Globalism – Page 71

June 15, 2020April 29, 2021

The Mockingbird (Trudeau) Foundation Of Canada

1. Media Bias, Lies, Omissions And Corruption

CLICK HERE, for #1: Unifor in bed with Federal Gov’t
CLICK HERE, for #2: Global News’ selective truth on TRP granted.
CLICK HERE, for #3: Post Media owning most Canadian media.
CLICK HERE, for #4: conservative content dominated by Koch/Atlas.
CLICK HERE, for #5: origins of Malcolm’s “charity” True North Canada.
CLICK HERE, for #6: the people running the Post Millennial.
CLICK HERE, for #7: how to do research, investigative journalism.
CLICK HERE, for #8: Koch/Atlas both sides, AB court challenge.
CLICK HERE, for #9: picking up on predictive programming.
CLICK HERE, for #10: Trudeau Foundation & media embeds.
CLICK HERE, for #11: Trudeau swapped out for body double?
CLICK HERE, for #12: Shanifa Nasser, racism narrative, FHA.
CLICK HERE, for #13: George Floyd “murder” was staged psy-op.
CLICK HERE, for #14: culture shift to make face masks normal.
CLICK HERE, for #15: response times, crisis actors, dummy swap.

2. Context For This Article

In order to fairly and accurately report on political and social events, the media has to have a certain level of detachment from the situation. Understandably, one cannot be a part of an organization, yet do any real investigative work on it. There is an obvious conflict of interest.

But that is exactly the case with the Trudeau Foundation. Many prominent members of the media (and former members) are part of the Foundation. This becomes a problem since they do little to hold the Foundation, or the Trudeau Family, to account for anything.

It must be mentioned, however, that Koch/Atlas cronies are prominent in so-called conservative media. Also, Post Media is the parent company of not only mainstream publications, but many alternative ones as well.

3(a). Candis Callison

From the UBC Graduate School of Journalism.

3(b). Susan Delacourt

Delacourt writes for (among other outlets), the Toronto Star.

3(c). Graham Fraser

After a long career in journalism, he is appointed Commissioner of Official Languages in Canada.

3(d). John Fraser

Now he is Executive Chair of the National NewsMedia Council.

3(e). Chantel Hebert

A longtime writer for many outlets, such as Toronto Star.

3(f). Daniel Lessard

After 39 years with Radio Canada, he gets the order of Canada.

3(g). Laxmi Parthasarathy

The Chief Operating Officer of Global Press.

3(h). Valerie Pringle

Much of Pringle’s career spent at the CBC.

3(i). Jeffrey Simpson

Former writer for the Globe & Mail.

3(j). John Stackhouse

Former editor-in-chief of the Globe & Mail

3(k). Robert Steiner

From the Munk School of Global Affairs, Steiner is a fellow.

3(l). Rosemary Thompson

20 years in journalism, mostly with CBC and CTV.

3(m). Marie Wilson

Yet another ex-CBC journalist on the Trudeau Foundation.

3(n). Lynn Zimmer

Former writer for Peterborough Examiner.

What is the result of the media being in bed with the Trudeau Foundation? For starters, they don’t seem to care about how many politicians or judges are also part of the group. Again, the conflict of interest is clear for everyone to see.

4(a). Ed Broadbent – NDP Leader

4(b).Philippe Couillard – QC Premier

4(c). Raymond Chretien – Ambassador

4(d). Michael Fortier – Senator

4(e). Michael Harcourt – BC Premier

4(f). Megan Leslie — NDP Deputy Leader

4(g). Wade MacLauchlan – PEI Premier

4(h). Elizabeth May – Green Party Leader

4(i). Anne McLellan – Deputy PM

4(j). Ed Roberts – NFLD Lt. Governor

4(k). Roy Romanow – Saskatchewan Premier

4(l). John Sims – Deputy AG

4(m). Chuck Strahl – Privy Council

Yes, politicians across the spectrum are also involved with the Trudeau Foundation. Makes one wonder how ideologically divided they are if membership in this group (named after a former Prime Minister), is no big deal for any of them. And things are about to get even worse still.

of course, many of these people have left their positions, but still.

5(a). Thomas Cromwell – SCC Justice

5(b). Marie DesChamps – SCC Justice

5(c). Louis LeBel – SCC Justice

5(d). Beverley McLachlin – SCC Justice

5(e). Louise Arbour – SCC Justice

5(f). Lynn Smith – BCSC Justice

Five former Supreme Court of Canada Justices, and 1 BC Supreme Court Justice are also members of the Trudeau Foundation. This won’t help with the impression that the judiciary is independent of the executive branch of government.

6. Jacques Bougie – SNC Lavalin

This person being with both Trudeau Foundation and on the SNC Lavalin Board of Directors wouldn’t have anything to do with how Lavalin got its deferred prosecution agreement, would it? No, didn’t think so.

Of course let’s not forget John McCall MacBain, head of the European Climate Foundation, or Roy Heenan, co-founder of the law firm Heenan Blaikie.

7. Are They All Involved?

Why is the mainstream media in Canada so hesitant to report on topics like the Trudeau Foundation, and why won’t they go into depth when they do? Consider the makeup of past and present members of the Trudeau Foundation:

Prominent members of the media
Politicians of all parties
Supreme Court Justices
Members of academia

What you see is an organization that has members of: (a) the media; (b) politicians; (c) the courts; and (d) universities, all under the same umbrella. There is no independence here, no checks and balances.

June 13, 2020June 11, 2024

DNA Testing For Spotting Fake Refugee Families

Regardless of what a person feels about letting high levels of refugees into their country, most people will agree on one fact: they want the “family units” who enter to actually be made up of related family members.

However, as is being seen more and more, particularly in the United States, this is not the case. Adults are coming with children they claim are “their” children, but DNA testing is proving that false. In a U.S. pilot program, nearly 1/3 of professed families were not blood relatives.

Obvious questions have to be asked. Who are these children? Who are the supposed parents? Are the children being used to simply help adults along, or are they being trafficked? How are these arrangements being set up, and where? Those are just a few that need to be answered.

Bizarrely though, migrant rights groups and civil liberties groups don’t seem so concerned about those questions. Instead, they focus on what will happen to the DNA sample afterwards.

1. UN High Commission On Testing

IV. DNA testing to establish family relationships in the refugee context
.
12. …. Thus, interviewing family members should normally be undertaken as the primary means of establishing family relationships. Where documents are available, they should be used as corroborative evidence. Care should however be taken to prevent that, because of pressure to produce such documents, refugees are driven to take risky actions. These may include, for instance, desperate measures to sneak back home and/or approach the authorities of the country of origin, which could place them at risk of arrest, detention or other inordinate consequences.

13. In line with the above, UNHCR considers that DNA testing to verify family relationships may be resorted to only where serious doubts remain after all other types of proof have been examined, or, where there are strong indications of fraudulent intent and DNA testing is considered as the only reliable recourse to prove or disprove fraud.

14. Even if the existence of a blood link is not established, this may not necessarily imply an intention to commit fraud. Cultural and social dimensions of ascribing family relationships should be considered. In the refugee context, the nature of ascribing family relationships should be understood based on the refugee’s social and cultural background. UNHCR also believes that individuals will be less inclined to misrepresent non-existing blood ties if they are confident that persons whom they have always treated and considered as part of the family and with whom they have developed strong personal bonds, or where there is mutual dependency, will be considered as part of the family for purposes of family reunification.

refugee.dna.testing.unchr.1
While it does pay lip service to the idea that nations need to be secure in who they allow to enter their borders, it becomes clear that the UN High Commission on Refugees sees DNA testing as a last resort. Even in cases where there is no biological link, the UNHCR recommends “looking at the culture” of the people anyway.

2. Canadian Policy On Testing

When to do DNA testing
An applicant may be given the option of undergoing DNA testing in cases in which documentary evidence has been examined and there are still doubts about the authenticity of a parent-child genetic relationship or when it is not possible to obtain satisfactory relationship documents. A DNA test to prove a genetic relationship should be suggested by IRCC only as a last resort.

For citizenship purposes, it is only necessary to establish one parent-child relationship with a Canadian citizen parent. However, it is preferable to take samples of genetic material from both parents as it facilitates the testing process.

A relative or family member’s DNA can be useful to DNA test results for immigration purposes, even if that person is not specifically involved with the sponsorship application. In such cases, the processing office needs to be satisfied that the person is a blood relative of the sponsor and that the person’s DNA sample is collected in accordance with these guidelines.

The IRCC does require DNA testing to prove a genetic relationship, but does so only as a last resort, when family ties cannot be proven otherwise. While this may not be a huge problem for people coming in many streams, it should be required for those coming via refugee channels, especially those coming illegally.

3. CBSA Checking Ancestry Sites

Immigration officials are using DNA testing and ancestry websites to try to establish the nationality of migrants, the Canada Border Services Agency said on Friday.

CBSA spokesperson Jayden Robertson said the agency uses DNA testing to determine identity of “longer-term detainees” when other techniques have been exhausted.

“DNA testing assists the CBSA in determining identity by providing indicators of nationality thereby enabling us to focus further lines of investigation on particular countries,” Robertson said in an email.

But the process raises concerns about privacy of data held by ancestry websites, and highlights political pressure over the handling of migrants by Canada’s Liberal government. More than 30,000 would-be refugees have crossed the U.S.-Canada border since January 2017, many saying they were fleeing U.S. President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.

Again, the DNA testing appears to be a last resort to verify identity, rather than a main one. Moreover, it’s sickening how people living in the U.S. illegally are able to enter Canada and try to claim asylum. The rules aren’t meant to allow for asylum shopping.

