society and is a former member of the Tax Executives Institute and the Canadian Tax Foundation. Ms. Henkelman currently sits on the Board of ATB Financial, where she sits on both the Audit and Human Resources committees.
Mary Junck (Director)
Ms. Junck is Chairman of Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, a leading provider of local news, information and advertising in 49 primarily midsize markets in the United States. Ms. Junck began her career at the Charlotte Observer in 1972 as marketing research manager. She later held senior executive positions at the former Times Mirror Company, as executive vice president of Times Mirror and president of Times Mirror Eastern Newspapers. Ms. Junck is the retired Chairman of the board of directors of The Associated Press, the world’s oldest and largest newsgathering organization and serves on the board of Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois, a private liberal arts college.
Daniel Rotstein (Director)
Mr. Rotstein serves as the Director of Human Resources/Risk Management for the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida and provides human resources, risk management, and administrative consulting services to companies in various industries, including American Media, Inc. Prior to that, Mr. Rotstein was the Executive Vice President, Human Resources and Administration, for American Media, Inc. Mr. Rotstein has over 25 years of experience holding human resources management positions in the manufacturing, financial services and retail services industries and has successfully assisted organizations in all facets of human resources, risk management and administration.
Graham Savage (Director)
Mr. Savage is a corporate director, and from 1997 to 2007 he was Chairman and Founding Partner of Callisto Capital, a private equity firm. Prior to that, Mr. Savage spent 21 years as a senior officer at Rogers Communications Inc. Mr. Savage is currently the Chairman of Sears Canada Inc. and a director of Cott Corporation. Mr. Savage previously served as a director of Canadian Tire Corp., Rogers Communications Inc., Sun Media Corp., Royal Group Technologies Ltd., Hollinger International Inc., among others.
5. Atlas Network’s Canadian Partners
Canadian Constitution Foundation
Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Canadians For Democracy And Transparency
Frontier Center For Public Policy
Institute For Liberal Studies
Justice Center For Constitutional Freedoms
MacDonald-Laurier Institute For Public Policy
Montreal Economic Institute
World Taxpayers Federation
Why address Atlas Network? Because many of its operatives pretend to be objective and non-partisan in what they write and speak about.
While Atlas certainly does not have a monopoly on the paid shills in the media, there seem to be an awful lot of them who are connected. So let’s take a look into it. Note: Not all will be conservative, but a lot of them are. Just shows they’re all globalists.
6. Tom Flanagan: Author, Campaign Manager
In the political realm, he managed Stephen Harper’s campaigns for leadership of the Canadian Alliance and the Conservative Party of Canada, the 2004 Conservative national campaign, and the 2012 Wildrose Alberta provincial campaign.
When not involved in politics, Flanagan writes articles and books. Very prolific writer.
7. Danielle Smith: NewsTalk 770 Host
Smith interned for the Fraser Institute in 1996/1997. She also hosted Global Sunday and wrote for the Calgary Herald. After a stint in Alberta politics, she hosts an afternoon radio show.
8. Ezra Levant: Current “Rebel Commander”
I started attending Fraser Institute Student Seminars, not just in my own city, but I’d even travel to go to others in nearby cities. I then attended the Student Leaders Colloquium, and then became an FI summer intern, where I wrote a book called Youthquake. I was a Koch Foundation Summer Fellow in Washington, DC, and have attended various Institute for Humane Studies (HIS) and Liberty Fund events over the years. I’m a lawyer by profession; right after articling I worked for several years on Parliament Hill for Preston Manning and later for Stockwell Day. I joined the National Post’s editorial board for two years. After trying my own hand in politics, I wrote a book called Fight Kyoto and practiced law. Last January, with several other Fraser Institute alumni, I founded the Western Standard magazine, which publishes every two weeks in a classical liberal vein.
That’s right. Ezra Levant cut his teethfor the Koch Foundation and the Fraser Institute. He then got involved in conservative politics and media outlets. One such venture was founding the Western Standard.
9. Derek Fildebrant: Western Standard Editor
Fildebrandt used to be head of the Alberta Branch of the Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation. However, people weren’t happy when he used his training to privately sublet a publicly funded apartment. Now out of politics, he revived Ezra Levant’s old publication, the Western Standard.
Interesting situation: Both Levant and Fildebrandt have ties to Atlas Network and Koch. Levant worked at Fraser Institute, Fildebrandt at the Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation. One big happy family.
Manny works as a lobbyist, but comes on shows such as Rebel Media and promotes himself as a commentator. He is also an advisor for the Conservative Party of Canada.
12. Spencer Fernando: Nat’l Citizens Coalition
Fernando joined the National Citizen’s Coalition, which is the organization Stephen Harper used to run. While at one time an independent writer and journalist, he is reduced to a mouthpiece and shill.
13: Chantel Hebert: Trudeau Foundation
Quebec media figure Chantel Hebert is also a member of the Trudeau Foundation.
Chantal Hébert is a national affairs writer with the Toronto Star and a guest columnist for Le Devoir and L’Actualité. She is a weekly participant on the political panel At Issue on the CBC’s The National as well as Radio-Canada’s Les Coulisses du pouvoir.
Ms Hébert began her career in Toronto as a reporter for the regional newsroom of Radio-Canada in 1975 before moving on to Parliament Hill for Radio-Canada radio. She has served as parliamentary bureau chief for Le Devoir and La Presse.
Hébert is a graduate of Glendon College, York University. She is a Senior Fellow of Massey College at the University of Toronto and hold an honorary doctorate from Bishop’s University. She is a recipient of two Asia-Pacific media fellowship (Malaysia and Japan). She is the 2005 recipient of the APEX Public Service Award. In 2006, she received the Hy Solomon award for excellence in journalism and public policy as well as York University’s Pinnacle Achievement Bryden Alumni award. She is the author of a 2007 book titled French Kiss: Stephen Harper’s Blind Date with Quebec.
Hébert is an Officer of the Order of Canada.
14. Alexandre Trudeau: Trudeau Foundation
If making Islamic propaganda films counts as “independent journalism“, then I guess this guy counts. Late brother of current Prime Minister, and son of former Prime Minister.
15. Canadian Media Is Controlled
Obviously, the list of media personalities with globalist ties is not exhaustive. There are more, but this article is getting long already. A few points to take away:
(A) Canada’s media is essentially controlled by 1 organization — Post Media. It owns not only the major outlet, but many smaller ones as well. It’s basically a monopoly.
(B) Even within so-called “conservative” and alt/indy media, there are many with globalist ties (such as with Koch, Atlas Network, or the Trudeau Foundation). As such, nothing they say can be taken at face value without doing research on the reporter.
(C) Looking at the names, a certain ethnic group appears a lot in the media, far more than it should. And no, it’s not white people. Whatever happened to promoting diversity?
CLICK HERE, for Washington Times on child abduction for border crossings.
From S3CA Court Case CLICK HERE, for abuse of Safe Third Country Agreement. CLICK HERE, for Prothonotary strikes out Statement of Claim. CLICK HERE, for Uppity Peasants on the moral arguments. CLICK HERE, for arguments to appeal S3CA dismissal. CLICK HERE, for reply submissions in S3CA appeal. CLICK HERE, for hypocrisy in Toronto/Vancouver cases. CLICK HERE, for appeal in S3CA challenge dismissed.
2. Context For This Piece
Canada has signed several international treaties, relevant to the prevention of trafficking, smuggling, and other exploitation of people. These agreements include:
“Protocol to Prevent. Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. Especially Women and Children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime”, in 2000
“Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography”
“ILO Convention 182 concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst forms of Child Labor”
The purpose, as you can imagine, is for governments around the world to cooperate in preventing these activities from happening. Also, it is to punish those responsible when it does happen. Accordingly, they must be taken seriously.
But what happens when certain governments turn a blind eye to people illegally crossing their borders? What happens when governments enact policies that openly encourage human smuggling and trafficking to occur? Does this not help circumvent the very treaties which are designed to keep vulnerable people safe?
This is a bit of a rhetorical question, but I believe the answers are “yes”. Should make for interesting discussion, especially if this ever gets advanced in court. As outlined in the last article, the appeal of the Prothonotary’s decision was dismissed. This is unjust, considering how big the issue of illegal crossings into Canada is.
3. Link Between Illegal Crossings/Trafficking
More on the research is available in this review. It details the size and scale of smuggling and trafficking, and gives much needed background information on the people who are likely to be involved. The original source is linked here, and well worth a read.
