As of late January, 2020, Theresa Tam saw very little risk to Canadians, and that human to human transmission was not a threat
1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”
The rest of the series is here. Many lies, lobbying, conflicts of interest, and various globalist agendas operating behind the scenes. The Gates Foundation finances: the World Health Organization, the Center for Disease Control, GAVI, ID2020, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the Pirbright Institute, the British Broadcasting Corporation, and individual pharmaceutical companies. Also: there is little to no science behind what our officials are doing; they promote degenerate behaviour; the Australian Department of Health admits the PCR tests don’t work; the US CDC admits testing is heavily flawed; and The International Health Regulations are legally binding. See here, here, and here.
Also check out this link, from an article that identifies Tam as “Tan Yongshi”. Credit is due to Christina Forbes for catching this is the first place.
As the chief health officer, what are the negligent duties that Ms. Tan Yongshi should step down from? In general, there are five aspects. First of all: she should be vigilant about the lack of the new crown epidemic. Wuhan was closed on January 23, and the first patient appeared in Canada on January 25. On January 30, WHO declared the new coronary pneumonia as a public health emergency, and the United States announced the closure of China the next day. At that time, the Chinese community understood the seriousness of the virus and appealed to the government to be vigilant, but Tan was indifferent to it and repeatedly emphasized that Canada’s risk was very low, thus missing the best time for prevention and control. After the closure of the United States, because Canada did not take measures, many travelers detoured to Canada to the United States. During their stay in Canada, they planted hidden dangers for the spread of the virus.
Second: Due to the contempt of Tan Yongshi and the government, the Canadian border epidemic prevention and isolation measures are useless. Among the countries in the world, Canada is the only country that has no airport temperature measurement since the outbreak. In the early stage of the epidemic, all entrants were only verbally asked whether they came from the epidemic area, and there was no requirement for isolation. Nevertheless, most Chinese are consciously isolated for 14 days. In the middle of the outbreak, although the government made a 14-day quarantine request, there was no compulsory follow-up measure. Now that the epidemic has almost peaked, the government has proposed coercive measures, but there is no guarantee of law enforcement, because the RCMP responsible for law enforcement has not issued a ticket. If it is said that Trudeau did this based on Ms. Tan ’s opinion, then Tan did not warn against the strengthening of airport detection and isolation, which is her negligence.
There appear to be translation issues, as it switches names several times. Nonetheless, it does refer to Theresa Tam as Tan Yongshi.
It would be nice to nail this down for certain. Should any reader come across this and have more information, please share. Personally, it would be nice to have more material than: (1) a Wikipedia page; and (2) an article from Google Translate.
To play some devil’s advocate, even if this is the case, it may be attempt to simply adopt a more English sounding name. Many people have done it before.
4. Critique Of 2006 Epidemic Plan
A 2006 report co-written by Dr. Theresa Tam – now the face of Canada’s COVID-19 response – predicted our current situation, and the steps needed to get out of it, with eerie accuracy. But the actual response has been very different
A pandemic sweeps across Canada in one or two months. It is spread not only by the sick, but by people who show no symptoms. There are shortages of medical supplies and the health system struggles to keep up. The peak won’t come for months, and it will be accompanied by a surge in deaths. Soon after, the country will brace for a second wave.
All of this is now true for the COVID-19 crisis, but the aforementioned scenario – a warning – comes from a 2006 federal report on pandemic preparedness. Fourteen years later, its words are eerily accurate.
Despite the prescience of such warnings, Canada and many other governments around the world significantly underestimated the severity of the coronavirus.
As recently as late January, federal officials, including Dr. Tam, said the threat of a major outbreak in Canada was very low, that measures such as travel restrictions weren’t needed, and that the risk of the virus being spread by people without symptoms was highly unlikely.
The article goes on to criticize the Federal Government’s lack of preparedness in many different ways, and in great detail. To their credit, the Globe & Mail is pretty thorough in many ways.
But what they missed in their critique is the propaganda elements within the 2006 report. They may be subtle, but they are there.
5. Contents Of 2006 Report
For vaccine program planning purposes, it is important to be prepared to immunize 100% of the population; however, the actual proportion of the population that will voluntarily seek vaccination will depend on public perception of the risk and the severity of the disease. Therefore, the demand, which will manifest as clinic attendance, will likely vary among jurisdictions and within each jurisdiction as the pandemic evolves. Previous experience with outbreak-related immunization clinics indicates that it would be prudent to prepare for an initial demand of 75% of the target population. It is recommended that planning activities also focus on delivering a two dose program to ensure that the public health response is ready to deal with this possibility.
Tam.Canada_Pandemic_Influenza.2006.report
If you go to section 2.2 (page 60 in the 550 page pdf file), it does point out an interesting fact: that the amount of people who will voluntarily take a vaccination depends on the public perception of risk.
Therefore: one can reasonably conclude from this, if the goal is mass vaccination of the public, it is necessary to get them afraid, and keep them afraid.
The Canadian Pandemic Influenza Plan for the Health Sector (the Plan) consists of an introduction and a background section, followed by the preparedness, response and recovery sections, which are consistent with the general principals of emergency response. Each section aims to assist and facilitate appropriate planning for the health sector at all levels of government for the next influenza pandemic. The Plan and the annexed guidelines, checklists and other documents were developed to assist all jurisdictions with the main components of health sector planning, including surveillance, vaccine programs, use of antivirals, health services, public health measures and communications. The most effective public health intervention to mitigate the impact of a pandemic is through immunization with an effective vaccine against the novel virus, and, to a lesser extent, through the use of antiviral drugs. In addition, comprehensive planning requires that appropriate surveillance capacity is in place, and that the health sector, emergency services and communities as a whole are informed and equipped to deal with a pandemic.
This is from the PREFACE (page 21 in 550 page pdf file). It states that the best solution is a vaccine against the novel virus, and that antivirals are a lesser option. Okay, so every time there is a “novel” virus, we need to break out the vaccine testing?
The preface also states that an appropriate surveillance capacity is needed. Perhaps it could be forcing people to wear bracelets, as Theresa Tam/Tan Yongshi suggests.
The components of the 2004 edition of the Plan included surveillance, vaccine programs, antivirals, health services, emergency services, public health measures and communications. In this edition of the Plan, the emergency services component has been removed; it is now addressed as part of the preparedness for overall emergency management and coordination.
Federal, provincial, territorial and local planners are encouraged to consider the psychosocial implications of pandemic influenza when developing their plans for preparedness and response activities. It is anticipated that a component focusing on psychosocial issues will be added to future versions of the Plan.
Section 2.0 (page 54 of the 550 page pdf) openly states that surveillance and vaccine programs are to be prominent portions of this plan. It seems nothing has changed.
Jurisdictions need to be prepared to rapidly implement or modify enhanced surveillance activities. For the purpose of informing public health risk assessment and response activities, a coordinated and rapid epidemiological investigation that includes the collection, collation and analysis of detailed epidemiological, laboratory and clinical data is required. Further, rapid sharing of data and efficient communication at all levels of government are critical for facilitating a coordinated response.
At the federal level, regular environmental scanning for the detection of potentially significant ILI is conducted using official information sources for influenza surveillance (e.g. World Health Organization [WHO] and government influenza surveillance programs from other countries) and unconfirmed reports from early warning systems (e.g. ProMed and other media scanning software, such as the Global Public Health Intelligence Network).
On an ongoing basis, the newly created national expert Working Group for Vaccine Preventable and Respiratory Infections Surveillance (VPRIS-N) will be assessing surveillance systems and making recommendations for enhancements and improvements for the Interpandemic, Pandemic Alert and Pandemic Periods. Recommendations from this group are being refined on an ongoing basis; current recommendations are included in Annex N, Pandemic Influenza Surveillance Guidelines.
The report in this focuses on the need for new surveillance methods (page 56 of 550 page pdf). While avoiding specifics, it acknowledges that expanding it would be greatly beneficial.
Because surveillance data will drive the pandemic response, it is important that physicians and other health care workers are educated and updated on an ongoing basis about the importance of ILI surveillance as well as their roles in the system. Surveillance systems must be established in advance of a pandemic because there will be little time to augment capacity at the time of a pandemic. At the time of a pandemic, surveillance and laboratory-testing capacity will be reduced (e.g. due to staff absenteeism and potential supply shortages) compared with pre-pandemic periods; only streamlined, resource-efficient systems will continue to function. Special study protocols if required (e.g. to determine epidemiology or to investigate reported adverse events following immunization) at the time of a pandemic must be developed and pretested during the pre-pandemic period, recognizing that refinements may be necessary at the time of a pandemic.
However, on the next page, the report suggests that surveillance systems must be established well in advance, as it may not be possible later. Again, avoiding specifics about what that surveillance would be about?
Vaccination of susceptible individuals is the primary means to prevent disease and death from influenza during an epidemic or pandemic. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) produces annual recommendations on the use of influenza vaccine in persons who are most at risk for influenza or those who could spread influenza to persons at greatest risk. These interpandemic recommendations are published annually in the Canada Communicable Disease Report. In the event of a pandemic, PIC, which includes representation from NACI, will provide recommendations to F/P/T immunization programs on the development, production and use of the pandemic vaccine, and priority groups for immunization. Efforts should be made to encourage all jurisdictions to adopt the national recommendations on priority groups at the time of a pandemic in order to facilitate equitable access and consistent messaging.
