Category: Free Trade

Posted on

Guest Post: Michael Comeau On “Buy Canadian”, Protectionist Policies

https://www.strategic-enterprise.ca
Contact: contact(at)strategic-enterprise.ca

Economic Leadership eh! Great fantastic! Maybe ask for a moment, ‘Who on earth are you waiting for?” A visionary, a leader, an inventor, an entrepreneurial free enterprise genius, an industrialist, a down to earth character with real Canadian values, a technological prodigy? A nationalist visionnaire extraordinaire? Who you are looking for is Michael Comeau, the founder and CEO of the most awesome advanced technological manufacturing development program and projects of the century. You just don’t know it yet.

Are you looking for someone capable of stealth business, national security rated, someone with a secret identity that you would never guess or suspect his true identity and profession? Are you looking for someone working on the most awesome Made in Canada portfolio in the history of Canada.

Made in Canada? Can you name anyone in government, an MP or MPP who actually talks or writes about Made in Canada? Eh? What about your friends and the people you know? Is there really someone known as the coffeeshop billionaire? They mystery man who claims he drinks coffee to do stupid things faster? Like how fast? How about CF-105Arrow.ca? Is that a little more up to speed?

Is Comeau Aerospace Inc. more up to speed, pure awesomeness, the ultimate flying machine, with a magnitude of design engineering genius and individual creative imagination, the genie out of Aladdin’s lamp. Zero unions, working share owners, asset protection, everyday advantage and more of what you never get in the news, as it makes everything else obsolete and backwards by comparison.

Do you want to talk about space programs, strategic airlifters, conventional and advanced design and technology? A few hundred billion in aerospace development programs, talk about go big or go home, what about that saying that the 21st century belongs to Canada? Imagine, zero government money, zero publicity, only people doing stuff because they want to, in fact, the less publicity the better, now how is that for a business model? Eh Who cares about all the negative defeatist anti Canadian editorial opinions, design, build, fly.

Stealth, UFOs, advanced weapons systems? Advanced materials and manufacturing? Is that more interesting? As-Garde Aerospace and Electrodynamics Inc. integrates creative imagination and inventive genius with a futuristic vision in their own portfolio of projects and also works to further refine and develop the next generation of the Comeau Aerospace Inc. – Ultimate Flying Machine series in addition to the core research and development vision. The transition from conventional aircraft design, production and propulsion is kind of like comparing the Avro Arrow Interceptor to a propeller driven aircraft, something from a futuristic outer space civilization or the CBC movie – Arrow.

What about the nationalist? Economic leadership includes a technological, enterprise and industrial continuum, with a nationalist foundation and national security rated people, with real Canadians with true values. Imagine an individual with a private life working incessantly on the greatest adventure of all time. Classified defence technology, advanced aerospace, marine and transportation technology, something with challenge and reward, the thrill of building something awesome, the proverbial censored white nationalist super achiever that mainstream news never talks about in a good way, and doesn’t want any other white nationalist to know about, because if you did, you would feel different, alive, confident, optimistic, purposeful, awesome, energized and excited.

What about National Turbo-machinery & Propulsion Incorporated, redeveloping engines for the ultimate Arrow, the CF-105, jet engines, rocket engines and the most advanced fuel systems in the world, which can’t be sold to just anyone, more of what you never hear or read about in mainstream media and government. Super Atomized Fuel Systems Inc., VapourInduction Fuel Systems Inc., Super Carburetor Inc. and Icosahedron Hydrogen GeneratorFuel Systems Inc.

With all the focus on “green technology” and “green investment” and the war on fossil fuels, and banks and investment portfolios “divesting” aka dumping those securities, because that is evil white man technology and the cause of global warming, you might think that they would be well invested, like an insider would be, invested into something useful, practical and real, something that could transform the world, with technological and economic leadership, right?

Saving money is like making money, that is economic leadership, right? Sometimes, massive investment in money, resources, time, infrastructure and people are all essential to make that possible, that takes confidence, technological and economic leadership, which can involve capital structure, enterprise and secure supply line development. This brings everything around in a circle of reality, as it is amazing, that with government legislation can make 4 different fuel system companies be worth billions of dollars, poof! With zero publicity! Of course those companies don’t believe in the carbon tax, or shutting down the fossil fuel industry in Canada, they like to burn fuel. Wouldn’t you at mach 3 or 200 miles per gallon?

What’s it going to be, a gas guzzler, or something a lot more awesome? How is that for leadership, eh? Many hands make light work – how is that for personal economic leadership? Mainstream news, aka liberal fascist news, with the cultural marxist anti nation state agenda will never have anything good to say about things like the Avro Arrow, or free enterprise about that don’t conform to their editorial opinion…all the more to ignore them, censor them, make them obsolete and irrelevant, like they are, useless.

Economic Leadership? How about Strategic Enterprise Development Inc. or IntergalacticSecurities & Management Corporation, the leading edge in private investment, private enterprise, defence technology, Made in Canada. If you want an education maybe check that out, you will make your investment advisor look and feel not very smart, with all their exports of money and stock market gambling on things that don’t matter, that are on par with the Canada Pension Plan, yes, lots of money for foreign companies and governments to put us out of business faster, since you refuse to exercise powerful freedom of choice and invest in private Canadian companies that actually do practice intelligent thoughtful patriotism, that only whitey qualifies for, a nationalist, Made in Canada? Is that so bad, is that racist to you, Made in Canada?

Go to the store, 95% made in china, is that racist and discriminatory? Now is that any way to exercise economic nationalism? Do you have a problem with self sufficiency or self government, or God helps those who help themselves? What about God eh? Don’t talk about religion? How about “I will command a blessing on you and all that you set your hands to do…” sounds economic to me, Is that the health and wealth gospel, here and now, we cannot deny our shared history, we can embrace our mutual future, right? Can we build great things together to the honour and glory of the great God? We can do it because we want to, we don’t need anyone’s approval, especially in mainstream media.

Create a more Canadian media industry, that would be economic leadership, our companies, inventions, products, jobs and careers, new enterprise opportunities, that would be economic leadership to promote, not censor, to empower, not suppress, to encourage, not to neutralize and defeat and ruin, to be proud, not bitter, resentful, hostile and negative like the mainstream news media, something more Canadian, real Canadian, eh! Optimism, awesome news eh!

We like our shared history, our national identity as real Canadians, the future too, step back in time, people had faith, people built things, inventions, buildings, infrastructure, technology, families, we of all countries in the world can be supremely self sufficient. We do not need imbeciles, traitors, saboteurs in Ottawa or anywhere else for that matter. We need people that can do the math, geometry, engineering, metallurgy, fabrication, production, logistics, pure creative imagination without limits. Real Canadians and nationalists capable of economic leadership, empowering technological and manufacturing leadership in government, not foreigners, or traitors and people that can’t do math, basic economics, money management and basic nation building, like Made in Canada, it does not even have to be advanced, but it does need to be Made in Canada Eh!

Go forward eh! What kind of economic leadership are we looking for? What does it look like? It looks like debt free money, not treasury bond debt creation and endless electronic debt created money. We need real M1 money, sticking to the point about economic leadership, when nobody else in the world is doing it, only to obsolete, debt, slave system, a defrauded future, failure from looking at history, such as, what did Graham Towers do? The government and the Bank of Canada with the cultural Marxist agenda is incompetent by comparison, endless debt, compound interest, exporting billions of dollars, massive tax, industrial economic and industrial genocide super imposed on the founding people, war. Sell of gold reserves, we don’t need that eh, destroy the industrial technological base, we don’t need jobs and careers, do we? Destroy the military and better yet buy someone else’s garbage, that is what we are dealing with, imbeciles and traitors with zero economic leadership for nation building, planes, trains, automobiles, heavy machinery, marine and defence technology, virtually all gone. Four hundred billion for welfare based on a bogus virus, but nothing for Made in Canada. All the more reason to align with Strategic Enterprise Development Inc.