(UN Office on Drugs and Crime)
(There is a connection between smuggling and “irregular migration”)
(UN abhors smuggling, but fake refugees get a pass)
2.1 Smuggling of migrants and the concepts of irregular migration and trafficking in persons
2.1.1 Irregular migration
The relationship between irregular migration and smuggling of migrants has been discussed in the literature, with most authors acknowledging the crucial role of smuggling of migrants in facilitating irregular migration.
In looking at the relationship between the two concepts, Friedrich Heckmann stresses that smuggling of migrants plays a crucial role in facilitating irregular migration, as smugglers may provide a wide range of services, from physical transportation and illegal crossing of a border to the procurement of false documents.
Yes, this has been brought up before, but it is designed to hammer the point home. Smuggling of people across borders is directly connected to the “irregular migration” that occurs at the end. It is the end result of these actions which show no respect for national borders or sovereignty. The UN review is rather blunt on the subject.
2.2 Conceptualization of smuggling of migrants
2.2.1 Smuggling as an illegal migration business
The conceptualization of smuggling as a migration business was formally developed by Salt and Stein in 1997, even if one may find reference to this theory in earlier literature. This new interpretation of the smuggling phenomenon had a great influence on academic circles, and the concept was then borrowed by many academics. In a critical analysis of this concept, Herman stresses that the focus of expert discussions then revolved around the notion of a migration industry and its professionalization, in which migrants are seen as “products” and “people who aid migrants are called ‘smugglers’, and are portrayed as illegal ‘entrepreneurs’”
Salt and Stein suggested treating international migration as a global business that has both
legitimate and illegitimate sides. The migration business is conceived as a system of institutionalized networks with complex profit and loss accounts, including a set of institutions, agents and individuals each of which stands to make a commercial gain.
The model conceives trafficking and smuggling as an intermediary part of the global migration business facilitating movement of people between origin and destination countries. The model is divided into three stages: the mobilization and recruitment of migrants; their movement en route; and their insertion and integration into labour markets and host societies in destination countries. Salt and Stein conclude their theory by citing the need to look at immigration controls in a new way, placing sharper focus on the institutions and vested interests involved rather than on the migrants themselves.
In some sense, this is quite obvious. Of course smuggling and trafficking are businesses, where the commodity being shipped is the people.
4. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress/Punish Trafficking
The full name of this treaty is the “Protocol to Prevent. Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. Especially Women and Children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. New York, US November 2000”.
Canada is a signatory to this treaty, and as such, should be expected to participate in good faith. Here is the preamble to the treaty, followed by a few Articles contained within.
The States Parlies to this Protocol,
Declaring that effective action to prevent and combat trafficking in persons, especially women and children, requires a comprehensive international approach in the countries of origin, transit and destination that includes measures to prevent such trafficking, to punish the traffickers and to protect the victims of such trafficking. including by protecting their internationally recognized human rights,
Taking into account the fact that, despite the existence of a variety of international instruments containing rules and practical measures to combat the exploitation of persons, especially women and children, there is no universal instrument that addresses all aspects of trafficking in persons,
Concerned that, in the absence of such an instrument, persons who are vulnerable to trafficking will not be sufficiently protected,
Recalling General Assembly resolution 53/111 of 9 December 1998, in which the Assembly decided to establish an open-ended intergovernmental ad hoc committee for the purpose of elaborating a comprehensive international convention against transnational organized crime and of discussing (he elaboration of, inter alia, an internationa.1 instrument addressing trafficking in women and children,
Convinced that supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime with an international instrument for the prevention, suppression and punishment of trafficking in persons, especially women and children, will be useful in preventing and combating that crime.
Have agreed as follows:
The goal is pretty straightforward, to create a universal and inclusive agreement on how to combat human trafficking.
The main difference between smuggling and trafficking is one of consent. Smuggled people are willing accomplices, while trafficked people are essentially prisoners. While this treaty specifically refers to trafficked people, the same measures should be taken considered people who are smuggled.
First, you can’t usually tell right away if the person is willing or not.
Second, the nations these people are entering should have some rights.
Statement of purpose The purposes of this Protocol are:
(a) To prevent and combat trafficking in persons, paying particular attention to women and children;
(b) To protect and assist the victims of such trafficking, with full respect for their human rights: and
(c) To promote cooperation among States Parties in order to meet those objectives.
I. Without prejudice to international commitments in relation to the free movement of people, States Parties shall strengthen, to the extent possible, such border controls as may be necessary to prevent and detect trafficking in persons.
2. Each State Party shall adopt legislative or other appropriate measures to prevent, to the extent possible. means of transport operated by commercial carriers from being used in the commission of offences established in accordance with article S of this Protocol.
3. Where appropriate, and without prejudice to applicable international conventions, such measures shall include establishing the obligation of commercial carriers. including any transportation company or the owner or operator of any means of transport, to ascertain that all passengers are in possession of the travel documents required for entry into the receiving State.
4. Each State Party shall take the necessary measures, in accordance with its domestic law, to provide for sanctions in cases of violation of the obligation set forth in paragraph 3 of this article.
5. Each State Party shall consider taking measures that permit, in accordance with its domestic law, the denial of entry or revocation of visas of persons implicated in the commission of offences established in accordance with this Protocol.
6. Without prejudice to article 27 of the Convention. States Parties shall consider strengthening cooperation among border control agencies by, inter alia. establishing and maintaining direct channels of communication.
Our current process of letting the RCMP escort people across the border only to release them a few hours later does the public no good at all. Even if people are being willfully smuggled (as opposed to trafficked against their will), we should not be letting such people enter the country on these terms.
The 2000 agreement Canada signed onto “should” mean something substantive. It shouldn’t allow people to flaunt our laws, with possibly trafficked persons in the group.
5. Rights Of Child Not To Be Exploited
This UN Protocol is called the “Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children,
child prostitution and child pornography”.
Considering also that the Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes the right of the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development,
Gravely concerned at the significant and increasing international traffic in children for the purpose of the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography,
Deeply concerned at the widespread and continuing practice of sex tourism, to which children are especially vulnerable, as it directly promotes the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography,
Recognizing that a number of particularly vulnerable groups, including girl children, are at greater risk of sexual exploitation and that girl children are disproportionately represented among the sexually exploited,
1. States Parties shall adopt or strengthen, implement and disseminate laws, administrative measures, social policies and programmes to prevent the offences referred to in the present Protocol. Particular attention shall be given to protect children who are especially vulnerable to such practices.
2. States Parties shall promote awareness in the public at large, including children, through information by all appropriate means, education and training, about the preventive measures and harmful effects of the offences referred to in the present Protocol. In fulfilling their obligations under this article, States Parties shall encourage the participation of the community and, in particular, children and child victims, in such information and education and training programmes, including at the international level.
3. States Parties shall take all feasible measures with the aim of ensuring all appropriate assistance to victims of such offences, including their full social reintegration and their full physical and psychological recovery.
4. States Parties shall ensure that all child victims of the offences described in the present Protocol have access to adequate procedures to seek, without discrimination, compensation for damages from those legally responsible.
5. States Parties shall take appropriate measures aimed at effectively prohibiting the production and dissemination of material advertising the offences described in the present Protocol.
1. States Parties shall take all necessary steps to strengthen international cooperation by multilateral, regional and bilateral arrangements for the prevention, detection, investigation, prosecution and punishment of those responsible for acts involving the sale of children, child prostitution, child pornography and child sex tourism. States Parties shall also promote international cooperation and coordination between their authorities, national and international non-governmental organizations and international organizations.
2. States Parties shall promote international cooperation to assist child victims in their physical and psychological recovery, social reintegration and repatriation.
3. States Parties shall promote the strengthening of international cooperation in order to address the root causes, such as poverty and underdevelopment, contributing to the vulnerability of children to the sale of children, child prostitution, child pornography and child sex tourism.
4. States Parties in a position to do so shall provide financial, technical or other assistance through existing multilateral, regional, bilateral or other programmes.
This protocol seems reasonable enough. Making sure that children are not being harmed or exploited is a valuable societal function.
However, when we allow people to enter Canada illegally, and release them into the country soon afterwards, we have no way of knowing what will happen. Our system, which rewards people for deliberately bypassing official border crossings does everyone a disservice.
No decent person wants children to be exploited, sexually or otherwise. But having laws that make it easy to do so ensures that it will happen at some point.
