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.

(1) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/refugee.dna_.testing.unchr_.1.pdf
(2) https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-border-agency-migrants-dna-1.4765487
(3) http://archive.is/3qYE8
(4) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals/standard-requirements/dna-testing.html
(5) http://archive.is/mD5JB
(6) https://2001-2009.state.gov/g/prm/refadm/rls/fs/2008/112760.htm
(7) http://archive.is/tzAoK
(8) https://www.thenationalsentinel.com/2019/07/15/cruz-graham-dna-testing-at-border-finds-that-nearly-one-third-of-migrant-families-are-fraudulent/
(9) http://archive.is/dEASk
(10) https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/dna-tests-reveal-30-of-suspected-fraudulent-migrant-families-were-unrelated
(11) http://archive.is/fZdHY
(12) https://www.theepochtimes.com/30-percent-of-suspected-illegal-alien-families-were-unrelated-dna-tests-show_2928316.html
(13) http://archive.is/de9tr
(14) https://www.aclu.org/families-belong-together
(15) http://archive.is/7Wx0G
(16) https://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrants-rights/immigrants-rights-and-detention/reunify-families-dna-testing-should-be-last
(17) http://archive.is/tnSRQ

IMM #1(B): 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. 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; and (f) losses to communities when major employers leave. Don’t believe the lies that these agreements are overwhelmingly beneficial to all.

3. Important Links

(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

4. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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?

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. 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.

A Rebuke To Shanifa Nasser, And Her Article On Defunding Toronto Police

This feels like an odd piece to write. Nevertheless….

But as protests over police brutality and racism erupt across the United States and beyond, sparked by the case of George Floyd — an unarmed black man whose final moments were spent with an officer’s knee pressed into his neck — one refrain is growing louder and louder: “Defund the police.”

Exactly what that means can differ somewhat depending on who you ask. While some have called for an outright abolition of police forces, many others favour reducing police budgets so that their work focuses more squarely on violent crime. But the sentiments behind it stem from a singular question when it comes to dealing with people in mental distress:

“Is that armed, highly-paid officer the right resource for that function?” asked Alok Mukherjee, who spent a decade as the chair of the Toronto Police Services Board.

In Toronto, the police service is the single-biggest line item in the city’s $13.5-billion operating budget. Out of an average property tax bill of $3,020, the largest share — about $700 — is allocated to police. That’s followed by about $520 for transit. Shelters and housing take up about $150, while about $60 goes to paramedic services.

“We’ve seen a proliferation of gang-intervention and prevention programs that include funding for the police … rather than simply providing after-school services, education services, extracurricular activities and sports activities for young people in disadvantaged neighbourhoods,” he said.

In true CBC fashion, the article doesn’t actually pose a concrete solution. Instead, it meanders, not really focusing on a coherent argument.

However, the more interesting questions are: Who is this author? What is her agenda in writing it? Why is she pushing this topic? What is her background?

1. Looking At Shanifa Nasser’s Twitter Feed

Tasser’s Twitter feed is filled with race-bait and race-hustling content. It’s clearly a large part of the content that she covers, and she seems to buy into the narrative of systemic racism in Canada. But what else is known about her?

Her biography has her taking religious studies — Islam specifically — from 2004 to 2011. Presumably her work with Focus Humanitarian Assistance was part time. While she thinks that white supremacy and racism in the West are big problems, she sees nothing wrong with fundraising from those same people in order to fund projects in the 3rd World.

2. Focus Humanitarian Assistance

Since our inception in 1995, Focus Humanitarian Assistance USA (FOCUS USA) has been serving vulnerable communities throughout Central and South Asia in the aftermath of devastating natural disasters. We are also committed to fostering and building disaster-resilient communities in susceptible areas—including areas in the United States—by developing disaster risk mitigation programs to minimize impact and better prepare families and individuals before environmental disasters such as winter storms, hurricanes or earthquakes strike.

Our mission is: to save lives, reduce suffering and create resilience in communities prone to man-made or natural disasters.

As an affiliate of the Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN), FOCUS collaborates closely with several of its branches. FOCUS also works with a number of other like-minded agencies and donor partners. These include partner government and government agencies, NGOs, as well as corporations that share an interest in the effort to provide relief and support services during and following natural and man-made disasters.