That’s from page 57. “Consistent messaging”??? Does that mean that government officials should keep their talking points consistent in order to prevent the public from picking out contradictions?
From page 59 of the report. In case you were wondering “recombinant vaccines” are ones that are made up of combined genetic material. Think of it as a Franken-vaxx.
Vaccines, when available, will be the primary public health intervention during a pandemic. However at the start of the pandemic, vaccines may not be available as soon as required and two doses of vaccine may be necessary to achieve an adequate immune response. Antivirals (anti-influenza drugs) are effective for both treatment and prophylaxis of annual influenza. These drugs were not available during past pandemics, but are expected to be effective against pandemic strains of the influenza virus. Antivirals will likely be the only virus-specific intervention during the initial pandemic response. Protection afforded by antivirals is virtually immediate and does not interfere with the response to inactivated influenza vaccines.
From page 61. Vaccines are to be the primary defence against an outbreak.
During a pandemic, antiviral strategies should use all the types of effective anti-influenza drugs that are available to Canadians, and should be adaptable to changing disease epidemiology and vaccine availability. If the novel virus is found to be susceptible to amantadine, which is not currently part of the National Antiviral Stockpile, it is recommended that amantadine be used for prophylaxis (not treatment) only. Oseltamivir could be used for both treatment of cases and prophylaxis. The efficacy of oseltamivir and amantadine are approximately equal for the treatment of cases infected with sensitive strains; however, amantadine is recommended exclusively for prophylaxis to minimize the development of amantadine resistance (which would render the drug ineffective) during the pandemic. The timing of the use of antivirals during a pandemic should be guided by local surveillance data.
From page 63. We think antivirals are okay, but only as long as they don’t interfere with vaccines at some point in the future.
This 550 page report is too long to go through in a single article. However, it’s morbid how much: (a) surveillance; and (b) vaccines are woven into the entire report. It reads as if the entire research was to set up a police state and drug everyone.
The Globe & Mail article referenced in the last section complained that the Federal Government was grossly unprepared considering this 2006 report. While true in some sense, the G&M authors apparently didn’t bother to actually read this report before publishing their article.
6. Vaxx/Surveillance Planned From 2004?
How long exactly has this been going on for? How long has this plan been in the works for? It can’t just be a series of random and unrelated events. Has it been going on for much longer that 16 years?
In 2004, this research begins.
In 2006, it is released. It recommends heavy surveillance, and vaccinations for everyone.
In 2010, Theresa Tam/Tan Yongshi participated in the film “Outbreak Of An Epidemic”, which depicted a fictional simulation of the Federal Government responding to a pandemic.
In 2017, Raj Saini (who is pharma lobbied), introduced M-132, to fund drug research and get drugs out to Canadians, and to the world at large.
In October 2019. Event 201 took place. This was the Gates-involved simulation which would see tens of millions of people die in a computer model of an outbreak.
Again, credit to Civilian Intelligence Network for digging up the 2010 film. The whole thing reads like a giant dress rehearsal for the actual shut down.
An interesting observation in the report: voluntary vaccinations will happen in much larger numbers if people feel the threat is real and imminent. That may explain all the dire warnings coming from the government.
As for Theresa Tam, is that her real name? To be fair, even if true, it could be to adopt a more “Anglo” sounding name. Still, it would be nice to know.
A response that frequently comes up is for people to ask what to do about it. Instead of just constantly pointing out what is wrong, some constructive suggestions should be offered. This section contains a list of proposals that, if implemented, would benefit society. While the details may be difficult to implement, at least they are a starting point.
This piece addresses the coronavirus “planned-emic”, but in the larger context of an attack on religion.
Over the last few months, the priorities and demands of various governments has seemed illogical, conflicting, and downright nonsensical. Here are just a few examples:
Abortion is still considered an essential service, but performing marriages is something that can wait
Interprovincial travel restricted, but foreigners still allowed in
Mass unemployment gets worse, but foreign workers still imported
Possible arrest for not “social distancing”, but criminals are released for their own safety
Religious gatherings banned, but only for some groups
Shutting down the economy and arranging bailouts for cronies is no shocker. However, there is something more nefarious at play, the destruction of Western Society. In particular, there is a continued attack on a major institution that built the West: Christianity.
It’s bittersweet that Prime Minister Trudeau constantly flouts the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms that his father implemented. There seems to be no hesitation to trample on Section 2 (fundamental freedoms).
As officials in Canada (and the U.S) see nothing wrong with forcibly shutting down religious services, the time is long overdue to fight back.
This fake pandemic is blatant, but it’s part of a larger effort. The goal is to erase the Christian founding of Canada and replace it with a mix of: nihilism; Satanism; Islam; diversity and multiculturalism. The ideology which built the West (and its old-stock) are being replaced.
But while these groups enjoy Human Rights Tribunals and special rights fighting for them, Christian groups are told they have to become secular to be ever more accommodating.
Yes, the majority are being told they can’t have an identity and must accommodate everything under the sun. Yet groups that are hostile to Christians are pandered to endlessly. This is a recipe for breaking up Western nations. This pattern applies both to religions and ethnic groups.
4. Theresa Tam Rehearsed Scenario In 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtSgG6-96×0&feature=youtu.be
Start clip at 56:50. It will give you chills.
Thank you to Civilian Intelligence Network for digging up the film. In what can only be described as predictive programming, or a trial run, Theresa Tam “Canada’s top Doctor” takes part in a 2010 film about a fictional epidemic in Canada. Doesn’t get much more premeditated than shooting a film a decade in advance.
In the film (56:50 to 57:50) Tam talks approvingly (seeming almost giddy) about being able to enforce mandatory quarantines, using tracking bracelets, and only “worry later” about questions of an overreach. It’s difficult to make the clip look worse than it actually is. Seems that life is now imitating art.
The video also talks about mandatory vaccinations. If people refused, they can be taken “to temporary detention centers”. Again, this video was released in 2010, a decade ago.
5. Lobbying/Vaxx Agenda Behind The Scenes
CLICK HERE, for CV #0: Theresa Tam; archives; articles; lobbying. CLICK HERE, for CV #1: piece on Bill Gates, Pirbright, depopulation. CLICK HERE, for CV #2: Coronavirus research at U of Saskatchewan. CLICK HERE, for CV #3: Gates; WHO, ID2020; GAVI; Vaccines. CLICK HERE, for CV #4: Gates using proxies to push vaxx agenda. CLICK HERE, for CV #5: Crestview Strategy, GAVI’s lobbying firm. CLICK HERE, for CV #6: people GAVI/Crestview lobbied follow Gates. CLICK HERE, for CV #7: M-132, Canada financing pharma research. CLICK HERE, for CV #8: Canada/WHO & “vaccine hesitancy” research. CLICK HERE, for CV #9: Raj Saini, lobbied by big pharma (M-132). CLICK HERE, for CV #10: pharma lobbying in Alberta legislature. CLICK HERE, for CV #11: ON Pharma; Bill 160 Not Implemented.
If you doubt that government lobbying and the pharma lobby are greatly influencing how this “pandemic” is playing out, consider the content in the above articles. The Federal Government, the Provincial Governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario (among many others), are being lobbied by drug companies.
Furthermore, “depopulation” fetishists like Bill Gates are active in the media claiming vaccines are needed. Globalists everywhere are clamoring for more control of their populations.
There is much more at stake than simply a virus or public illness. Assuming it even exists, the severe overreach cannot be explained merely by hysteria. Something else is in play.
Of course, if Western nations do impose mandatory vaccinations on their citizens, guess which groups will be predominantly impacted?
6. Court Rulings Against Christianity
This page is available on the Canadian Department of Justice website, and lists a few dozen critical cases in Charter precedent. While they may seems appealing on the surface, most are actually quite disturbing. Let’s look at some.
10. Hate speech towards targeted groups
James Keegstra was a high school teacher in Alberta who taught his students that Jewish people were evil. He also denied that the Holocaust occurred and said it was invented by Jewish people to gain sympathy. Keegstra was convicted for promoting hatred against an identifiable group based on these statements to his students.
.
Keegstra argued that the Criminal Code prohibitions on hate speech infringed his freedom of expression. The Supreme Court confirmed that the Charter protects all forms of speech, including hate speech, so long as it does not include violence. However, the majority of the Court concluded that the limits the Criminal Code placed on Keegstra’s freedom of expression were justifiable. This is because the limits aimed to protect groups targeted by hate speech and to promote positive relations in a country dedicated to equality and multiculturalism.
.
The Keegstra case serves as a reminder that freedom of expression is not absolute and can be limited in situations where there is a need to balance competing interests like respect for difference, equality and multiculturalism.
That’s right. As of 1990, “Holocaust denial” is deemed to be a criminal offense, regardless of how well founded it may be. This also applies even when there no violence sought. The Court considers promoting positive relations to be more important than truth.
