Subversion Archives - Page 12 of 20

August 10, 2022

Digital Citizen Contribution Program: Next round Of Grants

Canada’s Digital Citizen Contribution Program is back receiving the public’s attention. More taxpayer money is about to be handed out to groups and individuals who qualify under this program. Up to $100,000 (each) is available, depending on the details of the proposal.

This program, including the grants, has already been covered in the past. But it appears that Ottawa is gearing up to subsidize the next round of so-called fact checkers.

Eligible parties include:

a national, provincial, territorial, municipal, Indigenous, community or professional organization, society or association which has voluntarily associated itself for a not-for-profit purpose, and which has the mandate to represent its membership or community
a not-for-profit organization, including non-governmental or umbrella organizations, non-profit corporations, community groups, regulatory bodies or apprenticeship authorities, or associations serving the private sector
a university or educational institution
an individual researcher, acting in his or her personal capacity
a research institution with an established record in relevant field(s), intending to undertake work in a Canadian context
a for-profit Canadian and Canadian-owned institution with a record of developing and delivering programming, and performing research or related activities relevant to the goals of Canadian Heritage’s Digital Citizen Initiative, provided that the nature and the intent of the activity is non-commercial

The Digital Citizen Contribution Program supports the priorities of the Digital Citizen Initiative by providing time-limited financial assistance for research and citizen-focused activities. The Program aims to support democracy and social inclusion in Canada by enhancing and/or supporting efforts to counter online disinformation and other online harms and threats.

Of course, it’s deliberately vague what “online disinformation” and other “online harms and threats” really means. However, it’s not encouraging when the Government is using taxpayer money to fund groups to promote certain versions of truth.

The deadline for applications is August 18, 2022. Presumably, they get sent to the Ministry of Truth.

(1) https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/online-disinformation/digital-citizen-contribution-program.html
(2) https://canucklaw.ca/digital-citizen-contribution-program/
(3) (EN) Program Guidelines – DCCP
(4) (EN) Budget Template – DCCP
(5) (EN) Application Form – DCCP
(6) Unincorporated application acceptance of liability
(7) Direct deposit form

August 7, 2022August 7, 2022

Bill C-21: Reintroduced Legislation To Whittle Away Gun Rights

Bill C-21 was introduced in the last session of Parliament, but died when there was an election called. However, it’s been reintroduced, with some changes and new content. The changes primarily impact the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act.

It was recently announced, and covered by CPAC, that imports of handguns would be stopped by August 19, 2022. This was done by a regulatory change, without any democratic mandate or process. Seems that Ottawa doesn’t want to wait or take that chance.

Of course, the “temporary” measure announced on August 5th would be effectively made permanent if and when Bill C-21 is ever passed.

None of this ever addresses the elephant in the room: most serious crimes with firearms involve illegal guns, whereas this Bill primarily targets law abiding citizens. It’s almost as if there was some coordinated effort to disarm the population.

1. Adding “Red Flag” Laws To Canadian Criminal Code

Application for emergency prohibition order
110.‍1 (1) Any person may make an ex parte application to a provincial court judge for an order prohibiting another person from possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, prohibited ammunition or explosive substance, or all such things, if the person believes on reasonable grounds that it is not desirable in the interests of the safety of the person against whom the order is sought or of any other person that the person against whom the order is sought should possess any such thing.

Emergency prohibition order
(2) If, at the conclusion of a hearing of an application made under subsection (1), the provincial court judge is satisfied that the circumstances referred to in that subsection exist and that an order should be made without delay to ensure the immediate protection of any person, the judge shall make an order prohibiting the person against whom the order is sought from possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, prohibited ammunition or explosive substance, or all such things, for a period not exceeding 30 days, as is specified in the order, beginning on the day on which the order is made.

Service of order
(3) A copy of the order shall be served on the person to whom the order is addressed in the manner that the provincial court judge directs or in accordance with the rules of court.

Sections 109 and 110 of the Criminal Code call for people to be subjected to weapons prohibitions following convictions for certain offences. The proposed amendments would allow ordinary citizens to file an application to have another person’s guns seized.

The hearings would generally be ex-parte, or without the participation of the other side. That doesn’t really seem consistent with due process, or fairness.

There is a provision in the Bill to remove firearms if a protection order is issued against someone for domestic violence and/or stalking. However, that’s always been a remedy.

2. Adding “Yellow Flag” Laws, Halt/Suspend Certificates

Refusal to issue — chief firearms officer
68 Insertion start(1)Insertion end A chief firearms officer shall refuse to issue a licence if the applicant is not eligible to hold one and may refuse to issue an authorization to carry referred to in paragraph 20(b) or authorization to transport for any good and sufficient reason.

Refusal to issue — Commissioner
Start of inserted block
(2) The Commissioner may refuse to issue an authorization to carry referred to in paragraph 20(a) for any good and sufficient reason.

34 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 69:
Suspension
.
69.‍1 (1) If a chief firearms officer has reasonable grounds to suspect, on the basis of information that they have collected or received from any person, that the holder of a licence is no longer eligible to hold the licence, they may suspend, in respect of that licence, the holder’s authorization to use, acquire and import firearms for a period of up to 30 days.

Revocation of licence or authorization
70 (1) A chief firearms officer may revoke a licence, an authorization to carry referred to in paragraph 20(b)Insertion end or an authorization to transport — Insertion startand the Commissioner may revoke an authorization to carry referred to in paragraph 20(a)Insertion end — for any good and sufficient reason including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing,

A firearms officer can refuse to issue a permit “for any good and sufficient reason”. However, it’s not defined what a good and sufficient reason is This would make it almost entirely discretionary, and open to abuse. A license can also be suspended on those same grounds.