Protectionism? Is that racist? As if that is the only standard and reflex tool to censor whitey. Made in Canada versus who? Our we supposed to honestly compete when someone else is making something 5 cents to the dollar?? How is that competitive, when we have all the regulations and they don’t have any? Currency warfare, is that really ok? How do we exercise economic leadership in currency warfare scenarios, since that is going on right now? Easy debt free money, low taxes, greater investment, conditional sales contracts, invest and acquire, research and development, identify and get rid of people selling out the country to foreigners. Don’t worry only white people are racist, and you will like it, Made in Canada. Why is it ok for foreign companies, governments and sovereign funds to buy us up and out? Logging, mining, agriculture, natural resources. The only political party defending Canada is the National Citizens Alliance, anti globalist, pro Canadian, everyone else is selling out the country and their souls, if they have one.

Economic Leadership in defence, is that possible? Ask Battlegroup 301 Incorporated, they pioneered advanced program and project development with private investment to enable technology demonstration and super prototypes of advanced vehicles and weapons platform and secure supply line, and all kinds of other things, all to be available in case we might
actually have a real nationalist vision, a more patriot character, not a bunch of traitors. As some people know, there are plenty of people in government and media that stop any degree of Canadian national pride, a competent military, like most allies, stepped on, suppressed and neutralized, all those awesome products and technology that never see the light of day, censoring and disqualifying pure awesomeness is standard operating procedure, which is a what they do to neutralize economic leadership and technological industrial and defence leadership also, which could have a rather exciting, inspiring, encouraging effect on everyday Canadians. Like wow, we built that!

Most people don’t know, but to get in on government contracts, due to the control freaks who don’t want competition from smarter, faster, cheaper, more advanced, more Canadian Nationalist type of people, enterprise and products, only certain companies are entitled to bid. Like the naval ship program, no honest request for proposals are made, and the complex requirements to even get to the point of making a request for a certain vehicle or weapon system or otherwise is a big deal. Corruption and collusion, fixed and rigged, approved and disqualified or exempt, that is no way to have defence technology and economic leadership, at the expense of national security. So knowing how reality bites and the treason of traitors selling out to globalists and other people who do not want anyone to have nation state sovereignty or an independent integrated defence advanced technology and manufacturing base, and knowing that lead times are essential in addition to a product, vehicle and weapons platform and technology continuum require considerable resources and project management, it is pure genius from Battlegroup 301 Incorporated, who has accepted personal responsibility for, in their words, “National, industrial, economic, enterprise and civil defence.” How is that for economic leadership? What does the banks, investment advisors and wealth management say about that? Nothing, they are ignorant or censoring it, they don’t appear to care about
small town, rural industry, Made in Canada or strategic advantage, only, inclusion and diversity, which somehow does not include Made in Canada, private enterprise, and certainly not white nationalists who take pride in their country and love Canada.

The typical investment advisor or wealth manager is totally unaware or censoring one of the most incredible and innovative enterprise technology development endeavours in Canada, Battlegroup 301 Incorporated, all about Made in Canada. Censored and ignored, yes, but what about you, what will you do? Apply for a job, start a new career, do something awesome, I hope so. A guns & ammo co-op? While you are at it, check out the Railway industry development program, new locomotives, rail car (with no business with foreign countries we don’t need to mention that only counterfeit technology, product inferior goods and sabotage Canadian companies) Imagine, when we had a whole lot more of railroads going throughout Canada, there was vitality, a robust energy, a sense of identity, unity and purpose filled excitement. Why did we let people in government destroy it? Trains & the railway, isn’t that what made Canada? The auto industry association, what did they have to do with it? Collusion with government to tear up railway tracks. Now we are forced to drive plastic and electronic junk with rotten metal and fix it with more rotten junk imported from somewhere else, with next to nothing made in Canada, eh! Yes, let us compare economic leadership, shall we, nation building or industrial economic genocide, you can choose with powerful freedom of choice, right? What stops you, what are you waiting for? Eh?!

The Avro Arrow, torched, railways torn up, is that anyway to build a future, nation wreckers in charge, people that never built anything, most never ran a business, yet they make decisions with little or no math and financial competence, no real genius in economics except selling out the country. As we found out someone with a degree in economics did great things like selling out the country and trade deals that ruined us, talk about the wasteland in the search for the holy grail, the industrial landscape is a wasteland. Like unions who own nothing, invest in
nothing, contract nothing, yet want all the power, to extort and practice terrorism, which is the use of force or the threat of the use of force, to shut down company after company, strike to smash the enterprise, jobs and production, right out of the country. Now is that any way to have enterprise productivity ad prosperity that would generate economic leadership?

So Yeah, amazing, talking about the Avro Arrow and Economic Leadership, amazing how we can tie all that together flying 3 times or more faster than the speed of sound. Since we have common interests and beliefs and values, let us work to build great things together, knowing our history, that what was done before can be done again, and if we learn from the past, we can do certain things to enable, augment and amplify the success of the future. Let us recruit smart people with perception, perspective, awareness, understanding, wisdom, ideas and imagination. Let us express the best of who we are, not making excuses, but make effort, pro active pro Canadian. A spirit of co-operation is essential, building a team, where everything has something valuable to contribute, where nobody gets jealous, but everyone jumps in with both feet, hit the ground running, on fire, living everyday with purpose…and think about it, if this was a secret military operation, how will you respond, what kind of mission tasking will you have, your personal initiative, response ability, personal empowerment by exercising powerful freedom of choice, what will you do? What are you waiting for, Eh? Everything to be perfect? Do not let the infinite perfect be the enemy of the good, as it is written. The individual can contribute to make it perfect, at least infinitely better than to succeed at doing nothing.

You might wonder, how is it possible someone with individual creative imagination can start companies with a vision of such magnitude, that goes way beyond anything in government right now is doing, and in our history as a country, has ever done?

If you look at the idea of self government, this is actually law, one’s own code, the acceptance of personal responsibility, the power to exercise freedom of choice, which is for the most part censored, along with whitey, now, a new law, the one that creates the future, the law of one individual that decides to do something about it, make effort not excuses, to be part of the solution, build something awesome, or build anything at all. In our law, we agree to treat others in a civilized manner…this is not the case in Canada right now. There is a real difference, between the patriots and nationalists and old fashioned Canadians and those who are not. There is a difference in thinking, capabilities, aptitudes and interests, as well as intelligence, reasoning power and loyalty. I see it everyday. What is important, is that people do something, not waiting for everything to be perfect. Align your values and priorities with what you do, your actions. Do something, go forward, make decisions, keep making decisions with a pro-active life of adventure and achievement, even super-achievement, hold nothing back, express the best of who you are, encourage others, make friends and allies, build great things together, redevelop and rebuild the national dream. Someone has already made it a lot easier to do that, so what are you waiting for? Who are you waiting for? Wait no more, you have the answer you are looking for, you have the solution and power, all you need to do is exercise it.

It is time for all good men to come to the aid of their country, right? Wait no more!

Peace, Order and Good Government, right?

Cheers, have an awesome and pro-active day in Canada!
Michael Comeau

Posted on

IMM #1(D): CANZUK Still Going Ahead, Despite “Global Pandemic”

Canada is supposedly in the middle of a deadly health crisis. One might expect there to be a push to close national borders to the greatest extent possible. Instead, it’s full speed ahead to the one-world order. See Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3.