Shanifa Nasser’s LinkedIn page states that she held 2 different roles in Focus Humanitarian Assistance form 2010 to 2013. According to its biography, FHA was founded in 1994 by Aga Khan, and operates globally for disaster relief.

fostrian.children.1.patent.letters.
fostrian.children.2.organization.bylaws

A point of clarification though: according to records with Revenue Canada, Focus Humanitarian Assistance (at least the charity itself), was founded in 1981. It was originally named the Fostrian Children Universal Society. Three members, Zainel Mohamed, Nurjehan Bharmal, and Haider Merchant were the first directors of the group. It was taken over by Aga Khan and renamed in 1994.

focus.humanitarian.1.articles.of.continuance
focus.humanitarian.2.change.of.address
focus.humanitarian.3.director.changes

2015 Canada Revenue Agency Financial Information
Receipted donations $5,489,963.00 (69.42%)
Non-receipted donations $52,949.00 (0.67%)
Gifts from other registered charities $56,927.00 (0.72%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $2,308,926.00 (29.19%)
Total revenue: $7,908,765.00

Charitable programs $7,468,065.00 (92.36%)
Management and administration $423,607.00 (5.24%)
Fundraising $193,950.00 (2.40%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $8,085,622.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$1,165,091.00

Full-time employees (14)
Part-time employees (3)

Professional and consulting fees
$144,480.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$1 to $39,999 (2)
$40,000 to $79,999 (9)
$80,000 to $119,999 (1)
$120,000 to $159,999 (1)
$160,000 to $199,999 (0)
$250,000 to $299,999 (1)

2016 Canada Revenue Agency Financial Information
Receipted donations $5,319,296.00 (83.26%)
Non-receipted donations $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts from other registered charities $712,825.00 (11.16%)
Government funding $255,735.00 (4.00%)
All other revenue $100,925.00 (1.58%)
Total revenue: $6,388,781.00

Charitable programs $9,468,278.00 (93.78%)
Management and administration $416,922.00 (4.13%)
Fundraising $211,116.00 (2.09%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $1.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $10,096,317.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$1,173,256.00

Full-time employees (11)
Part-time employees (1)

Professional and consulting fees
$342,875.00

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

2017 Canada Revenue Agency Financial Information
Receipted donations $5,536,400.00 (74.59%)
Non-receipted donations $294,348.00 (3.97%)
Gifts from other registered charities $57,048.00 (0.77%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $1,534,522.00 (20.67%)
Total revenue: $7,422,318.00

Charitable programs $7,474,628.00 (92.30%)
Management and administration $494,142.00 (6.10%)
Fundraising $129,694.00 (1.60%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $8,098,464.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$1,390,227.00

Full-time employees (14)
Part-time employees (4)
Professional and consulting fees
$105,665.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$1 to $39,999 (1)
$40,000 to $79,999 (8)
$80,000 to $119,999 (2)
$120,000 to $159,999 (1)
$200,000 to $249,999 (1)

Focus Humanitarian Assistance (which is part of the Aga Khan Development Network), takes in several million dollars per year and states that it is used for humanitarian purposes.

Nasser left the organization in 2013, after working as a project lead, and in donor relations. While the older tax information isn’t posted, recent years show it doing well at making money. That being said, it seems strange that it routinely seems to be spending more than it takes in.

It’s also odd that Nasser repeatedly touts the “systemic racism” narrative in Canada, but she has no issues with fundraising from those same people. In fact, there are so many people willing to donate that FHA is able to have many full time staff in its organization.

3. Munk School, Fellow Global Journalism

Designed to produce subject-specific journalists who craft beats around their areas of expertise or professional experience, this eight-month program allowed me to leverage my background in Islamic Studies to pitch and report on topics of relevance in Canadian media.

Nasser has also spent 5 years working for the CBC. With experience and credentials like this, what’s not to love? Why not embrace such a voice?

The problem is that this serious journalist has done nothing in the way of actual research. Let’s go through some of the ways that this article is not presenting the complete picture.

7. Gladue Rights Tilt Incarceration Rates

Gladue Rights not only apply to Aboriginals, but to blacks as well. Not many people know that.

Think of how bizarre this is. One or two groups of people commit crime at a much, MUCH higher rate than others, and are subsequently locked up in higher numbers. This is considered “systemic discrimination”, and the solution is to alter the laws to let them out of prison earlier.

Apparently, the prison population is supposed to reflect a random sample of society. It’s not supposed to reflect the group that commits serious crimes.