19. Freedom speech and equality of the LGBTQ2 community
Little Sisters was a specialized bookstore that sold books primarily to the gay and lesbian community. The bookstore imported most of its material from the United States. Customs officials classified the books and other materials as “obscene” which prevented the shipments from entering Canada. Under the customs regime, businesses and individuals in Canada were prohibited from importing “obscene” materials into Canada.
.
Little Sisters challenged the customs rules, arguing that the regime violated freedom of expression and the equality rights of the LGBTQ2 community. The Supreme Court concluded that the customs regime did limit freedom of expression, but that most of the law could be justified as a reasonable limit on this right. However, the Court found that the way that the customs officials were applying the law violated the equality rights of the customers of Little Sisters bookstore because the officials were applying a discriminatory standard to their materials compared to those aimed at a heterosexual audience.
.
This case helped pave the way for further recognition of the rights of sexual minorities in Canada and also confirmed that freedom of expression protects the right to receive materials like books. The case also highlighted that both laws and the actions of all government officials must respect the Charter.
So Customs was within its discretion to not allow obscene material into Canada. However, the gay rights screamed discrimination and had their property admitted anyway. Now that drag queen story hour is a reality, will denying child pornography now be constitutionally protected?
24. Religious freedom in school
Gurbaj Singh Multani was an orthodox Sikh student who believed that his religion required him to wear a kirpan at all times, including at school. A kirpan is a religious object worn by people of Sikh faith that looks like a dagger. Multani and his parents agreed with the school board’s request that he seal the kirpan in his clothing at all times while wearing it at school. However, the school board’s council of commissioners told Multani that he could not wear the kirpan to school even if it was sealed in his clothing because bringing dangerous objects to school violated the school’s code of conduct.
.
The Supreme Court found that the council’s decision infringed Multani’s freedom of religion. Multani sincerely believed that his Sikh faith required him to wear the kirpan and the prohibition on wearing it would have prevented him from attending public school altogether. The school board had not justified that a full ban on wearing kirpans in school was a reasonable limit on freedom of religion. There had never been a violent incident involving a kirpan at school and there was no evidence that the kirpan itself was a symbol of violence. The Court’s decision provides important guidance on the relationship between religious freedom, multiculturalism and public education in Canada. A total ban on wearing kirpans in schools ignores the importance of respect for minorities and religious tolerance in Canada’s multicultural society.
It seems that knives are a public safety issue in Canadian schools, and must be banned. That doesn’t seem to apply, though, when people of non-Christian religions complain that it’s mandatory.
29. Supervised injection sites
In 2003, health authorities in British Columbia opened a supervised drug injection site to combat the epidemic of HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver. In order for the operation of these sites to be considered legal, the federal Minister of Health must grant an exemption from the prohibitions of possession and trafficking of controlled substances. In 2008, the BC health authorities made an application for a new exemption before the previous one expired. The Minister denied the application. The organization that ran the site and a number of its clients argued that the Minister’s decision violated the right to life, liberty and security of the person.
.
The Supreme Court found that the Minister’s decision would prevent injection drug users from accessing life-saving health services. As a result, the health of the clients would be threatened and their lives would be endangered. Evidence showed that in over the 8 years of its operation, the safe injection site had proven to save lives with no known negative impact on public safety or health. The Minister’s decision went against the public safety objectives it was supposed to be pursuing. It was also arbitrary, meaning it had no rational connection to the government’s stated purpose of protecting lives and health. The Court ordered the Minister to grant the exemption.
Rather than getting these people real treatment, the BC Health Authorities decided that funded that taxpayer funded narcotics was a better solution. Additionally, BC would also cover the salaries and building overhead needed for this operation to function.
31. Balancing competing rights and freedoms: religious freedom and trial fairness
After N.S. was sexually assaulted, the Crown called her as a witness in the preliminary inquiry of her accused attackers. For religious reasons, N.S. asked to testify wearing a niqab, a head scarf that covers the face except the eyes. The judge ordered her to remove her niqab, but N.S. argued that making her do so would infringe her right to religious freedom.
.
The majority of the Supreme Court held that if wearing the niqab poses no serious risk to trial fairness, a witness who wishes to wear it for sincere religious reasons may do so. This case requires judges try to find a way to balance freedom of religion and trial fairness if the two rights conflict with each other. More generally, this case highlights the need for public institutions to accommodate religious difference as much as possible so everyone feels respected, while still upholding other Charter-protected rights and freedoms.
Most adults will know that a lot of information can be gleaned from facial expressions. In criminal cases, being able to properly cross examine a witness is very important. Having the face covers denies the other side the chance to fully get a read on the person. Additionally, it is extremely disrespectful to have this coming into the courts at all.
32. Sex work and the right to security of the person
Terri Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch and Valerie Scott were current or former sex workers who challenged three provisions of the Criminal Code which criminalized various activities relating to prostitution, including:
-public communication for the purposes of prostitution
-operating a bawdy house
-living off of the avails of prostitution
.
They argued that these restrictions deprived sex workers of their right to security by forcing them to work in secret, which prevented them from adopting important and life-saving safety measures, even though prostitution itself was legal.
.
The Supreme Court decided these provisions violated the right to security because they increased the serious risks sex workers faced on a daily basis. The government had not proven that the provisions were a proportionate response to the harms of social nuisance and the exploitation of sex workers. The provisions were unconstitutional because they went too far in terms of the conduct they prohibited as compared to the social harms they were supposed to address. In addition, the very serious impact of some of the prohibitions on sex workers’ safety was “totally out of sync” with the objective of the law.
The Canadian authorities have an obligation to ensure that the most degenerate and disgusting acts are performed safely. Perhaps not engaging in it at all would be safer, but who am I to judge?
So what do we have here?
Holocaust denial is an actual crime
Degeneracy allowed into Canada as gay rights
Sikhs can bring knives to school
Taxpayer funded narcotics is a human right
Muslims can conceal their faces while testifying
Laws changed to make sex work safe
Ex-pats with citizenship allowed to vote
Criminals allowed to vote while in prison
The above rulings of course are just a small piece of what has been happening in Western countries. While Christianity (the foundation of the West) is being stripped away, other groups are able to come in and use the courts to impose their ideologies.
Another important one to list is marriage being redefined. While it is arguable how much harm this causes, the gay rights movement has proceeded to demand that institutions such as churches host their weddings, and that bakers make their cakes. So much for not imposing on others.
What is obviously the best option is to stop the ever increasing demands for accommodation. Alternatively, Christians need to start militarizing the courts to have their interests protected. Being passive about it will only lead to their destruction.
Simply being tolerant and accepting of other groups does not work when they seek to replace your way of like with theirs. This is what multiculturalism brings: eventually the host(s) get replaced by the foreigners who are allowed in.
What is the consequence of laws and rulings that strip away the founding religion of the country? Eventually you end up with a group, (despite being a majority), have no real rights. And when they become a minority — as demographics shift — they will become targeted.
7. Churches Shut Down During “Planned-Emic”
Government across the West are ordering religious congregations to stope while the alleged “pandemic” is putting everyone in danger. However, it is nice to see that some are willing to defy what are illegal and unconstitutional orders. This is in the U.S., but things are starting to happen in Canada as well.
Having such incidents videotaped and splashed across the internet causes headaches for the police, who come across looking heavy handed and fascistic. It also creates problems for politicians who claim to support freedom of religion and be religious themselves.
If the court can’t or won’t act to defend these fundamental freedom, then perhaps good old fashioned shaming and humiliation will do the trick.
8. Fighting For Freedom Of Religion
Now let’s get into the Charter a little bit:This is going to be a bit out of order, though done intentionally. The purpose is to go through the mental process of standing up for your rights
Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
These are the fundamental freedoms that any modern society would have. The content of section 2 is very similar to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Without these fundamental freedoms, you are essentially living in a dictatorship. There are 2 provisions in the constitution which will help
Enforcement of guaranteed rights and freedoms
24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances
Primacy of Constitution of Canada
52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.
Marginal note:
Constitution of Canada
(2) The Constitution of Canada includes
(a) the Canada Act 1982, including this Act;
(b) the Acts and orders referred to in the schedule; and
(c) any amendment to any Act or order referred to in paragraph (a) or (b).
If your rights are being violated, you can cite one of — or both — Sections 24 and 52. Section 24 states that you have the right to seek a remedy in court, and section 52 states that laws inconsistent with the Constitution have no effect. (Note: The Charter is a subset of the Constitution as a whole). But, it is not quite as simple as that, and here is why:
Rights and freedoms in Canada
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Section 1 is very important here. Plainly put, it says that the government must be able to justify any Charter violation it causes in any of the further sections. While a difficult burden, it’s often not impossible to meet.
If you believe that these forced church closures violate your Section 2 rights (fundamental freedoms), you can go to court to assert that. Should you be able to prove it, the burden then shifts to the Government to establish that these violations are justified under Section 1.
Interestingly, these prohibitions seems almost exclusively aimed at Christians. Most likely, Muslims would react violently if treated the same way.
Now, would a court find that these restrictions are reasonably justified? The answer is not as clear cut as many would like. It would largely depend on information coming from the Office of Public Health, and laws such as the Quarantine Act or Emergencies Act.
Let’s ignore for the time being that this pandemic is a hoax, and that the courts are politically stacked. Let’s assume it were to play out in a fair way.