3. Prohibiting Any Sales Or Transfers Of Hundguns

Authorization to transfer prohibited or restricted firearms
.
23.2 (1) A person may transfer a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm if, at the time of the transfer,
(a) the transferee holds a licence authorizing the transferee to acquire and possess that kind of firearm;
(b) the transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee is not authorized to acquire and possess that kind of firearm;
(c) the transferor informs the Registrar of the transfer;
(d) if the transferee is an individual, the transferor informs a chief firearms officer of the transfer and obtains the authorization of the chief firearms officer for the transfer;
(e) a new registration certificate for the firearm is issued in accordance with this Act; and
(f) the prescribed conditions are met.

27 On being informed of a proposed transfer of a prohibited firearm or restricted firearm under section 23.2, a chief firearms officer shall
(a) verify
(i) whether the transferee or individual holds a licence,
(ii) whether the transferee or individual is still eligible to hold that licence, and
(iii) whether the licence authorizes the transferee or individual to acquire that kind of firearm or to acquire prohibited weapons, prohibited devices, ammunition or prohibited ammunition, as the case may be;
.
(b) in the case of a proposed transfer of a restricted firearm or a handgun referred to in subsection 12(6.1) (pre-December 1, 1998 handguns), verify the purpose for which the transferee or individual wishes to acquire the restricted firearm or handgun and determine whether the particular restricted firearm or handgun is appropriate for that purpose;

These are Sections 23.2 and 27 of the Canada Firearms Act. It specifies the steps and actions needed to transfer a restricted or prohibited firearm from one party to another. Pretty straightforward. Bill C-21 would add an extra clause to that

[Section 23.2]
(d.‍1) if the transferee is an individual and the firearm is a handgun, the individual is referred to in section 97.‍1;

[Section 27]
(iv) if the proposed transfer is in respect of a handgun, whether the transferee is an individual referred to in section 97.‍1;

If a handgun is to be transferred to an individual, this would be referred to another portion of the Firearms Act. Section 97 allows the Governor in Council to restrict such sales or transfers.

4. Expanding Definition Of “Replica” Firearm

1 (1) The definition replica firearm in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code is replaced by the following:
replica firearm means any device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, a firearm that is designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.‍4 m per second and at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.‍7 Joules, and that itself is not a firearm, but does not include any such device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, an antique firearm;

Changes to the criminal code would list that a replica firearm that can fire a projectile at a certain speed )(or with a certain amount of energy) can be prohibited. This could include things like paintball guns, which have valid recreational uses. Problem is, “exactly resemble” is subjective.

5. Other Thoughts On The Matter

There are a few small points which seem beneficial, such as making it harder for foreigners to enter Canada if they have convictions for certain firearms offences. But overall, that doesn’t offset the erosion of rights that’s being done with this legislation.

Another section would create a new criminal offence for altering the capacity of a magazine (allowing it to hold more bullets than allowed). While it sounds fine on the surface, someone with an illegal or stolen gun wouldn’t care about such things.

These measures do little to target crime. Instead, they restrict the rights of people to legally possess and use guns. Strange how that always seems to be the group of people these Bills hit.

Do read the entire Bill, as this critique is not exhaustive. It would be impractical for the Government to simply ban guns right away — though many would like to. Instead, introducing these measures bit by bit seems to be the way forward.

(1) https://www.cpac.ca/episode?id=38406422-ecdb-494b-8439-a1fbdeaf4e28
(2) https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/f-11.6/FullText.html
(3) https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/index.html
(4) https://canucklaw.ca/ottawa-to-ban-handgun-imports-august-19th-using-regulatory-measure/
(5) https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/en/bill/43-2/c-21
(6) https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/43-2/bill/C-21/first-reading
(7) https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/en/bill/44-1/c-21
(8) https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/bill/C-21/first-reading

July 19, 2022July 19, 2022

Police On Guard Case: Nothing Since Filing 15 Months Ago

You probably haven’t heard any concrete or specific updates from Notice Of Application concerning the lawsuit that was filed in April 2021. The most likely reason is that nothing has happened in the 15 months since the initial Notice of Application.

Why continue to follow up? A few reasons. First, knowing the truth about these publicly funded cases is important. After all, people have donated. Second, so that false hope isn’t attached to cases that will never go anywhere. Third, it’s not just the obvious people whose activities need to be monitored.

For anyone interested in SEARCHING CASE FILES, click on this link. A free account can be created. If you have the court file number, it can be instantly searched.

Recently, a follow-up article showed that Vaccine Choice Canada’s lawsuits (both of them) had been dormant since 2020.

As for some detailed critiques of various challenges, see here and here for some of the more obvious flaws and defects. How does this happen, unless intentionally?

Another Notice Of Application was filed in April 2021, concerning masks on students in Ontario schools. The 2 documents are virtually identical, suggesting a cut-and-paste creation for the second. And likewise, there’s no activity going on, nor anything in the foreseeable future.

Again, members of the public can SEARCH FOR FREE as to the updates on such cases. Instead of taking the word of people who have incentives to drive fundraising — or some reporter on the internet — go check the cases for yourselves.

Ontario Superior Court, Civil Branch
330 University – Toronto
330 University Ave.
Toronto ON M5G 1R7

Court file# CV-20-00643451-0000

Civil – Superior Court of Justice
tel. 416-327-5440 (front desk)

CSD.SCJRecords(at)ontario.ca (records department)

An ambitious person showing initiative can also verify what’s been happening with various cases by contacting the court directly, or by visiting. There are many options.