4. Black Crime Rate Is Much Higher

Just to use the 2018 data available from the FBI crime statistics, Table 43, let’s look at some numbers. This is information where the race of the criminal(s) was known. Keep in mind, that blacks make up 13% of the U.S. population. However, they commit:

  • 27% of all crime
  • 53% of murder, non-negligent manslaughter
  • 29% of rape
  • 54% of robbery
  • 34% of aggravated assault
  • 29% of all burglary
  • 32% of motor vehicle theft
  • 25% of arson
  • 29% of vandalism
  • 43% of weapons carrying
  • 39% prostitution, commercialised vice

Social justice types frequently complain about there being a much higher police presence in black communities, and there being more frequent interactions with police. While true, there is a valid reason for it: crime rates. Yet Nasser and those like her ignore the hard facts.

Interestingly, while there is hard data in crime rates and race in the U.S. and the U.K., very little information is available in Canada. This is likely to avoid having to publish the hard truths. Apologists point to the higher incarceration rates of certain groups, calling it “injustice”. Yet they tap dance around crime rates. Or when it is reluctantly admitted, rates are spun as a consequence of poverty of systemic racism.

5. FBI Data On Hate Crime Stats

According to the data on this page, 60% of single instance hate crimes were based on race/ethnicity. 54% of the offenders (where race was known) were white, and 26% were black.

Or take this data from 2015. The FBI reports that 500 whites were killed by blacks, while 229 blacks were killed by whites. This is more than a 2 to 1 ratio, just looking at the totals.

However, consider that blacks make up around 13% of the population, and whites 65%. Per capita, this works out to more than a 10 to 1 ration of interracial murder black/white that is done by blacks.

Of course these are just a small sample of the information that is available from official crime statistics. The author of the CBC article mentions none of this when talking about disbanding the police in Toronto. The narrative she helps perpetuate has nothing to do with hard numbers.

6. Floyd’s Arrest Record Was Public

This was reported over a week ago by the Daily Mail, but George Floyd had a lengthy arrest record for many serious charges. Of course, it doesn’t make it justified to kill him (I know), but puts things in a bit of a different light.

7. George Floyd Knew His Killer?

George Floyd and the police officer involved with his death, Derek Chauvin, both worked security at the same Minneapolis club, according to the club owner.

“Chauvin was our off-duty police for almost the entirety of the 17 years that we were open,” Maya Santamaria, the former owner of El Nuevo Rodeo club in Minneapolis, which was sold months prior to the incident, told KSTP in an interview Thursday.

Floyd worked at the club for about a year, but Santamaria said he was one of 20 or 30 employees hired for security on the busiest nights in addition to off-duty police, and is not sure if the pair ever actually spoke to one another.

Newsweek reported that George Floyd and Derek Chauvin has worked at the same club in Minneapolis. Chauvin had been there (as a side job) for 17 years, while Floyd had been there for a year.

To be fair, the article does add the disclaimer that they may not have worked together directly. Still, knowing they were colleagues does make one rethink the entire situation. This death may have absolutely nothing to do with race. It could have just been an intentional murder for any number of reasons. Yet another detail not focused on by the CBC.

8. These Riots Are Being Coordinated

As riots continue to wreak havoc on cities across the country, officials have continued to point to “outside influencers,” along with anarchists and opportunists, who have hijacked the otherwise peaceful demonstrations against police brutality following the death of an African-American man, George Floyd, in Minneapolis last weekend.

According to multiple U.S. intelligence sources, law-enforcement officials in various departments nationwide and analysts monitoring the activity, the playbook in every city is almost the same: the peaceful protests are organized, and a point place is designated for people to gather in the daylight hours.

But, as the night falls and thousands go home, the looting and discord are ignited by a fresh round of people camouflaged with dark clothing and masks, armed with spray paint for graffiti and sometimes homemade weapons, and their nefarious behavior continues well into the early hours.

Although this article is too short to do the topic justice, it’s becoming evident that there is some real organization within the protests for George Floyd. Fox also has covered it, concluding as well that these riots are being carefully planned. There is nothing spontaneous or organic about this.

Bricks are (allegedly) being dropped off to locations so that they can be used to make a riot more destructive. Riots have been quickly assembled and coordinated globally. This is not simply restricted to the United States, as any quick search engine check can verify.

Some obvious questions: Who is coordinating the riots? Why are they doing it? What is the end-goal? How are they managing to put it all together?

But instead of asking the tough questions, mainstream media personalities are deflecting. Instead, they shift to topics like Should we abolish the police?

One also has to wonder what is going on when the official narrative on the coronavirus “pandemic” suddenly flips like this. In early 2020, we were told by the Government that the situation in China is no big deal and to get on with our lives. Starting in March, it was an emergency and severe measures had to be taken. Now, gathering in large groups to protest is no big deal, just don’t yell.