9. Quarantine & Emergencies Act
Quarantine station
6 (1) The Minister may establish a quarantine station at any place in Canada.
Marginal note:
.
Provision and maintenance of area or facility
(2) The operator of a facility in which a customs office, within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Customs Act, is located shall, when required in writing by the Minister, provide and maintain free of charge any area or facility, along with its fixtures, that the Minister considers necessary for establishing a quarantine station
Quarantine facilities
7 The Minister may by order designate any place in Canada as a quarantine facility and amend, cancel or reinstate the designation.
Well, so much for properties rights if any place in Canada can simply be deemed a quarantine station by the Minister, with no say so by the owners or tenants.
Duty to provide
8 (1) Any person in charge of a place shall, at the request of the Minister, provide that place to the Minister if, in the opinion of the Minister, the temporary use of the place as a quarantine facility is necessary to protect public health.
Marginal note:
Deeming
(2) The place is deemed to be designated as a quarantine facility.
Marginal note:
Compensation
(3) The Minister may compensate any person for the Minister’s use of the place.
Marginal note:
Consultation
(4) The Minister shall consult with the provincial public health authority of the province in which the place is situated before taking possession of it.
The Minister “may” compensate the owners for property that is seized and used but they don’t have to. Also, while the Province must be consulted, it doesn’t say they have to agree.
Arrest without warrant
18 A peace officer may, at the request of a screening officer or quarantine officer, arrest without a warrant and bring to a quarantine officer any traveller who the peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe has refused to be isolated or refuses to comply with a measure under subsection 15(3).
Offence committed intentionally
67 (1) Every person is guilty of an offence if they cause a risk of imminent death or serious bodily harm to another person while wilfully or recklessly contravening this Act or the regulations.
Marginal note:
Punishment
(2) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1) is liable
(a) on conviction on indictment, to a fine of not more than $1,000,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than three years, or to both; and
(b) on summary conviction, to a fine of not more than $300,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than six months, or to both.
The problem is that so much in this Quarantine Act is discretionary, and leaves citizens with no real rights. The act is too long to cover in a single article, but the link is provided.
National emergency
3 For the purposes of this Act, a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that
(a) seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions or nature as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with it, or
(b) seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada
and that cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.
Declaration of a public welfare emergency
6 (1) When the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that a public welfare emergency exists and necessitates the taking of special temporary measures for dealing with the emergency, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 14, may, by proclamation, so declare.
Marginal note:
Contents
(2) A declaration of a public welfare emergency shall specify
(a) concisely the state of affairs constituting the emergency;
(b) the special temporary measures that the Governor in Council anticipates may be necessary for dealing with the emergency; and
(c) if the direct effects of the emergency do not extend to the whole of Canada, the area of Canada to which the direct effects of the emergency extend.
Orders and regulations
8 (1) While a declaration of a public welfare emergency is in effect, the Governor in Council may make such orders or regulations with respect to the following matters as the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, are necessary for dealing with the emergency:
(a) the regulation or prohibition of travel to, from or within any specified area, where necessary for the protection of the health or safety of individuals;
(b) the evacuation of persons and the removal of personal property from any specified area and the making of arrangements for the adequate care and protection of the persons and property;
(c) the requisition, use or disposition of property;
(d) the authorization of or direction to any person, or any person of a class of persons, to render essential services of a type that that person, or a person of that class, is competent to provide and the provision of reasonable compensation in respect of services so rendered;
(e) the regulation of the distribution and availability of essential goods, services and resources;
(f) the authorization and making of emergency payments;
(g) the establishment of emergency shelters and hospitals;
(h) the assessment of damage to any works or undertakings and the repair, replacement or restoration thereof;
(i) the assessment of damage to the environment and the elimination or alleviation of the damage; and
(j) the imposition
(i) on summary conviction, of a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprisonment not exceeding six months or both that fine and imprisonment, or
(ii) on indictment, of a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding five years or both that fine and imprisonment,
for contravention of any order or regulation made under this section.
There are some problems with the Emergency Act, and they are much the same as with the Quarantine Act. The Act allows the Government broad, sweeping powers, with little in the way of oversight.
How does having entire cities in lockdown, and shutting down religious services make the public safer? The government knows so little about this virus, that it is cutting off the well being and livelihoods of people in the name of scaremongering.
Both the Emergency Act (1985) and the Quarantine Act (2005), have been on the books for a long time. Would invoking either of them be a reasonably justified used of limiting people’s fundamental freedoms, which are guaranteed under Section 2 of the Charter? Would the circumstances allow the infringement to be justified under Section 1?
Most people would say no. And most wouldn’t want important things — such as weekly services — shut down for such vague reasons. However, if Government agents were to CLAIM there is an ever present threat, they may be able to get away with it for a time.
While there is little interest in packed grocery stores (although that is changing), religious services need to be shut down almost entirely. This is not about public safety, but about control.
If the public officials are acting on the orders from near dictatorial politicians, and the courts are unable or unwilling to intervene, what options do we have?
10. Tips On Fighting Back
First, understand that according to Pintea v. Johns (2017), court officers now have a legal obligation to go the extra mile to ensure that self represented people get a fair hearing. It isn’t option.
Second, in most cases (criminal court) there will be a duty counsel that you can speak to — for free — to get general information on how to proceed.
Third, legal research is within the grasp of most everyone with decent reading skills. My favourite is https://www.canlii.org/en/, where there is a wealth of free information. The skill involved is a combination of searching Google and Wikipedia.
Fourth, all of the rules you need to know are freely available online. This includes the Canadian Criminal Code (if applicable), and the Rules for Civil Procedure in your Province.
This experience will be frustrating, but standing up for your rights is within the grasp of most people. You can always pay for a lawyer later if need be.
People who do get arrested, or who are ticketed for practicing their faith (or some other harmless activity) should fight back. Contest the ticket, and fight any charges. If it’s something you and you family are comfortable with, publish the incident, and feel free to out the police officer or by-law officers.
While this does seem daunting, the overwhelming majority of these cases will be quietly dismissed. Why? Because the authorities don’t want a lingering public headache.
But think it through before making a hasty decision.
11. Demographic Replacement Of Christianity
About 20% of Canada’s current population was born in some other country. With such a large presence, immigrants have had a substantial impact on Canada’s religious landscape (as in the United States, where immigrants – including those who are unauthorized – make up an estimated 13% of the total population.)
In the 1970s and 1980s, Canada’s foreign-born population was smaller, largely European and overwhelmingly Christian. In recent years, however, rising numbers of immigrants – nearly half of Canada’s immigrant population – have come from Asia, Africa and the Middle East. In the U.S., by comparison, three-in-ten of all foreign-born residents have come from these three regions.
In Canada, disaffiliation has increased markedly within some generations as they have aged. For example, one-in-ten Canadians born between 1947 and 1966 had no religious affiliation in 1981, but one-in-five are unaffiliated as of 2011. Even Canada’s older adults (those born in 1946 or earlier) have experienced gradual increases in disaffiliation; their rate of disaffiliation has gone from the single digits in the 1970s to double digits in recent years. In the U.S., by contrast, the share of people with no religious affiliation has been fairly stable within each generation over time (though disaffiliation has ticked up slightly among American Baby Boomers – those born between 1946 and 1964 – and Gen Xers – those born between 1965 and 1980).
As the geographic origins of Canadian immigrants have shifted, so has their religious makeup. A majority of immigrants (56%) who arrived during the 1970s were either Catholic or Protestant, while about a quarter were affiliated with other religious traditions, including Eastern Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, Hinduism, and Judaism. Since 2001, about four-in-ten (39%) new Canadian immigrants have belonged to these religious minorities, the same as the share of new immigrants (also 39%) who identify as either Catholic or Protestant. Because immigrants comprise more than a fifth of Canada’s population, the rising share of immigrants who belong to religious minorities has had a substantial impact on the religious composition of the overall population.
This 2013 report from Pew Research details Canada’s changing religious landscape over recent decades. It correctly points out that huge amounts of immigration is in fact changing the overall landscape.
12. Pop’n Replacement Is Spiritual Replacement
This seemingly absurd statement makes sense when you put it into context. Every year, Canada is bringing in large numbers of people from countries that are of a very different religious makeup. Consequently, there is a large demographic shift going on.
(Page 18 of the 2004 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 24 of the 2005 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 18, 19 of the 2006 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 19, 20 of the 2007 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 21, 22 of the 2008 Annual Report to Parliament)
Note: this by no means it everyone who enters Canada in those years. In particular, it leaves out large numbers of students and temporary workers.
Nonetheless: look at who is actually staying in Canada. Each year we bring in people from India (Sikh and Hindu), China (Communist, Atheist), and various Middle Eastern and African nations (Islam). While the people coming in are not monolithic, these trends do have a significant impact on the religious demographic changes in Canada.
Interestingly, there doesn’t seem to be much of a difference in Liberal and Conservative immigration policies. Neither care about maintaining the demographic or founding ideologies of the West. Of course if you bring any of this up, you will be called a bigot.
All they focus on is:
(a) Singing the praises of diversity
(b) Perceived economic growth — ie cheap labour
13. Spiritual Replacement Is Genocide
Consider the UN Convention on preventing and punishing genocide.