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. Offshoring, Globalization, Free Trade

The other posts on outsourcing/offshoring are available here. It focuses on the hidden costs and trade offs society as a whole has to make. Contrary to what many politicians and figures in the media claim, there are always costs to these kinds of agreement. These include: (a) job losses; (b) wages being driven down; (c) undercutting of local companies; (d) legal action by foreign entities; (e) industries being outsourced; (f) losses to communities when major employers leave; and (g) loss of sovereignty to foreign corporations and governments. Intellectual property also becomes a tricky issue. Don’t believe the lies that these agreements are overwhelmingly beneficial to all.

3. Important Links

(1) https://www.linkedin.com/in/jrskinner/
(2) https://archive.is/IZ7MB
(3) http://openparliament.ca
(4) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x167VPhSJaY
(5) https://www.ic.gc.ca/app/scr/cc/CorporationsCanada/fdrlCrpDtls.html?corpId=12424363&V_TOKEN=1611040234112&crpNm=canzuk&crpNmbr=&bsNmbr=
(6) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch?V_SEARCH.command=navigate&time=1611036807784
(7) https://www.canzukinternational.com/2021/01/canzuk-a-cure-for-our-healthcare-challenges.html
(8) https://www.canzukinternational.com/2020/09/all-party-parliamentary-group-appoints-canzuk-international-as-official-adviser.html
(9) canzuk.01.directors.list
(10) canzuk.02.articles.of.incorporation
(11) canzuk.03.corporate.profile

4. CANZUK During (Alleged) Deadly Epidemic

For a bit of context, keep in mind that Covid-19 is supposedly a deadly disease that has caused untold death and misery across the planet. Now, it would seem counter-intuitive to promote the open borders agenda in the middle of it. However, that is exactly what is happening.

5. Who Is James Skinner, CANZUK Head?

  • Congressional Assistant (U.S.)
  • Parliamentary Adviser (Australia)
  • Parliamentary Adviser (U.K.)
  • Conservative Party of Canada

James Skinner is quite the varied political operative. It’s important to note that he was the Vice President of a Conservative Party of Canada EDA at the same time. Quite the conflict of interest.

Also, the politicians supporting CANZUK aren’t Liberals, they’re Conservatives. Skinner is using his political ties to push CPC policy towards open borders. Skinner is also an experienced lobbyist, and brings those skills to this project.

6. Bait-And-Switch #1: CANZUK V.S. UNGMC

In late 2018, the Conservative Party of Canada finally decided that it opposed the UNGMC, the United Nations Global Migration Compact. This was done just days before the agreement was scheduled to be signed. There were valid criticisms about “setting international standards” for migration.

However, this involves some serious mental gymnastics. CANZUK is literal open borders, and the CPC has that policy on its books. Worse, this would be legally binding, unlike the UN Compact.

7. Bait-And-Switch #2: Expand CANZUK Zone

This was addressed here. CANZUK is sold to the public as a free trade & open movement agreement between 4 countries. However, there are many, like Erin O’Toole, who support expanding it even further. Once it’s operational, open up to other countries.

8. Bait-And-Switch #3: When It Started

To begin with, the group was formed in 2015. The Above video of Erin O’Toole was from the 2018 CPC Policy Convention in Halifax. At that point, the Party officially adopted CANZUK. It is only AFTER this adoption that CANZUK International forms a Federal Corporation in Canada.

And it is only in the last few months that there is any “official” lobbying done on behalf of the organization. The order seems completely backwards.

The only way this makes sense is that it was all agreed to — behind closed doors — long before anything official was put into writing.

9. Bait-And-Switch #4: Countering China

Here’s another sleight of hand going on: CANZUK is currently being sold as a way to counter growing Chinese influence. This is nonsense, as CANZUK is not any sort of military agreement, simply trade and movement. Moreover, since O’Toole still supports high levels of Chinese immigration and trade, it’s unclear what he expects to accomplish.

Got to admire the nerve. The CPC pushed for FIPA, which allowed China almost unfettered access into Canada. It was sold as an investment protection initiative, and an increase in trade. Now that Canadians want less to do with China, CANZUK is sold as a way to counter China increasing global influence.

10. Bait-And-Switch #5: Healthcare Boost

Remember the panic over empty shelves of toilet paper or the sudden drug prescription limit of 30 days? Now imagine an alliance that would have allowed us to be better prepared to handle this crisis.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted numerous gaps in our healthcare systems, be it issues of equity and access as evidenced by the disproportionately affected visible minorities or the inadequate security of our supply chains. The disruptions in personal protective equipment (PPE), lack of adequate testing and drug shortages have been sources of stress for frontline workers, healthcare managers and patients alike.

Our healthcare services are perennially underfunded and overstretched: the pandemic has laid bare our vulnerabilities to physician shortages, high rates of infection (nearly 20 per cent as of September 2020) among healthcare workers, increased healthcare costs, worsening mental health, and chronically underfunded long-term care. Furthermore, the pandemic has demonstrated the lack of an effective international crisis-management system. With global and national realignments the need of the hour, CANZUK is an idea whose time has come.

Remember people buying out all the toilet paper last year? Well, guess what? If we had more open borders, with more free trade, that likely wouldn’t have happened. In fact, things would have been a lot better off. Forget about closing borders in a crisis.

11. Bait-And-Switch #6: No Global Crisis

One would think that in the middle of a so-called “global pandemic” that open borders ideas like CANZUK would be put on the backburner, at least for the foreseeable future. Nope. Instead, there is scarcely a mention. Funny, how that works out. It’s almost like there really is nothing serious to worry about.

In fact, scrolling through CANZUK’s many articles, there’s barely a mention at all.

Different excuses. Different lies. But the open borders agenda rolls on.

Posted on

Canada Condemns China’s Human Rights Abuses, But Still Does Trade


Testimony at Parliament is available to watch. China’s human rights abuses are detailed in the House of Commons.

1. Trafficking, Smuggling, Child Exploitation

Serious issues like smuggling or trafficking are routinely avoided in public discourse. Also important are the links between open borders and human smuggling; between ideology and exploitation; between tolerance and exploitation; between abortion and organ trafficking; or between censorship and complicity. Mainstream media will also never get into the organizations who are pushing these agendas, nor the complicit politicians. These topics don’t exist in isolation, and are interconnected.

2. Important Links

1948 UN Convention Genocide Prevention Punishing
Canadian Gov’t Condemns Treatment Of Uyghurs In China
House Of Commons Study
Testimony From Dominic Barton
Business Council Of Canada
Dominic Barton’s Century Initiative Profile
Canada-China Business Council
CBC Article By John Paul Tasker
CBC Article On New Canadian Measures For China

uyghur.01.letter
uyghur.02.another.letter
uyghur.03.prisoner.testimony
uyghur.04.situation.of.the.camps
uyghur.05.testimonial
uyghur.06.CSRDN.plea.for.help
uyghur.07.global.affairs.canada

December 8 Testimony

3. UN On Preventing/Punishing Genocide

Hereby agree as hereinafter provided :
Article I
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article III
The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.

This is how the United Nations defines genocide, and how it seeks to punish it. Keep this in mind for later.

4. Canada Condemns Abuses By China

Building on the important testimony of seven witnesses over five sessions before the Subcommittee in 2018, on 20–21 July 2020 the Subcommittee convened urgent meetings to understand the latest developments in the plight of the Uyghurs. Over two days and 12 hours of testimony, the Subcommittee heard from academics, civil society as well as many survivors of the Government of China’s atrocities in the region. The subcommittee wishes to make clear that the condemnations in this statement are directed towards the Government of China, as represented by the Chinese Communist Party, and not the Chinese people, who the Subcommittee support wholeheartedly and hope that one day will benefit from the peace, freedom and security enjoyed by many others in this world.