6. Eliminating Worst Child Labour
This international agreement is the “CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION AND IMMEDIATE ACTION FOR THE ELIMINATION OF THE WORST FORMS OF CHILD LABOUR ADOPTED BY THE CONFERENCE AT ITS EIGHTY-SEVENTH SESSION, GENEVA, 17 JUNE 1999”.
For the purposes of this Convention, the term “child” shall apply to all persons under the age of 18.
For the purposes of this Convention, the term “the worst forms of child labour” comprises:
(a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict;
(b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances;
(c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties;
(d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.
1. The types of work referred to under Article 3(d) shall be determined by national laws or regulations or by the competent authority, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, taking into consideration relevant international standards, in particular Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Recommendation, 1999.
2. The competent authority, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, shall identify where the types of work so determined exist.
3. The list of the types of work determined under paragraph 1 of this Article shall be periodically examined and revised as necessary, in consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned.
Each Member shall, after consultation with employers’ and workers’ organizations, establish or designate appropriate mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the provisions giving effect to this Convention.
1. Each Member shall design and implement programmes of action to eliminate as a priority the worst forms of child labour.
2. Such programmes of action shall be designed and implemented in consultation with relevant government institutions and employers’ and workers’ organizations, taking into consideration the views of other concerned groups as appropriate.
All of these articles are completely reasonable, and admirable goals. However, to repeat from earlier, how do we enforce these things we have committed ourselves to doing if we aren’t willing to properly enforce a border? How can we make sure the children (and adults too) are being let in under the pretenses we are told?
Without taking the time to check thoroughly, how can the RCMP, (and Border Services) ensure that they are not unwitting accomplices to human trafficking or human smuggling?
7. What If People Aren’t Who They Claim?
Canada of course has other international obligations. These listed are just 3 of them related to prevent of people being exploited.
“Protocol to Prevent. Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. Especially Women and Children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime”, in 2000
“Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography”
“ILO Convention 182 concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst forms of Child Labor”
Let’s take a look at what is happening across the U.S./Mexico border: people are abducting children in order to pass as a “family unit” when illegally crossing into the U.S.
The government warned federal judges in 2016 that their attempts to create a catch-and-release policy for illegal immigrant families would lead to children being “abducted” by migrants hoping to pose as families to take advantage.
The court brushed aside those worries and imposed catch-and-release anyway.
Two years later, children are indeed being kidnapped or borrowed by illegal immigrants trying to pose as families, according to Homeland Security numbers, which show the U.S. is on pace for more than 400 such attempts this year. That would be a staggering 900 percent increase over 2017’s total.
This Washington Times article details how adults wanting to illegally cross into the U.S. are actually abducting children to appear as a “family unit”. That’s right, children are being kidnapped to make it easier for others to stay in the United States illegally. An article in May 2019 suggested that 1/3 of “families” crossing were not blood related at all.
Sure, the adults use children to cross the border. What happens to them afterwards?
Is permitting illegal crossings a violation of international agreements? In context, many people who say yes they are.
8. How Diligent Is IRB/CBSA?
This evidence transcript is from a Parliamentary meeting on the illegal crossings going on. Let’s look at a few sections of the testimony.
Spoiler, it’s not very encouraging. 16 month wait times, and it’s based largely on the honour system. Of course, we take people at their word that they, and “their” children, are who they claim to be.
The response team has both operational and adjudicative thrusts. I’d like to underline that this response has not diminished in any way IRB’s ongoing commitment to one of the key objectives of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which is the security of Canadian society. For example, the IRB has a publicly accessible policy that requires that the RPD not accept a refugee claim until CBSA has had a reasonable opportunity to complete its security screening. This policy remains in place for all claims, including those heard through the response team. There are other processes related to security matters that I would be happy to discuss during the question period, if they are of interest.
Since July 1, more than 8,000 claims were referred to the RPD. Before this, we were projecting an intake of 40,000 cases for this fiscal year. The strain on the organization to handle this many people's hearings is enormous, as our capacity to hear cases this fiscal year, following a plan of action for efficiency and internal reallocation of funds, is roughly 2,000 per month, or 24,000 per year.
Naturally, claimants whose hearings are not brought before a decision-maker of the response team in the next two months will wait to be scheduled like other claimants. Wait times before the <strong>Lacolle arrivals were already at approximately 16 months per person</strong>. Intake in the eastern region, in the month of September alone, was equal to the eastern region's intake for all of 2016.
Mr. Larry Maguire:
What kind of lag time would we see in that?
Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
We have a 16-month wait time for our regular stream. But are you asking me about when the basis of claim form will be expected?
That practice notice is just a temporary practice notice. We’re going to wait to see probably until the end of November before we reconsider whether or not we suspend that practice notice in which case it would go back to 15 days.
Mr. Larry Maguire:
How do you keep track of those people in the meantime? Where are they?
Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
If you go to our website, it says that you need to submit all the information around tombstone data, like address, and you have to keep us apprised of your changes of address and contact information. If you have counsel or if you have a consultant who is working with you, we need their contact information as well.
We are in contact with them about the scheduling and their claim processing.
Mr. Larry Maguire:
Are either of you aware of any process that CBSA or others would use to make sure they know where all the illegal immigrants that come across are in Canada at all times?
Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
Do you mean by that, people who have crossed the border irregularly?
Mr. Larry Maguire:
Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
You have to ask CBSA but we all keep track of the claimants relative to the information they’ve given us. They are responsible for keeping all of us up to date on their changes of address and where they are in the country, which is how my colleague was able to describe where the secondary migration to other cities has happened.
Mr. Larry Maguire:
When you say “they”, is that information that immigration or CBSA has given you, or is it the individuals themselves?
Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
The claimants are responsible for maintaining their files up to date. Like any court procedure, you would always be responsible to that tribunal for your information. These are very official processes with the claimants.
Mr. Larry Maguire:
You were saying there were 8,000 crossings since September 1, or was it July 1?
Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
That’s the number that had been referred to us since July 1, and we don’t keep the statistics about the number of people crossing. We only become seized with the matter when the referral has been by CBSA or IRCC. Our data are always about our caseload, not about the number of people who have interfaced with IRCC or CBSA.
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!”
Demographic changes in the U.S., both from legal “and” illegal immigration are changing voting trends. Specifically, most first generation immigrants vote for Democrats, and by a large margin.
This is not lost on Democrats. The party is pushing for:
(a) More immigration;
(b) More amnesty programs for illegals already here
(c) Voting rights for illegal aliens
(d) Abolishing the Electoral College
(e) Getting felons the right to vote in more states
(f) Getting younger people to vote
(g) Voting without photo I.D.
The reason behind this is not idealistic or moral. The idea is to effectively rig elections by getting more people to vote, if they are part of groups that vote for them by large margins.
As demographics change, voting patterns change. Once solidly conservative states are “turning blue”, as demographics now favour Democrats in more and more places. At one time unthinkable, Virginia turned blue, and Colorado, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Texas and others are close to turning blue.
This issue is important to Canadians because the same thing is happening here. Demographic changes are turning more and more ridings liberal and socialist. It is making conservatism an unelectable ideology. While it is nice to say that demographics don’t matter, the fact is they do.
Look at the recent Canadian election. The Greater Toronto Area is now solidly Liberal, despite Trudeau’s horrible job as Prime Minister. This population change is irreversible, and will never support conservative candidates again.
Interestingly, it was Stephen Harper and Jason Kenney who flooded the GTA from 2006 to 2015, making those ridings uncompetitive. And when the next riding redistributions go ahead, there will be more and more liberal/socialist ridings created.
3. Data From 2018 U.S. Midterms
In U.S. congressional races nationwide, an estimated 69% of Latinos voted for the Democratic candidate and 29% backed the Republican candidate, a more than two-to-one advantage for Democrats, according to National Election Pool exit poll data
Blacks voted overwhelmingly (90%) for the Democratic candidate, including comparable shares of black men (88%) and black women (92%).
Overall, 41% of voters said whites in the country today are favored over minorities; 19% said that minorities are favored over whites, while 33% said that no group is favored. Attitudes on this question were strongly correlated with vote choice. Among those who said whites are favored in the U.S., 87% voted for Democrats. By contrast, large majorities of those who said minorities are favored (85%) or that no group is favored (69%) voted for Republican candidates.
Among voters who said this was the first midterm in which they voted, 62% favored the Democrat and just 36% supported the Republican.
The data from Pew Research makes it pretty clear: minorities vote by very large margins for Democrats. 90% of blacks, and 70% of Hispanics support them, margins that have remained fairly constant for decades.