Article I
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Despite the West being founded on Christianity, our “leaders” see nothing wrong with bringing hordes of other ideologies over. They are given free reign and protected status, while Christians must become more secular and accommodating. I wonder how tolerant these other groups will be as their numbers grow. This is all while “conservatives” crow about how tolerant they are.
Just like with replacing ethnic groups, replacing religious groups also qualifies as genocide under the 1948 UN Convention.
14. Foreign Religions Taking Over
At the Al-Quds Festival, Muslim man bragging that demographic change will lead to Sharia Law replacing Canadian Law at some point. He cites Pew Research data that suggests Muslims will have a plurality — be the biggest individual group — by 2060.
This man isn’t kidding about Islam becoming the biggest religious group. The goal is world domination, and they are breeding their way to get it. These findings, from Pew Research.
Babies born to Muslims will begin to outnumber Christian births by 2035; people with no religion face a birth dearth.
More babies were born to Christian mothers than to members of any other religion in recent years, reflecting Christianity’s continued status as the world’s largest religious group. But this is unlikely to be the case for much longer: Less than 20 years from now, the number of babies born to Muslims is expected to modestly exceed births to Christians, according to new Pew Research Center demographic estimates.
Muslims are projected to be the world’s fastest-growing major religious group in the decades ahead, as Pew Research Center has explained, and signs of this rapid growth already are visible. In the period between 2010 and 2015, births to Muslims made up an estimated 31% of all babies born around the world – far exceeding the Muslim share of people of all ages in 2015 (24%).
The current age distribution of each religious group is an important determinant of demographic growth. Some groups’ adherents are predominantly young, with their prime childbearing years still ahead, while members of other groups are older and largely past their childbearing years. The median ages of Muslims (24 years) and Hindus (27) are younger than the median age of the world’s overall population (30), while the median age of Christians (30) matches the global median. All the other groups are older than the global median, which is part of the reason why they are expected to fall behind the pace of global population growth.
He’s not wrong at all. Pew Research is predicting exactly that. Muslims will become the biggest religious group in a short time.
Of course, the fact that they murder: Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Atheists, gays, blasphemers, apostates, and different sects of Islam “might” have something to do with those changing demographics. They aren’t exactly tolerant.
How is Canada, or any nation for that matter, supposed to retain its heritage when it allows large numbers of people annually from completely different backgrounds who will soon outbreed their hosts?
Muslims maintain their religion and culture. Westerners give it all up in the name of being “diverse and tolerant”. But when push comes to shove, the stronger and more cohesive group will win, especially should civil war break out.
15. Time To Reverse This Trend
The government imposed closing of churches and other religious institutions is an attack on religion itself. None of this is necessary for public health. Instead, this is a show of force, and a show of how much contempt it holds in general for faith.
While the Quarantine Act and Emergency Act are seriously overreaching. There are ways to fight back. And the fighting back must happen. This “pandemic” is a thinly veiled attempt at seizing money and power, and was never about public safety.
Beyond this though: Christianity has been under attack in the West for a very long time. Most overtly, the population replacement agenda has led to the importation of large numbers of people (each year), who have nothing to do with Christianity. Worse still, Liberals and Conservatives (basically the same thing) see nothing wrong with bringing people — like Muslims — who are openly hostile to Christianity.
It’s beyond cliché at this point, but modern Conservatives conserve absolutely nothing. Preserving the spiritual foundations of the Western world is no exception. It’s disturbing how much pride they take in proclaiming that “we don’t play identity politics”, and that “We’re not socially conservative. We support freedom”.
It is group identity and cohesion that is the basis for a society. If Christians (or related denominations) don’t do it, they will be replaced by groups that are cohesive. Islam being an obvious example.
Some of the lobbying at the Federal level has been published in earlier pieces on this site. However, this is not true at the Provincial level. The question that has to be asked is whether lobbying is playing a role in getting various Premiers to support the vaccination agenda.
The answer is yes, or at least it certainly looks like it. This article will focus on Alberta, now headed by Jason Kenney. Others will be addressed subsequently. Kenney is blatantly pro-vaxx, and people have to ask who is pulling the strings for this agenda.
Clearly, Wellington Advocacy and Counsel Public Affairs are not the only 2 groups lobbying the Alberta Government. But they are both very prominent.
Also noteworthy is that Kenney is a former Cabinet Minister in Stephen Harper’s Government. He is a twice-attendee of the Bilderberg meetings. Kenney has powerful connections.
Jason Kenney, like the Federal Government, and other Premiers, supports the agenda for mass vaccination. Unlike the Feds, though, Kenney hasn’t (so far) said that it will be mandatory, but we will have to see what becomes of it.
EDMONTON — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau defended his government Tuesday after Alberta’s premier suggested Ottawa is dragging its feet on approving potential screening devices and treatments for COVID-19.
On Sunday, Jason Kenney tweeted that he had directed staff to consider using tests, vaccines or medications “that have been approved by the high standards of at least one credible peer country’s drug agency.”
That of course is just a clip from a broader article. Point is, Kenney seems on board with vaccinations. He doesn’t want Ottawa potentially slowing it down.
2. Wellington Advocacy, ex-PMO Staffers
What we do
Wellington Advocacy helps you build, run and win campaigns.
.
After a decade of working alongside Stephen Harper on the campaign trail and in office, our team is uniquely positioned to help you build government relations strategies, digital campaigns, stakeholder coalitions and blueprints to run.
.
Government Relations
Our team will work with you to build and deliver a concise and compelling presentation to government. Drawing on vast public policy and government experience, we ensure the right people hear your message at the right time.
.
Digital
Finding and winning over an audience is central to any successful campaign. We know how to identify and engage audiences and will help you build a bespoke digital strategy to capture the attention you need to deliver your message.
This lobbying firm was with Stephen Harper for more than a decade, and even played a role in the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office). They brag about having influence. Now, they lobby (current) Alberta Premier Jason Kenney. Keep in mind, that Kenney was Immigration Minister for much of his time in Harper’s Government. All of this reeks of a conflict-of-interest.
According to the Lobbying Registry of Alberta, Wellington Advocacy has lobbied the Alberta Government 53 times since May 2019. While certainly not all of their clients are drug companies, several of as late, are.
DATE
LOBBYIST
CLIENT
SENIOR OFFICER
23-Apr-2020
Wellington Advocacy Inc.
Triple M Housing
Nick Koolsberge
23-Apr-2020
Wellington Advocacy Inc.
Spartan Bioscience Inc
Nick Koolsbergen
19-Apr-2020
Wellington Advocacy Inc.
AMD Medicom Inc
Nick Koolsbergen
22-Mar-2020
Wellington Advocacy Inc.
Bayshore Healthcare LTD
Nick Koolsbergen
22-Mar-2020
Wellington Advocacy Inc.
Shoppers Drug Mart
Nick Koolsbergen
3. Counsel Public Affairs, Inc.
Healthcare
Our team has extensive experience working across the health care sector, from hospital operations and broader health care industry governance, to service providers and product manufacturers, and to the regulated health professionals who support the system. Counsel has advocated on behalf of doctors, nurses, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, pharmacies, medical device manufacturers, healthcare associations and patient groups on a wide range of mandates.
LOBBYING
Engaging decision makers with a powerful, persuasive and fact-based position is the key to success. With decades of experience working at all levels of government, we know how to effectively bridge the gap between those inside and outside of the political sphere to find solutions for your most important issues.
.
POLICY DEVELOPMENT
We know how government weighs options, evaluates impacts, and makes choices. We understand the policy process and how your organization can intervene effectively. We’ll help to ensure the facts are laid out, your case gets in front of the right people, and the policy implications are clear.
.
STAKEHOLDER AND INFLUENCER ENGAGEMENT
Skilled and targeted stakeholder management involves both recruiting allies and minimizing opposition. We can help you identify, track, and influence stakeholders.
Their LinkedIn page is filled with countless examples of Counsel Public Affairs attempting to control political narratives. Members have ties to many political parties, so they really are playing all sides.
11-Apr-2020
Counsel Public Affairs Inc.
Emergent BioSolutions Canada Inc. (formerly Adapt Pharma Canada Ltd.)
Philip Dew
Counsel does have offices in other provinces, and connections to many political parties.
4. Registered Lobbying Reports
24-Apr-2020
AstraZeneca Canada Inc.
Jane Chung
23-Apr-2020
Wellington Advocacy Inc.
Triple M Housing
Nick Koolsbergen
22-Apr-2020
Stosic & Associates Ltd.
Mint Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Aleksandar Stosic
16-Apr-2020
Hill + Knowlton Strategies
3M Canada Company
Sheila Wisniewski
15-Apr-2020
Global Public Affairs
Applied Pharmaceutical Innovation
Randy Pettipas
15-Apr-2020
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc.
Christian Macher
11-Apr-2020
Counsel Public Affairs Inc.
Emergent BioSolutions Canada Inc. (formerly Adapt Pharma Canada Ltd.)
Philip Dewan
09-Apr-2020
Lundbeck Canada Inc.
Peter Anastasiou
09-Apr-2020
Rothmans, Benson, & Hedges
Peter Luongo
07-Apr-2020
Pfizer Canada ULC
Cole Pinnow
07-Apr-2020
Merck Canada Inc.