12. Systemic Racism Narrative Pushed

Any online search will uncover a host of material saying that in the wake up George Floyd’s death, racism must be stamped out. In particular, the narrative that white supremacy caused it is being thrown in our faces.

The fact that all four police officers were of difference ethnicities (quite the diverse squad), seems irrelevant in this narrative. The media keeps pushing the claim that white racism is responsible for the death.

Obvious question where: WHY is this narrative being pushed? Why aren’t questions such as the Floyd/Chauvin relationship being explored in greater detail? How did George Floyd really die? Why isn’t there more in depth research going on into the planning and coordination of these global riots? Who is financing these riots, and what is their interest? Why aren’t people in the media asking about the anti-white push (unless they are the ones pushing it)?

These are just some of the hard questions that need to be asked. But “journalists” like Shanifa Nasser are not doing that. Instead, they try to divert to other issues, like abolishing or at least downsizing the police.

CLICK HERE, for Shanifa Nasser’s article on defunding police.
http://archive.is/wip/S7wCa
CLICK HERE, for Shanifa Nasser’s LinkedIn profile.
http://archive.is/lb5vB
CLICK HERE, for Focus Humanitarian Assistance info.
http://archive.is/sEXRb
CLICK HERE, for Daily Mail on Floyd arrest record.
http://archive.is/7gmPo
CLICK HERE, for Table 43, FBI 2018 crime stats.
http://archive.is/8NuV1
CLICK HERE, for Floyd & Chauvin knew each other.
http://archive.is/GAYBB
CLICK HERE, for Floyd riots being coordinated.
http://archive.is/nGukb
CLICK HERE, for Tam supports groups for protesting.

https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/
EIN: 52-1937154

Media Games: Has Trudeau Been Swapped Out With Someone Else?

Is this the same man? Are they both Justin Trudeau?

The man on the right appears to have a bruise on the left cheek. The bridge of this nose is flatter, and the nostrils are more pronounced. The brow ridge also looks more defined.

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.

2. “Dave” Movie Released In 1993

Dave Kovic runs a temporary employment agency in Georgetown, Washington, D.C., and has a side job impersonating President Bill Mitchell. He is requested by Secret Service agent Duane Stevensen to make an appearance as the president at a hotel. Dave assumes it is a matter of security, but it is really to cover up Mitchell’s extramarital affair with a White House staffer.

Mitchell suffers a severe stroke during the rendezvous, leaving him in a coma. White House Chief of Staff Bob Alexander and Communications Director Alan Reed convince Dave to continue impersonating the president, telling him that Vice President Gary Nance is mentally unbalanced. Only Bob, Alan, the Secret Service, and the medical staff know of the switch. First Lady Ellen Mitchell leads a separate life, rarely seeing the president, in contrast to their public image of a closely knit couple.

The public is notified that Mitchell has had a “minor circulatory problem of the head”. With Dave established as president, Bob and Alan send Nance on a 12-nation goodwill tour of Africa and implicate him in savings and loan fraud. Once Nance is forced to resign, Bob plans for Dave to nominate him as vice president, whereupon Mitchell will have a more serious stroke and Bob will ascend to the Presidency.

After apologizing to Nance and the country, Dave fakes a stroke and makes a switch with the real Mitchell in an ambulance en route to the hospital. Nance becomes acting president under the terms of the 25th Amendment and is sworn in as president five months later when Mitchell dies. Bob and eight other members of the Mitchell administration are indicted two days after Dave’s jobs initiative passes.

The above is quotes of a plot synopsis that Wikipedia provides. In short, an imposter ascends to the Presidency, and the intent is to have someone take over.

Interestingly, in the movie, there are “conspiracy nuts” who try to raise attention that the President has been swapped out with someone else.

Why is this important? Because it could be an instance of predictive programming. There are rumours circulating that the man occupying 24 Sussex is not Justin Trudeau, but a double. There have also been claims that Chrystia Freeland (now Deputy Prime Minister), is being groomed to take over.

Absurd conspiracy theory? Or is there something more substantive behind it?

As an aside, Kevin Kline looks at lot like the new Melinda Gates, except with a haircut. This is not meant as an insult, but stating an observation. And Melinda doesn’t look anything what we were used to seeing.

3. Recent Changes In Justin Trudeau

The screenshot on the left was taken from the October 2019 election victory speech. The one on the right is from a March 2020 press conference. This Justin Trudeau has a gap between his front teeth, something that hadn’t been noticed before. One interesting trait is that the newer Justin rarely (if ever smiles), which may be a deliberate attempt to make the gap less obvious.