Why do Democrats push for more and more immigration? Amnesty for illegals? Voting rights for children? Voting rights restored for felons? Because they want more voters.
Demographics are destiny, and these changes are permanently altering Western nations.
4. Whites To Become A Minority
The Brookings Institute that in 2045, whites will stop being an overall majority in the United States, and will drop below 50% completely. From there the percentage of whites will continue to fall.
Of course, if more amnesties are granted for illegal aliens, that switch could happen a lot sooner than 2045. As stated before, Democrats are pushing for amnesty, as they know the (net) vote addition will go very well in their favour.
New census population projections confirm the importance of racial minorities as the primary demographic engine of the nation’s future growth, countering an aging, slow-growing and soon to be declining white population. The new statistics project that the nation will become “minority white” in 2045. During that year, whites will comprise 49.7 percent of the population in contrast to 24.6 percent for Hispanics, 13.1 percent for blacks, 7.9 percent for Asians, and 3.8 percent for multiracial populations
Why this drastic shift? Well, it could be the 1965 Hart Cellar Act, which changed U.S. immigration laws that favoured Europeans and capped the number. Despite claims that there would be no drastic change in the makeup of the United States, that has proven to be false.
But don’t worry, these changes won’t lead, to people being arrested or fined for hate speech. Oh wait, yes they will.
5. Changes To Lead To Seat Redistribution
High Immigration Causes Political Redistribution.
If immigrants were evenly spread throughout the country, they would have no impact on the distribution of House seats. Historically, immigrants have always been concentrated in some areas, and that is still true today. Of course, immigrants do tend to become more dispersed over time, but it is a very gradual process. In 1990, the top six states of immigrant settlement accounted for 73 percent of the total foreign-born population, while in 2000 these same six states accounted for 69 percent of the total foreign-born population. In 2020, the top six states will account for 63 percent of all immigrants, but only 40 percent of the nation’s total population. Although immigrants will almost certainly continue to move into new parts of the country, for decades to come there will continue to be states with very large immigrant populations, while other states have only a modest number. In 2020, there will still be 11 states with fewer than 100,000 immigrants, while five states will have more than two million.
The redistributive effects of immigration are not just a result of its concentration, but also partly depend on immigrants’ share of the total population. A very large immigrant population, even if it becomes more dispersed, can still have a significant impact on the distribution of House seats and Electoral College votes. As long as the number of immigrants (legal and illegal) entering the country remains very high, immigration will continue to redistribute political power in Washington. (While not examined in this report, the same dynamic applies within states, in drawing districts for the state legislatures.)
Representing Non-Citizens in Congress.
Although the political stakes for low-immigration states from continued high levels of immigration are clearly very significant, the related question of creating districts because of the presence of non-citizens is equally important to consider. While there is a consensus that naturalized citizens should be represented in Congress just like any other American, awarding congressional seats to states on the basis of their non-citizen populations raises important questions about political representation. This is especially true when one considers that these districts are created by taking representation away from states comprised of American citizens.
Consider the case of Ohio, the biggest loser from immigration-induced reapportionment. In 2020, there will be 292,000 non-citizens in Ohio, accounting for just 2 percent of the state’s population; California will be home to nearly 4.8 million non-citizens, accounting for 12 percent of the state’s population. Non-citizens cannot vote in federal elections, serve on juries, or work for the federal government in most cases. Many non-citizens, including foreign students, guestworkers, and illegal immigrants also may not make campaign contributions. Thus, it may seem odd that they are “represented” in Congress. This is especially true because the majority of non-citizens in the country are either illegal immigrants or temporary visitors such as foreign students or guestworkers. While one can at least argue that legal permanent residents who have not naturalized are entitled to representation in Congress because they are future Americans, illegal aliens and temporary visitors can make no such claim.
It is predicted that a few dozen seats will go towards Democrats in the 2020 election. This is because that immigration and population shifts will result in more seats that Democrats can win. This is about shifting political power.
Why Republicans support mass migration when it continuously dilutes their own base and voting bloc is a bit of a mystery. Is the cheap labour they import really worth it?
6. Canadian Parliament Seat Redistribution
The 2011 Fair Representation Act added 30 seats to the Canadian Parliament, (or about 10%) bringing the total to 338. It gave Ontario 15 more seats, BC 6 more, Alberta and Quebec 3 each. As a result, areas with most growth, such as high immigration, get more political power.
Although the Parliament has a limited number of seats, shifts will continue to mean high concentrations of immigrant communities will gain more power. Consequently, the original beliefs and values of the founding stock will continue to be replaced.
Well, according to this graph from Global News, most ridings with the highest immigrant population tend to vote Liberal.
7. About Those Students, Temp Workers
Not only is there the “official” population replacement going on in Canada, but there is the unofficial replacement as well. Specifically, hundreds of thousands of international students and temporary workers are coming to Canada. As has been covered here repeatedly, there are almost all eligible for some option of remaining in Canada long after their visa runs out.
How will Canada’s electoral map look after the next seat distribution? How many more safe Liberal ridings will there be as a result.
Whites are expected to become a minority in Canada soon. What will elections and voting results look like then?
CLICK HERE, for the Climate Change Scam Part I. CLICK HERE, for Part II, the Paris Accord. CLICK HERE, for Part III, Saskatchewan Appeals Court Reference. CLICK HERE, for Part IV, Controlled Opposition to Carbon Tax. CLICK HERE, for Part V, UN New Development Funding. CLICK HERE, for Part VI, Disruptive Innovation Framework. CLICK HERE, for Part VII, Blaming Arson On Climate Change. CLICK HERE, for Part VIII, Review Of Green New Deal. CLICK HERE, for Part VIII(II), Sunrise Movement & Green New Deal. CLICK HERE, for Part IX, Propaganda Techniques, Max Boykoff. CLICK HERE, for Part X, GG Pollution Pricing Act & Bill C-97. CLICK HERE, for part XI, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai Explains Paris Accord CLICK HERE, for Part XII, Joel Wood and Carbon tax “option”. CLICK HERE, for Part XIII, controlled opposition going to SCC. CLICK HERE, for Part XIV, Mark Carney, UN Climate Finance Envoy. CLICK HERE, for UN global taxation efforts.
2. Why Focus On This Book?
Most “scientists” involved in the climate change business at least claim that their focus is on the science itself. However, a subset has emerged which focuses on the science of persuasion.
That’s right, the goal isn’t using scientific research to PROVE that climate change is a serious and ongoing global threat. Rather, the goal is using social science methods to CONVINCE people that the threat is real. These are two very different things.
In layman’s terms, this book reads like a propaganda manual for tricks and techniques of persuasion. There never appears a moment of doubt in Boykoff’s mind that climate change is urgent. He seems to views the public’s disengagement simply as a communications issue. As such, this book focuses on emotionally manipulative tactics to get around that.
The idea is creepy enough. The fact that there is an entire segment of academia that focuses on this area is very troubling. Unfortunately, Boykoff is entirely serious about his work. Also, the many, many sources he cites are serious.
Max’s research and creative work has developed primarily in two arenas:
(1) cultural politics of science, climate change and environmental issues = this refers to ways that attitudes, intentions, beliefs and behaviors of individuals and groups shape (and are shaped by) the perceived spectrum of possible action in the context of science-policy, climate change and environmental issues.
(2) transformations of carbon-based economies and societies (with emphasis on the interface of science and practical action) = this refers to decarbonization politics, policies and decision-making, with particular interest in how these activities find meaning in people’s everyday lives, as well as how they, in turn, feed back into science-policy decision-making.
4. Specific Examples From CCC Book
(Page 18) Boykoff cites some research suggesting that racial and gender politics should be injected into the subject. Supposedly, racial minorities are going to be disproportionately impacted, and that needs to be discussed openly. Also, female researchers are more likely to have their work ridiculed and mocked. Obviously that is because of sexism and not poor research. That’s right, race and gender are now dimensions in the climate change debate.
(Page 21) A technique called “pre-bunking” is introduced. This is a form of inoculation, which climate change pushers will attempt to pre-empt criticism or questions ahead of time. They do it to sew seeds of doubts in people who would otherwise see obvious problems with the research.
(Page 23) One idea is go beyond simply telling the truth. The focus here is to go beyond simply stating facts and conclusions, and to introduce a “story-telling” element to it. By doing this, people are more accepting of the story, and are less likely to pick up on deficiencies in the arguments themselves.