Anna Van Acker
06-Apr-2020
Alberta Pharmacists’ Association
Margaret Wing
01-Apr-2020
Janssen Inc.
Jorge Bartolome
This is of course not an exhaustive list of who has been lobbying the Government in Alberta. Nor is health the only topic that gets lobbied for.
But it is interesting to see how many interested parties are coming forward. And “interested” refers to those who will be able to make money off such a vaccine or other remedy. When there is a lot of money at stake, people must always be wondering who is possibly pulling the strings.
One thing seems clear though: the Alberta Government won’t be waiting around for Ottawa to make a decision. Whether AB ultimately decides to go the route of mass vaccinations is unknown. However, there are companies who would profit greatly from it.
It also can’t be understated the conflict of interest that arises when lobbyists — many of whom have ties to government officials — start lobbying those officials on matters that are not in the best interests of the people. Much like Crestview Strategy and many more, Wellington Alliance and Counsel Public Affairs rely on their personal connections to pass initiatives that their clients pay for.
The Canadian Government has adopted significant portions of the WHO’s vaccine agenda, including expanding it to include more and more items. Parliament has approved (see last article) increased funding for research and supply of more vaccines. The Government and Gates’ people seem to be in lockstep ideologically.
Even worse than the government simply going along with this is the propaganda elements. They refer to it as “overcoming vaccine hesitancy”. In practice, this amounts to little more than psychological manipulation in order to convince people that these vaccines are safe. Both the Canadian Government and the World Health Organization engage in this very shady tactic.
For some perspective on the vaccine agenda, let’s look at a partial timeline of events that are happening in Canada and elsewhere.
TIMELINE:
2000 – GAVI (Global Vaccine Alliance) formed
2003 – Nat’l Immunization Strategy Report released
2010 – At WEF, Gates announces $10B to develop vaccines
2014 – Research done into “vaccine hesitancy”
2015 – Journal of Vaccine article on “vaccine hesitancy”
2016 – $25M Committed in 2016 budget for more immunizations
2016 – ID2020 launched by Gates
2017 – M132 passed, to get more funding for big pharma
2018 – GAVI/Crestview lobbies Canadian politicians/bureaucrats
2018 – CANimmunize app launched for smartphones
2018 – HoC Committee on Health approves M-132
2018 – Measuring Behavioural, Social Drivers of vaxx meeting
2019 – Recommendations of M-132 formally adopted
2019 – Working Group (Gates/GAVI) to promote vaxx agenda
2020 – Canada’s economy is unnecessarily crashed
2020 – PM, Premiers talk about mandatory vaxx in Canada
The following sections will cover both initiatives that the Canadian Government has undertaken, as well as the public relations efforts to combat what they refer to as “vaccine hesitancy”.
4. CANimmunize Mobile App
In 2018, the CANImmunize App was released publicly. See this original YouTube video. If putting all your records on some app is becoming more mainstream, what’s to stop there from eventually being a biological record?
The CANimmunize app is promoted on the page. So the Government of Canada sees this as a totally valid and legitimate pathway to take. But don’t worry, as bad as that is, there are worse things to be considered.
There is of course ID2020, which Bill Gates is a major supporter of. He is in favour of creating a digital ID for everyone, and even goes as far as to propose embedding immunization records into people’s skin.
Preamble
Over the past several years, the Advisory Committee on Population Health and Health Security (ACPHHS) has supported development of a national approach to addressing immunization issues in Canada. During this period, numerous meetings and consultations with federal, provincial, and territorial (F/P/T) public health representatives and other relevant stakeholders were undertaken to identify and develop collaborative approaches to strengthening immunization in Canada.
The value of this collaborative work was reflected in the February 2003 First Ministers’ Accord on Health Care Renewal, which included direction to Health Ministers to continue their pursuit of a national immunization strategy. The 2003 Federal Budget provided $45 million over five years to assist in the continued pursuit of a national immunization strategy, as directed by First Ministers. Specifically, Health Canada is to receive $5 million in 2003-04 and $10 million in 2004-05 and ongoing. This funding will enable strengthened collaboration with the provinces, territories and key stakeholders to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of immunization programs in Canada, but will not be used for vaccine procurement
All of this seems harmless enough, but in 2003, a report had been released about the Government’s agenda of boosting vaccinations across Canada.
6. Nat’l Immunization Objectives: 2016-2021
Our next steps: NIS objectives 2016 – 2021
While immunization coverage in Canada today is good, we are not reaching any of the coverage goals set in 2005, leaving Canadians vulnerable to preventable illness. Furthermore, while rates of vaccine preventable diseases in Canada are low, recent measles and pertussis outbreaks demonstrate that Canadians are still at risk.
In its 2016 Budget, the Government of Canada committed $25M over five years to increase immunization coverage rates. While all NIS priorities are important, given the shared responsibility for immunization in Canada, and respectful of the collaborative, ongoing work of the NIS, F/P/T partners have worked together to establish a set of short term objectives that can capitalize on this new investment, leverage momentum and build from the 2013 priorities to provide F/P/T focus for the next five years.
This page outlines in extremely broad strokes the agenda for 2016 to 2021
7. CDA Immunization Partnership Fund
Today, not enough Canadians are vaccinated. As a result, Canadians are still at risk for needless illness and death from infectious diseases that could be prevented through vaccination. Recognizing this public health challenge, the Government of Canada committed $25 million in Budget 2016 to increase vaccination coverage in Canada.
The page does however go into considerable detail about “overcoming vaccine hesitancy”. This is short amounts to efforts to CONVINCE people that vaccines are safe.
increasing demand for vaccination
addressing gaps in
knowledge
attitudes
beliefs
And below we will get to some specific efforts being launched.
Creation of a Canadian Immunization Resource Centre (CANVAX)
This project, led by The Canadian Public Health Association, is designed to provide ready access to the latest evidence-based products and tools via the online Canadian Vaccination Evidence Resource and Exchange Centre. The Centre primarily targets those who are responsible for the planning, development and promotion of immunization programs, and aims to increase their understanding, awareness and capacity to enhance vaccine acceptance and uptake in Canada.
Decreasing Vaccine Hesitancy: Enhancing the knowledge and skills of health care professionals
This project, led by the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS), has developed a workshop and an online education module on vaccine hesitancy. These courses will provide health care providers with a better understanding of the common causes of vaccine hesitancy and the most effective ways to counsel their patients and families to make informed decisions. Additionally, CPS has reinstated the online version of its Education Program for Immunization Competencies (EPIC), which is designed to help health care professionals provide accurate and complete information to their patients about immunization.
Examining and overcoming barriers to vaccine hesitancy in Yukon
Yukon Health and Social Services is implementing a project with the goal of understanding the factors that contribute to vaccine uptake and incomplete/non-vaccination. The data that is gathered will be used to inform evidence-based strategies aimed at improving vaccination service delivery and uptake in Yukon.
HPV Vaccination in Schools: Developing effective strategies for increasing vaccine coverage
The Institute national de santé publique du Québec, in collaboration with the ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux du Québec, will develop and evaluate different strategies designed to increase vaccination coverage rates in select elementary schools within the province. These parent-focused strategies include motivational interviewing, education, decision making tools, and reminders to submit consent forms
Immunize Nunavut: Using data to inform practice
Immunize Nunavut, led by the Department of Health in Nunavut, will improve the quality of vaccination data that will then be used to inform tailored interventions aimed at increasing vaccination coverage rates and to strengthen existing vaccination delivery programs
(COMPLETED)
Enhancing adult immunization coverage in Prince Edward Island
This project, led by the Prince Edward Island Department of Health and Wellness, has implemented a multi-faceted, province-wide initiative to increase adult vaccination rates by working with health care providers to increase their ability to identify under and unvaccinated individuals through the development and use of an Immunization Assessment Tool. As well, this project will enhance health care provider’s ability to communicate more effectively with their patients about vaccination.
(COMPLETED)
Implementation of an educational strategy to promote immunization based on motivational interviewing techniques in maternity hospitals in Québec
In collaboration with provincial partners, the Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et Services de l’Estrie – Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke implemented this project to increase infant vaccination coverage rates in Quebec. To do this, health care providers from the 13 largest maternity wards in Quebec received training in motivational interviewing techniques specific to infant vaccination. Motivational interviewing allows health care providers to better address the concerns of parents who are reluctant to vaccinate their children and to support them in their decision-making process regarding infant vaccination.
What is particularly disturbing here is that about half the programs seem focused on promoting and selling the vaccines. It comes across as propaganda the way they are worded.
However, it is about to get much, MUCH creepier than this. The World Health Organization has done extensive research on it. Parties including UNICEF, the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation all got together to discuss how to better pitch vaccines to the public.
8. Tricks To Beat “Vaccine Hesitancy”
The World Health Organization has done considerable research on the subject of “vaccine hesitancy”. This of course is the natural reaction of people to be reluctant to put needles of unknown substances into their bodies.
Improving vaccination demand and addressing hesitancy
Increasing and maintaining vaccination uptake is vital for vaccines to achieve their success. Addressing low vaccination requires an adequate understanding of the determinants of the problem, tailored evidence-based strategies to improve uptake, and monitoring and evaluation to determine the impact and sustainability of the interventions.