4. Fraud Longstanding Problem In U.S.

Q: Why did the US decide to conduct DNA testing of some nationality groups applying for resettlement in the US?
.
A: PRM and DHS/USCIS jointly decided to test a sample of refugee cases due to reported fraud in the P-3 program, particularly in Kenya. This pilot program later expanded to test applicants in other parts of Africa. (See questions and answers below.)
.
Q: What rate of fraud did you discover?
.
A: The rate of fraud varied among nationalities and from country to country, and is difficult to establish definitively as many individuals refused to agree to DNA testing.
.
We were, however, only able to confirm all claimed biological relationships in fewer than 20% of cases (family units). In the remaining cases, at least one negative result (fraudulent relationship) was identified, or the individuals refused to be tested.
.
Q: Which refugees are being tested? From which countries?
.
A: We initially tested a sample of some 500 refugees (primarily Somali and Ethiopian) in Nairobi, Kenya under consideration for U.S. resettlement through the P-3 program. After that sample suggested high rates of fraud, we expanded testing to Ethiopia, Uganda, Ghana, Guinea, Gambia and Cote d’Ivoire. Most of the approximately 3,000 refugees tested are from Somalia, Ethiopia, and Liberia, as these nationalities make up the vast majority of P-3 cases.
.
It is important to note that the initial DNA testing was limited to members of families applying for the P-3 program, and not between the applicants and the anchor relative in the United States.

Even in late 2008, the U.S. State Department was reporting that on DNA testing for refugee families had interesting results. Less than 20% of cases were confirmed to be actual families. Others failed testing, or simply refused to undergo it.

Also in that same page, the State Department stated that they stopped accepting affidavits of relationship for people coming from all countries. It stopped accepting the documents and has looked for other ways to verify identity and relationships.

5. How Prevalent Is It?

Relevant part starts at about 8:00 mark in video. Conversation gets to child separation, and that entire families end up getting released. In pilot program, 30% of “families” were made up of unrelated people. Children are in fact being recycled and used to help multiple families.

The National Sentinel reported that U.S. border guards are finding a very high number of so-called families entering the U.S. illegally from Mexico, who aren’t related at all. From the Washington Examiner:

In a pilot program, approximately 30% of rapid DNA tests of immigrant adults who were suspected of arriving at the southern border with children who weren’t theirs revealed the adults were not related to the children, an official involved in the system’s temporary rollout who asked to be anonymous in order to speak freely told the Washington Examiner Friday.

“There’s been some concern about, ‘Are they stepfathers or adopted fathers?'” the official said. “Those were not the case. In these cases, they are misrepresented as family members.”

In some incidents where Immigration and Customs Enforcement told the adults they would have to take a cheek swab to verify a relationship with a minor, several admitted the child was not related and did not take the DNA test, which was designed by a U.S. company.

Nearly a third of the families coming into the U.S. as refugees aren’t in fact related. Okay, who are they really? What exactly are the children being used for? Smuggling aids for adults? Are they being recycled? Are they being trafficked? Has any money changed hands to make these arrangements happen?

6. Civil Liberties Groups Oppose Testing

The ACLU filed a federal lawsuit earlier this year to stop family separation and to require the immediate reunion of all separated children and parents. On June 29, a federal judge issued a national injunction in our class-action lawsuit, requiring the reunification of thousands. Now, we must ensure the administration heeds the court’s ruling and the policy of family separation ends once and for all. The government deported hundreds of parents without their children — without a plan for how they would be ever be found. The ACLU is working to locate every separated parent and advise them of their rights to be reunited.

We are in the courts, streets, and in Congress to hold the Trump administration accountable for the irreparable damage it has done to these young lives. We need you in this fight.

One has to wonder why, if the U.S. was such a horrible place, would people come by the tens of thousands to go there? Why would people travel for thousands of miles just to end up on concentration camps?

The tortured logic is also on display here. The ACLU wants DNA testing to be done only as a last resort, and took the Government to court on that issue. However, they also oppose separating children from parents (or at least people who “claim” to be families).

In short, the ACLU wants children and adults to remain together, and be promptly released into the United States. Yet, they oppose the one measure which would determine if they are in fact related by blood.

The ACLU is far from the only organization that opposes DNA testing, while trying to get “families” released into the mainland. It would seem logical to at least ensure that the children are with family members, but that doesn’t seem to be a concern. The priority with opposing DNA testing seems to be to keep it out of criminal databases.

Who knows how many of these children are being trafficked by their so-called parents? What about the human rights and civil liberties of the children involved? However, groups like the ACLU don’t address that.

June 11, 2020January 4, 2026

CANZUK Expansion, The Open Borders Bait-And-Switch

1. Mass LEGAL Immigration In Canada

Despite what many think, LEGAL immigration into Canada is actually a much larger threat, 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. See this Canadian series, and the UN programs for more detail. There is so much information that politicians, the media, and so-called “experts” are withholding.

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.

2. CANZUK’s Luke Fortmann On Expansion

As proponents of a new and exciting geopolitical union between the four CANZUK nations (Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK), we’re very often met with one particular question: looking ahead, who else might be able to join the partnership?

It should be said that a new Commonwealth union would be welcoming of any potential members – with each being considered on a case-by-case basis – and that the CANZUK project is very much a work in progress; always receptive of fresh ideas and potential avenues to explore.

A useful way to begin is by taking a look at the CANZUK countries’ dependent territories, such as Christmas Island, the Cook Islands and Anguilla, for example, which are dependencies of Australia, New Zealand, and the UK, respectively, as well as the UK’s Crown dependencies (Guernsey, Jersey, and the Isle of Man).

Each area would naturally become full members of the new group along with the nations to which they are related. Some advocates claim that these small islands, and their generally sparse populations, are currently under-utilised, and that a CANZUK alliance would offer a tremendous opportunity for their communities to acquire a far more extensive set of rights by becoming equal partners in a union, while shaking off their somewhat colonial tint.

Widening our scope, we arrive at the Commonwealth realms. These realms are sovereign states who are members of the Commonwealth and who currently share Queen Elizabeth II as their monarch, of which, there are 16 including the CANZUK countries.

A further concern, and no doubt the most pressing, is that a union involving most or all of the current Commonwealth would be a political impossibility, with almost every country having broken off colonial ties with the British in order to achieve their independence, which says nothing for the relationships between some of the nations (India and Pakistan or Bangladesh and Pakistan, for example). Of course, it would be entirely possible for individual Commonwealth countries to make a solo membership claim.

When weighing up the potential barriers to entry that many of these Commonwealth countries have, we’re often confronted with the challenge that this new alliance is concerned only with nations that are populated by white folk. Such criticism is fairly lazy and can be easily dealt with. Firstly, as we’ve just seen, there’s absolutely no reason why these countries couldn’t join in the future, so long as efforts were directed at bringing them up to par in the ways just discussed.

The original article was deleted, but thankfully it is archived. CANZUK researcher Luke Fortmann writes about the possible expansion and states that options are “always being considered”. To be blunt, this 4 nation alliance could swell.

Also, he does acknowledge that expansion would lead to mass migration to the original 4 nations, and to their demographic replacement. But he doesn’t seem to care as long as it’s done in an orderly fashion.

3. Erin O’Toole Supports Expanding CANZUK

Listen to Erin O’Toole at 2:00 in the video

We can take it to the next level, to show that multi-later organizations can be aspirational. Where you have the rule of law, GDP, respect for rights, the Common Law system, the ability to support a free market, that you’ll work more together. Then we let more and more countries in, and revolutionize opportunities with CANZUK. Please support it. Thank you.

4. Australian Senator Paterson Supports It

Senator Paterson has also let it slip that he sees expanding the CANZUK zone as quite possible as soon as it is operational. The initial 4 are just the starting point. Interestingly, he points out that CANZUK is effectively an expansion of the 1973 Trans-Tasmanian Agreement.

(3:50) Rather than drafting a new agreement entirely from scratch, Australia should advocate adding Canada and the U.K. to the [Closer Economic Relations] Agreement, with only a few major changes if required…. Like the CER, CANZUK would include the freedom of movement between the 4 Commonwealth countries.

It could act as a strong voice in favour of the rules-based liberal order, that is under attack from populist movements on both sides of the political aisle around the world. Over time, this is a group which could grow. In the past week, I’ve had many good suggestions of countries that would make logical additions to CANZUK. Getting the core building block in place, though, I think makes sense.

Again, a bait-and-switch. Promoting it as just a 4 nation pact is the selling feature. Goal is to expand it once it’s fully operational.

5. Free Movement Is Primary Goal

Steve Paiken points out that Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the U.K. happen to be majority white “for now”. Great emphasis. Knowing that it will change pretty soon. The people in the video make it clear they don’t care about demographic change.

6. ExtraNewsFeed Article On CANZUK

That leads into the benefit for the group in terms of geopolitics. Forming a close economic alliance with the EU would be easier for the bloc, and the two unions combined would have a population of 600 million people, around an eleventh of the world’s population. The combined economies of the two blocs would represent over a quarter of world GDP, at around $23 trillion.

Throw the US in as a partner, and this Western/Anglophone bloc is now worth half of the world’s economy and hosts an eighth of its people.

Some have mooted that the US or some African Anglophone countries might also join such a union, although this would certainly complicate trade matters and the idea of free movement. Perhaps a second “outer ring” union, with a pathway to full membership contingent on democratisation and economic development, could be created for other Anglophone countries.

That’s right. The article promoting CANZUK suggests creating a “secondary” level of nations, with a pathway to eventual full partnership.

7. CANZUK.org On Expanding The Zone

So, each of the CANZUK nations have focused on their local geographic regions with their trade deals, for reasons of proximity and ease of transport. But there would seem to be a huge opportunity here – for collaboration in free trade deals with each other’s home regions. For example, Australia and New Zealand already have free trade deals with China – Canada and the UK could hitch a ride onto these existing channels. And all four nations are interested in a trade deal with India – why not combine efforts?