The Subcommittee was profoundly disturbed by what it heard and is convinced of the need for a strong response. The Subcommittee heard that the Government of China has been employing various strategies to persecute Muslim groups living in Xinjiang, including mass detentions, forced labour, pervasive state surveillance and population control. Witnesses were clear that the Government of China’s actions are a clear attempt to eradicate Uyghur culture and religion. Some witnesses stated that the Government of China’s actions meet the definition of genocide as set out in Article II of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention).

The Subcommittee unequivocally condemns the persecution of Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang by the Government of China. Based on the evidence put forward during the Subcommittee hearings, both in 2018 and 2020, the Subcommittee is persuaded that the actions of the Chinese Communist Party constitute genocide as laid out in the Genocide Convention.

The Government of Canada should also impose sanctions on entities and individuals that benefit from the use of forced labour. Furthermore, recognizing the impact that government and corporate corruption play in allowing the practice of forced labour to continue throughout the world, the Government of Canada must condemn corruption in all its forms and take firm actions to combat it.

The Government of Canada should empower the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise with independence and the power to investigate human rights abuse allegations and enact a comprehensive human rights due diligence law that compels businesses to respect the most current international human rights standards across their global operations and supply chains and be held accountable for harms caused or on behalf of their operations.

The Government of Canada should conduct a review of its procurement practices to ensure it is not purchasing products manufactured through forced labour. It should also create legislation with respect to federal government procurement practices to strengthen transparency and oversight mechanisms, such as reporting to parliament, particularly as it relates to product origins, production and manufacturing.

The Subcommittee was informed that the Government of China’s repressive measures against Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang are part of a broader strategy to control the region. Xinjiang is a resource-rich area with important oil deposits. It also borders several Central Asian countries that the Government of China considers strategically important for its Belt and Road Initiative and its pursuit of expansionism. Because some Uyghurs desire more autonomy or independence from China, the Government of China considers them a threat to its economic development and prosperity. The Subcommittee was informed that its solution is the elimination of Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in the region.

The Canadian Government has declared that what is going on in China amounts to genocide. These measures seem designed and calculated to bring about the destruction of these groups as a whole.

5. Open Borders Policies Are Genocide

Yes, displacing or eliminating a group is a human rights violation. To address the elephant in the room: current policies in Canada amount to open borders, and to erosion of distinct groups. These are things the public never voted for. Such a replacement would be considered genocide under the UN’s own definition here. But to speak up against the Kalergi Plan is considered racism.

6. Such Measures Now Used In “Pandemic”

Considering that many nations are at least considering mandatory vaccinations, would this not lead to mass sterilization? After all, that could easily happen. Given the “isolation centers” being built, and the increase in surveillance, is this not a roundabout way of imposing these conditions? Perhaps this “pandemic” is a method to get the public to accept this as normal.

7. Dominic Barton Supports Trade With China

Canada’s Ambassador to China, Dominic Barton, supports continued trade with China. It’s worth pointing out, however, he is a co-Founder, and former Board Member of Century Initiative, an NGO committed to growing Canada’s population 100 million people. Considering the economic focus of the group, Barton likely sees little real issue with China, or large scale Chinese immigration.

Barton has also been lobbied by the Business Council of Council, which Goldy Hyer is President and CEO. Hyer also is on the Board of Century Initiative.

As a bit of an aside, Century Initiative is chaired by Mark Wiseman. He was the Senior Managing Director of Blackrock, which owns SNC Lavalin.

8. Canada-China Business Council

There is Ambassador Barton, featured prominently.
Who else runs the group?

  • Paul Desmarais Sr. — former head of Power Corp (deceased)
  • Andre Desmarais — son-in-law of Jean Chretien
  • Oliver Desmarais — Vice President of Power Corp
  • Sam Boutziouvis — VP (Government Relations) of SNC Lavalin
  • Morgan Elliott — VP (Government Affairs) of Huawei
  • Tim McGuire — Executive VP, China Construction Bank
  • Martin Cauchon — was in Jean Chretien’s Cabinet
  • James Moore — was in Stephen Harper’s Cabinet
  • Stockwell Day — was in Stephen Harper’s Cabinet
  • Scott Brison — was in Justin Trudeau’s Cabinet

Do you think that these connections might have something to do with the fact that Canada is still doing business with China? Perhaps these things are related.

9. Canada (Not Really) Stops China Trade

The federal government announced a suite of new regulations today meant to ensure that Canadian companies are not complicit in human rights abuses or the use of forced labour in China’s Xinjiang province.

The measures include new requirements for firms that do business in the region and a pledge to ban the export of products from Canada to China if there is a chance they could be used by Chinese authorities for surveillance, repression, arbitrary detention or forced labour.

“Canada is deeply concerned regarding the mass arbitrary detention and mistreatment of Uighurs and other ethnic minorities by Chinese authorities,” Foreign Affairs Minister François-Philippe Champagne said in a news release shortly before leaving the department to become the new minister of Innovation, Science and Industry.

“Nobody should face mistreatment on the basis of their religion or ethnicity,” Champagne added.

To be clear on this, the Canadian Government has no issue with doing business with China, in spite the human rights abuses they allege. Instead, the requirement is that there be no exports if the goods themselves can be used to aid in those abuses.

This is a bit of tortured logic. If trading with China enriches the Government, then couldn’t ANY trade potentially be used to finance such abuses?

So, do human rights abroad mean anything? Or is the “illusion” of caring about human rights what matters? Seems that the Government’s actions are all just for show.

Posted on

Some Thoughts On Leslyn Lewis’ Pro-Paris Accord PhD Dissertation

Leslyn Lewis finished her PhD dissertation in May 2019 from York University, in Toronto. It covered a number of legal areas around climate change, the Paris Accord, intellectual property, and trade agreements. Months after finishing, she ran for the leadership of the CPC, as Andrew Scheer had been forced out.

1. About Leslyn Lewis’ PhD Dissertation

To start out: the quality of the writing is very good. The content is well organized and the paper well cited. This wasn’t just some mess hastily thrown together. This is not to question her reading or writing abilities — which are impressive — but to ask ideologically what she stands for.

However, the concern now starts to creep in. This wasn’t some undergraduate paper written 20 or 30 years ago, but Lewis’ PhD dissertation. She finished it in 2019, at the age of 48.

From the content of the paper, it seems clear that Lewis fully embraces the climate change scam as a reality. She supports the Paris Agreement, despite its explicit and repeated focus on “climate finance, and its focus on “alternative energy sources”. She appears to have bought into the green agenda. The paper itself discusses (among other things), how trade agreements and intellectual property disputes can impede efforts to fight climate change.

Less than a year later, Lewis, (a political unknown), would be running for the Conservative Party of Canada leadership. She finished 3rd. Like most “conservatives”, she sings the praises of the UNSDA and Paris Accord, only objecting to a Carbon tax.

Lewis also calls herself a “social conservative”, but was once a Director at LEAF, the Women’s Legal Education & Action Fund. LEAF is a pro-death, anti-family organization.

2. Offshoring, Globalization, Free Trade

The other posts on outsourcing/offshoring are available here. It focuses on the hidden costs and trade offs society as a whole has to make. Contrary to what many politicians and figures in the media claim, there are always costs to these kinds of agreement. These include: (a) job losses; (b) wages being driven down; (c) undercutting of local companies; (d) legal action by foreign entities; (e) industries being outsourced; (f) losses to communities when major employers leave; and (g) loss of sovereignty to foreign corporations and governments. Intellectual property also becomes a tricky issue. Don’t believe the lies that these agreements are overwhelmingly beneficial to all.

3. Debunking The Climate Change Scam

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

4. Quotes From Lewis’ 2019 Dissertation

The dissertation consists of several chapters, each with its own abstract. The document itself is large enough to stand alone as a book. This review doesn’t really do justice to the volume of writing, but outlines the more interesting parts.