Hesitancy in relation to vaccination may affect motivation, causing people to reject it for themselves or their children. Hesitancy can be caused by individual, group, and contextual influences, as well as any vaccine-specific issues.
Given the potential for hesitancy to rapidly undermine vaccination coverage in specific settings, it is important that all countries take steps to understand both the extent and nature of hesitancy at a local level, on a continuing basis. Accordingly, each country should develop a strategy to increase acceptance and demand for vaccination, which should include ongoing community engagement and trust-building, active hesitancy prevention, regular national assessments of concerns, and crisis response planning
It’s fair to take from this, that the efforts to understand hesitancy do not at all seem rooted in any altruistic motivation. Rather, they seem designed to form the basis to manipulate and otherwise persuade people into taking something that could be extremely harmful to them.
Meeting participants, from left to right: Kerrie Wiley, Neetu Abad, Gilla Shapiro, Alina Lack, Wenfeng Gong, Nick Sevdalis, Julie Leask, Monica Jain, Gustavo Correa, Noel Brewer, Saad Omer, Cornelia Betsch, Charles Wiysonge, Gillian SteelFisher, Lisa Menning, Eve Dubé
In May 2019, a group of people got together to come up with ways to make mass vaccination an easier sell to the public. Read the report and decide whether this is harmless enough.
In addition to the above research, there are questionnaires that are available. Asking and probing for certain types of information will give the illusion that you are concerned with the person’s well being.
In January 2015, this paper was released, giving insight into the various reasons people are likely to avoid taking vaccines. It also provided helpful information to convincing the subject that it was still in their best interest.
There is of course more research available on the subject. But the point is that it has been extensively studied. A cynic might wonder if the WHO spends more effort researching ways to pitch vaccines to the public than they do researching to see if they are actually safe.
9. Vaccine Hesitancy Parallels Climate Scam
Although this may initially seem absurd, there is a parallel between overcoming “vaccine hesitancy” as the WHO and others call it, and selling the climate change scam to the public.
Consider the reviews done of Maxwell Boykoff here, here, and here. Boykoff, in his book Creative Climate Communications, outlined an extensive array of psychological and sociological tactics used to convince people that they were in danger from climate change.
In order words, the research was done into manipulation techniques. The same thing can be seen with vaccine hesitancy research.
10. Canada/WHO Vaccine Targets Of 2025
Now that the anxiety is out of your system, let’s look a bit into Canada’s objectives and targets for mass vaccinations.
As part of the National Immunization Strategy objectives for 2016-2021, vaccination coverage goals and vaccine preventable disease reduction targets were set based on international standards and best practices. The goals and targets are consistent with Canada’s commitment to World Health Organization (WHO) disease elimination targets and Global Vaccine Action Plan, while reflecting the Canadian context.
According to this, Canada’s goals are consistent with the commitments made to the Global Vaccine Alliance Plan, and to disease reduction targets.
Vaccination Coverage Goals by 2025
Vaccination coverage goals were developed for infants, childhood, adolescent and adult vaccines that are publically funded in all provinces and territories (PT). Progress toward the national vaccination coverage goals will be reported based on the data collected using national coverage surveys. Vaccine coverage monitoring at the national level takes into account variations in PT vaccination programs.
Infants and Children
To ensure children are protected through routine vaccination, a high vaccination coverage goal of 95% has been established for all childhood vaccines by two and seven years of age.
This level of vaccination coverage is based on the level of population protection required for measles, the most easily-spread vaccine preventable disease.
Don’t worry. Once you have been cured of your vaccine hesitancy, the Government has an extensive array of pharmaceuticals and medications that you will able to get for free. Don’t worry that many of these are being developed by people who think the world is overpopulated. Nothing to see here.
The catalyst for GVAP was the call by Bill and Melinda Gates at the 2010 World Economic Forum for the next decade to be the ‘Decade of Vaccines’.
Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, established in 2000, was making newer vaccines accessible to the poorest countries, while the Global Immunization Vision and Strategy, launched in 2006, provided a common vision and specific strategies for protecting more people against more diseases. New vaccines were being developed that held even greater promise.
PREFACE
The Global Vaccine Action Plan 2011–2020 (GVAP) was developed to help realize the vision of the Decade of Vaccines, that all individuals and communities enjoy lives free from vaccine preventable diseases. As the decade draws to a close, it is time to take stock of the progress made under GVAP and to apply the lessons learned to the global immunization strategy for the next decade. This report has been prepared for the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) by the SAGE Decade of Vaccines Working Group (Annex 1).
Development of GVAP The Decade of Vaccines Collaboration was launched in 2010 to develop a shared plan to realize this vision. The Collaboration was led by WHO, UNICEF, Gavi, the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, coordinated by the Instituto de Salud Global Barcelona, Spain, and funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. A Leadership Council, comprising executives of the lead organizations and a representative of the African Leaders Malaria Alliance, provided sponsorship and strategic guidance.
HISTORY
Ministers of health unanimously endorsed GVAP at the 2012 World Health Assembly; the monitoring and evaluation framework was endorsed a year later. In the following years, Regional Vaccine Action Plans and national multi-year plans were developed or updated to align with GVAP. African stakeholders went further to build political will for immunization, convening the Ministerial Conference on Immunization in Africa in 2016. This meeting launched the Addis Declaration on Immunization, through which heads of state and ministers of health, finance, education and social affairs as well as local leaders made ten specific commitments to promote health on the African continent through continued investment in immunization.
The global monitoring, evaluation and accountability process was the only aspect of GVAP with dedicated resources. In this effort, GVAP indicators were added to the WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Form and SAGE established the Decade of Vaccines Working Group to assess progress and draft recommendations for course corrections. Through the decade, countries reported annually, WHO and partner agencies compiled progress reports, and the SAGE independent assessment report and its recommendations were reviewed annually as a standing agenda item at the World Health Assembly
12. World Economic Forum: 2010 Gates
In 2000, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance was launched at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, with an initial pledge of $750 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Gavi brings together key influencers from the public and private sectors to save children’s lives and protect the population’s health by increasing the equitable use of vaccines in lower-income countries. To date, the Vaccine Alliance has contributed to the immunization of 760 million children, saving more than 13 million lives.
The World Economic Forum has completely embraced the vaccination agenda, and heralds it as some salvation for humanity. it many times provided a platform for Gates and his vaccine push.
13. Would You Trust This Man?
(Bill Gates and depopulation, from 2011, clip from video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc16H3uHKOA
(Bill Gates and depopulation, from 2011, entire video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WFa4bHC0Do
(Bill Gates, improved health care, overpopulation)
(Bill Gates: health and population correlation)
(Bill Gates: vaccines and Ebola virus)
Gates talks about improving the health and well being of mothers in the 3rd world by use of vaccines, and that it would lead to a lower population. However, it seems illogical that improving the health would lead to less children being born. Gates counters that parents will simply choose to have less children if they knew the ones they had would be healthier.
Gates has also spoken about the world being overpopulated, and claims it is causing environmental problems. One should be extremely concerned about taking vaccinations from someone who is interested in depopulation.
The research that the World Health Organization and its partners have done into “vaccine hesitancy” is downright creepy. If the vaccines produced are what they claim to be, it shouldn’t be a hard time pitching them for others to take.
The Canadian Government seems on board with the vaccination agenda. (See previous articles on this subject in Section #1). The Prime Minister and various Premiers openly call for mass vaccines. M-132 passed in Parliament, making it easier to fund future research. The University of Saskatchewan has long conducted research with partners that are Gates and UN funded. The Government has been lobbied at least 20 times on behalf of GAVI by Crestview Strategy, and the bureaucrats themselves seem to be okay with it.
CLICK HERE, for #0: Theresa Tam; archives; articles; lobbying. CLICK HERE, for #1: piece on Bill Gates, Pirbright, depopulation. CLICK HERE, for #2: Coronavirus research at U of Saskatchewan. CLICK HERE, for #3: Gates; WHO, ID2020; GAVI; Vaccines. CLICK HERE, for #4: Gates using proxies to push vaxx agenda. CLICK HERE, for #5: Crestview Strategy, GAVI’s lobbying firm. CLICK HERE, for #6: people GAVI/Crestview lobbied follow Gates.
Motion Text
That the Standing Committee on Health be instructed to undertake a study on ways of increasing benefits to the public resulting from federally funded health research, with the goals of lowering drugs costs and increasing access to medicines, both in Canada and globally; and that the Committee report its findings and recommendations to the House no later than one year from the time this motion is adopted.
In Canada and around the world, there is rising concern that innovative drugs produced by pharmaceutical companies are no longer affordable and are placing increasing strain on health care budgets. Policy makers have begun to examine ways that public funding for pharmaceutical research and development could address this issue. On 8 November 2017, the House of Commons adopted Private Members’ Business M-132, which requested that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health (the Committee) “undertake a study on ways of increasing benefits to the public resulting from federally funded research, with the goals of lowering drug costs and increasing access to medicines, both in Canada and globally.”