These would have small effects to start with; but when combined over three regions – Asia-Pacific, North America and Europe, the effects would accumulate. Essentially, trade deals which would be too marginal to be worth pursuing on an individual national basis (for example, Australia-Norway) could be wrapped into a CANZUK framework. In this case, the UK would be the lead partner, opening their region to the other CANZUK partners.

Exactly how this would work remains to be seen. You could have a single CANZUK trade delegation, working together to land bigger deals, or a piecemeal approach, where the region lead partner(s) initiates the approach, bringing the others along for the ride as negotiations proceed.

While the talk of expansion appears to be in the context of trade, it would lead to economic harm, given how places like India and China can simply underbid local companies and put them out of work. And who’s to say it “won’t” lead to free movement at some point?

8. UK CANZUK On Expanding The Zone

I’m an advocate of creating a new geopolitical partnership between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK (CANZUK). This would begin with a free trade agreement, an agreement for free movement to live and work, and a defence and security partnership. If that were seen to function well, we might move on to establish an ever closer union principle, and create some formal mechanisms for caucusing our views in global debates and enhancing mutual recognition of regulation and coordinating in other relevant ways. The aim would not be to create a new integrated superstate (certainly not at first, and probably not for many decades or centuries, if at all) but, rather, a geopolitical partnership, akin to the European Economic Community or Warsaw Pact partnerships of the 1970s.

However, a more natural way to proceed would surely be to get CANZUK established and if those initial countries worked well together for a few decades, we could then consider adding the Bahamas, Barbados, Antigua and St Kitts, perhaps after some providing some assistance to raise their GDPs per capita a little closer to ours.

Overall, then, it would be best to begin with the narrower set of countries that are most compatible. That will be challenge enough to start with. That does not mean that in some decades time we should not consider adding countries with similar constitutions, such as The Bahamas or Barbados, if they can raise their GDP per capita and reduce their murder rates. But decisions on that question are, at this stage, many decades away.

Yet another piece reiterating that the current list (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom), are not the end result. Many more countries could be added at some point.

9. CANZUK Report Addresses Expansion

CANZUK-International-The-Future-of-Post-Brexit-Britain-2019

From a socio-economic standpoint, it is clear that integrating other Commonwealth nations within a facilitated migration initiative at this time would not work. At present, additional countries (such as South Africa, India, Jamaica and Pakistan, to name a few) do not meet the economic criteria that is essential for facilitated migration to succeed, as the benefits of reciprocal migration can only be guaranteed by Commonwealth countries that are very similar in terms of socio-economic characteristics.

There is no reason why additional countries within the Commonwealth would not be able to eventually join a facilitated migration initiative, but for the foreseeable future, the CANZUK countries are so similar in terms of social, economic, cultural and historical factors, it would be folly not to promote reciprocal migration, free trade and foreign policy among these countries and observe the benefits that such arrangements would bring

Read between the lines (page 9 of the report). Expanding CANZUK beyond the original 4 members doesn’t seem feasible, but doesn’t mean that it can’t or won’t happen at some point.

10. CANZUK Bait-And-Switch

It is sold to the public as a free trade and free movement (visa free) pact between 4 very similar countries. While this may not sound too bad in principle, fact is that expanding it to other countries is also being talked about. What people are being sold on is not the entire story.

Of course, there are other references available to CANZUK expansion, but hopefully the point has already been made here.

(1) https://www.canzukinternational.com/2018/07/which-countries.html
(2) http://archive.is/vH7wu
(3) Which Countries Could Eventually Join CANZUK_ – CANZUK International
(4) https://extranewsfeed.com/how-canzuk-could-change-the-shape-of-the-modern-world-64caf3756933
(5) http://archive.is/7ckF7
(6) https://www.canzuk.org/canzuk_a_bold_idea_for_a_new_kind_of_trade_bloc.php
(7) http://archive.is/TAcAU
(8) https://www.canzuk.co.uk/single-post/2017/03/10/Lilico-What-other-countries-might-eventually-join-CANZUK
(9) http://archive.is/Il7Br

June 1, 2020October 17, 2025

George Soros & Open Society: Smuggling; Lawfare; Population Replacement

Knowing who funds an organization is important to knowing its real goal, especially if it is something other than profit. Money speaks louder than words. This review looks at the various Open Society groups headed by George Soros, and where the money is going. The Open Society funds a variety of causes, but the goal is the same: collapse of Western Civilization.

Some examples include:

Open borders NGOs are funded in order to advance policies of loosening immigration rules. This means funding political candidates who share these views
Cultural Marxist groups are funded since their goal is upending social norms. They claim that others are being oppressed, and are anti-white, in particular anti-white men. Note: these groups often share open borders ideals.
So-called “anti-hate” groups are funded, whose objective is to silence legitimate criticism of multiculturalism and mass migration.
Open Society funds scholarships of foreign students often leads to them permanently settling in the West, especially with the diversity laws on the books. As such, student visas are a form of backdoor population replacement.
Open Society partners with the Canadian Government (and other Governments) on refugee relocation programs
Open Society indirectly finances court challenges to strike down, amend or otherwise weaken our borders

To put it mildly, this is a convoluted mess of connections and financing. This critique in no way covers everything that is going on. However, it is meant to shed light on how bad the problem is.

1. Review By Civilian Intelligence Network

The corruption of higher education by the Soros cabal was covered by Civilian Intelligence Network in this earlier article. In depth and with a lot of detail, it is worth a long read. This will not be a rehash of the CIN piece, but rather some different coverage brought to George Soros.

2. Open Society Group Tax Records

https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/

OPEN SOCIETY FUND INC.
EIN: 13-3095822
open.society.fund.2016
open.society.fund.2017
open.society.fund.2018

OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE
EIN: 13-7029285
open.society.institute.1.2016
open.society.institute.1.2017
open.society.institute.1.2018

OPEN SOCIETY POLICY CENTER
EIN: 52-2028955
open.society.policy.center.2016
open.society.policy.center.2017
open.society.policy.center.2018

FOUNDATION TO PROMOTE OPEN SOCIETY
EIN: 26-3753801
foundation.to.promote.open.society.2016
foundation.to.promote.open.society.2017
foundation.to.promote.open.society.2018

SOLIDARITY FOR OPEN SOCIETY INC.
EIN: 45-4209345
No tax returns yet, just determination letters

INSTITUTE FOR OPEN SOCIETY IN MIDDLE EAST
EIN: 46-5635908
No tax returns yet, just determination letters

FUND FOR AN OPEN SOCIETY
EIN: 52-1035144
fund.for.open.society.2016
fund.for.open.society.2018

ALLIANCE FOR OPEN SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL
EIN: 81-0623035
international.alliance.open.society.2016
international.alliance.open.society.2017

There isn’t a single Open Society Group. Rather, it is a series of charities available for tax-exempt status. The above records are available with this link, and searching the IRS.

3. Michael Ignatieff VP Open Society Fund

Michael Ignatieff is the rector and president of Central European University in Budapest. A university professor, writer, and former politician, Ignatieff served for three years as the Edward R. Murrow Professor of the Practice of Politics and the Press at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, where he was the director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy from 2000 to 2005.

Ignatieff earned his doctorate in history at Harvard University, and has taught at the Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto; Kings College, Cambridge; the London School of Economics and Political Science; and the University of British Columbia. Active in Canadian politics from 2006 to 2011, Ignatieff was a member of parliament and leader of the Liberal Party. An author and journalist, he is widely published, including Fire and Ashes: Success and Failure in Politics (2013) and The Ordinary Virtues: Moral Order in a Divided World. In 2019, he was awarded The Dan David Prize for the defense of democracy.

Does that last name look familiar? It should. Michael Ignatieff used to be the head of the Canadian Liberal Party, from early 2009 until mid 2011. Only the biggest defeat in Liberal history kept him from becoming Prime Minister. He is now on the Board of the Open Society Foundation.

Ignatieff crashed and burned in the May 2011 Federal election. However, Soros would get a Liberal Prime Minister as a puppet in the very next session. As a bonus, Chrystia Freeland would also get elected, and get chosen for Foreign Affairs Minister.

4. Areas Open Society Finances

CATEGORY	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020
DP	$76.5M	$102.9M	$113.9M	$99.3M	$140.5M
ECE	$18.6M	$20.7M	$21.9M	$21.3M	$22M
EGA	$76.7M	$127.4M	$146.2M	$131.7M	$136.7M
EAD	$75.8M	$82.4M	$80.2M	$85.3M	$111.5M
HR	$47.3M	$58.8M	$50.1M	$46.8M	$47.2M
EDU	$26.0M	$19.5M	$52.2M	$85.3M	$63.7M

DP = Democratic Practice
ECE = Early Childhood Education
EGA = Economic Governance & Advancement
EAD = Equality & Anti-Discrimination
HR = Health & Rights
EDU = Higher Education

For the entire list that Open Society discloses.