Vaccine Choice Canada (VCC), et. Al. (and others) v. Her Majesty the Queen, et.al. (and others) Ontario Superior Court #CV-00629810-0000. Filed October 2019. No movement since pleadings closed in March 2020.
Vaccine Choice Canada (VCC), et. Al. (and others) v. Justin Trudeau, et.al. (and others) Ontario Superior Court #CV-20-00643451-0000. Filed July 2020. No movement at all since Statement of Claim filed.
Gill & Lamba v. MacIver et al. Ontario Superior Court #CV-20-00652918-0000. Filed November 2020. Dismissed as a SLAPP, or strategic lawsuit against public participation. Appealed, but status unknown.
Sgt. Julie Evans, et al v. AG of Ontario, et al Ontario Superior Court #CV-21-00661200-000. Filed April 2021. No movement since Notice of Application filed.
M.A. and L.A., et al vs. Eileen De Villa, et al Ontario Superior Court #CV-21-00661284-0000. Filed April 2021. No movement since Notice of Application filed.
Action4Canada, et al vs. Dr. Bonnie Henry, Justin Trudeau, Premier Horgan, et al British Columbia Superior Court # VLC-S-S-217586. Filed August 2021. Awaiting decision for Application to Strike given the exceptionally poor quality drafting of the Statement of Claim

Not too encouraging, is it?

There had been claims floating around starting in 2021 about affidavits of evidence that totaled in the thousands of pages. Problem is: if they actually exist, they haven’t been filed anywhere. One possible explanation is that this was deliberate deception to soothe over the concerns of donors with the lack of record activity.

Apparently a new suit has been filed in Federal Court. (Archive is here). While not written well, it’s nowhere near as bad as some of the other Claims. It’s only been a month, so too soon to determine where that goes. However, if recent history is any indication, it will likely sit for months or years with no activity.

To readers who have donated to these “lawsuits”: you may want to seriously consider demanding a refund. It seems very unlikely that this is what you thought was really going on.

July 16, 2022November 17, 2023

World Health Organization Constitution: Have You Actually Read It?

The World Health Organization Constitution is just one document that Canadians were subjected to, and this being done without knowledge or consent. Was there ever a referendum or election campaign run on this? Probably not.

The full text is available with a quick internet search. Below are some sections which might be the most troubling to any nationalist or patriot.

Article 4
Members of the United Nations may become Members of the Organization by signing or otherwise accepting this Constitution in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XIX and in accordance with their constitutional processes.

This part cannot be overemphasized. If a country wants to be part of the WHO, then they necessarily have to sign onto their constitution. The Federal Government did this on their own, with a signature. And as we go through it, the problems with this become obvious.

Article 7
If a Member fails to meet its financial obligations to the Organization or in other exceptional circumstances, the Health Assembly may, on such conditions as it thinks proper, suspend the voting privileges and services to which a Member is entitled. The Health Assembly shall have the authority to restore such voting privileges and services.

So, being part of this group is voluntary. However, if you don’t pay your bills, WHO can suspend your voting rights. They can also be removed under the undefined “exceptional circumstances”. Sounds a bit undemocratic, doesn’t it?

Article 19
The Health Assembly shall have authority to adopt conventions or agreements with respect to any matter within the competence of the Organization. A two-thirds vote of the Health Assembly shall be required for the adoption of such conventions or agreements, which shall come into force for each Member when accepted by it in accordance with its constitutional processes.

Article 20
Each Member undertakes that it will, within eighteen months after the adoption by the Health Assembly of a convention or agreement, take action relative to the acceptance of such convention or agreement. Each Member shall notify the Director-General of the action taken, and if it does not accept such convention or agreement within the time limit, it will furnish a statement of the reasons for non-acceptance. In case of acceptance, each Member agrees to make an annual report to the Director-General in accordance with Chapter XIV

The Health Assembly has the right to determine its own conventions and agreement, and it can be done with a 2/3 vote. By this rationale, Canada could easily be forced into adopting policies that it fundamentally disagrees with. And to state the obvious, there was never any domestic vote or referendum over this.

Members are also obligated to go along with any convention or agreement. If they refuse, written reasons have to be provided.

Article 21
The Health Assembly shall have authority to adopt regulations concerning:
(a) sanitary and quarantine requirements and other procedures designed to prevent the international spread of disease;
(b) nomenclatures with respect to diseases, causes of death and public health practices;
(c) standards with respect to diagnostic procedures for international use;
(d) standards with respect to the safety, purity and potency of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce;
(e) advertising and labelling of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce.

Article 22
Regulations adopted pursuant to Article 21 shall come into force for all Members after due notice has been given of their adoption by the Health Assembly except for such Members as may notify the Director-General of rejection or reservations within the period stated in the notice.

W.H.O.’s constitution makes it clear that quarantine measures fall under their purview. Quarantine, of course, is code for movement and population control. Strange how none of the freedom fighters in the media or politics ever mention this.

As for the standards and nomenclature of pharmaceuticals, this includes vaccines that are pushed on the public despite only having emergency authorization. There’s also a reference to testing, such as the PCR tests, which can’t determine anything.

W.H.O. names diseases as well, including ones that have never been proven to exist.

It doesn’t appear that Canada ever rejected or opted-out of any of this. As such, we are compelled to play along with this globalist organization.