(Page 26) This is the start of Chapter 2. This chapter gets shifting the discussion away from a scientific one, and appealing to a more emotional issue. By framing it as a social issue, there is more of a focus on people’s ability to act. One technique suggested is to keep it “upbeat” so that others will remain optimistic that their actions will have consequences. Boykoff’s sources also suggest moving away from the “DOOMSDAY APPROACH”. This should have the effect of keeping people more engaged if their aren’t told it is hopeless.
(Page 35) There is more detail about how to turn climate change into stories. Stories in general have: main characters, villains, plot, description, complexity, some ambiguity, and conflict resolution. Boykoff talks about telling the “facts” of climate change as if it were a story. This will do wonders to keep people engaged. Interestingly, the approach is to water down the hard facts, and to focus more on a compelling narrative.
(Page 45) The book heads towards cultural politics and interdisciplinary communication. What this means is that taking different approaches, or combining approaches, may work best depending on who the specific audience is. Page 47, Boykoff begins to detail the actual communication training that climate change pushers are being given in order to more effectively market this concept. Yes, there is now formal training in how to peddle this.
(Page 50) Boykoff talks about a “building bridges” approach, something he also refers to as a “common ground” approach. This involves making some effort to find out what other people are interested in, and building a relationship with them. Climate change information will gradually be introduced via this relationship. The other people will eventually be sold on the agenda, but without realizing that was your goal all along. The entire tactic is emotional manipulation, and the worse form of bonding that can take place.
(Page 58) Boykoff discusses some of the research that has been done across demographic groups and across political leanings. He also explains that the climate change agenda can still be pitched to almost everyone, but the message needs to be shifted depending on which group you are addressing.
(Page 96) We get into the idea of adding visualizations (images) to help sell the climate change agenda. The idea here is that if people can actually see what is happening, it should compel them more strongly to act. Now, it doesn’t really matter if what people see is what is truly happening. What’s important is that they see what they should.
(Page 132) Boykoff talks about the framing climate change in certain ways. One is as a sacrifice v.s. benefits approach. This is one where the experts will outline the sacrifices needed (such as your standard of life) and various benefits that will come. Always, there is the bit about making the world a better place for those in developing countries. After all, they had no hand in this. This is a combination of guilt tripping and a call to patriotism, and put together beautifully.
(Page 190) Boykoff explains more of this “silver buckshot approach”, as opposed to the silver bullet. In short, there have to be multiple forms and paths to spread the message of climate change at any given time. Since no one technique will work on everyone, we need many streams ready to convince people of the cause. And really, that is what this book is: listing and detailing these multiple paths.
In short, Boykoff suggests inserting climate change into the discussion wherever possible. Though he doesn’t explicitly add this, it’s implied that it should be done even when the above issue has nothing to do with it.
Make the connections. And make the other people see those connections. Sometimes best if done subtly, as you don’t want your agenda to be too obvious.
The examples above are by no means exhaustive, but should demonstrate how devious and cunning the author is. He outlines technique after technique to push the narrative. And these techniques are lifted directly from psychological and sociological research. Boykoff is applying those findings in his quest to do a better job of selling climate change to the public.
5. Boykoff Avoids Actual Research
You will likely notice that Max Boykoff never gets into the so-called climate change science. He mainly avoids any real detail on how climate change research is conducted. Why is that?
It’s because this entire book shies away from telling people the hard and fast truth (at least as he perceives it), and focuses on indirect and roundabout ways of getting people on board. In short, this book is still intended to push the climate change agenda, but just shows ways to be more sneaky and dishonest about it.
Was this a worthwhile read? Yes, in the context of knowing how your enemies are lying and manipulating you. Boykoff gives an in-depth, well researched book on exactly that. If nothing else, he if very thorough in detailing these underhanded methods.
Western “leaders” frequently tell people how immigration is a boon to the economy, and that it will bring all sorts of wealth in.
Not withstanding: culture clash, ethnic tensions, increased competition for jobs, added costs when social services factored in, overcrowding, demographic replacement, there is the topic of remittances. Remittances are funds that are sent across borders, typically to family members.
Mass migration enthusiasts routinely claim that people temporarily come to a nation to work, and few intend to stay. Notwithstanding the truth that many (if not most) don’t, does it make it okay if it’s true? How does it enrich a nation when huge sums of money are sent out of the country? How does draining the wealth make it more prosperous?
How big exactly is the issue of remittances? Let’s take a dive into the hard data. Yes, the topic was addressed in this review, but why not dig deeper?
3. Global Migration Compact, Objective 20, 22
OBJECTIVE 20: Promote faster, safer and cheaper transfer of remittances and foster financial inclusion of migrants
36. We commit to promote faster, safer and cheaper remittances by further developing existing conducive policy and regulatory environments that enable competition, regulation and innovation on the remittance market and by providing gender-responsive programmes and instruments that enhance the financial inclusion of migrants and their families. We further commit to optimize the transformative impact of remittances on the well-being of migrant workers and their families, as well as on sustainable development of countries, while respecting that remittances constitute an important source of private capital, and cannot be equated to other international financial flows, such as foreign direct investment, official development assistance, or other public sources of financing for development.
The UN Global Migration Compact specifically lists making remittances easier and cheaper. Why? To send money back to families. This means that instead of money circulating the host country, much of it will be sent away. Don’t worry, it will get worse.
OBJECTIVE 22: Establish mechanisms for the portability of social security entitlements and earned benefits
38. We commit to assist migrant workers at all skills levels to have access to social protection in countries of destination and profit from the portability of applicable social security entitlements and earned benefits in their countries of origin or when they decide to take up work in another country.
Social benefits such as pensions will be able to be transferred from one nation to another. This means countries like Canada will be forced to pay for pensions and such to people that have not contributed to the country over the years. Now, can these paid out social benefits be turned around and sent back to family members in the form of remittances?
How does the first world benefit from this treaty? How does importing people and forcing locals to face foreign competition help? How does driving down the wages help locals? How does sending that money overseas help the local economy?
It doesn’t. But that’s what Canada has been signed up for. All without a democratic mandate of course. Rather than stopping, or even slowing the money leaving Western nations, this agreement aims to make it easier and cheaper.
4. New York Declaration, Para 57
57. We will consider facilitating opportunities for safe, orderly and regular migration, including, as appropriate, employment creation, labour mobility at all skills levels, circular migration, family reunification and education-related opportunities. We will pay particular attention to the application of minimum labour standards for migrant workers regardless of their status, as well as to recruitment and other migration-related costs, remittance flows, transfers of skills and knowledge and the creation of employment opportunities for young people.
In addition to promoting mass migration and cheaper remittances, is the New York Declaration also trying to normalize people working illegally?
5. SDA Agenda 2030, Goal 10.7
10.7 Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies
10.a Implement the principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries, in particular least developed countries, in accordance with World Trade Organization agreements
10.b Encourage official development assistance and financial flows, including foreign direct investment, to States where the need is greatest, in particular least developed countries, African countries, small island developing States and landlocked developing countries, in accordance with their national plans and programmes
10.c By 2030, reduce to less than 3 per cent the transaction costs of migrant remittances and eliminate remittance corridors with costs higher than 5 per cent
Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people? Doesn’t that sound a lot like the UN Global Migration Compact? It does, but the same language is written into Agenda 2030 as well. This was signed in September 2015 by Stephen Harper, who calls himself a conservative.
One specific goal is to have the fees for remittances reduced to less than 3%. Why? Because with the mass migration plans that our “leaders” have, replacing the population is only going to continue. So sending money away should be easier and cheaper.
And despite all the talk about these workers being “temporary”, they are not. The bulk of them are not going to leave.
6. World Bank Review: 2016 Remittances
Recently, several high-income countries that are host to many migrants are considering taxation of outward remittances, in part to raise revenue, and in part to discourage undocumented migrants. The list of countries where such taxes are being considered includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, the United States, and the United Arab Emirates. However, taxes on remittances are difficult to administer and likely to drive the flows underground.
De-risking has the potential to reverse the progress made in reducing remittance costs and adversely impacts broader development objectives. Moreover, the disappearance of regulated and legal remittance providers could divert flows toward informal channels, which in turn could increase anti-money laundering/countering financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) risks. In August 2016, the U.S. Treasury and federal banking agencies (including the Federal Reserve Board, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) released a factsheet aimed at clarifying the AML/CFT regulations and sanctions related to correspondent banking. According to the factsheet, the agencies “do not utilize a zero tolerance philosophy.”