There are virtually no photos available of Trudeau smiling since he returned from his trip to Costa Rica. While he once would flash a smile at any time, the “new” Trudeau has become much more reserved.

The gray on the right was the choice of the publisher, so please ignore. Trudeau looks to have aged a decade between the pictures, but it was really 2 1/2 months. And most of that time, Trudeau was on vacation. The dates are: October 21, 2019, and January 6, 2020.

A lot of media hoopla came out when Trudeau finally returned to Canada, sporting his new beard. Thing is, is isn’t much of a beard, just thick stubble. In his early days in Parliament, Trudeau adopted the Captain Morgan look. Yet all of this is glossed over.

True, wearing the masks is part of the psy-op. That said, there is another benefit: it helps obscure differences in THIS Trudeau’s face. If this is a different person, then it’s wise to avoid drawing attention to it.

It could be argued that these physical differences are circumstantial. Fair enough, except Trudeau seems to have undergone a personality change as well. He is far more measured and controlled, and has lost a lot of his joking side. This may be seen as a sign of maturity, if he didn’t hide from the public 23 1/2 hours per day.

Same man, just aging very badly? Or is it a duplicate, who just wants us to “think” that it’s the real person, but just aging badly?

Look at the tip of his nose, real Justin has a bump, double doesn’t Eye brows and eyes not the same. Ear lobes are different. No teeth in this one, we already know they don’t match.

The double looks like his eye brows are waxed to get that shape.

Comment from YouTuber, Blue Apple

Does it look like the features match? Ears, nose, chin?

4. Staged Affection With Sophie

From the 2020 Canada Day announcement. Considering Justin’s well known boundary issues, this seems incredibly forced and staged. Almost like they weren’t a real couple. Also, are they in front of a green screen?

5. Did “Dave” Become A Reality?

Yes, this comes across as an absurd conspiracy theory. However, this doesn’t at all look like the same man who has been the Prime Minister for the last session.

At a quick glance, this man looks similar enough as to not generate much thought. However, when you look more closely, the differences start showing through.

While the physical differences may not seem like a cause for concern, it’s worth pointing out that Trudeau (at least this version of him), seems to have had his personality removed. His antics and snarkiness have all but vanished. If this isn’t a placeholder, then what is it?

And why hasn’t the media reported on it, or asked questions? It could be that since so many of them belong to the Trudeau Foundation, they have no interest in this issue.

Controlled Opposition Politicians On Debt & Loans

(Political parties registered with Elections Canada)

Yeah…. this needs to be addressed.

The public is lied to constantly about the national debt in Canada. While media figures and politicians whine about “borrowing and overspending”, they intentionally leave a key piece out of the puzzle: the corruption of the monetary system.

In 1974, then Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau (without a mandate), stopped using the Bank of Canada to issue money and started using private banking loans. Money is still artificially created, but at least using the Bank of Canada meant that ownership of the debt remained in Canadian hands. There was no legitimate reason for doing so, yet it is rarely questioned in the media.

Instead of continually drawing attention to this change, politicians and media puppets focus on borrowing itself, not the usurious private loans. They focus on a much lesser issue.

This particularly true among “conservatives” and their parties. While many how about excessive borrowing and debt, few (if any), will discuss the changes to the banking system since 1974. By diverting attention away from the main issue, politicians distract the public, and act as a form of controlled opposition.

This is the current list of registered political parties, according to the Elections Canada website:

  • Animal Protection Party of Canada
  • Bloc Québécois
  • Canada’s Fourth Front
  • Canadian Nationalist Party
  • Christian Heritage Party of Canada
  • Communist Party of Canada
  • Conservative Party of Canada
  • Green Party of Canada
  • Liberal Party of Canada
  • Libertarian Party of Canada
  • Marijuana Party
  • Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada
  • National Citizens Alliance of Canada
  • New Democratic Party
  • Parti pour l’Indépendance du Québec
  • Parti Rhinocéros Party
  • People’s Party of Canada
  • Stop Climate Change
  • The United Party of Canada
  • Veterans Coalition Party of Canada

Note: this is not to endorse any one particular candidate or party. This research is just to see who is willing to address the topic of the Banking Cartel in an open and sincere manner.

1. Some Parties “Do” Address Banking Cartel

Before writing off all politicians and political parties as corrupt, it’s worth noting that some of them do address the corruption of the money system in their platforms. Let’s give credit where credit is due.