(screenshots from the dissertation)

[Page 112]
ABSTRACT
Climate change abatement strategies are intrinsically linked to policies that encourage the use of alternative energy sources such as renewable energies. The importance of these strategies has been entrenched in various World Trade Organization (WTO) treaties including the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (“SCM Agreement”), Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (“TRIPS”), Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures (“TRIMs”), as well as pre-WTO treaties like the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (“GATT”). The issue of environmental subsides, specifically renewable energy subsidies, have resurfaced in a number of disputes before the WTO Dispute Settlement Body since its first green subsidy case, brought in 2010 by Japan against Canada’s Feed-In Tariff Program (“FIT Program”). In the initial case, Japan alleged that the Ontario FIT Program’s local content requirement was discriminatory against foreign renewable energy products. Moreover, discrimination amounted to a prohibited subsidy under the SCM Agreement and was simultaneously contrary to the most favourable nation status (“MFN”) under the GATT. This decision raises concern about whether the SCM Agreement poses a barrier to governmental policies promoting FIT Programs to encourage renewable energy usage and its impact on the developing world. Specifically, do treaties like the SCM Agreement impede the development of government climate change abatement policies by requiring these programs to meet a minimum standard of trade compliance? Should WTO treaties like the SCM Agreement be amended to include flexibilities to combat climate change, especially in light of the goals set in the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change? This paper will review the WTO subsidy rules and query whether flexibilities need to be entertained within the area of nonactionable subsidies. This mode of inquiry questions whether FIT Programs be classified as subsidies under the SCM Agreement. If FIT Programs are properly classified as subsidies, should these initiatives be granted an exemption under the SCM Agreement on the basis of public policy— with the goal of facilitating affordable renewable energy and climate change abatement in the developing world?

For better or for worse, there are a number of trade regulations, such as those imposed by the World Trade Organization. These set out guidelines for international trade. Lewis makes an argument that perhaps exceptions should be put into such rules in certain circumstances. In this case, she specifically refers to climate change and complying with the Paris Agreement.

[Page 171]
ABSTRACT
Intellectual property law was constructed to facilitate innovation and development by granting a limited monopoly in exchange for the public’s right to use an invention after the period of exclusivity expires. The trade-off of granting intellectual property protections in reward for the investment in an invention is intended to be a temporary benefit. Trade secrets have been thought of as the weakest form of intellectual property, because non-disclosure is the only form of protection. In other words, infringement of a trade secret occurs upon the unauthorized disclosure of the secret. However, absent reverse engineering and/or legitimate disclosure, protection over trade secrets may arguably extend the exclusivity rights in perpetuity. The debate on “evergreening” has focused largely on extending the life cycle of pharmaceutical patents to the omission of other forms of intellectual property, like trade secrets. The concept has also been widely ignored in relation to climate change abatement technologies. In this regard, considerations around evergreening and trade secrets have been substantially neglected. The loophole in international intellectual property treaties, like Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (“TRIPS”), may lead to inequalities between industrial nations and developing ones, especially for products like photovoltaic solar panels that rely heavily on trade-secret protection. In addition, this non-disclosure may also impact on green technology transfer and may impede climate change abatement strategies in the developing world. This paper will explore the practice of evergreening as it relates to the prospect that trade secret protection may extend beyond the 20-year limit, as prescribed in TRIPS, and the implications of this practice for developing countries that seek to meet climate change commitments as outlined in the 2016 Paris Climate Change Agreement (the “Paris Agreement”). Arguably, the absence of a fixed statutory period for trade secrets may enable patent owners to participate in creative ways to “evergreen” their products or processes, with the result of extending the life-cycle. The practice of evergreening through trade secrets may have a negative impact on the ability of developing nations to meet their national climate change objectives. Specifically, international treaties like TRIPS, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 1994 (“GATT”), the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (the “UNFCCC”), and the Paris Agreement, have attempted to incorporate climate change flexibilities that assist developing countries in meeting their climate change goals. The efficacy of technology transfer provisions in international law will be examined within the context of how the lack of a fixed term for trade secrets impacts on actual green technology transfer. It will canvass whether trade secret protection of off-patent green technologies acts as an inadvertent barrier to technology transfer within the developing world.

Intellectual property is what it sounds like. When a person creates or discovers things, they have certain rights to it. This makes sense. Patents prevent others from scooping and using another’s inventions, at least for a number of years. Trademarks or copyright prevent others from using creations or designs (subject to fair dealing limitations).

Lewis raises the argument of making exceptions to these IP laws if they were used for a “greater good”, such as combatting climate change.

[Page 245]
ABSTRACT
A number of Conference of Parties (“COP”) to the United Nations Framework on Climate Change (“the UNFCCC”) have addressed the issue of climate change and its effect on the developing world. Energy insecurity must be addressed as a precondition to sustainable development, along with the regional factors that pose legal and institutional barriers to implementing of green energy projects in sub-Saharan Africa. Many sub-Saharan African nations have enacted renewable energy laws and regulations to increase investor confidence in green energy projects. Despite current regulatory enhancements, investors are still reluctant to invest in the region due to financing and political risks. Climate financing could potentially address investor concerns, however, initiatives like the Green Climate Fund (“GC Fund”) and the African Climate Change Fund need to be implemented in a manner that promotes confidence among investors in these high capital projects. Arguably, for climate financing to achieve its full potential in sub-Saharan Africa it must be implemented in an innovative fashion that contemplates the infrastructure, environment and social governance for investments as well as fulfilling the dual goal of development and balancing national commitments under the Paris Climate Change Agreement (COP 21).

In this chapter Lewis goes on to make the argument that “climate financing”, (which really means a variety of Carbon taxes), should be implemented in order to fulfill the Paris Agreement and promote development in the 3rd World.

Lewis doesn’t seem to have an issue with intellectual property or trade regulations on principle. She just argues that exceptions should be made for fighting climate change.

These, of course, are just abstracts of a few chapters, not the entire dissertation. The whole document is quite long, nearly 400 pages when all the references and citations are added in.

5. Paris Accord Will Kill Oil & Gas Industry

Just read Article #9…..

Article 9
1. Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.

2. Other Parties are encouraged to provide or continue to provide such support voluntarily.

3. As part of a global effort, developed country Parties should continue to take the lead in mobilizing climate finance from a wide variety of sources, instruments and channels, noting the significant role of public funds, through a variety of actions, including supporting country-driven strategies, and taking into account the needs and priorities of developing country Parties. Such mobilization of climate finance should represent a progression beyond previous efforts.

4. The provision of scaled-up financial resources should aim to achieve a balance between adaptation and mitigation, taking into account country-driven strategies, and the priorities and needs of developing country Parties, especially those that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change and have significant capacity constraints, such as the least developed countries and small island developing States, considering the need for public and grant-based resources for adaptation.

5. Developed country Parties shall biennially communicate indicative quantitative and qualitative information related to paragraphs 1 and 3 of this Article, as applicable, including, as available, projected levels of public financial resources to be provided to developing country Parties. Other Parties providing resources are encouraged to communicate biennially such information on a voluntary basis.

6. The global stocktake referred to in Article 14 shall take into account the relevant information provided by developed country Parties and/or Agreement bodies on efforts related to climate finance.

7. Developed country Parties shall provide transparent and consistent information on support for developing country Parties provided and mobilized through public interventions biennially in accordance with the modalities, procedures and guidelines to be adopted by the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to this Agreement, at its first session, as stipulated in Article 13, paragraph 13. Other Parties are encouraged to do so.

8. The Financial Mechanism of the Convention, including its operating entities, shall serve as the financial mechanism of this Agreement.

9. The institutions serving this Agreement, including the operating entities of the Financial Mechanism of the Convention, shall aim to ensure efficient access to financial resources through simplified approval procedures and enhanced readiness support for developing country Parties, in particular for the least developed countries and small island developing States, in the context of their national climate strategies and plans.