Article 54
The Pan American Sanitary Organization represented by the Pan American Sanitary Bureau and the Pan American Sanitary Conferences, and all other inter-governmental regional health organizations in existence prior to the date of signature of this Constitution, shall in due course be integrated with the Organization. This integration shall be effected as soon as practicable through common action based on mutual consent of the competent authorities expressed through the organizations concerned.

All other organizations that use “public health” as a means of population control will eventually become integrated with W.H.O. Guess it keeps everything centralized.

CHAPTER XIII – VOTING
Article 59
Each Member shall have one vote in the Health Assembly.

Article 60
(a) Decisions of the Health Assembly on important questions shall be made by a two-thirds majority of the Members present and voting. These questions shall include: the adoption of conventions or agreements; the approval of agreements bringing the Organization into relation with the United Nations and inter-governmental organizations and agencies in accordance with Articles 69, 70 and 72; amendments to this Constitution.
(b) Decisions on other questions, including the determination of additional categories of questions to be decided by a two-thirds majority, shall be made by a majority of the Members present and voting.
(c) Voting on analogous matters in the Board and in committees of the Organization shall be made in accordance with paragraphs (a) and (b) of this Article.

This becomes a numbers game, where decisions that are detrimental to some nations can be adopted simply because the majority overall vote for it. With this mechanism in mind, there really is no sovereignty to rely on.

CHAPTER XV – LEGAL CAPACITY, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES
Article 66
The Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each Member such legal capacity as may be necessary for the fulfilment of its objective and for the exercise of its functions.

Article 67
(a) The Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each Member such privileges and immunities as may be necessary for the fulfilment of its objective and for the exercise of its functions.
(b) Representatives of Members, persons designated to serve on the Board and technical and administrative personnel of the Organization shall similarly enjoy such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connexion with the Organization.

Article 68
Such legal capacity, privileges and immunities shall be defined in a separate agreement to be prepared by the Organization in consultation with the Secretary-General of the United Nations and concluded between the Members

All employees and other workers are given immunity from legal action as part of their contracts with W.H.O. That’s a pretty good deal. They can’t be sued, charged, or have recourse taken against them, as long as they were doing their jobs. There doesn’t even seem to be a requirement that they be acting in good faith.

Article 69
The Organization shall be brought into relation with the United Nations as one of the specialized agencies referred to in Article 57 of the Charter of the United Nations. The agreement or agreements bringing the Organization into relation with the United Nations shall be subject to approval by a two-thirds vote of the Health Assembly.

The W.H.O. would be subject to U.N. control. It’s pretty clear that the ultimate goal is to merge all of these organizations into a single, centralized institution of power.

Article 71
The Organization may, on matters within its competence, make suitable arrangements for consultation and co-operation with non-governmental international organizations and, with the consent of the Government concerned, with national organizations, governmental or non-governmental

On its own, this doesn’t sound too bad, but the devil is always in the details. Which groups would be consulted? How would they be screened? Would their recommendations become binding on members?

Article 72
Subject to the approval by a two-thirds vote of the Health Assembly, the Organization may take over from any other international organization or agency whose purpose and activities lie within the field of competence of the Organization such functions, resources and obligations as may be conferred upon the Organization by international agreement or by mutually acceptable arrangements entered into between the competent authorities of the respective organizations.

The W.H.O. constitution gives itself the power to take over from any “international organization or agency” within its designated scope, as long as there is a 2/3 majority vote from the Health Assembly.

Sure, it’s done “on consent”, but who are the people that are really consenting?

Article 79
(a) States may become parties to this Constitution by:
(i) signature without reservation as to approval;
(ii) signature subject to approval followed by acceptance; or
(iii) acceptance.
(b) Acceptance shall be effected by the deposit of a formal instrument with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Article 80
This Constitution shall come into force when twenty-six Members of the United Nations have become parties to it in accordance with the provisions of Article 79.

This isn’t everything, but just more eye-opening parts. The full text of the W.H.O. constitution is freely available. (Here’s the highlighted version). Look it up, read it, and see what exactly we have been signed onto without any sort of democratic mandate.

Rest assured, there are a lot more than 26 countries now. This means the constitution has come into force. And if anyone hasn’t gone through the chronology of events, it’s all laid out here:

1908: International Public Health Office to be created
1926: International Sanitary Convention was ratified in Paris.
1946: WHO’s Constitution was signed, and it’s something we’ll get into in more detail.
1951: International Sanitary Regulations adopted by Member States.
1969: International Health Regulations (1st Edition) replaced ISR. These are legally binding on all Member States.
2005: International Health Regulations 3rd Edition of IHR were ratified.

Being part of the World Health Organization means submitting to their rules and control. It’s laid out in their own constitution. To be clear, sovereignty will never be possible as long as Canada is part of this entity.

As has been outlined here before, the 2005 Quarantine Act, Bill C-12, was really just domestic implementation of the 3rd Edition of the International Health Regulations.

We’ve also gone heavily into the creation of PHAC, which is essentially just a branch of the World Health Organization. It was created at WHO’s instigation. It takes over (to a large degree) what Health Canada had been doing. The timeline is laid out, and worth a read.

The W.H.O. Constitution is a major step is the erasure of nations — under the guise of public health. Anyone serious about “freedom” in Canada, or elsewhere, needs to address this. Far too many are propped up as heroes, but who ignore the underlying legislation and treaties.

July 9, 2022

Canadian Media: Qualifying Digital News Subscriptions List

We’ve previously addressed how “approved” media outlets effectively get a tax subsidy with digital subscriptions. In short, they are able to somewhat discount the price because readers can send their receipts to the Canada Revenue Agency for a 15% discount.