Despite the clarification from the U.S. Treasury and federal banking agencies, global banks have begun to exit or reduce their exposure to the retail remittance business. The banks include JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Banamex USA in the United States; National Australia Bank, Westpac Group, and ANZ in Australia; Barclays and HSBC in the United Kingdom; and BBVA in Spain.
The World Bank discusses things that are being considered, such as formally taxing remittances being sent out of the country.
Also keep in mind, this is April 2017, and the New York Declaration has already been signed. The UN Global Migration Compact is to be signed in 2018, and it is expected to drive remittances much higher. Mass migration will be more easily available, so the assumption makes sense.
7. Ratha: World Bank, Remittances
Ratha comments that there is steady year after year growth in the scale of remittances being sent across borders. Of course, the growth varies on region, but in the data presented it is 6-12% consistently.
India, China, Mexico and the Philippines are listed as receiving the highest amount of remittances in 2018. Interestingly, China, India and Philippines are the top 3 sources of immigration in Canada. Mexico being on that list is probably explained by massive immigration (both legal and illegal) into the United States.
Yes, Goal 10(7)(c) of Agenda 2030 is to reduce the fees for remittances to under 3%. Seems like the people involved are only expecting it to keep increasing.
8. Remittance Estimates: World Bank
Let’s take a look at the money flowing in and out of the developed/developing world. One important disclaimer to add: although the World Bank estimates money going in and out of the 1st and 3rd World nations, it doesn’t specify to what degree they cross over, or are just transferred within.
It is fair to estimate, however, that the vast majority of the funds going to the 3rd World are transfers from the 1st. Also, it’s fair to estimate that the majority of fund the 1st World receives are from other 1st world nations.
To 1st World
To 3rd World
Sources For The Chart CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2013. CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2015. CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2016. CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2017. CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2018.
Hundreds of billions of dollars a year flow annually to the developing world, the majority of it from the Western World. When politicians talk about the financial benefits of immigration, is this what they mean? The pouring of money out of their countries?
9. Pew Research: $150B in 2017 (USA)
Pew Research, among many other things, tracks and estimates remittances sent back. The numbers are staggering, particularly in the U.S. An estimated $150 billion was sent outside the country in the year 2017.
Just think. All that money could have funded Donald Trump’s border wall. In fact, it would fund it several times over. Let’s take a look
Est. ($ Billions)
This table only covers the top destinations for the remittances out of the U.S., but the point should be obvious. It doesn’t really stimulate the “American” economy when so much money is being sent overseas. It disproves (to a large degree) that there is any real economic benefit to this immigration system.
Also worth noting is that large amounts of foreign “temporary” labour has the added effect of driving down wages, as more people will be competing for the same job. This creates an employer’s market. And as we all know, these aren’t really “temporary” workers. Most will try to stay.
True, this focuses on the U.S. situation, but it’s worth covering, as Canada faces the same issues that our Southern neighbours do.
To address the obvious: many temporary workers (and students) will remain in Canada even after their visa is up. Transitioning to permanent resident is usually an option. But even if they don’t, money is still being sent out of the country. Take a look at how many “temporary” workers we have in the TFWP and the International Mobility Program.
Temporary Foreign Worker Program
International Mobility Program
Also, it’s worth noting that students are allowed to work up to 20 hours/week, even while school is in session. Many (though not all) do. And Canada has certainly experienced an uptick in workers in recent years.
Data for the tables, is in this link. It includes archived listings for the Annual Reports to Parliament on Immigration from 2004 to 2018.
And no, not everyone coming to Canada will be sending money back. However, the temptation is there for anyone with family members left behind.
11. Remittances Directly Tied To Immigration
The World Bank is candid in making the connection between immigration and remittances. It is mainly by people who have gone to another country to world, and then send money back for family members.
While this is certainly noble, the money leaving the host nation is money that is not being spent in the host economy. It is money disappearing.
True, the person earning the money does have the right to spend it. However, how does that help the host country, when large sums of money are simply transferred out, year after year? It is a massive drain which could otherwise be spent here.
CLICK HERE, for abuse of Safe Third Country Agreement. CLICK HERE, for Prothonotary strikes out Statement of Claim. CLICK HERE, for Uppity Peasants on the moral arguments. CLICK HERE, for arguments to appeal S3CA dismissal. CLICK HERE, for reply submissions in S3CA appeal.
3. Context Of This Article
This case involves the joint application for judicial review. These cases (for which arguments were just heard in Toronto) involves applicants trying to strike down the Safe Third Country Agreement.
If you have been following this site at all, you will know that a challenge has been launched in BC to close the “loophole” in the agreement. This loophole, in effects, allows fake refugees to jump the queue by GOING AROUND official border ports.
4. Gov’t Defends S3CA (In Toronto)
The Canadian government on Friday denied that the rights of any refugees are threatened by a U.S.-Canada agreement that compels asylum seekers trying to cross the border into Canada to first apply for sanctuary in the United States.
Under the Safe Third Country Agreement between the two neighbours, asylum seekers at a formal border crossing traveling in either direction are turned back and told to apply for asylum in the country they first arrived in.
Lawyers for unnamed refugees who had been turned away at the Canadian border are challenging the agreement, saying the United States does not qualify as a “safe” country under U.S. President Donald Trump.
However, the Canadian government argued in its submission that its “continued reliance on the regime is lawful and meets its Charter and international law obligations.”
“There’s no rights at stake here,” government lawyer Lucian Gregory told the federal court.
The court challenge comes as Canada seeks to stem the human tide of asylum seekers that has flowed into the country over the past three years. Trump was elected in 2016 after promising in his campaign to crack down on illegal immigration.
That’s right. The Trudeau Government tells a Toronto Court that the Safe 3rd Country Agreement is necessary to protect its borders, and does not discriminate on any human rights grounds.
Also, that same Government is telling a Vancouver Court that the Plaintiff/Moving Party has no right to attempt to close the loophole in the agreement.
In case any real journalists would like to learn more about the cases, these are the names and court files of the people involved.
MOHAMMAD MAJD MAHER HOMSI ET AL v. MCI ET AL
Court File: #IMM-775-17
NEDIRA JEMAL MUSTEFAv. MIRC ET AL
Court File: #IMM-2229-17
THE CANADIAN COUNCIL FOR RFUGEES ET AL v. MIRC ET AL
Court File: #IMM-2977-17
5. Gov’t: Open Court Needed (Toronto)
An interesting development in the case: The Federal Government opposed efforts by these “refugee claimants” to have their names redacted. In that case, only their initials would have been posted. The Government — in this case — values having an open court system.
6. Gov’t: No Loophole In S3CA (Vancouver)
These quotes are from the Government’s Motion to Strike, filed on May 22, 2019. In short, the lawyer claimed that since I was not a refugee claimant, I had no real interest or stake in the matter. Furthermore, there apparently was no loophole, and this poor wording was written in intentionally.
7. Rule 221: Motions To Strike
Striking Out Pleadings
Motion to strike
221 (1) On motion, the Court may, at any time, order that a pleading, or anything contained therein, be struck out, with or without leave to amend, on the ground that it
(a) discloses no reasonable cause of action or defence, as the case may be,
(b) is immaterial or redundant,
(c) is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious,
(d) may prejudice or delay the fair trial of the action, (e) constitutes a departure from a previous pleading, or
(f) is otherwise an abuse of the process of the Court,
and may order the action be dismissed or judgment entered accordingly.
(2) No evidence shall be heard on a motion for an order under paragraph (1)(a).
From the Federal Court Rules. Now, I am no expert on the matter, but filing contradictory, or at least incoherent or illogical pleadings should be grounds to strike out a defense. We shall see how it goes.
8. Two Courts, Two Priorities
The above is only a snapshot of what is going on, but the point should be clear. The Government is telling the Toronto Court that the Safe Third Country Agreement is necessary to protect our borders, and that not anyone can just walk in.
By contrast, that same Government is telling a Vancouver Court that there is no loophole to worry about, and that private citizens have no right to demand they enforce our laws and borders.