National Economic Plan
Restore the Bank of Canada to its purpose as outlined in the Bank Act of 1938.
-Review and potentially repudiate debt incurred by our public institutions.
-Revise the Investment Canada Act so that foreign investment is prohibited in Class A Banks.
Withdraw ourselves from organizations such as the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) and International Monetary Fund (IMF).
-Increase the reserve ratio of our banking sector from 0%.
-Establish state-owned trusts or funds (GLCs) in major sectors of the economy under a policy of corporatization.

Platform of the Canadian Nationalist Party.

BANK OF CANADA
(a) Canada currently borrows operating and investment capital from other nations and from international bankers and pays interest on the debt incurred—around $70 million every single day!
(b) The CHP would restore the Bank of Canada to its proper function. It would create and provide Canada’s money supply and provide low-interest or interest-free loans to Provinces, crown corporations and municipalities for urgently needed infrastructure.
(c) Current governments, through incorrect use of the Bank of Canada, have created a blight over the futures of our children as they will be forced to repay the debt plus interest.

Platform of the Christian Heritage Party.

Central Banking
Central banking is essentially legal counterfeiting that enriches a few at the expense of the many, increases wealth inequality, erodes buying power, constitutes a tax on the unborn, incentivizes consumption over production, leads to a harmful business cycle of booms and busts, creates market distortions and creates inefficient resource allocation. The Libertarian Party seeks to end the central banks monopoly on money supply and monetary policy and move back to a system of free banking.

Platform of the Libertarian Party of Canada.

Restore the 1934 Bank of Canada Act along with the 1938 Amendment and our own amendments, and thereby re-institute the true Bank of Canada, people’s bank, which fully belongs to the Canadian people, and thereby end the usury, inflation, and control of Canadians’ wealth by central banks.

Platform of National Citizens Alliance.

There may be other parties that have adopted similar policies. However, there are other parties who are clearly aware of the banking system, even if isn’t reflected in their current platforms.

2. Green Party BoC Motion in 2012

Party Commentary
If adopted, this motion will dramatically change the party’s fiscal policies by introducing the requirement that the federal government borrow from the Bank of Canada.

Preamble
-WHEREAS government debt is reaching such critical proportions that many countries are currently facing financial collapse because of the interest on the debts they owe to banks;
-WHEREAS Section 91 of Canada’s Constitution (classes 1A, 4, 14, 15, 18, 19 & 20) on the Legislative Authority of the Parliament of Canada stipulates that Parliament has full control of the public debt and interest, as well as the right to issue money;
-WHEREAS the interest on money borrowed by the government through the issue of treasury bills and bonds purchased by banks and foreign governments now accounts for about 90% of the total market debt of $596.8 billion (31 March 2011) owed by the people of Canada, and repaying that interest is advantageous to banks but deleterious to the welfare of the country;
-WHEREAS the Bank of Canada issues interest-free currency into circulation for the benefit of the nation, though this is currently only about 5% of the country’s money supply, under the authority of the Bank of Canada Act it is authorized to make interest-free loans to the Government of Canada to make up budget deficits and is currently doing so, by holding approximately $60 billion in Government of Canada bonds and treasury bills;
-WHEREAS the Bank of Canada currently lends the Government of Canada money interest-free through the purchase of government bonds and treasury bills;

Background
The Canadian government has been running deficits since the Trudeau years, except for a few years under Paul Martin when it was finally, painfully, able to move back into a surplus. But even when running a surplus, the government is still paying down the debt accumulated over those decades – debt which is composed of principal, interest, and interest on interest. And interest on interest is by far the largest portion of that debt. A 1993 Auditor General report said that of the accumulated net debt of $423 billion, only $37 billion was principal – the rest was due to the ‘magic’ of compound interest. Thus, a very large portion of all of the painful cutbacks, program cuts, etc. needed to ‘pay down the debt’ are to pay interest on debts owed to bankers. In 2009 (the last year for which data is available on Statcan), Canada paid $28.882 billion in interest charges. Since then, with a return to deficit budgets under the Conservatives, that figure has been rising.
It doesn’t have to be this way. This system of government borrowing is rarely questioned because the people running our banks and central banks have a vested interest to keep the system as it is because it works very well for them – they receive billions in interest payments for the ‘risk’ of lending governments money.

The GPC Shadow Cabinet believes that this is not a fiscally responsible policy. The Bank of Canada already lends at no interest to the government but when it determines that such lending would be inflationary, it requires the government to borrow on private markets. This resolution would undermine the ability of the Bank of Canada to carry out its mandate to control inflation. This approach to government borrowing is essentially the same as was used in Argentina, leading to chronic hyper inflation at great social cost.