Now, this only covers 15% of up to $500/year. This means that it could amount to $75 in the following tax season. Who’s eligible to offer this?

It’s also a bit sickening to see “conservative” commentators who pretend to be against bailouts, but who see nothing wrong working for outlets that receive them. Guess resigning from such a job on principle is too much to ask.

Now, let’s take a look at which “media” organizations are able to give discounted subscriptions, off the backs of taxpayers. It’s quite the long list.

ORGANIZATION	TYPE	PUBLICATION	DATE
3030106 Nova Scotia Limited	allNovaScotia.com	allNovaScotia allNewfoundlandLabrador.com allNewBrunswick	January 1, 2020
4437594 Canada Inc.	Digital	The Low Down to Hull & Back News	January 1, 2020
Addington Publications Limited	Print and Full Online Access	Guysborough Journal	January 1, 2020
Addington Publications Limited	Online Only Access	Guysborough Journal	January 1, 2020
AllNewBrunswick.com Online News Service Ltd.	allNewBrunswick.com	allNewBrunswick allNovaScotia allNewfoundlandLabrador.com	January 1, 2020
AllNewfoundlandLabrador.com Online News Service Ltd.	allNewfoundlandlabrador.com	allNewfoundlandLabrador.com allNovaScotia allNewBrunswick	January 1, 2020
AllSaskatchewan.com Online News Service Ltd.	Digital subscription	allSaskatchewan.com	July 15, 2021
Alta Newspaper Group Limited Partnership	Premium	Lethbridge Herald	January 1, 2020
Alta Newspaper Group Limited Partnership	Digital e-Edition	Lethbridge Herald	January 1, 2020
Alta Newspaper Group Limited Partnership	Digital e-Edition	Medicine Hat News	January 1, 2020
Alta Newspaper Group Limited Partnership	Digital ePaper	The Taber Times	January 1, 2020
Baby Media Mogul Inc.	Daily Newsletter Subscription	Queen’s Park Today	January 1, 2020
Baby Media Mogul Inc.	Daily Newsletter Subscription	British Columbia Today	January 1, 2020
Baby Media Mogul Inc.	Daily Newsletter Subscription	Alberta Today	January 1, 2020
Brunswick News Inc.	Digital subscription	Telegraph Journal	January 1, 2020
Brunswick News Inc.	Digital plus Print Subscription	Telegraph Journal	January 1, 2020
Coopérative Nationale de L’information Indépendante, coop de solidarité	L’essentiel numérique	Le Soleil, Le Nouvelliste, Le Droit, Le Quotidien, La Tribune et La Voix de l’Est.	January 1, 2021
Coopérative Nationale de L’information Indépendante, coop de solidarité	Le numérique tout compris	Le Soleil, Le Nouvelliste, Le Droit, Le Quotidien, La Tribune et La Voix de l’Est.	January 1, 2021
Coopérative Nationale de L’information Indépendante, coop de solidarité	Le numérique et papier tout compris	Le Soleil, Le Nouvelliste, Le Droit, Le Quotidien, La Tribune et La Voix de l’Est.	January 1, 2021
FolioJumpline Publishing Inc.	Digital	Prince Albert Daily Herald	January 1, 2020
FolioJumpline Publishing Inc.	Digital	Digital plus print in city	January 1, 2020
FP Canadian Newspapers Limited Partnership	All Access Digital	Winnipeg Free Press	January 1, 2020
FP Canadian Newspapers Limited Partnership	Read Now Pay Later	Winnipeg Free Press	January 1, 2020
FP Canadian Newspapers Limited Partnership	All Access Digital	Brandon Sun	January 1, 2020
FP Canadian Newspapers Limited Partnership	Read Now Pay Later	Brandon Sun	January 1, 2020
FP Canadian Newspapers Limited Partnership	All Access Digital	The Carillon	January 1, 2020
Halifax Examiner Inc.	HalifaxExaminer.ca	Halifax Examiner	January 1, 2020
Hill Times Publishing Inc.	Digital	Hill Times	January 1, 2020
Hill Times Publishing Inc.	Print & Digital	Hill Times	January 1, 2020
Icimédias inc.	Numérique	Le Canada	January 1, 2020
Icimédias inc.	Papier + Numérique	Le Canada	January 1, 2020
Island Press Limited	Unlimited digital access	The Eastern Graphic West Prince Graphic Island Farmer Atlantic Post Calls	June 22, 2021
Island Press Limited	Print + Digital	The Eastern Graphic West Prince Graphic Island Farmer Atlantic Post Calls	June 22, 2021
Island Press Limited	Print + Digital Combo	The Eastern Graphic	November 29, 2021
Island Press Limited	Print + Digital Combo	The West Prince Graphic	November 29, 2021
Island Press Limited	Print + Digital Combo	Island Farmer	November 29, 2021
Island Press Limited	Print + Digital Combo	Atlantic Post Calls	November 29, 2021
Kelowna Daily Courier Newspaper Limited Partnership	Print Subscriber Free Access	Daily Courier	January 1, 2020
Kelowna Daily Courier Newspaper Limited Partnership	Print Subscriber Free Access	Penticton Herald	January 1, 2020
Kelowna Daily Courier Newspaper Limited Partnership	Total Digital	Daily Courier	January 1, 2020
Kelowna Daily Courier Newspaper Limited Partnership	Total Digital	Penticton Herald	January 1, 2020
Les Éditions de l’Acadie Nouvelle (1984) Ltée	Abonnement Numérique	Acadie Nouvelle	January 1, 2020
Les Éditions de l’Acadie Nouvelle (1984) Ltée	Abonnement Tout compris	Acadie Nouvelle	January 1, 2020
Manitoulin Publishing Company Limited	Digital subscription	The Manitoulin Expositor	January 1, 2020
MédiaQMI Inc.	Offre Tout Inclus Combo Papier et Édition Électronique	Journal de Montréal	January 1, 2020
MédiaQMI Inc.	Édition Électronique 7 jours sur 7	Journal de Montréal	January 1, 2020
MédiaQMI Inc.	Offre Tout Inclus Combo Papier et Édition Électronique	Journal de Québec	January 1, 2020
MédiaQMI Inc.	Édition Électronique 7 jours sur 7	Journal de Québec	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Digital access + ePaper	Hamilton Spectator	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Home delivery including digital access + ePaper	Hamilton Spectator	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Digital access + ePaper	Waterloo Region Record	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Home delivery including digital access + ePaper	Waterloo Region Record	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Home delivery including digital access + ePaper	Peterborough Examiner	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Digital access + ePaper	Peterborough Examiner	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Digital access + ePaper	St. Catharines Standard	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Home delivery including digital access + ePaper	St. Catharines Standard	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Digital access + ePaper	Niagara Falls Review	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Home delivery including digital access + ePaper	Niagara Falls Review	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Digital access + ePaper	Welland Tribune	January 1, 2020
Metroland Media Group Ltd.	Home delivery including digital access + ePaper	Welland Tribune	January 1, 2020
Mishmash Media Inc	Numérique et Papier	L’actualité	January 1, 2020
Mishmash Media Inc	Numérique	L’actualité	January 1, 2020