Paris Agreement Full Text

That is, of course, just Article 9. Here is an earlier review. Claiming to be able to implement the Paris Accord without Carbon taxes is disingenuous, as large parts of the Agreement specifically refer to climate finance.

While many could claim that they never actually read the Agreement, Lewis’ dissertation revolves around this and the Sustainable Development Agenda. She quotes it at length. She has clearly read and understood what is going on. The dissertation is very well written, and it’s clear a lot of work went into it.

So what does Leslyn Lewis actually believe when it comes to climate change, the Paris Agreement, and various UN taxes? Who knows?

Note: Since Lewis did run to become head of the CPC (and official Opposition Leader), and since she is still running for office, she is a public figure.

As an side: Alberta MP Garnett Genuis tried to defend voting for the Paris Agreement in 2017. It didn’t go well. Here is a clip of him with Ezra Levant from Rebel News.

Posted on

Canada’s Bills/Treaties Undermine Hague Convention On Child Abduction

Today is the 40th anniversary of the Hague Convention on Child Abduction. This is to focus on the civil side (such as custody issues). While this seems impressive, Canada has done much domestically and internationally to undermine and weaken the principles. Even the UN has studied the connection between illegal border crossings and smuggling, trafficking and child exploitation. Quite simply, without real borders, the Hague Convention is meaningless.

1. Trafficking, Smuggling, Child Exploitation

For the previous work in the TSCE series. This is the 40th anniversary of the Hague Convention of Child Abduction. However, Governments ensure that it will continue. Also, take a look at open borders movement, the abortion and organs industry, and the NGOs who are supporting it. This is information that won’t be found in the mainstream or alternative media.

2. Important Links

CLICK HERE, for the Hague Convention treaty itself.
Hague Convention Civil Treaty
CLICK HERE, for Canada’s announcement on 40 year anniversary.

CLICK HERE, for Agenda 21, full treaty.
CLICK HERE, for Gov’t info on Safe 3rd Country Agreement.
CLICK HERE, for text of Safe 3rd Country Agreement.
CLICK HERE, for the many exemptions in S3CA.

CLICK HERE, for FIPA agreement Canada/China.
CLICK HERE, for previous review on FIPA.
CLICK HERE, for CD18.5, sanctuary for illegals in Toronto.
CLICK HERE, for Toronto EC5.5, human and sex trafficking resolution.
CLICK HERE, for Canadian Labour Congress on sanctuary cities.

CLICK HERE, for CANZUK International website.
CLICK HERE, for proposed expansion of CANZUK zone.
CLICK HERE, for review of new USMCA (NAFTA 2.0)
CLICK HERE, for link to official Agenda 2030 text.
CLICK HERE, for review of UNSDA Agenda 2030.
Text Of Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda
CLICK HERE, for text of New York Declaration.
new.york.declaration.2016

CLICK HERE, for Bill C-6, citizenship for terrorists.
CLICK HERE, for Bill C-32, lowering age of consent for anal.
CLICK HERE, for Bill C-75, reduced criminal penalties.
CLICK HERE, for 2nd review of Bill C-75 (child offences).
CLICK HERE, for asking if Gov’t actually supports trafficking.

UN Global Migration Compact (Full Text)

OTHER SOURCES:
CLICK HERE, for UN Review On Smuggling Migrants.
CLICK HERE, for UN Convention On Transnational Crime.
http://archive.is/q0XqK
CLICK HERE, for UN Protocol Against Human Trafficking.
http://archive.is/cjnJt
CLICK HERE, for UN Opt. Protocol On Rights Of The Child.
http://archive.is/onmrr
CLICK HERE, for UN Global Initiative To Fight Trafficking.
http://archive.is/Fjuv6
CLICK HERE, for UN Protocol To Prevent/Punish Trafficking.
CLICK HERE, for UN Rights Of The Child, Sale, Prostitution, Porn.
http://archive.is/onmrr
CLICK HERE, for Eliminate Worst Forms Of Child Labour.
http://archive.is/OZQM
CLICK HERE, for the Rome Statute, Int’l Criminal Court.
CLICK HERE, for Canada’s antitrafficking strategy, 2019-24.
http://archive.is/15ov0

3. Quotes From Hague Convention (Civil) Treaty

Article 3
The removal or the retention of a child is to be considered wrongful where –
a) it is in breach of rights of custody attributed to a person, an institution or any other body, either jointly or alone, under the law of the State in which the child was habitually resident immediately before the removal or retention; and
b) at the time of removal or retention those rights were actually exercised, either jointly or alone, or
would have been so exercised but for the removal or retention.

Article 4
The Convention shall apply to any child who was habitually resident in a Contracting State immediately before any breach of custody or access rights. The Convention shall cease to apply when the child attains the age of 16 years.

Article 5
For the purposes of this Convention –
a) “rights of custody” shall include rights relating to the care of the person of the child and, in particular, the right to determine the child’s place of residence;
b) “rights of access” shall include the right to take a child for a limited period of time to a place other than the child’s habitual residence.

Article 8
Any person, institution or other body claiming that a child has been removed or retained in breach of custody rights may apply either to the Central Authority of the child’s habitual residence or to the Central Authority of any other Contracting State for assistance in securing the return of the child.
The application shall contain –
a) information concerning the identity of the applicant, of the child and of the person alleged to have removed or retained the child;
b) where available, the date of birth of the child;
c) the grounds on which the applicant’s claim for return of the child is based;
d) all available information relating to the whereabouts of the child and the identity of the person with whom the child is presumed to be.
.
The application may be accompanied or supplemented by –
e) an authenticated copy of any relevant decision or agreement;
f) a certificate or an affidavit emanating from a Central Authority, or other competent authority of the State of the child’s habitual residence, or from a qualified person, concerning the relevant law of that State;
g) any other relevant document.

Article 13
Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding Article, the judicial or administrative authority of the requested State is not bound to order the return of the child if the person, institution or other body which opposes its return establishes that –
a) the person, institution or other body having the care of the person of the child was not actually exercising the custody rights at the time of removal or retention, or had consented to or subsequently acquiesced in the removal or retention; or
b) there is a grave risk that his or her return would expose the child to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation.
.
The judicial or administrative authority may also refuse to order the return of the child if it finds that the
child objects to being returned and has attained an age and degree of maturity at which it is appropriate
to take account of its views.
.
In considering the circumstances referred to in this Article, the judicial and administrative authorities shall
take into account the information relating to the social background of the child provided by the Central
Authority or other competent authority of the child’s habitual residence.

Article 17
The sole fact that a decision relating to custody has been given in or is entitled to recognition in the requested State shall not be a ground for refusing to return a child under this Convention, but the judicial or administrative authorities of the requested State may take account of the reasons for that decision in applying this Convention.

In short, this is an international agreement to enforce child custody orders, or family disputes. Note: the children don’t have to be return if administrators determine there is some danger. Unfortunately, this seems entirely subjective.

4. Announcement From Global Affairs Canada

Statement
October 25, 2020 – Ottawa, Ontario – Global Affairs Canada
.
The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, today issued the following statement:
.
“Today, we mark the 40th anniversary of the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
“Every year, in Canada and abroad, thousands of children are wrongfully taken across international borders by a parent or guardian in violation of rights of custody. This has devastating effects on families, and it is the children who suffer the most. Children must be at the heart of family justice, and mechanisms like the Hague Convention on child abduction are essential in order to assist them in these terrible situations.
.
“Canada, along with 100 contracting states, continues to support this global effort to protect children from wrongful removal or retention and return them to their country of residence. We continue to call on the global community to join us and to ratify this important convention.
.
“We are committed to working with our international partners to continue to protect children and to reinforce the operation of the convention.”

While this all sounds fine, it should be noted that Canada has done a lot, both domestically, and with international treaties to weaken and undermine the spirit of this agreement.