Free Trade/Mass Migration Research CLICK HERE, for U.S. Census, most STEM grads don’t work in STEM. CLICK HERE, for the myth of the STEM shortage. CLICK HERE, for EPI: STEM shortage a manufactured crisis. CLICK HERE, for EPI: rise in temporary labour wave. CLICK HERE, for CDN Gov’t splits up TFWP. CLICK HERE, for free trade, US trade deficit with China. CLICK HERE, for trade deficits caused by NAFTA. CLICK HERE, for EPI: free trade is driving down wages. CLICK HERE, for Pew Research on wage stagnation. CLICK HERE, for EPI: extra costs from globalization. CLICK HERE, for tariffs levied on currency manipulation. CLICK HERE, for EPI: 3.4M jobs lost to China. CLICK HERE, for T.P.P.: National Treatment
2. Context For This Article
True, the content of this site is primarily focused on Canada. However, the issues that face the United States are similar. What happens over there spills over here, and there is lots of data available on it.
There are 2 linked concepts to discuss:
Mass Economic Immigration
Free Trade Agreements
How are these ideas linked? Because they are 2 ends of the same problem. Mass economic immigration involves importing large numbers of people into a country. It leads to a much higher supply of workers, and more competition for the same jobs. As a result, it helps drive down wages as it becomes an employer’s market. It INCREASES the demand for jobs in developed countries. Free trade works by exporting jobs and entire industries to other nations where the work can be done for less. In other words, it DECREASES the supply of local jobs available. Now combine them.
MORE competition + LESS work = disaster.
For the purposes of this article, concerns that the U.S. has can be viewed as happening (or at risk to happen) in Canada as well.
The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) is a left leaning think tank in Washington. Among the topics it covers are free trade and immigration. EPI points out repeatedly that there are high social costs to the conservative or libertarian policies. Let’s get into it.
3. STEM Field Is Glutted
The U.S. Census Bureau reported today that 74 percent of those who have a bachelor’s degree in science, technology, engineering and math — commonly referred to as STEM — are not employed in STEM occupations.
“STEM graduates have relatively low unemployment, however these graduates are not necessarily employed in STEM occupations,” said Liana Christin Landivar, a sociologist in the Census Bureau’s Industry and Occupation Statistics Branch.
According to new statistics from the 2012 American Community Survey, engineering and computer, math and statistics majors had the largest share of graduates going into a STEM field with about half employed in a STEM occupation. Science majors had fewer of their graduates employed in STEM. About 26 percent of physical science majors; 15 percent of biological, environmental and agricultural sciences majors; 10 percent of psychology majors; and 7 percent of social science majors were employed in STEM.
These numbers are shocking. It speaks volumes about the state of education when half (or more) of STEM graduates aren’t even employed in fields relating to their studies.
The EPI report tends to focus on the relevance of these findings to guest worker programs and other immigration issues. The tech industry has long suggested that it cannot find STEM workers in America and therefore needs immigration changes that will enable it to bring in more workers from abroad. Skeptics have rebuffed that the tech industry really is just interested in cheaper STEM labor and that its proclamations about a dearth of STEM-qualified domestic workers is just a convenient cover story. This report provides ammunition to the latter camp to say the least.
It’s a long repeated myth that the United States (and Canada too) cannot find qualified STEM people. Strange, as there are so many of them coming out of schools. But the real issue seems to be finding “cheaper” workers.
Contrary to its report and public statements, Microsoft (and other employers in STEM fields) already have plenty of avenues to hire and retain new foreign graduates to work in STEM occupations. Recent research suggesting that the most highly educated graduates in STEM fields are in fact remaining in the United States for the long term supports this conclusion. Keeping the best and brightest foreign STEM workers in the United States to fill labor shortages in STEM occupations should be a national priority, but recent data show that no significant labor shortages exist, and suggest that an adequate number of foreign graduates in STEM fields are already remaining in the United States to fill the limited job openings available in the stagnating U.S. labor market.
The EPI study claims there is no shortage of tech workers available, and that rather this is a manufactured crisis used to bring in even more people. Why? To drive down wages. U.S. workers will often be willing to work for less if they know it’s easy to replace them. And if need be, just replace them anyway.
4. “Temporary” Workers Depressing Wages
What appears to be a neat match between excess labor supply in some countries and unfulfilled demand in others is often messy in practice. Economics teaches that there are often alternative ways of producing goods and services, so that recruiting and hiring migrant workers is only one option available to firms and employers. The alternatives may include making jobs more attractive to local workers, using labor-saving mechanization, or increasing imports. Employers who approach governments for permission to hire migrant workers have usually decided that employing migrant workers is their best or least expensive option, and the question for governments is whether to permit employers to hire migrants and to determine how to regulate the movement and employment of migrant workers.
The major policy question for governments weighing claims of labor shortages is whether they should allow naturally occurring wage changes to balance labor supply and demand when employers complain of labor shortages, or whether they should use migration policy to admit new workers into the country to address shortages. And if governments decide to admit new migrant workers, the next question that arises is what the terms and conditions of their admission should be. For example, should new migrant workers be admitted as permanent immigrants with freedom in the labor market or as temporary workers who are tied to a particular employer? In recent decades, many governments have chosen the latter, leading to a proliferation of TLMPs.
Many countries have youth exchange programs to facilitate cultural exchanges and promote development in poorer countries (Table 1, row 4). Japan allows employers to hire trainees who work and learn for several years, while the J-1 visa program in the United States allows exchange visitors to work while learning about the United States and traveling, for a few months to a few years, depending on the program. Australia has a Working Holiday Maker program that allows youth from many countries to work to earn money to cover the cost of their vacation in the country. While these are not standard TLMPs, they are included in Table 1 because some of these programs have been criticized as operating mainly as employment rather than cultural exchange programs and, as a sort of “TLMP in disguise,” offering few protections for local workers and fewer protections and benefits for migrants than traditional TLMPs (Costa 2011; Stewart 2015; Osumi 2018).
Other rationales for TLMPs include allowing multinational corporations and firms to move employees between offices and subsidiary companies in different countries. These mobile workers include intra-company or intra-corporate transferees (ICTs), and “posted” workers, who are workers employed by a company in one country who are sent or posted to work in another. As with other programs not linked explicitly to labor shortages, governments usually allow multinational corporations to move managers and workers with specialized skills from one country to another with minimum bureaucracy. However, abuses have arisen, and some employers wind up using ICTs and posted workers as low-cost guest workers because the programs sometimes lack prevailing wage rules, or the ICT or posted-worker wages are exempt from all or some payroll taxes (Avalos 2014; Flinders 2011).
I would disagree with this report in one area: the notion that these are temporary workers. The reality is that people are staying longer and longer, and many transitioning into permanent residents. So the temporary label is somewhat misleading.
In Canada, the Temporary Foreign Worker was loudly criticized for replacing Canadians with cheap foreign labour. The response was to split up the TFWP, and to boost the International Mobility Program (which was basically an open work permit). This was a cosmetic solution that didn’t address the real problem.
EPI points out that a lot of these temporary positions pay less and have less job security. That is true. The response will be to enshrine ever more rights on these “temporary” workers. EPI is also correct that a lot of the support behind increasing these programs is the cheaper labour that results from it.
5. Remittances Sent Abroad
This was covered in a previous article, but what about the money that gets sent overseas by “temporary” workers in this country? It is billions every year.
Aside from welfare cases (which is another story), yes the wages were fairly earned. But it is disingenuous to exclude this fact from the debate. Economic immigration leads to money being sent outside the country.
6. Free Trade, Soaring Trade Deficits
The rapidly growing U.S. trade deficit with China is directly linked to the growth of multinational firms operating in China. Of China’s more than $200 billion in exports in 1998, over 40% had their source in multinational firms operating in China (Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation 2000).
• The activities of U.S. multinational firms, together with China’s protectionist trade policies, have had a significant role in increasing the U.S. trade deficit with China. A 10% increase in the level of U.S. direct investment in an industry in China is associated with a 7.3% increase in the volume of U.S. imports from China and a 2.1% decline in U.S. exports to China in that industry. • Supporters of China’s WTO and PNTR agenda typically assert that jobs lost to China trade threaten only low-skill, low-wage jobs in the United States, while expanded exports to China will create high-wage U.S. jobs. However, the changing composition of imports from China over the last 10 years has led increasingly to job losses among higher-wage and more-skilled U.S. manufacturing workers. Although in 1989 only 30% of imports from China competed against goods produced by high-wage industries in the U.S. market, by 1999 that percentage had risen to 50%.  To make matters worse, although U.S. workers are five times as productive as their Chinese counterparts, average compensation in the United States is at least 10 and maybe even 20 times larger than that paid by U.S. multinationals to Chinese workers. Thus, U.S. workers will be unable to compete with the much cheaper labor in China despite their higher levels of productivity. U.S. firms build export-oriented production base in China
Trade between the U.S. and China is not a level playing field, to put it mildly. Hypocritically, China relies on its own protectionist measures while doing what it can to secure access to U.S. markets. And because many of the U.S. corporate leaders put profit over well being of their people, they are quite happy to outsource U.S. to China. Products get made cheaper, but American workers pay with their jobs and livelihoods. Of course, this is not limited to one country. NAFTA caused the same problems.