Observer Media Group Inc.	Digital Access	Canada’s National Observer	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	National Post	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	National Post	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	National Post	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Calgary Herald	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Calgary Herald	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Calgary Herald	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Calgary Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Calgary Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Calgary Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Edmonton Journal	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Edmonton Journal	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Edmonton Journal	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Edmonton Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Edmonton Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Edmonton Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	The Province (Vancouver)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	The Province (Vancouver)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	The Province (Vancouver)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	The Vancouver Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	The Vancouver Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	The Vancouver Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Winnipeg Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Winnipeg Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Winnipeg Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	London Free Press	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	London Free Press	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	London Free Press	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Ottawa Citizen	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Ottawa Citizen	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Ottawa Citizen	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Ottawa Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Ottawa Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Ottawa Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Toronto Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Toronto Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Toronto Sun	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Windsor Star	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Windsor Star	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Windsor Star	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Montreal Gazette	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Montreal Gazette	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Montreal Gazette	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Regina Leader-Post	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Regina Leader-Post	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Regina Leader-Post	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online Access	Saskatoon Star Phoenix	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Weekend Home Delivery	Saskatoon Star Phoenix	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	Online plus Daily Home Delivery	Saskatoon Star Phoenix	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	Daily Herald-Tribune	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Intelligencer (Belleville)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Expositor (Brantford)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Recorder & Times (Brockville)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Chatham Daily News	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	Standard Freeholder (Cornwall)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Kingston Whig-Standard	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	North Bay Nugget	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Observer (Sarnia)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Sault Star (Sault Ste. Marie)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	Simcoe Reformer	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	St. Thomas Times-Journal	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Beacon Herald (Stratford)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Sudbury Star	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	The Daily Press (Timmins)	January 1, 2020
Postmedia Network Inc.	E-Paper	Sentinel-Review (Woodstock)	January 1, 2020
Presse-Ouest Ltée.	Numérique la-liberte.ca	La Liberté	January 1, 2020
Presse-Ouest Ltée.	Numérique et Papier la-liberte.ca	La Liberté	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Unlimited Digital Access	The Telegram	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	The Telegram	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Unlimited Digital Access	The Guardian	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	The Guardian	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Unlimited Digital Access	The Cape Breton Post	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	The Cape Breton Post	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Unlimited Digital Access	Tri-County Vanguard	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	Tri-County Vanguard	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Unlimited Digital Access	Truro News	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	Truro News	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Unlimited Digital Access	New Glasgow News	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	New Glasgow News	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Unlimited Digital Access	Valley Journal Advertiser	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	Valley Journal Advertiser	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Unlimited Digital Access	Annapolis Valley Register	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	Annapolis Valley Register	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Unlimited Digital Access	Journal Pioneer	January 1, 2020
Saltwire Network Inc.	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	Journal Pioneer	January 1, 2020
TC Publication Limited Partnership	Print and E-edition	Times Colonist	January 1, 2020
TC Publication Limited Partnership	E-edition	Times Colonist	January 1, 2020
The Catholic Register	Digital Edition	The Catholic Register	January 1, 2020
The Catholic Register	Print and Digital	The Catholic Register	January 1, 2020
The Globe and Mail Inc.	Digital Access	The Globe and Mail	January 1, 2020
The Globe and Mail Inc.	Home Delivery plus Digital Access	The Globe and Mail	January 1, 2020
The Globe and Mail Inc.	Globe2Go	The Globe and Mail	January 1, 2020
The Halifax Herald Limited	Unlimited Digital Access	The Chronicle Herald	January 1, 2020
The Halifax Herald Limited	Print + Unlimited Digital Access	The Chronicle Herald	January 1, 2020
The Logic Inc.	The Logic Annual Subscription	The Logic	January 1, 2020
The Logic Inc.	The Logic All-Access Subscription	The Logic	January 1, 2020
Thunder Bay Chronicle Limited Partnership	Digital e-version	The Chronicle Journal	January 1, 2020
Thunder Bay Chronicle Limited Partnership	Print subscriber free online account	The Chronicle Journal	January 1, 2020
Toronto Star Newspaper Limited	Print + ePaper + Digital access	The Toronto Star	January 1, 2020
Toronto Star Newspaper Limited	ePaper + Digital Access	The Toronto Star	January 1, 2020
Toronto Star Newspaper Limited	The Star Digital Access	The Toronto Star	January 1, 2020
Toronto Star Newspaper Limited	The Star ePaper	The Toronto Star	January 1, 2020

While there are 165 listings (thus far) for this tax credit, many are of the same outlet offering different formats. It’s also obvious that many are owned by the same conglomerates, such as Post Media.