5. Groups Open Society Helps Fund

For a glimpse into what groups Open Society sees as worthy of funding, consider this 2016, 2017, and 2018 returns, and the names that are on it. There are a lot of NGOs and civil societies who receive Soros money.
EIN: 52-2028955

GROUP	YEAR	AMOUNT GIVEN
American Civil Liberties Union	2016	$170,000
Advance Carolina	2016	$112,500
Alliance San Diego Mobilization	2018	$150,000
America’s Voice	2018	$575,000
American Immigration Council	2016	$190,000
American Immigration Council	2017	$190,000
American Immigration Council	2018	$35,000
American Jewish World Service	2017	$150,000
Amnesty International USA	2016	$350,000
Amnesty International USA	2017	$350,000
Amnesty International USA	2018	$250,000
Arizona Wins	2016	$75,000
Arizona Wins	2017	$425,000
Ballot Initiative Strategy Center	2016	$300,000
Ballot Initiative Strategy Center	2018	$650,000
Bend The Arc Jewish Action	2018	$200,000
Beyond The Choir	2018	$140,000
Catholic Legal Immigration Network	2016	$80,000
Catholic Legal Immigration Network	2017	$80,000
Center For American Progress	2018	$240,000
Center For A New Economy	2016	$120,000
Center For Community Change Action	2016	$1,475,000
Center For Community Change Action	2017	$2,500,000
Center For Community Change Action	2018	$1,060,000
Center For International Policy	2018	$125,000
Center For Popular Democracy	2016	$1,030,000
Center For Popular Democracy	2018	$700,000
Color Of Change	2018	$350,000
Engage Cuba	2017	$750,000
Every Voice	2016	$475,000
Institute For Asian Democracy	2016	$25,000
J Street	2017	$25,000
J Street Action Fund	2017	$25,000
Maine People’s Alliance	2016	$400,000
Mercy Corps	2016	$150,000
Mercy Corps	2017	$150,000
MoveOn Org Civic Action	2016	$25,000
National Ass’n Latino Elected	2016	$55,000
National Security Archive Fund	2016	$55,000
New Left Acceleration	2016	$250,000
Planned Parenthood	2018	$1,000,000
Pretrial Justice Institute	2016	$50,000
Pretrial Justice Institute	2017	$50,000
Project On Middle East Democracy	2017	$90,000
Retain A Just Nebraska	2016	$500,000
San Diegans For Voter Participation	2016	$200,000
Sierra Club	2016	$125,000
Sixteen Thirty Fund	2016	$481,000
Sixteen Thirty Fund	2017	$2,257,000
Sixteen Thirty Fund	2018	$3,837,000
Taxpayers For Sentencing Reform	2016	$500,000
The Aspen Institute	2018	$65,000
The Constitution Project	2016	$50,000
Tides Advocacy	2018	$1,760,000
Tides Center	2016	$20,000
Tides Center	2018	$22,500

America’s Voice claims to track hatred and racist media. Consider it a form of the ADL, or the Canadian Anti-Hate Network

The Alliance San Diego Mobilization Fund, sells itself as a voter empowerment group, but is really concerned with pushing for the “rights” of people in the country illegally.

The American Immigration Council effectively wages lawfare against the United States by challenging existing laws and regulations as unconstitutional.

The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center is a group trying to mobilize younger people, in an effort to get more liberal policies voted into law.

This group, Bend The Arc Jewish Action, is a group trying to mobilize Jews into a political force. The goal allegedly is to defeat white supremacy and give power to marginalized people.

The group Beyond The Choir looks at different marketing strategies for how to promote and advance liberal causes in the West. Also touts an openly anti-Trump agenda.

The Center For American Progress Action Fund contains many Democrats in high ranking positions. It’s an openly partisan group trying to get Donald Trump out of office.

The Center For Popular Democracy is a group that promotes every marginalized group under the sun, claiming that they are all oppressed.

The group Color Of Change calls itself a “racial justice” group, and is trying to build real power for black communities, whatever that means.

Community Change Action is a group trying to get more people voting for pro-immigration policies, and focuses on potentially close political races.

Sixteen Thirty seems to be missing, (was it taken down?) but according to critics, it was used to influence politicians towards liberal leaning causes.

The Aspen Institute is a think tank which promotes global solutions to a variety of world problems. Interesting list of members.

The Tides Foundation promotes and funds a variety of environmental and social justice causes around the world.

Of course this is nowhere near all of the groups who receive some funding from the various Open Society groups. But it does help illustrate the types of institutions that George Soros and his people would be interested in financing.

6. Open Society & Higher Education

GROUP	YEAR	AMOUNT GIVEN
John Hopkins University	2017	$15,000
Fellows Of Harvard College	2016	$50,000
University Of Maryland	2017	$49,000
Fellows Of Harvard College	2016	$196,000
Various Scholarships (12)	2016	$717,000
Various Scholarships (12)	2017	$717,000

The above listings are just a small sample of what the various Open Society groups offer.

This has been addressed many times on this site. However, the typical Canadian is completely unaware of just how many students and temporary workers are being let into the country. While this is sold to the public as forms of “temporary” migration, the reality is that there are many pathways to stay longer.

7. Open Society Pushes For More Refugees

UNITED NATIONS/NEW YORK CITY, September 19, 2016 – The Government of Canada, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and the Open Society Foundations have agreed to launch a joint initiative aimed at increasing private sponsorship of refugees around the world. Research demonstrates that privately sponsored refugees tend to have relatively early, positive integration and settlement outcomes, thanks in part to the social support provided by sponsors.

This announcement came from the UN High Commission on Refugees.

In September 2016, a partnership was announced between the Canadian Government, the UN High Commission on Refugees and the Open Society, to bring more refugees to Canada.

Interesting side note: despite all the attention that the UN Global Migration Compact gained in 2018, few people seemed to care about its predecessor, the New York Declaration, which was adopted in September 2016.

8. UNCHR Party To Canada/U.S. Border

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?

Few people know this, but the UNHCR is legally speaking, a party to this agreement. It is not a bilateral pact between 2 countries, but includes at least 3. Yet this detail isn’t spoken about in the media.

In fact, Canada hasn’t had true border security since 2002 (when the Safe 3rd Country Agreement was signed), if it ever did at all. This is addressed in Part 7 of the series.

9. Open Society Finances Lawfare In Court

FIRST ATTEMPT: KILL “SAFE COUNTRY” DESIGNATION
(a) Federal Court, Trial Division, Rouleau J., [1989] 3 F.C. 3

(b) Canadian Council of Churches v. Canada,
Federal Court of Appeal, [1990] 2 F.C. 534

(c) Canadian Council of Churches v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 236
1992.SCC.Rules.No.Standing

SECOND ATTEMPT: KILL CANADA/US S3CA
(a) 2008 ruling S3CA has no effect
Docket: IMM-7818-05
rel=”noopener” target=”_blank”S3CA Provisions Struck Down

(b) The 2008 ruling is overturned on appeal
Canadian Council for Refugees v. Canada, 2008 FCA 229
Appeal granted, S3CA restored

THIRD ATTEMPT: TORONTO CASES TO STRIKE S3CA
(a) 2017, Prothonotary Milczynski considers consolidation
IMM-2229-17, IMM-2977-17, IMM-775-17
Milczynski Considers Consolidation

(b) 2017, CJ Crampton transfers cases to J. Diner
Crampton Transfers Consolidated Cases

(c) 2017, Justice Diner grants public interest standing
Citation: 2017 FC 1131
Amnesty Int’l, CDN Councils of Churches, Refugees

(d) 2018, Justice Diner grants consolidation of 3 cases
Citation: 2018 FC 396
Cases to be consolidated

(e) 2018, Justice Diner allows more witnesses
Citation: 2018 FC 829
2018.Diner.Calling.More.Witnesses

(f) 2019, Justice McDonald says no more witnesses
Citation: 2019 FC 418
2019.McDonald.No.More.Intervenors

Since 1989, NGOs have made at least 3 major attempts to have portions of our laws struck down. This would make it easier for fake refugees to enter from the United States. This has been addressed elsewhere in the series, such as in Part 16.

But an interesting piece of the puzzle was left out: who’s funding this? Who is the source of financing for the lawyers who want to strike down Canadian Borders?

GROUP	YEAR	AMOUNT GIVEN
Amnesty International USA	2016	$350,000
Amnesty International USA	2017	$350,000
Amnesty International USA	2018	$250,000

This of course is the American counterpart, but Amnesty International works in similar ways across Western nations. Obviously, Amnesty International has many donors. However, the Open Society does contribute to groups who take Governments to court to allow refugees easier access.

10. Soros Allegedly Funding Civil Unrest

A disclaimer to start out with: given that these are still not proven fully at this point, the qualifier “allegedly” will be used here. It has been alleged that the Center For Community Change has helped finance and coordinate Antifa riots and other violent demonstrations, with money from the Open Society and other such groups.

GROUP	YEAR	AMOUNT GIVEN
Center For Community Change Action	2016	$1,475,000
Center For Community Change Action	2017	$2,500,000
Center For Community Change Action	2018	$1,060,000

This data is available from the 2016 to 2018 tax returns for the Open Society Policy Center (EIN: 52-2028955). From the information presented, Open Society clearly does fund the group Center for Community Change Action. However, the group obviously doesn’t publicly admit to staging violence.

11. Caravans Facilitating Illegal Entry

Pueblo Sin Fronteras is a transborder organization made up of human rights defenders of diverse nationalities and immigration statuses that promotes accompaniment, humanitarian assistance, leadership development, recognition of human rights, and coordination of know-your-rights training along migrant routes, as well as monitoring and raising awareness of human rights abuses against migrants and refugees in Mexico and the United States. Our accompaniment does not end at the border, it continues in the immigration detention centers of the United States and the communities in Mexico and the US.

This NGO openly admits that its agenda is getting people across the border from the United States into Mexico. The name, PUEBLO SIN FRONTERAS, loosely translates to “Town Without Borders”. It openly supports illegal waves of people (called Caravans) coming up north to the U.S.

WASHINGTON – Hundreds of Central American migrants demanding asylum at the U.S. border with Mexico Sunday may be poor, but they have support of major foundations, corporations and billionaire George Soros for their well-organized caravan-style invasion.