In addition to the lost jobs, this creates a huge trade deficit, where hundreds of billions of dollars leave the U.S. annually. Certainly there will always be some surpluses and deficits in trading internationally. But it can’t be so one sided as it is simply unsustainable.
7. Free Trade Driving Down Wages
A standard model estimating the impact of trade on American wages indicates that growing trade with less-developed countries lowered wages in 2011 by 5.5 percent—or by roughly $1,800—for a full-time, full-year worker earning the average wage for workers without a four-year college degree. One-third of this total effect is due to growing trade with just China.
Trade with low-wage countries can explain roughly a third of the overall rise since 1979 in the wage premium earned by workers with at least a four-year college degree relative to those without one. However, trade with low-wage countries explains more than 90 percent of the rise in this premium since 1995.
For full-time wage earners without a college degree, annual earnings losses due to trade with low-wage nations are larger than income losses under a hypothetical policy that permanently extends the Bush-era tax cuts by making across-the-board cuts to government transfer payments such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and unemployment insurance.
Free trade has hurt the middle class more than anyone else. Manufacturing was a booming industry that people — mainly men — could earn a decent living even without higher education. However, profit driven corporations have outsourced more and more of that manufacturing, leaving those worker to fight for lower paying jobs.
The topic of wage stagnation has also been covered by Pew Research. If wages stay the same, or decrease, but inflation remains, then real buying power decreases.
Serious question: how much will it help these companies in the end when no one can afford to buy their products?
8. Free Trade Removes Bargaining Power
The textbook analysis of the effects of trade on wage suppression discussed earlier assume that these effects run through trade flows that shift the relative demand for different types of labor. But trade’s effects on wages could run through other channels as well. After all, in the real world, wages are not set in perfectly competitive labor markets solely through shifts in demand and supply curves. Rather, the relative bargaining power of employers and employees matters greatly for wage-setting, and the threat effects of growing globalization surely hamstring this bargaining power for many American workers. In previous eras, the only fallback position for employers in the face of a breakdown in wage bargaining was to stop production. Now employers have the option of setting up production facilities abroad. This improved fallback position boosts employers’ bargaining power vis-à-vis their American employees, and this can lead to substantial downward pressure on wages.
As is always the case, measuring bargaining power at all, let alone its ebb and fall, is difficult, so the precise empirical impact of this channel of globalization’s wage-suppressing effects is hard to gauge. But there is growing evidence that these effects could be significant. Bertrand (2004), for example, shows that import competition tears down the protection that incumbent workers’ wages have traditionally enjoyed against rising unemployment. Senses (2007) finds that offshoring is associated with greater elasticity of labor demand—implying that wage gains will cut more sharply into employment gains. Bivens (2006) finds evidence that industry-level rent-sharing is eroded by growing import shares. Jayadev (2007) finds capital account openness associated with a shift from labor to capital income shares across countries, and attributes this finding to the bargaining channel. Anderson, Tang, and Wood (2006) construct a model of globalization eroding American workers’ privileged access to institutional and human capital and lowering wages through this channel. They find empirically that greater ease of movement of high-credential, high-skill managers leads to wage declines for American labor, supporting the predictions of their model.
To clarify, this article faults both the mass migration policies and free trade policies in creating these problems. In both cases, it becomes a race to the bottom. Either we import a replacement workforce here, or we export the work to the foreign labour force. The result is much the same.
It is also pointed out that collective bargaining and other rights get eroded once the option to replace the workforce becomes practical. So much for looking after your own.
9. Tariffs V.S. Currency Manipulation
According to Scott, Trump’s proposals fail to effectively address currency manipulation, the single largest cause of manufacturing job loss over the past 20 years. While Trump cites currency manipulation as a major problem, Scott argues, his strategy for dealing with it—calling for higher tariffs on imports from currency manipulators and promising to negotiate “better” trade deals—doesn’t reflect an analytical understanding of how currency manipulation works and what to do about it.
“Trump could not, as pledged, bring back American manufacturing jobs by negotiating ‘great trade deals’ because he doesn’t understand why globalization and trade and investment deals have hurt U.S. workers,” said Scott.
Trump’s plan to deal with currency manipulation by imposing tariffs would make other countries’ goods more expensive in the United States but do nothing to make U.S. goods less expensive in those countries. Scott recommends that the Fed conduct countervailing currency intervention (CCI) by buying up large amounts of foreign assets denominated in the currencies of the surplus countries, and impose a “market access charge,” a tax or fee on all capital inflows that would reduce the demand for dollar-denominated assets and hence the value of the currency.
It’s nice to see currency manipulation being addressed. Of course, if one or more parties plays games with their currency, they can in effect create products dirt cheap. They won’t have to worry about massive imports, since other nations won’t be able to undercut their manipulated prices.
Trump seems to have a fight-fire-with-fire mentality, but it doesn’t really work when others are not willing to act in good faith.
10. Free Trade Wrecks Communities
The growth of the U.S. trade deficit with China between 2001 and 2017 was responsible for the loss of 3.4 million U.S. jobs, including 1.3 million jobs lost since 2008 (the first full year of the Great Recession, which technically began at the end of 2007). Nearly three-fourths (74.4 percent) of the jobs lost between 2001 and 2017 were in manufacturing (2.5 million manufacturing jobs lost).
The growing trade deficit with China has cost jobs in all 50 states and in every congressional district in the United States. The 10 hardest-hit states, when looking at job loss as a share of total state employment, were New Hampshire, Oregon, California, Minnesota, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Texas. Job losses in these states ranged from 2.57 percent (in Texas) to 3.55 percent (in New Hampshire) of total state employment. The five hardest-hit states based on total jobs lost were California (562,500 jobs lost), Texas (314,000), New York (183,500), Illinois (148,200), and Pennsylvania (136,100).
The trade deficit in the computer and electronic parts industry grew the most: 1,209,000 jobs were lost in that industry, accounting for 36.0 percent of the 2001–2017 total jobs lost. Not surprisingly, the hardest-hit congressional districts (those ranking in the top 20 districts in terms of jobs lost as a share of all jobs in the district) included districts in Arizona, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, and Texas, where jobs in that industry are concentrated. A district in Georgia and another in North Carolina were also especially hard hit by trade-related job displacement in a variety of manufacturing industries, including computer and electronic parts, textiles and apparel, and furniture.
Between 2001 and 2011 alone, growing trade deficits with China reduced the incomes of directly impacted workers by $37 billion per year, and in 2011 alone, growing competition with imports from China and other low wage-countries reduced the wages of all U.S. non–college graduates by a total of $180 billion. Most of that income was redistributed to corporations in the form of higher profits and to workers with college degrees at the very top of the income distribution through higher wages.
Trade with China has caused an estimated 3.4 million jobs to be lost from 2001 to 2017. These job losses have hit every state, and every community.
Directly impacted workers lost $37 billion in wages, and non-college graduates $180 billion overall. How is this at all desirable, or even sustainable to keep driving down wages and incomes? How is outsourcing many of the better paying jobs good for the host country?
Again, it doesn’t matter how cheaply China (or other 3rd world nations) can build their products. If no one can afford to buy them, then they won’t sell.
11. Loss Of Sovereignty
This has been addressed in other posts, but nearly all free trade deals contain a “National Treatment” Clause. In plain English, these clauses prohibit nations from taking any measures to protect jobs or industries. Canada has ben successfully sued for doing so in the past.
Allowing large numbers of people into the country, causing extra demand for work and driving down wages doesn’t help. And we haven’t even gotten into cultural compatibility. Nor the money removed from the economy when vast sums of remittances are sent abroad.
Nor does outsourcing our industries and jobs to the 3rd World help us. Sure, products get made cheaper, but these offshoring kills people’s livelihoods. And what good is all of the formal education received if the jobs that should have resulted are sent away?
Mass economic migration and free trade are two sides of the same coin. The effects are much the same. But you won’t hear conservatives or libertarians talk about this. Ironically, more left leaning political parties are inclined to address such topics.