There are, of course, other subsidies available. Independent media — that doesn’t receive handouts — is virtually nonexistent, at least for large and medium companies. Even groups that claim to be truly independent can withhold important information.

Now, the question everyone needs to ask: will these outlets be too critical of Government policy, or investigate too deeply? After all, it’s not wise to bite the hand that feeds you.

(1) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency.html
(2) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/deductions-credits-expenses/deductions-credits-expenses/digital-news-subscription/list-qualifying-digital-news-subscriptions.html#wb-auto-4
(3) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/programs/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/federal-government-budgets/budget-2019-investing-middle-class/canadian-journalism/refundable-labour-tax-credit.html
(4) https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/funding/periodical-fund/aid-publishers/application-guidelines.html
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/funding/periodical-fund/special-measures-journalism/application-guidelines.html

July 3, 2022July 21, 2024

Replacement Migration In Canada: 1966 To 1979 Data

Here’s some data going back to the 1960s. These years feature quite differently than more recent reports. The United States and United Kingdom were consistently at the top of the source countries list. That has since been replaced by China, India and the Philippines. White genocide (a.k.a “replacement”) is a very real thing.

According to the United Nations, enacting policies designed to bring about the destruction of an ethnic, racial, or religious group (in all or in part), is considered genocide. Consequently, forced multiculturalism and population replacement should be viewed through that lens.

1. Mass LEGAL Immigration In Canada

Despite what many think, LEGAL immigration into Canada is actually a much larger threat than illegal aliens, given the true scale of the replacement that is happening. What was founded as a European (British) colony is becoming unrecognizable due to forced demographic changes. There are also social, economic, environmental and voting changes to consider. See this Canadian series, and the UN programs for more detail. Politicians, the media, and so-called “experts” have no interest in coming clean on this.

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

Note: If there are errors in calculating the totals, please speak up. Information is of no use to the public if it isn’t accurate.

2. Source Countries From 1966 To 1979

Let’s look at the “official” numbers from 1966 to 1979. The U.S. and U.K. are still featured prominently, something that will change in the coming years.