What other treaties or bills do this?

5. Canada’s Bills/Treaties Since 1980

Here are some of the major developments in Canada in the last few decades. All of these either weaken the borders and/or reduce the criminal penalties involved.

  • UN Agenda 21 (1992)
  • Canada/US Safe 3rd Country Agreement (2002)
  • FIPA (2012)
  • Sanctuary cities (First in 2013)
  • CANZUK: Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK (2015)
  • UN Agenda 2030 (2015)
  • New York Declaration (2016)
  • Bill C-6 citizenship for terrorists (2016)
  • Bill C-32/C-75 (2018)
  • UN Global Migration Compact (2018)
  • USMCA, NAFTA 2.0 (2020)

It doesn’t matter who’s in power. They’re all globalists.

6. Canada/US Safe 3rd Country Agreement

CONVINCED, in keeping with advice from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and its Executive Committee, that agreements among states may enhance the international protection of refugees by promoting the orderly handling of asylum applications by the responsible party and the principle of burden-sharing;

ARTICLE 8
(1) The Parties shall develop standard operating procedures to assist with the implementation of this Agreement. These procedures shall include provisions for notification, to the country of last presence, in advance of the return of any refugee status claimant pursuant to this Agreement.
(2) These procedures shall include mechanisms for resolving differences respecting the interpretation and implementation of the terms of this Agreement. Issues which cannot be resolved through these mechanisms shall be settled through diplomatic channels.
(3) The Parties agree to review this Agreement and its implementation. The first review shall take place not later than 12 months from the date of entry into force and shall be jointly conducted by representatives of each Party. The Parties shall invite the UNHCR to participate in this review. The Parties shall cooperate with UNHCR in the monitoring of this Agreement and seek input from non-governmental organizations.

Source is here. Serious question: why have Canada and the United States signed an agreement that quite clearly gives the UN a seat at the table?

The treaty was pretty ineffective anyway, given that people could still get into the country as long as they BYPASSED legal border ports. Now, thanks to the Federal Court, the agreement is effectively dead.

Of course, the tens of thousands entering Canada illegally in recent years pales in comparison to the hordes of LEGAL migrants entering under various programs.

7. FIPA Between Canada And China

FIPA largely eliminated the border between Canada and the Chinese. This means that Chinese nationals can freely enter Canada, almost without restrictions. They can also bring their own security to look after their national interests. Makes it easy to smuggle products — or people — into Canada.

8. Sanctuary Cities Forming In Canada

In 2013, Toronto became the first city in Canada to officially obtain status a sanctuary city. It was supported by “conservatives” Doug and Rob Ford. How are child custody agreements supposed to be enforced overseas when children can simply disappear in one of them?

Now list includes: Toronto, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Edmonton and others. In the 2018 Ontario election, the NDP campaigned on turning Ontario into a sanctuary province.

9. CANZUK (CDA, Australia, New Zealand, UK)

The Trans-Tasmanian Partnership is an agreement between Australia and New Zealand to let citizens work and freely travel in each other’s countries. CANZUK would essentially be an expansion of that agreement by adding both Canada and the UK. This is an actual open borders arrangement which could be further expanded.

CANZUK International was formed in 2015, and members of the CPC are some of its biggest supporters.

It’s also interesting how the justifications have changed. Previously, it was about opportunity. Now it’s about containing Chinese influence, which Conservatives allowed to grow in the first place. One obvious example is FIPA.

10. UN Agenda 2030, Sustainable Development

Agenda 2030 was signed in September 2015 by then PM Stephen Harper. It signs away more of Canada’s sovereignty to the “sustainable development agenda”, and makes mass migration across international borders even easier. So-called conservatives would be hard pressed to explain why this is okay, but why the Paris Accord and UN Global Migration Compact are so wrong. There is a lot of overlap with the content.

Worth a mention is that “Conservative” Brian Mulroney was in power in 1992 when Agenda 21 was signed in Brazil.

11. New York Declaration, UN GMC Prelude

This was signed in September 2016, just a year after Agenda 2030. The UN Global Migration Compact was largely based on this text. Both agreements are to make it easier to bring large numbers of people across borders, and to establish international standards. It’s not difficult to see how this would make child abduction and transportation easier to do.

12. Bill C-6, Citizenship For Terrorists

It cheapens Canadian citizenship when anyone can get it. This is especially true for convicted terrorists and traitors. There’s also the increased likelihood of people gaming the system to avoid being sent back, for say crimes against children.

13. Bill C-32/C-75, Reducing Criminal Penalties

If the government is concerned about the well being of children, then why would they introduce a bill to water down criminal penalties for sex crimes against children, and reduce the age of consent?

  • Section 58: Fraudulent use of citizenship
  • Section 159: Age of consent for anal sex
  • Section 172(1): Corrupting children
  • Section 173(1): Indecent acts
  • Section 180(1): Common nuisance
  • Section 182: Indecent interference or indignity to body
  • Section 210: Keeping common bawdy house
  • Section 211: Transporting to bawdy house
  • Section 242: Not getting help for childbirth
  • Section 243: Concealing the death of a child
  • Section 279.02(1): Material benefit – trafficking
  • Section 279.03(1): Withholding/destroying docs — trafficking
  • Section 279(2): Forcible confinement
  • Section 280(1): Abduction of child under age 16
  • Section 281: Abduction of child under age 14
  • Section 291(1): Bigamy
  • Section 293: Polygamy
  • Section 293.1: Forced marriage
  • Section 293.2: Child marriage
  • Section 295: Solemnizing marriage contrary to law
  • Section 435: Arson, for fraudulent purposes
  • Section 467.11(1): Participating in organized crime

Bill C-75 “hybridized” these offences. What this means is that they were initially to be tried by indictment (felony), but now prosecutors have discretion to try them summarily (misdemeanor). Of course, there were plenty of Section 83 offences (terrorism) that were also hybridized.

14. UN Global Migration Compact

What is strange about the UNGMC is that its text explicitly undermines its stated goals. While the UN supposedly opposed smuggling, the agreement says people shall not be punished. And while condemning trafficking, the UN provides advice and guidance on how to do it more successfully.

15. USMCA, More Than Just Trade

The new USMCA (U.S., Mexico & Canada Agreement) is far more than just a trade agreement. It ensures that more “workers” will be coming across the borders, and cedes areas of labour rights to the UN.

16. How Does Any Of This Help Children?

Remember, this is the 40th anniversary on the Hague Convention on Child Abduction. Member states, (of which Canada is one), should take seriously the obligation to ensure that children are not taken across borders illegally, even if it’s by a parent, or some other guardian.

Instead, Canada signs treaties and passes bills that ensure that this will continue. Erasing borders, and reducing penalties does nothing to deter child smuggling. In fact, it only encourages it.

Sure, these changes don’t explicitly state moving children around illegally is a major goal (or even a goal at all). But as borders become less meaningful, this will certainly increase.

Posted on

A Look Back At FIPA, And Selling Sovereignty To China

Erin O’Toole was a Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Trade in 2014. It’s clear from these quotes that he doesn’t see a problem selling out Canada’s sovereignty to China with the Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA). In fact, he glosses over just how bad this arrangement really is. All of the Conservatives did.

https://openparliament.ca/debates/2014/9/22/erin-otoole-1/

1. Offshoring, Globalization, Free Trade

The other posts on outsourcing/offshoring are available here. It focuses on the hidden costs and trade offs society as a whole has to make. Contrary to what many politicians and figures in the media claim, there are always costs to these kinds of agreement. These include: (a) job losses; (b) wages being driven down; (c) undercutting of local companies; (d) legal action by foreign entities; (e) industries being outsourced; (f) losses to communities when major employers leave; and (g) loss of sovereignty to foreign corporations and governments. Don’t believe the lies that these agreements are overwhelmingly beneficial to all.