It doesn’t appear that this motion was ever adopted into Green Party policy. Nonetheless, it does show that high ranking people in the Green Party (even in 2012), were aware of the scam that is the International Banking Cartel.

Elizabeth May and Jack Layton (then NDP leader), both knew full well about how the banking system worked in Canada. Yet neither would make it a major issue to be decided by Canadians. One really has to wonder how sincere they were, to intentionally leave this out.

3. NDP Socialist Caucus In 2018

28. Reforming the Bank of Canada Act
Whereas Canada’s national debt, owed primarily to wealthy bond holders, is the primary motivator behind austerity and the resistance to public spending to grow the Canadian economy,

And whereas well over 90% of Canada’s public/government debt is attributable to accumulated interest payments on Government issued bonds, interest on which no goods or services were ever consumed by the Canadian public;

And whereas it is both possible and preferable for the Government to use, as it has in the past, the Bank of Canada, to hold its public debt;

Therefore Be It Resolved that a Federal NDP Government, in its very first year, amend the Bank of Canada Act and proceed as follows, nullifying any international agreements that stand in the way:

Use the Bank of Canada as the buyer of all future Government of Canada Bonds and hold them interest free,
Expand the Bank of Canada as a full service Commercial and Industrial Bank that would serve Canadians on the same terms as the existing private banks
. And host in its public service buildings Bank of Canada operations, including in, but not limited to Canada Post Offices, federally regulated airports, and any hospitals under provincial jurisdiction that accept federal monies through the Canada Health Act and corollary agreements.

The Socialist Caucus of the NDP, in 2018, passed a resolution to have the party revert back to using the Bank of Canada as a source of money creation, instead of the private banks.

In the 2019 election platform, the topic of the Bank of Canada was not mentioned anywhere. Pretty bizarre when the Socialist Caucus is the voice of reason on this issue.
NDP.2019.federal.campaign.platform

4. Canada’s Major LibCon Parties

This was addressed in Part 2 of the series, the COMER case. In 2011, COMER (and its lawyer Rocco Galati) filed a lawsuit against the Bank of Canada. Beyond the private loans themselves, COMER challenged the idea that meetings with the Bank for International Settlements could be kept secret — despite the BIS effectively setting monetary policy in Canada.

In 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear an appeal from the Federal Court of Appeal, effectively ending the case. In short, they gave political deference to the government in allowing it to do such a thing.

The Liberal Government of Pierre Trudeau started in process in 1974. Successive administrations (both Liberal and Conservative), have kept the system intact.

Also worth a mention, the People’s party of Canada (while not a real party), is headed by Maxime Bernier. Bernier was in cabinet during the early part of the lawsuit. It’s therefore extremely unlikely that he isn’t aware of the lawsuit. With his nearly 20 years in finance and banking, it’s not credible that he isn’t aware of how the monetary system works. While Bernier goes on and on about the DAIRY cartel, he never mentions the BANKING cartel. A nice way to deflect.

5. Parties Are Aware Of Banking Cartel

From the information compiled above, let’s ask who is fully aware of the scam that is private bank loans? At a minimum, it includes these parties listed below.

  • Canadian Nationalist Party
  • Christian Heritage Party of Canada
  • Conservative Party of Canada
  • Green Party of Canada
  • Liberal Party of Canada
  • Libertarian Party of Canada
  • National Citizens Alliance of Canada
  • New Democratic Party
  • People’s Party of Canada

Of course, it’s likely that most — if not all — of the other parties know about this as well. However, these are the ones where admissions can be directly proven.

While some on this list do openly campaign against the international Banking Cartel, others choose to ignore it. However, the topic isn’t addressed by the media. Politicians talk about a symptom (the debt), while ignoring the disease (the banking cartel).

It’s a sleight-of-hand that goes on all the time. Focus on the debt, without looking at WHO the money is being borrowed from.