The caravan is organized by a group called Pueblo sin Fronteras. But the effort is supported by the coalition CARA Family Detention Pro Bono Project, which includes Catholic Legal Immigration Network, the American Immigration Council, the Refugee and Immigration Center for Education and Legal Services and the American Immigration Lawyers Association – thus the acronym CARA. At least three of the four groups are funded By George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, WND has confirmed

Pueblo Sin Fronteras is a member of the National Day Laborer Network, which is affiliated with United for Justice and Peace, Caravan Against Fear and Freedom Road Socialist Organization. The connections run deep between left-wing activism and corporate and foundation sponsorship.

The Democratic Party links are also in strong evidence. Earlier this month, Oregon’s Democratic Governor Kate Brown accepted a contribution to her re-election campaign from Soros – his first direct involvement in that state’s elections. Three days later, Brown announced the Oregon National Guard would not be participating in President Trump’s effort to get the Guard providing border security.

The online site WND has reported that some of the groups behind the Pueblo Sin Fronteras movement have been receiving funds from the Open Society. They cite these following organizations:

American Immigration Council 52-1549711
American Immigration Lawyers
Catholic Legal Immigration Network 52-1584951
Refugee & Immigration Center For Education And Legal Services

https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/
EIN: 26-3753801
EIN: 52-2028955

GROUP	YEAR	AMOUNT GIVEN
American Immigration Council	2016	$190,000
American Immigration Council	2017	$190,000
American Immigration Council	2018	$35,000
Catholic Legal Immigration Network	2016	$80,000
Catholic Legal Immigration Network	2017	$80,000

The American Immigration Council and the Catholic Legal Immigration Network are both unquestionably being partially funded by the Open Society. It’s quite possible that one or both of the others are being funded through an intermediary.

GROUP	YEAR	AMOUNT GIVEN
Mercy Corps	2016	$150,000
Mercy Corps	2017	$150,000

Worth a mention is the NGO called Mercy Corps, which helps bring large numbers of refugees to the West. Soros is a large supporter of them as well.

(1) https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/
(2) https://realisticobserver.blogspot.com/2017/04/fyi-206-us-organizations-funded-by.html
(3) http://archive.is/qTXUo
(4) https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/who-we-are/financials
(5) http://archive.is/NwmN7
(6) ttps://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/9/57e0e2784/canada-unhcr-open-society-foundations-seek-increase-refugee-resettlement.html
(7) http://archive.is/tqdRc
(8) https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/private-refugee-sponsorship-soros-un-1.3769639?cmp=rss
(9) http://archive.is/zvvNx
(10) https://thegoldwater.com/news/9164-Soros-and-Clinton-Organisations-Both-Donated-1-75-Million-to-Antifa
(11) http://archive.is/ZnuYs
(12) https://www.pueblosinfronteras.org/
(13) http://archive.is/UGX8N
(14) https://www.wnd.com/2018/04/border-caravan-call-it-the-george-soros-express/
(15) http://archive.is/p0KKw

May 25, 2020January 3, 2026

Pharma Lobbying In Canada Flooded With Gates’ Proxies/Allies

The topic of lobbying has been addressed in earlier pieces in the series, but let’s show just how big it is. The truth is, one can’t honestly discuss the vaccine push in Canada (or elsewhere), without getting into the influence peddling behind the scenes.

This is by no means everything. This is just the tip of iceberg. Still, it’s necessary for the public to see, in order to understand what’s going on.

Bill Gates Jr., is the face behind the vaccine industry today. He is a well known proponent for population reduction. He is also the son of Bill Gates Sr., former head of Planned Parenthood.

The companies listed below are lobbying the Federal Government (and Provinces too), to push the for vaccine research. Why? In part because The Gates Foundation Trust owns stock in several of these organizations. The Gates Foundation — a separate entity, but not really — spends money on these groups as well. In short, pharma bucks help push the agenda.

And what is the result of this?

1. Gates Foundation Tax Returns

Link to search IRS charity tax records:
https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/

Let’s clarify here: there are actually 2 separate entities. The Foundation is the group that distributes money to various organizations and institutions. The Foundation Trust, however, is concerned primarily about asset management.

BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION
EIN: 56-2618866
gates.foundation.taxes.2016
gates.foundation.taxes.2017
gates.foundation.taxes.2018
gates.foundation.taxes.2019

BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION TRUST
EIN: 91-1663695
gates.foundation.trust.taxes.2018

What does the Gates Foundation Trust Own?

Company	Type Of Stock	Shares	Total Value
Eli Lilly	Corp Bonds	–	$952,265
Gilead Sciences	Common	21,250	$1,329,188
Gilead Sciences	Corp Bonds	–	$3,297,777
Laobaixing Pharma	Common	831,829	$5,719,831
Merck	Common	27,200	$2,078,352
Novartis	Common	70,330	$5,995,662
Pfizer	Common	39,500	$1,724,175
Roche	Common	37,881	$9,353,059
Sichuan Kelun	Common	2,818,448	8,480,098
Sinopharm	Common	394,080	$1,655,978
Tasly Pharma	Common	8,114,941	$22,693,515
Teva Fin BV	Corp Bonds	–	$819,555
Teva Fin IV	Corp Bonds	–	$9,465
Teva Pharma NE	Corp Bonds	–	$1,106,435

Why does Bill Gates promote the health and well being of these companies? It could (and probably does) have to do with that fact that he is a stockholder in them. Plainly put, he is part owner of these pharmaceutical companies.

Of course, this is only a tiny portion of the total assets within the trust. There are stocks and bonds in a wide array of industries and companies.

Interesting side note: There is almost $11 million of stock in SNC Lavalin owned by the Trust, $1.25M in Goldman Sachs, and about $14M in Blackrock’s various groups.

2. Lobbying And Pharmaceutical Money

Ablynx (a Sanofi company)
Autolus
Denali Therapeutics
Eli Lilly and Company
Gilead Sciences
GlaxoSmithKline
Global Health Foundation (Gates Foundation)
Kodiak Sciences
Lyell
Merck (MSD)
Novartis Pharmaceuticals
Pfizer Inc.
Sanofi Pasteur
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd.

It was addressed in Part 14, the AbCellera grant, how many of the firm’s partners have been involved with the Gates Foundation, and some of the lobbying behind the scenes.

In addition to those partners in the above list, consider the following, as they also have direct or indirect ties to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation:

AbCellera itself
Apotex Pharmaceuticals
Bayer
GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance
VIDO-InterVac

3. AbCellera Biologics

As of March 2020, AbCellera is registered with the Lobbying Commissioner’s Office. There are no communication reports — yet — but AbCellera is set up and ready to go and start lobbying. Also worth noting is that AbCellera received $289,116.00 from Western Economic Diversification Canada last year, and expects to receive more this year.

In November 2016, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation gave AbCellera $645,000 to help develop antibodies to treat the tuberculosis infection. So when AbCellera is getting the current grant from the Canadian Government, is it really the Gates Foundation that is getting the money?

4. Apotex Pharmaceuticals

Apotex was involved in a scandal in 2017, where it’s alleged that there was illegal lobbying in 2015 of then-Candidate Justin Trudeau. Apotex owners Barry and Honey Sherman were murdered in 2017, around the time that M-132 was introduced in the Federal Parliament. While Apotex lobbying on the Federal sphere may have stopped, it is a very different story Provincially.

Apotex has a manufacturing base in Ontario, so it’s no surprise that they would try to influence the Government there. This will be the topic of a separate article, but the Apotex owners (Honey and Barry Sherman), were murdered in 2017. This was while there was an ethics investigation for illegal lobbying, and around the time that M-132 started up. M-132 was a motion for Canada to fund pharma research and distribute cheap drugs to Canadians — AND THE WORLD.

5. Bayer

Bayer has lobbied the Ontario Government several times in the last few years. Bayer is one of the partners that the Gates Foundation announced would help with CV vaccine research.

6. GAVI, The Vaccine Alliance

This has been addressed in earlier parts of the series, but the Gates funded GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations) has been lobbying the Federal Government since 2018. There are 20 communications reports on file.

This is probably the most well known link in the chain. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation helped found GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance in 1999. There was an initial grant of $750 million, and the Gates Foundation made regular contributions to GAVI, about $4 billion in total. The foundation essentially runs the show.

The Global Vaccine Alliance, as the name suggests, is an organization devoted to pushing vaccinations on the public all across the world. Bill Gates has long been a proponent of mass vaccinations.

Just 3 weeks ago, May 4, 2020, the Gates foundation released a press report for another $50 million worth of funding going to GAVI.

7. Gilead Sciences Canada

According to records from the Lobbying Commissioner’s Office, Gilead had 42 various registrations over the years, but has only lobbied the Federal Government 10 times. Seems a bit odd.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust owns stocks and bonds in Gilead. And the Foundation has contributed to Gilead’s research in recent years.

8. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)

There are 187 communications reports on file with the Office of the Lobbying Commissioner. Also noteworthy is that GlaxoSmithKline lobbies Provincially as well.

Year	Company	Amount
2011	GSK Biologicals	$16,956,274
2012	GSK Biologicals	$2,890,159
2013	GlaxoSmithKline	$2,347,273
2014	GSK Biologicals	$1,199,441
2014	GSK Biologicals	$6,000,000
2014	GSK Biologicals	$14,060,000
2014	GSK Biologicals	$1,281,469
2015	GSK Biologicals	$1,281,432
2016	GlaxoSmithKline	$1,511,994
2016	GSK Biologicals	$15,100,417
2017	GlaxoSmithKline	$322,663
2017	GlaxoSmithKline	$1,801,901
2017	GlaxoSmithKline	$320,265

9. Merck Canada Inc.

Merck has been lobbying the Federal Government since 2001, on a variety of pharmaceutical related issues. There are 103 listed communications reports. And they are a major partner for AbCellera Biologics.