2. Important Links

(1) https://openparliament.ca/debates/
(2) https://openparliament.ca/debates/2014/9/22/erin-otoole-1/
(3) https://archive.is/p2fkV
(4) WayBack Machine Archive
(5) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/fipa-agreement-with-china-what-s-really-in-it-for-canada-1.2770159
(6) https://archive.is/C6Xvi
(7) https://www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/china-chine/fipa-apie/index.aspx?lang=eng&_ga=2.159712829.1468063288.1601709213-445290716.1601709213
(8) https://archive.is/wC5ed
(9) WayBack Machine Archive

3. Other “Conservatives” Support FIPA

https://openparliament.ca/debates/2013/4/18/ron-cannan-3/

https://openparliament.ca/debates/2013/4/18/rob-merrifield-3/

https://openparliament.ca/debates/2014/6/4/lois-brown-7/

https://openparliament.ca/debates/2013/4/18/james-moore-3/

https://openparliament.ca/debates/2013/4/18/michael-chong-1/

4. Quotes From FIPA Agreement

Article 5
Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment
1. Each Contracting Party shall accord to investors of the other Contracting Party treatment no less favourable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to investors of a non-Contracting Party with respect to the establishment, acquisition, expansion, management, conduct, operation and sale or other disposition of investments in its territory.
2. Each Contracting Party shall accord to covered investments treatment no less favourable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to investments of investors of a non-Contracting Party with respect to the establishment, acquisition, expansion, management, conduct, operation and sale or other disposition of investments in its territory.
3. For greater certainty, the “treatment” referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article does not encompass the dispute resolution mechanisms, such as those in Part C, in other international investment treaties and other trade agreements.

Article 6
National Treatment
1. Each Contracting Party shall accord to investors of the other Contracting Party treatment no less favourable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to its own investors with respect to the expansion, management, conduct, operation and sale or other disposition of investments in its territory.
2. Each Contracting Party shall accord to covered investments treatment no less favourable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to investments of its own investors with respect to the expansion, management, conduct, operation and sale or other disposition of investments in its territory.
3. The concept of “expansion” in this Article applies only with respect to sectors not subject to a prior approval process under the relevant sectoral guidelines and applicable laws, regulations and rules in force at the time of expansion. The expansion may be subject to prescribed formalities and other information requirements.

Article 11
Compensation for Losses
Investors of one Contracting Party who suffer losses in respect of covered investments owing to war, a state of national emergency, insurrection, riot or other similar events, shall be accorded treatment by the other Contracting Party, in respect of restitution, indemnification, compensation or other settlement, no less favourable than it accords in like circumstances, to its own investors or to investors of any third State.

Local laws — environmental protection, for example — which are seen as harmful and detrimental to business interests will be considered grounds to submit a claim for compensation.

Article 23
Consent to Arbitration
Each Contracting Party consents to the submission of a claim to arbitration in accordance with the procedures set out in this Agreement. Failure to meet any of the conditions precedent provided for in Article 21 shall nullify that consent.

Disputes won’t be heard in any open or transparent way. Instead arbitration that is largely secret will be resolving disputes.

Article 35
Entry into Force and Termination
1. The Contracting Parties shall notify each other through diplomatic channels that they have completed the internal legal procedures for the entry into force of this Agreement. This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the following month after the second notification is received, and shall remain in force for a period of at least fifteen years.
2. After the expiration of the initial fifteen-year period, this Agreement shall continue to be in force. Either Contracting Party may at any time thereafter terminate this Agreement. The termination will be effective one year after notice of termination has been received by the other Contracting Party.
3. With respect to investments made prior to the date of termination of this Agreement, Articles 1 to 34, as well as paragraph 4 of this Article, shall continue to be effective for an additional fifteen-year period from the date of termination.
4. The Annexes and footnotes to this Agreement constitute integral parts of this Agreement.

So the agreement itself lasts for at least 15 years. Then, we are required to give a 1 year notice, at which time, Articles 1 to 34 will lapse in another 15 years. All in all, this agreement will then last a minimum of 31 years. This is an entire generation away from being able to really terminate.

5. What Is Canada Getting With FIPA?

The secrecy shrouding the much-delayed Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA) with China makes it hard for experts, let alone average Canadians, to figure out what benefits this country will see from the deal.

-Canadian governments are locked in for a generation. If Canada finds the deal unsatisfactory, it cannot be cancelled completely for 31 years.
-China benefits much more than Canada, because of a clause allowing existing restrictions in each country to stay in place. Chinese companies get to play on a relatively level field in Canada, while maintaining wildly arbitrary practices and rules for Canadian companies in China.
-Chinese companies will be able to seek redress against any laws passed by any level of government in Canada which threaten their profits. Australia has decided not to enter FIPA agreements specifically because they allow powerful corporations to challenge legislation on social, environmental and economic issues. —-Chinese companies investing heavily in Canadian energy will be able seek billions in compensation if their projects are hampered by provincial laws on issues such as environmental concerns or First Nations rights, for example.
-Cases will be decided by a panel of professional arbitrators, and may be kept secret at the discretion of the sued party. This extraordinary provision reflects an aversion to transparency and public debate common to the Harper cabinet and the Chinese politburo.
–Differences between FIPA and the North American Free Trade Agreement may offer intriguing loopholes for American lawyers to argue for equal treatment under the principle of Most Favoured Nation.

The CBC covered the story and raised several legitimate concerns over this deal. Secrecy aside, it’s difficult to see what (if any) real benefits Canada gets from it.

6. China Buying Up Assets Across Canada

This is too long to do justice here, but Canadian laws make it easy for foreigners to buy property in Canada. This applies regardless of whether they live here, or even intend to. The Chinese in particular are taking full advantage of that.

7. Putting China Over Canadians

This isn’t really related to FIPA, but still good to point out: even so-called “populists” can be globalist shills. Here is no different. How does making it easier to import cheap Chinese products keep industries and jobs in Canada? However, China has more freedom and less government in recent decades.

8. CANZUK To Counter Chinese Influence?

CPC Policy Declaration August 2018

Have to love the mental gymnastics here. CPC Leader Erin O’Toole spoke in support of CANZUK in the 2018 Policy Convention. He explicitly stated he wanted to “let more and more countries” into the agreement. Fast forward 2 years, and he wants to accelerate CANZUK to stop the growing Chinese influence ….. that he supported in 2014. Way to be consistent.

9. Can O’Toole/CPC Actually Be Trusted?

How can anyone trust Erin O’Toole?
(a) He has no qualms about selling sovereignty to China.
(b) He supports CANZUK — and expanding the zone.
(c) CANZUK is now just a way to counter China, who is still here.
(d) Heenan Blaikie was Trudeau Sr.’s and Chretien’s old law firm.
(e) He is an ex-Facebook lobbyist.
(f) He openly shills for foreign powers like Israel.
(g) He supports even more draconian measures than Trudeau.
(h) His Chief of Staff is a Director at Sick Kids Hospital.
(i) CPC supports the temp-to-PR pipeline.

10. Objection To FIPA Pushed, No Real Debate

See here, here and here for original source material. There were people who opposed the sellout by the Conservatives.

11. Conservative Politicians Are Globalists

One would think that “conserving” in the sense of trade meant protecting local industries, and protecting communities from having major employers shipped overseas.

However, that is not the case. What passes for conservatism is really just “corporatism”, putting those interests over that of the local population. There are far more important things than stock prices and overall profits.

Ask them to “conserve” the makeup, culture, language, traditions, or heritage of a country, and that’s being racist. After all, Canada is make up of abstract values (that few can agree on), not any sort of identity.

*Disclaimers, Ethics* Proudly powered by WordPress