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1966
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	63,291	32.5	1
Italy	31,625	16.2	2
United States	17,514	9.0	3
Germany	9,263	4.8	4
Portugal	7,930	4.0	5
France	7,872	4.0	6
Greece	7,174	3.7	7
China	4,094	2.1	8
West Indies	3,935	2.0	9
Netherlands	3,794	1.9	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	156,492	80.4	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	38,251	19.6	—
GRAND TOTAL	194,743	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1967
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	62,420	28.0	1
Italy	30,055	13.4	2
United States	19,038	8.6	3
Germany	11,779	5.3	4
Greece	10,650	4.6	5
France	10,122	4.5	6
Portugal	9,500	4.2	7
West Indies	8,403	3.8	8
China	6,409	2.9	9
Australia	4,967	2.2	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	173,343	77.8	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	49,533	22.2	—
GRAND TOTAL	222,876	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1968
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	37,889	20.6	1
United States	20,422	11.1	2
Italy	19,774	10.8	3
Germany	8,966	4.8	4
China	8,382	4.6	5
France	8,184	4.4	6
Austria	8,125	4.4	7
Greece	7,739	4.2	8
Portugal	7,738	4.2	9
West Indies	7,563	4.1	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	104,782	57.0	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	79,192	43.0	—
GRAND TOTAL	183,974	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1969
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	31,977	19.8	1
United States	22,785	14.1	2
West Indies	13,093	8.1	3
Italy	10,383	6.4	4
China	8,272	5.1	5
Portugal	7,182	4.4	6
Greece	6,937	4.3	7
Germany	5,880	3.6	8
France	5,549	3.4	9
India	5,395	3.3	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	117,453	72.7	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	44,078	27.3	—
GRAND TOTAL	161,531	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1970
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	26,497	18.7	1
United States	24,424	16.5	2
West Indies	12,456	8.4	3
Italy	8,533	5.8	4
Portugal	7,902	5.4	5
Greece	6,327	4.3	6
Yugoslavia	5,672	3.8	7
India	5,670	3.8	8
China	5,377	3.6	9
France	4,410	2.9	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	101,596	68.8	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	46,118	31.2	—
GRAND TOTAL	147,714	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1971
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United States	24,366	20.0	1
United Kingdom	15,451	12.8	2
Portugal	9,157	7.5	3
Italy	5,790	4.8	4
India	5,313	4.4	5
China	5,009	4.1	6
Greece	4,769	3.9	7
Philippines	4,180	3.4	8
Yugoslavia	2,997	2.4	9
France	2,966	2.4	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	79,998	66.6	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	41,902	34.4	—
GRAND TOTAL	121,900	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1972
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United States	22,618	18.5	1
United Kingdom	18,197	14.9	2
Portugal	8,737	7.2	3
Hong Kong	6,297	5.2	4
India	5,049	4.1	5
Uganda	5,021	4.1	6
Italy	4,608	3.8	7
Greece	4,016	3.3	8
Philippines	3,946	3.2	9
France	2,742	2.2	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	81,231	66.6	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	40,775	33.4	—
GRAND TOTAL	122,006	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1973
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	26,973	14.6	1
United States	25,242	13.7	2
Hong Kong	14,662	8.0	3
Portugal	13,483	7.3	4
Jamaica	9,363	5.1	5
India	9,203	5.0	6
Philippines	6,757	3.7	7
Greece	5,833	3.2	8
Italy	5,468	3.0	9
Trinidad-Tobago	5,138	2.8	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	122,122	66.3	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	62,078	33.7	—
GRAND TOTAL	184,200	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1974
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	38,456	17.6	1
United States	26,541	12.1	2
Portugal	16,333	7.5	3
India	12,868	5.9	4
Hong Kong	12,704	5.8	5
Jamaica	11,286	5.2	6
Philippines	9,564	4.4	7
Greece	5,632	2.6	8
Italy	5,226	2.4	9
Haiti	4,857	2.2	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	143,467	65.7	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	74,998	34.3	—
GRAND TOTAL	218,465	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1975
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	34,978	18.6	1
United States	20,155	10.7	2
Hong Kong	11,132	5.9	3
India	10,144	5.4	4
Portugal	8,390	4.5	5
Jamaica	8,211	4.4	6
Philippines	7,364	3.9	7
Italy	5,078	2.7	8
Guyana	4,394	2.3	9
South Korea	4,314	2.3	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	114,163	60.8	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	73,718	39.2	—
GRAND TOTAL	187,881	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1976
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	21,548	14.4	1
United States	17,315	11.6	2
Hong Kong	10,725	7.2	3
Jamaica	7,282	4.9	4
Lebanon	7,161	4.8	5
India	6,733	4.5	6
Philippines	5,939	4.0	7
Portugal	5,344	3.6	8
Italy	4,530	3.0	9
Guyana	3,430	2.3	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	90,007	60.2	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	59,422	39.8	—
GRAND TOTAL	149,429	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1977
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	17,977	15.6	1
United States	12,888	11.2	3
Hong Kong	6,371	5.5	3
Philippines	6,232	5.4	4
India	5,555	4.8	5
Lebanon	3,847	3.3	6
Portugal	3,579	3.1	7
Italy	3,411	3.0	8
France	2,757	2.4	9
Guyana	2,472	2.4	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	65,089	56.7	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	49,825	43.3	—
GRAND TOTAL	114,914	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1978
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
United Kingdom	11,801	13.7	1
United States	9,945	11.5	2
India	5,110	5.9	3
Hong Kong	4,740	5.5	4
Philippines	4,370	5.1	5
Portugal	3,086	3.6	6
Italy	2,976	.43	7
France	1,754	2.9	8
South Africa	1,653	1.9	9
Lebanon	1,454	1.7	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	46,880	54.3	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	39,424	45.7	—
GRAND TOTAL	86,313	100	—

PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN YEAR 1979
SOURCE COUNTRY	NUMBER	PERCENTAGE	RANK
Vietnam	19,859	17.7	1
United Kingdom	12,853	11.5	2
United States	9,617	8.6	3
Hong Kong	5,966	5.3	4
India	4,517	4.0	5
Laos	3,903	3.5	6
Philippines	3,873	3.5	7
Jamaica	3,213	2.9	8
Guyana	2,473	2.2	9
China	2,058	2.1	10
TOTAL — TOP 10	68,332	61.0	—
TOTAL — OTHERS	43,764	39.0	—
GRAND TOTAL	112,096	100	—

Permanent Residents: U.S., Europe and Australia as a percentage of overall migration globally. The vast majority of people getting PR in recent years aren’t from those areas.

YEAR	# U.S.	% U.S.	# Eur.	% Eur.	# Aust	% Austr	# Other	% Other
1973	25,242	13.7	71,883	39.0	2,096	1.1	84,979	46.1
1974	26,541	12.1	88,694	40.6	2,022	0.1	102,208	46.3
1975	20,155	10.7	72,898	38.8	1,654	0.1	87,174	46.4
1976	17,315	11.5	49,908	33.3	1,387	0.1	80,819	54.1
1977	12,888	11.2	40,747	35.5	1,063	0.1	60,216	52.4
1978	9,945	11.5	30,075	34.8	1,233	1.4	45,060	52.2
1979	9,617	8.6	32,858	29.3	808	0.1	68,813	61.4

3. More Recent Statistics On Immigration Source Countries

The above may not seem too bad, but keep in mind that the trends are about to get a whole lot worse. Here are numbers from within the last decade. Of course, this doesn’t include the hordes of students and “temporary” workers who come and don’t leave.

(Page 16 of the 2015 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 10 of the 2016 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 14 of the 2017 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 28 of the 2018 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 36 of the 2019 Annual Report to Parliament)

Notice any major changes? The U.K. and U.S. are nowhere near as prominent as they once were, and the demographic replacement is accelerating.

Of course, this doesn’t address the levels of student visas and “temporary” workers, which would increase drastically in the coming years.

4. Documents Provided By Canadian Government

Category: Subversion

Bill C-21: Reintroduced Legislation To Whittle Away Gun Rights

1. Adding “Red Flag” Laws To Canadian Criminal Code

2. Adding “Yellow Flag” Laws, Halt/Suspend Certificates

3. Prohibiting Any Sales Or Transfers Of Hundguns