9. True Scale Of Borrowing

(1) Debt.Management.Report.1996.1997
(2) Debt.Management.Report.1997.1998
(3) Debt.Management.Report.1998.1999
(4) Debt.Management.Report.1999.2000
(6) Debt.Management.Report.2001.2002
(7) Debt.Management.Report.2002.2003
(8) Debt.Management.Report.2003.2004
(9) Debt.Management.Report.2004.2005
(11) Debt.Management.Report.2006.2007
(12) Debt.Management.Report.2007.2008
(15) Debt.Management.Report.2010.2011
(16) Debt.Management.Report.2011.2012
(17) Debt.Management.Report.2012.2013
(18) Debt.Management.Report.2013.2014
http://archive.is/fp6MW
(19) Debt.Management.Report.2013.2014
http://archive.is/kkGL3
(20) Debt.Management.Report.2015.2016
http://archive.is/rrEEW
(21) Debt.Management.Report.2016.2017
http://archive.is/xy8Vt
(22) Debt.Management.Report.2017.2018
http://archive.is/SACp4
(23) Debt.Management.Report.2018.2019

Fiscal Year Amount Payable Amount Raised
2012-2013 $283B $246B
2013-2014 $271B $251B
2014-2015 $242B $243B
2015-2016 $238B $220B
2016-2017 $276B $252B
2018-2019 $241B $226B

Note: a few of the online debt reports have broken links and are not accessible.

The reality is that the Federal Government borrows over $200 billion per year, and the bulk of it is to pay off old debts. If we still used the Bank of Canada as a source of money creation this would not be a problem. However, the money is coming from private sources.

Rather than going through this cycle every year, one has to ask why not just pay off the existing debt (with a Bank of Canada loan), and then cancel the debt. Instead, successive governments seem content to just let the interest grow.

Taxation is only one source of revenue raising. The other big one is a form of “Ponzi borrowing”. It’s where the government issues more and more bonds in order to cover the costs from other bonds which are now due. Obviously this is an unsustainable system.

Instead of constantly shifting the focus with “overspending” or with “excessive borrowing”, politicians and the media should focus on the privatization of money creation (starting in 1974). Almost everything else becomes irrelevant when you realize this change was done in order to create unending debt. However, they won’t focus on the head of the snake.

(1) https://elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&dir=par&document=index&lang=e
(2) http://archive.is/Keu60
(3) https://nationalist.ca/program/
(4) http://archive.is/3fBrE
(5) https://www.chp.ca/about/2019platform/
(6) http://archive.is/vGqlD
(7) https://www.libertarian.ca/platform_2019
(8) http://archive.is/wFyp8
(9) https://www.nationalcitizensalliance.ca/about-our-policies/
(10) http://archive.is/jSEGy
(11) https://www.greenparty.ca/en/convention-2012/voting/motions/g12-p13
(12) http://archive.is/KmP7N
(13) http://ndpsocialists.ca/socialist-caucus-resolutions-2018-federal-ndp-convention/
(14) http://archive.is/HzBkn

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

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

(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

See section #8 for links to the various groups that George Soros and the Open Societies are financing. This will give insight as to what the motivations are.

3. Context For This Article

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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. 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.

15. 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.

16. Trudeau Foundation Media Swamp

Why doesn’t the Canadian media do any real investigating into George Soros, the Open Society (any of those groups), or any of the money flowing to various globalist NGOs? Why aren’t MSM outlets doing much more to inform the public as to what is really going on?

It was addressed in this piece before, that there are many prominent members of the Canadian media who also belong to the Trudeau Foundation. This is likely why (or at least part of the reason) that the coverage is so limited.

The connections between Soros and many nefarious groups is not difficult to piece together, yet the main media heads in Canada simply won’t do it. Refusing to cover a story, or only giving it superficial coverage, is an indication of being controlled opposition.

By contrast, Civilian Intelligence Network actually went into great length about Stephen Toope, the first President of the Trudeau Foundation. The group laid out his many globalist links. This is an example of how investigative journalism SHOULD be done.

17. Open Society Attacks In Many Ways

The Open Society (and groups like it) are waging a war against the West. They do this by funding and coordinating a number of events — both legal and illegal — meant to bring about our destruction. Some examples include:

  • Financing lobby groups to invert social order
  • Financing “education” to warp public opinion
  • Financing scholarships to bring more foreign students over
  • Lobbying to install open borders politicians into office
  • Financing groups that challenge immigration/refugee laws in court
  • Financing groups that facilitate illegal mass entries
  • Financing groups that cause violence in public

Why aren’t these seditionist actions detailed in the mainstream media? Two main reasons are: (a) the MSM is financially dependent on government handouts; and (b) many members are part of the Trudeau Foundation, and similar groups. These conflicts of interest make it impossible for them to act effectively.

In 2018, there was a $595 million bailout of unprofitable media in Canada. This left many outlets in the awkward position of being dependent on the very government they are supposed to hold to account.

There isn’t just a single avenue that Soros or the Open Society groups take. This is a multipronged approach to attacking our civilization. The details need to be shared.

Make no mistake: these groups are our enemies.