SEATTLE — The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation today announced that Richard Henriques has been appointed chief financial officer, effective April 19, 2010. He will be based in Seattle, Washington at the foundation’s headquarters.

Henriques will join the foundation from Merck, where he has served as senior vice president of finance and corporate controller since 2006. In this position, he focused on operations, governance, strategic planning, performance measurement, and cost management within the pharmaceutical and pharmacy benefit management industries.

Interesting side note: in 2010, the Gates Foundation scooped Richard Henriques from Merck, where he was a Senior VP.

Year	Company	Amount
2013	Merck KGAA	$1,142,794

According to the most recent tax return, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust owns over $2 million worth of common stock in Merck. Presumably they’d like it to do well.

10. Novartis Pharmaceuticals

Novartis has been lobbying the Federal Government since 2007, and is one of AbCellera’s partners. There are 13 communications reports filed with the registry.

Year	Company	Amount
2016	Novartis Vaxx Diag.	$1,537,375
2016	Novartis Pharma	$659,154
2017	Novartis Biomed	$1,541,000

According to the most recently available tax return, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust owns about $6 million worth of common stock in Novartis. Novartis lobbies the Canadian Government for causes that benefit Gates.

11. Pfizer Canada

Since 2007, Pfizer, one of AbCellera’s partners, has 143 communications reports filed with the Lobbying Commissioner’s Office. It has operated under a few different corporate titles though.

Year	Company	Amount
2016	Pfizer	$1,813,282

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust owns about $1.7 million worth of common stock in Pfizer. Pfizer lobbies the Canadian Government for pharma related issues.

12. Sanofi Pasteur Ltd.

Sanofi is yet another one of AbCellera’s partners that has long been lobbying the Federal Government. Could have contributed to why AbCellera was able to get that $175.6 million contract from Ottawa.

Press Release: Inactivated Polio Vaccines Broadly Available for the World’s Children in the Drive toward Polio Eradication
.
Sanofi Pasteur
.
February 28, 2014
Sanofi Pasteur, the vaccines division of Sanofi (EURONEXT: SAN and NYSE: SNY), announced today its further commitment to the international community’s efforts to complete polio eradication. UNICEF, the organization that procures the vaccine to meet global needs, announced it will purchase significant quantities of Inactivated Polio Vaccine (IPV) from Sanofi Pasteur and make it available based on country needs and vaccination plans. To achieve the goal of polio eradication by 2018, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that by end 2015, all children receive routinely at least one dose of IPV in over 120 countries that solely use Oral Polio Vaccine.
.
In order to support rapid and widespread adoption of IPV, Sanofi Pasteur – the world’s largest producer of IPV – and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have developed a joint price support mechanism, including a financial contribution from both organizations.

In 2014, a partnership was announced between Sanofi Pasteur and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This was to promote more widespread polio vaccines, and work out a pricing scheme.

Year	Company	Amount
2015	Sanofi Pasteur	$1,663,388
2016	Sanofi Pasteur	$722,071

13. TEVA Canada Ltd.

Since becoming a registered lobbyist, there have been 94 communications made with various officials of the Federal Government, according to records in the Registry.

Year	Company	Amount
2015	Teva Pharmaceuticals	$11,418,031

Friendly reminder: the Gates Foundation Trust owns at least a few million dollars worth of corporate bonds in various Teva branches.

14. VIDO-InterVac, Vaccine Center

The International Vaccine Institute (IVI) is a not-for-profit International Organization established in 1997 as an initiative by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). It is among the few organizations in the world dedicated to vaccines and vaccination for global health.

IVI is involved in all aspects of bringing a vaccine to reality: discover new technologies to make new vaccines or improve existing ones; develop promising vaccine candidates for licensure and World Health Organization (WHO) prequalification by transferring the technology to manufacturers and partnering with them on clinical development; deliver licensed vaccines in low-income countries by generating scientific data on the need for vaccines and the impact of vaccination for decision makers; building capacity in vaccinology in developing countries through technical assistance and training to promote self-sufficiency and sustainability in vaccines and vaccination; and building partnerships in Asia and globally for vaccines and global health.

This has long been a partner with InterVac (University of Saskatchewan). It is funded by the United Nations. However, it does get some hefty grants, from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

15. Major Gates Partnership Announced

SEATTLE, March 25, 2020 – Today, a consortium of life sciences companies announced an important collaboration to accelerate the development, manufacture, and delivery of vaccines, diagnostics, and treatments for COVID-19. The life sciences industry brings a range of assets, resources, and expertise needed to identify effective and scalable solutions to the pandemic, which is affecting billions worldwide. The impact on health systems, economies, and livelihoods is profound, and an effective response requires an unprecedented collaboration across governments, academia, the private sector, and the philanthropic community.

“This is an encouraging start in a critical area, because if any of these compounds are shown to be effective against COVID-19, it dramatically accelerates the path to product approval and scale up,” said Suzman. “While each of the consortium’s partners will also be pursuing independent efforts with national governments and others, we are optimistic that this unprecedented collaboration will provide a platform for a fundamentally different kind of partnership to help address this global health emergency.”

Companies participating in the collaboration include Bayer, BD, bioMérieux, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Johnson & Johnson, Merck (known as MSD outside the U.S. and Canada), Merck KGaA, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi.

About the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Guided by the belief that every life has equal value, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation works to help all people lead healthy, productive lives. In developing countries, it focuses on improving people’s health and giving them the chance to lift themselves out of hunger and extreme poverty. In the United States, it seeks to ensure that all people—especially those with the fewest resources—have access to the opportunities they need to succeed in school and life. Based in Seattle, Washington, the foundation is led by CEO Mark Suzman and Co-chair William H. Gates Sr., under the direction of Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffett.

Announced in March 2020, this is a press release unveiling a major collaboration between the Gates Foundation, and a number of major pharmaceutical companies. Who’s on the list?

Bayer
BD
bioMérieux
Boehringer Ingelheim
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Eisai
Eli Lilly
Gilead Sciences
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)
Johnson & Johnson
Merck
Novartis
Pfizer
Sanofi Pasteur

An astute person will recognize several of these names as partners from the $175.6 million AbCellera grant awarded just a month ago. From the previous sections on lobbying the Federal Government, these same parties are trying to influence government policy. It’s clear that it really is Gates’ partners who are doing a lot of the legwork.

Also, several of these names are companies that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust owns stock in, and that the Foundation (again, 2 separate entities) spends money on.

16. Other Honourable Mentions

Yes, Gates donates to the Aga Khan Foundation.

Year	Company	Amount
2016	Pirbright Inst.	$44,598
2016	Pirbright Inst.	$385,144
2016	Pirbright Inst.	$525,826
2017	Pirbright Inst.	$100,000
2018	Pirbright Inst.	$311,878

For a walk down memory lane: Pirbright became infamous a while back when it was learned they had patented a new group of coronaviruses and were funded by Gates.

Year	Company	Amount
2014	Microchip Biotech	$7,717,271

There are other firms whose work could conceivably be used to advance the ID2020 agenda. This is just one of them.

17. Gates Is Behind Pharma Lobbying

While it obviously isn’t exclusively the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, they do play a very prominent role in pushing the vaccine agenda across the world. It should come as no surprise, given the amount of money they have tied up in this industry.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust owns stocks and bonds in many pharmaceutical companies. The Gates Foundation (yes, the Foundation and trust are separate), gives/spends money on those same pharma businesses — and others. There’s no altruism behind it, but rather a business decision.

It also would surprise no one, given the Gates Family has long had a love of eugenics, or population reduction. So one has to wonder what else will be slipped into these vaccines, when they are finally available.

BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION
EIN: 56-2618866
gates.foundation.taxes.2016
gates.foundation.taxes.2017
gates.foundation.taxes.2018

BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION TRUST
EIN: 91-1663695
gates.foundation.trust.taxes.2018

Take a look at the documents for yourself. The full list can be found here, just search for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Those 2 organizations will pop up.

The above sections are only a tiny piece of what is really going on. There are many, MANY companies and grants that are in the tax returns, but not listed in the article. For practical purposes, it can’t be done in a single article, or even a few. The returns run to hundreds of pages each.

(1) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch
(2) https://www.gatesfoundation.org
(3) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=366216&regId=898133#regStart
(4) http://archive.is/7w15g
(5) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=12241&regId=880634#regStart
(6) http://archive.is/MljjW
(7) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=365218&regId=892723
(8) http://archive.is/zE7UT
(9) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch?keywords=gilead+sciences&keywordsOp=AND&documentType=both&adv_1001_level1common=&adv_2002_level1reg=&adv_3003_level1comlog=&srch=
(10) http://archive.is/t9ZUY
(11) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=15599&regId=896896#regStart
(12) http://archive.is/zNBIw
(13) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=15283&regId=898856#regStart
(14) http://archive.is/fdk5U
(15) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=5088&regId=891566
(16) http://archive.is/Pfv86
(17) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=4887&regId=875507
(18) http://archive.is/szVu6
(19) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch?keywords=teva+canada&keywordsOp=PHRASE&documentType=both&adv_1001_level1common=&adv_2002_level1reg=&adv_3003_level1comlog=&srch=
(20) http://archive.is/dBTxv
(21) https://sif.gatesfoundation.org/news-and-updates/press-release-inactivated-polio-vaccines-broadly-available-worlds-children-drive-toward-polio-eradication/
(22) http://archive.is/TXd3c
(23) https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press-Releases/2020/03/Life-Science-Companies-Commit-to-the-Fight-Against-COVID-19-Pandemic-alongside-Gates-Foundation
(24) http://archive.is/OZ8qr
(25) https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/

May 21, 2020March 1, 2023

A Look Into The Trudeau Foundation, Finacing, $125M Grant, And Media Embeds

1. Media Bias, Lies, Omissions And Corruption

2. Important Links

CLICK HERE, for the Trudeau Foundation.
CLICK HERE, from announcement from Allan Rock.
http://archive.is/n8Y7Z

annual.report.trudeau-2014-2015_en_web

CLICK HERE, for Euro Climate Foundation founder.
http://archive.is/K1mHy
CLICK HERE, for Lavalin, $200M McGill grant, David Lametti.
CLICK HERE, for SNC Lavalin lobbying entire parliament.
CLICK HERE, for McCall MacBain’s $200M gift to McGill.
http://archive.is/t5Aoi
CLICK HERE, for Trudeau Foundation funding.
http://archive.is/fsEU9
CLICK HERE, for Sheila Fraser, Auditor General.
http://archive.is/L7XFW

3. Context For This Article

Why doesn’t the mainstream media take a deeper look into the Trudeau Foundation? It could be that many prominent members of the media are MEMBERS of the Trudeau Foundation. Hard to be objective while being part of the group. The next section shows some of the people involved.

Of course, the 2018 announcement to heavily subsidize the media likely played a role as well. It doesn’t make sense from a business perspective to bite the hand that feeds you.

The Trudeau Foundation received a $125 million startup grant from the Federal Government in 2002, with all parties supporting. What has happened to the money? Seems that the Foundation still has it, and has invested it.

There’s a lot about the Foundation that the public is unaware of. Let’s take a look into it.

4. Media Is Part Of Trudeau Foundation

Yes, this could very well be why the Canadian media seems to have little interest in digging into Elizabeth May, or into the Trudeau Foundation more broadly. Huge conflict of interest here.

Susan Delacourt
Chantel Hebert
Daniel Lessard
Valerie Pringle
John Stackhouse
Jeffrey Simpson
Robert Steiner
Rosemary Thompson
Marie Wilson

Does anyone look familiar? They should. This isn’t all of the names, but a quick look at the mainstream media in Canada having some of their people as part of the Trudeau Foundation.

Pretty hard to hold Trudeau or his government accountable for their actions when the media is part of the same swamp. And let’s look at some more names in this group.

5. Powerful People In Foundation

Other current and former members include:

Ex-Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin
Ex-Supreme Court Justice Thomas Cromwell
Ex-Supreme Court Justice Louis LeBel
Ex-Supreme Court Justice Marie DesChamps
Ex-BC Supreme Court Judge Lynn Smith
Ex-Senator Michael Fortier
Ex-NDP Leader Ed Broadbent
Ex-Opposition Leader Megan Leslie
Ex-Cabinet Minister Chuck Strahl
Ex-Attorney General Anne McLellan
Ex-Deputy Attorney General John Sims
Ex-Deputy Minister Michael Horgan
Ex-Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard
Ex-PEI Premier Wade MacLauchlan
SNC Lavalin Director Jacques Bougie
Roy. L Heenan (Heenan Blaikie Partner)
John H McCall MacBain (Euro Climate Founder)

The Trudeau Foundation comprises Justices, and many high ranking officials from across parties. Elizabeth May is just one of the people in this organization. So why isn’t this heavily reported by the media? Also, how much money does the Foundation take in annually?

6. Corporate Documents & Info

This isn’t all of them, of course, but a few that are available publicly.

Trudeau.01.Bylaws.2020
Trudeau.02.certificate.of.continuance
Trudeau.03.director.change.david.emerson.out.2016
Trudeau.03.director.change.macbain.out
Trudeau.04.notice.of.filing.return.2019

7. Taxpayer Start Up Money

Last week the Minister of Human Resources Development and I published our innovation strategy. In the strategy we spoke of the need to create a Canadian program similar to the Rhodes scholarships to promote excellence, encourage those who seek it and reward those who achieve it.

I am honoured to announce today that the Government of Canada will endow the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation with $125 million allocated in the budget to enable the creation of a truly world class program for advanced studies in the humanities.

The Foundation will award internationally competitive doctoral fellowships, similar in value and stature to the Rhodes, so that Canadian universities will continue to attract the very best students from our own country, and around the world. And all of this, in the name of Pierre Elliott Trudeau.

What is a more fitting legacy to man who symbolized youth, excellence and the innovative spirit?

The innovation agenda that we announced last week spoke of creating in Canada a culture of excellence to strengthen our economy and to increase our prosperity, but excellence is not measured by material progress alone. Yes, we want the highest standard of living in the world. We want to make the best products and services to create a research climate that will fire technological achievement and spur scientific discovery. The knowledge economy demands no less. Together we will do all of that and more.

It was announced in 2002 that $125 million of taxpayer money would be used to launch the Trudeau Foundation. This would be the equivalent to creating Rhodes scholars.

8. Recent Taxes/Revenues Of “Charity”

Reporting Period Ending August 31, 2015
Here are the Directors at the time.

Receipted donations $617,210.00 (7.17%)
Non-receipted donations $16,251.00 (0.19%)
Gifts from other registered charities $1,000.00 (0.01%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $7,977,622.00 (92.63%)
Total revenue: $8,612,083.00

Charitable programs $5,891,783.00 (89.40%)
Management and administration $683,008.00 (10.36%)
Fundraising $0.00 (0.00%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $15,521.00 (0.24%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $6,590,312.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$971,144.00

Full-time employees (9)
Part-time employees (2)

Professional and consulting fees
$376,636.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$40,000 to $79,999 (5)
$80,000 to $119,999 (3)
$250,000 to $299,999 (1)

Reporting Period Ending August 31, 2016
Here are the Directors at that time.

Receipted donations $122,066.00 (2.72%)
Non-receipted donations $122,798.00 (2.74%)
Gifts from other registered charities $52,500.00 (1.17%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $4,191,679.00 (93.38%)
Total revenue: $4,489,043.00

Charitable programs $6,551,877.00 (88.80%)
Management and administration $686,611.00 (9.31%)
Fundraising $124,183.00 (1.68%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $15,250.00 (0.21%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $7,377,921.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$1,186,681.00

Full-time employees (9)
Part-time employees (3)

Professional and consulting fees
$349,738.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$40,000 to $79,999 (5)
$80,000 to $119,999 (2)
$120,000 to $159,999 (1)
$250,000 to $299,999 (1)

Reporting Period Ending August 31, 2017
Charitable programs $5,189,590.00 (85.03%)
Management and administration $733,680.00 (12.02%)
Fundraising $164,533.00 (2.70%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $15,200.00 (0.25%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $6,103,003.00

Strangely, very strangely, there is no REVENUE being reported here. Did they not take any in, or is it just missing from the filings that are available? Let’s look at the T3010 for more information.

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$1,204,006.00

Full-time employees (11)
Part-time employees (2)

Professional and consulting fees
$409,860.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$40,000 to $79,999 (7)
$80,000 to $119,999 (2)
$120,000 to $159,999 (1)
$250,000 to $299,999 (1)

Reporting Period Ending August 31, 2018
Here are the Directors listed at that time.
Receipted donations $25,374.00 (0.42%)
Non-receipted donations $39,503.00 (0.65%)
Gifts from other registered charities $50,000.00 (0.82%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $5,996,497.00 (98.12%)
Total revenue: $6,111,374.00

Charitable programs $3,996,014.00 (72.03%)
Management and administration $1,124,793.00 (20.27%)
Fundraising $412,005.00 (7.43%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $15,000.00 (0.27%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $5,547,812.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$1,418,973.00

Full-time employees (10)
Part-time employees (8)

Professional and consulting fees
$801,966.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$40,000 to $79,999 (6)
$80,000 to $119,999 (2)
$120,000 to $159,999 (1)
$250,000 to $299,999 (1)

Reporting period ending August 31, 2019
Here are the Directors listed on the T3010

Receipted donations $7,917.00 (0.13%)
Non-receipted donations $135,618.00 (2.23%)
Gifts from other registered charities $0.00 (0.00%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $5,936,983.00 (97.64%)
Total revenue: $6,080,518.00

Charitable programs $5,560,040.00 (86.25%)
Management and administration $739,268.00 (11.47%)
Fundraising $135,708.00 (2.11%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $11,350.00 (0.18%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $6,446,366.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$1,361,701.00

Full-time employees (11)
Part-time employees (5)

Professional and consulting fees
$607,970.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$1 to $39,999 (1)
$40,000 to $79,999 (5)
$80,000 to $119,999 (4)
$250,000 to $299,999

As the data shows (and it’s all freely available on the CRA website), the Foundation takes in millions annually. Why isn’t the group and its donors more carefully probed by the media?

It could be that several members of the mainstream media in Canada are also part of the Trudeau Foundation. Can’t exactly hold these people to account when they are part of the swamp as well.

NOTE: Revenue Canada was contacted for earlier tax information. They responded that they are busy with the CERB and related issues, and that this will take time.

9. MSM Not Reporting Investment Income

Interesting article from the National Post, covering John McCall MacBain and other foreign donation. For the most part, this is a wealth of information.

John McCall MacBain, a Canadian businessman, is a founder of the McCall MacBain Foundation and chairman of the Trudeau Foundation. MacBain is the 75th richest person in Canada and has a net worth of $1.37 billion, according to Canadian Business magazine.

He sold his global classified-advertising empire in 2006. Yellow Pages bought the Canadian branch, called Trader Canada, for $760 million. MacBain now lives in Switzerland but comes to Canada regularly to give money to universities and other education-related charities.

The $53,000 foreign donation in 2014 was a single contribution from the McCall MacBain Foundation, with the Switzerland-based foundation giving $428,000 in 2015 and Google accounting for the rest. The McCall MacBain Foundation donated $500,000 in 2016, with the remaining $35,000 coming from four Canadians affiliated with the Trudeau Foundation and living outside Canada, according to the foundation.

Date	Receipt	Non-Receipt	Other	Total
Aug 2015	$617,210	$16,251	$7,977,622	$8,612,083
Aug 2016	$122,066	$122,798	$4,191,679	$4,489,043
Aug 2017	$277,173	$42,790	$3,884,907	$-1,948,070
Aug 2018	$25,374	$39,503	$5,996,497	$6,111,374
Aug 2019	$7,917	$135,618	$5,936,983	$6,080,518

In 2017, returns in interest and investment was the bulk of revenue for the Foundation. Note: the totals will not add up exactly, since a few smaller categories are not included.

The problem here, and what Canadians should view as a problem, is that the $125 million grant from the Canadian Government (or Canadian taxpayers really) is being used to generate investment income for the Trudeau Foundation.

In other words, this $125 grant was financed by added debt by the Canadian public, without any sort of debate or democratic referendum. The public pays interest (thanks to the International Banking Cartel the Government supports). However, this money sits in the Foundation’s covers and generates more money.

The public is forced to debt finance the grant that the Foundation makes a few million from annually. Yet no debate on that takes place in the House of Commons. All parties seem to support it.

10. Start Up Money Being Invested?

Information from T3010 in recent years

Date	Line In Taxes	Total Assets
Aug 2015	4200	$156,683,101.00
Aug 2016	4200	$155,404,971.00
Aug 2017	4200	$147,268,800.00
Aug 2018	4200	$146,058,014.00
Aug 2019	4200	$145,483,356.00

The $125 million startup from 2002 is still here, apparently still gathering interest and other returns. Interesting how Canadian money (debt financed) is used to act as a grant for the Trudeau Foundation, and it sits in holding.

Date	Line In Taxes	Total Assets
Aug 2015	4580	$4,188,165.00
Aug 2016	4580	$3,618,791.00
Aug 2017	4580	$3,884,907.00
Aug 2018	4580	$3,055,669.00
Aug 2019	4580	$2,618,185.00

11. John McCall MacBain

John H. McCall MacBain is Founder of Pamoja Capital and Co-Founder and Chair of the McCall MacBain Foundation. Previously, Mr. McCall MacBain was the Founder, President and CEO of Trader Classified Media, the world’s leading company in the classified advertising sector. He served as the President and Chief Executive Officer since the inception of the business in 1987 until its sale in 2006.

A Canadian from Niagara Falls, Mr. McCall MacBain is a founding chair of the European Climate Foundation. He is also Chair of the McGill Principal’s International Advisory Board, Second Century Founder of the Rhodes Trust, director of the Mandela Rhodes Foundation in Cape Town and an Officer of the Order of Canada.

Mr McCall MacBain is a Rhodes Scholar (Oxford, M.A. Law), a Harvard M.B.A. and an Honours B.A. graduate in Economics from McGill University. He holds honourary degrees from Dalhousie University, the University of Ottawa, McGill University and Brock University in Canada, as well as Monash University in Melbourne.

John McCall MacBain founded the European Climate Foundation, and was also the head of the Trudeau Foundation at one point. This dual role makes it easier to get taxpayer money sent to environmental causes.

(then Parliamentary Secretary to Minister for ISED, David Lametti, met with SNC Lavalin President Neil Bruce)

(McGill University Law Professor, David Lametti, Who is on leave while he sits as the Attorney General of Canada)

(February 13, 2019, McGill University is “gifted” $200M)

(The $200M gift to McGill came from John McCall MacBain, European Climate Foundation founder, and Chairman of the Board of the Trudeau Foundation).

Today, John and Marcy McCall MacBain announced the creation of the McCall MacBain Scholarships at McGill through a landmark gift of $200 million (Canadian), the single-largest gift in Canadian history.

The McCall MacBain Scholarships at McGill will provide outstanding students from Canada and internationally with the opportunity to pursue a master’s or professional degree, combined with a world-class enrichment program.

In addition to full funding to cover tuition and fees plus a living stipend, scholars will benefit from mentorship and immersive learning experiences including retreats, workshops and internships. It will be the most generous and comprehensive graduate scholarship to exist at this level in Canada.

In initiating this gift in honour of McGill’s bicentennial, the McCall MacBains and their Foundation recognize an important gap in the Canadian higher education landscape: that there is currently no comprehensive, leadership-driven scholarship in the country for master’s and professional degree students. As a result, the McCall MacBain Scholarships will invest in students who are developing expertise in their respective fields and have a track record of collaborating with others to understand and address important problems and challenges. By creating Canada’s first comprehensive scholarship at this level – one that builds on but is not limited to academic excellence – John and Marcy McCall MacBain hope to bring together a resilient community of students dedicated to solving pressing global issues and complex problems, to ultimately improve the lives of others.

Within days of John McCall MacBain announcing a $200 million grant to McGill University, new Attorney General David Lametti announced that he was still willing to consider a deferred prosecution for SNC Lavalin.

12. Sponsorship Scandal A Diversion?

gomery.report.es_full_v01

A cynic might wonder if the media outrage at the Sponsorship Scandal was designed to divert attention away from the $125 million being used to start up the Trudeau Foundation.

There is also this competing theory that the Sponsorship hype was meant to divert attention from something else. Jack Layton and Elizabeth May know full well about the international banking cartel. However they act as controlled opposition and remain silent.

Whatever the specific cause, there’s no denying that the focus on this one program diverted the public’s attention from other issues. It’s as if the media was part of the system they claim to be holding to account.

13. Getting A More Complete Picture

Many members of the mainstream media are part of the Trudeau Foundation. This conflict of interest makes it impossible for the Foundation to be covered and held to account in any meaningful way.

The 2018 economic update which allotted $595 million to subsidize media outlets amounts to bribery. However, controlling the media started long before that.

Supreme Court Justices and members of all political parties are part of the Foundation as well. Looking at the vast range shows how the group has influence in all major aspects of public life.

The $125 million startup that the Foundation received in 2002 is still there. It’s being used to generate millions of return investment every year. The donations that it receives it paltry by comparison. The article contains tax information for the last 5 years, and Revenue Canada has been contacted for more. It’s reasonable to ask if the Sponsorship Scandal was used to divert attention from the grant that the Foundation got.

John McCall MacBain has his fingers in many pies. He also donated $200 million to McGill University days after new Attorney General, David Lametti, announced he would reconsider giving SNC Lavalin a deferred prosecution. The DPA would allow Lavalin to still be awarded Federal contracts.

In effect, the Trudeau Foundation acts as a propaganda outlet. Media outlets and aspiring journalists/researchers are able to use it as a source of income to promote Liberal agendas and talking points.

1. Media Bias, Lies, Omissions And Corruption

2. Context For This Article

3(a). Candis Callison

3(b). Susan Delacourt

3(c). Graham Fraser

3(d). John Fraser

3(e). Chantel Hebert

3(f). Daniel Lessard

3(g). Laxmi Parthasarathy

3(h). Valerie Pringle

3(i). Jeffrey Simpson

3(j). John Stackhouse

3(k). Robert Steiner

3(l). Rosemary Thompson

3(m). Marie Wilson

3(n). Lynn Zimmer

4(a). Ed Broadbent – NDP Leader

4(b).Philippe Couillard – QC Premier

4(c). Raymond Chretien – Ambassador

4(d). Michael Fortier – Senator

4(e). Michael Harcourt – BC Premier

4(f). Megan Leslie — NDP Deputy Leader

4(g). Wade MacLauchlan – PEI Premier

4(h). Elizabeth May – Green Party Leader

4(i). Anne McLellan – Deputy PM

4(j). Ed Roberts – NFLD Lt. Governor

4(k). Roy Romanow – Saskatchewan Premier

4(l). John Sims – Deputy AG

4(m). Chuck Strahl – Privy Council

5(a). Thomas Cromwell – SCC Justice

5(b). Marie DesChamps – SCC Justice

5(c). Louis LeBel – SCC Justice

5(d). Beverley McLachlin – SCC Justice

5(e). Louise Arbour – SCC Justice

5(f). Lynn Smith – BCSC Justice

6. Jacques Bougie – SNC Lavalin

7. Are They All Involved?

Share this:

Like this:

1. UN High Commission On Testing

2. Canadian Policy On Testing

3. CBSA Checking Ancestry Sites

4. Fraud Longstanding Problem In U.S.

5. How Prevalent Is It?

6. Civil Liberties Groups Oppose Testing

Share this:

Like this:

1. Mass LEGAL Immigration In Canada

2. CANZUK’s Luke Fortmann On Expansion

3. Erin O’Toole Supports Expanding CANZUK

4. Australian Senator Paterson Supports It

5. Free Movement Is Primary Goal

6. ExtraNewsFeed Article On CANZUK

7. CANZUK.org On Expanding The Zone

8. UK CANZUK On Expanding The Zone

9. CANZUK Report Addresses Expansion

10. CANZUK Bait-And-Switch

Share this:

Like this:

1. Review By Civilian Intelligence Network

2. Open Society Group Tax Records

3. Michael Ignatieff VP Open Society Fund

4. Areas Open Society Finances

5. Groups Open Society Helps Fund

6. Open Society & Higher Education

7. Open Society Pushes For More Refugees

8. UNCHR Party To Canada/U.S. Border

9. Open Society Finances Lawfare In Court

10. Soros Allegedly Funding Civil Unrest

11. Caravans Facilitating Illegal Entry

Share this:

Like this:

1. Gates Foundation Tax Returns

2. Lobbying And Pharmaceutical Money

3. AbCellera Biologics

4. Apotex Pharmaceuticals

5. Bayer

6. GAVI, The Vaccine Alliance

7. Gilead Sciences Canada

8. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)