On 16 and 18 October 2018, the Committee held two meetings as part of this study and heard from a range of witnesses including health researchers, health research funding organizations, patient groups and civil society organizations. Drawing on witness testimony and written submissions, this report examines the role the federal government can play in fostering pharmaceutical research and development both in Canada and globally to ensure that pharmaceutical drugs are accessible and affordable.
Note: Recommendations can be found starting at page 20 in the 2018 report released to the House of Commons.
HOUSE OF COMMONS STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH CALLS ON THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA TO FOSTER PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BOTH IN CANADA AND GLOBALLY THROUGH OPEN SCIENCE
Ottawa, November 26, 2018 –
Bill Casey, Chair of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, presented the Committee’s twentieth report today entitled, Towards Open Science: Promoting Innovation in Pharmaceutical Research and Development and Access to Affordable Medications both in Canada and Abroad.
The Committee’s study is in response to Member of Parliament Raj Saini’s Private Members’ Motion M-132, which requested that the Committee, “undertake a study on ways of increasing benefits to the public resulting from federally funded research, with the goals of lowering drug costs and increasing access to medicines, both in Canada and globally.”
In presenting the report to the House, Chair Bill Casey highlighted that “in our testimony, we heard loud and clear that more needs to be done to strengthen research and innovation in Canada. I thank Mr. Saini for bringing forth M-132, and for his efforts in ensuring that the Health Committee can hear why Canada must continue to be a leader in this field.”
Drawing on witness testimony heard over the course of two meetings held on 16 and 18 October 2018 and on 23 written submissions, the Committee’s report examines how increased federal investment in health research, across the continuum from fundamental to clinical research, would support the development of new medicines. However, witnesses also emphasized the importance of ensuring that federal funding in pharmaceutical research and development must also result in the creation of drugs that are affordable in Canada and abroad. Witnesses suggested that this could be achieved by fostering the creation of innovative models of pharmaceutical research that prioritize open science in both the development of new drugs and the repurposing of existing drugs. Witnesses explained that the Government of Canada could lead the way by developing a framework that sets priorities for pharmaceutical research and development and promotes open science through collaboration and leveraging of funding across governments, universities, health charities and private industry.
The Committee agrees with these findings and has included in its report nine recommendations that it believes will support the transformation of pharmaceutical research and development in Canada.
Recommendation 1
That the Government of Canada create a specific funding mechanism for the development of clinical trial research and infrastructure in Canada through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
. Recommendation 2
That the Government of Canada increase its funding for clinical trial research and infrastructure in Canada to 10% of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research’s budget to be on par with jurisdictions leading in this area, such as the United Kingdom and the United States.
. Recommendation 3
That the Government of Canada explore ways to incentivize clinical trial research in Canada for pharmaceutical drugs and incentivize and support the production of those drugs in Canada at an advantaged price for Canada and provide venture capital for the proponent.
. Recommendation 4
That the Canadian Institutes of Health Research attach a Global Access Licensing requirement to recipients of its research funding that wish to commercialize their research findings.
. Recommendation 5
That the Canadian Institutes of Health Research include in its existing research and development programs support for the development of open science models of drug discovery.
. Recommendation 6
That the Canadian Institutes of Health Research develop a framework for open science that supports collaboration and the leveraging of research funding among different partners in pharmaceutical research and development, including health charities, universities, governments, and private industry.
. Recommendation 7
That Health Canada develop regulatory incentives for pharmaceutical companies that commit to open access to their research data and affordable prices for their products.
. Recommendation 8
That the Government of Canada undertake a strategic review of its health-related research funding priorities across departments and agencies to enhance coordination, including Health Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Global Affairs Canada, and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada.
. Recommendation 9
That the Government of Canada explore the feasibility of the public manufacturing of generic medicines.
In the follow-up report, the recommendations were formally adopted.
As provided by the report, these are the names and ranks of the Committee.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH
CHAIR
Bill Casey
VICE-CHAIRS
Marilyn Gladu (lobbied by GAVI)
Don Davies
MEMBERS
Ramez Ayoub
Doug Eyolfson
Raj Grewal
Ben Lobb
Ron McKinnon
John Oliver (Parliamentary Secretary — Non-Voting Member)
Sonia Sidhu
Len Webber
OTHER MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT WHO PARTICIPATED
Randy Boissonnault
Terry Duguid
Randy Hoback
Tom Kmiec
Christine Moore
Raj Saini (lobbied by GAVI)
Dave Van Kesteren
CLERK OF THE COMMITTEE
Marie-Hélène Sauvé
Why is the list of the Committee Members here? Well, once you see who some of the connections are, it will likely make the report findings a lot more suspicious.
7. Committee Members & Pharma Lobbying
The above screenshots came from information provided in the Office of the Lobbying Commissioner of Canada. These are far from exhaustive, but show a snapshot at the lobbying that is going on in Canada. Members of this Parliamentary Committee are being lobbied by various drug companies. It’s not difficult to see that this is done in order to influence them.
8. Conflict Of Interest Here
The same committee members who are recommending that Canada undertake more research for pharmaceuticals are the same ones who are being lobbied by pharmaceutical companies. It’s not difficult to piece it together.
Despite what many think, LEGAL immigration into Canada is actually a much larger threat than illegal aliens, given the true scale of the replacement that is happening. What was founded as a European (British) colony is becoming unrecognizable due to forced demographic changes. There are also social, economic, environmental and voting changes to consider. See this Canadian series, and the UN programs for more detail. Politicians, the media, and so-called “experts” have no interest in coming clean on this.
CLICK HERE, for UN Genocide Prevention/Punishment Convention. CLICK HERE, for Barcelona Declaration & Kalergi Plan. CLICK HERE, for UN Kalergi Plan (population replacement). CLICK HERE, for UN replacement efforts since 1974. CLICK HERE, for tracing steps of UN replacement agenda.
Note: If there are errors in calculating the totals, please speak up. Information is of no use to the public if it isn’t accurate.
2. Important Link
CLICK HERE, for Michelle Rempel’s take on immigration. CLICK HERE, for sources of demographic replacement. CLICK HERE, for Canada doesn’t track people exiting. CLICK HERE, for World Bank & global remittances. CLICK HERE, for remittances and brain drain. CLICK HERE, for CANZUK, border erasure. CLICK HERE, for economic immigration during high unemployment. CLICK HERE, for UN Convention on Genocide.
84,229 TFW permits issued
+ 255,034 International Mobility + 356,876 Student Visas
696,139 temporary migrants admitted in 2018
Also noted: there were 721,000+ international students (total) in Canada.
Over the past decade, the number of post-graduation work permit holders in Canada has increased from 95,455 in 2014 to 186,055 in 2018.
So, that is the “temporary migration”, nearly 700,000 people came into Canada on various student/temp worker visas. That’s a starting point. Now, how many people are coming through other streams? Disclaimer: Am not entirely sure on this, but will try to piece the totals together. It seems fairly convoluted.
Canada resettled 28,076 refugees (page 21 of the report). This is on top of the 45,758 refugees who became permanent residents,
321,035 PR handed out, of those:
49,504 refugees, protected people
85,179 family reunification
186,352 economic pathways
(From page 15 is states)
(a) 95,283 people who held a work permit became PR
(b) 53,805 who held a student visa became PR
So, then are we to assume that
321,035 PR handed out
-95,283 who held a work permit -53,805 who held a student visa
171,947 new people brought in??
Or were some more people who had visas and then left? In fairness, a lot are likely counted as Provincial Nominees. Assuming (although it does not state explicitly) that those who held work or student visas previously were already in the country, it would mean that another 171,947 people entered and became permanent residents.
84,229 Temporary Foreign Workers
+ 255,034 International Mobility Program
+ 356,876 Student Visas
+ 171,947 (at least) economic/family/refugee
+ 28,076 (resettled) refugees + 40,000 (estimated) illegals
936,163 or more
Note: if there is an error in how this has been added up, please point it out. Accuracy is important.
But beyond the raw number of people entering Canada with potential to stay, there are many more things to factor in, and social costs to weigh.
4. Continued Population Replacement
That is from page 36 of the 2019 Annual Report to Parliament on Immigration in Canada. The overwhelming majority of people entering (as usual) are from the 3rd world, and it keeps transforming Canada demographically. No, it is by no means everyone coming in, but just a snapshot of the group being granted permanent residence.
What’s frustrating is that politicians and the media refer to the PR totals, as if that was anywhere near representative of who was entering Canada. Since we don’t actually track who is leaving the country, we really have no idea how many people actually remain.
Now it that all the people coming? Do you really think that the hordes of students and “temporary” workers are going to leave afterwards?
Looking back in recent years:
(Page 18 of the 2004 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 24 of the 2005 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 18, 19 of the 2006 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 19, 20 of the 2007 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 21, 22 of the 2008 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 16 of the 2009 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 14 of the 2010 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 18 of the 2011 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 15 of the 2012 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 19 of the 2013 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 16 of the 2014 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 16 of the 2015 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 10 of the 2016 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 14 of the 2017 Annual Report to Parliament)
(Page 28 of the 2018 Annual Report to Parliament)
Did you think that importing large numbers of people from:
(a) China
(b) India
(c) Philippines
(d) Pakistan
(e) Iran
might be the reason we have such large enclaves of these groups? Think there may be some connection between them? This is not a single year, but a consistent pattern.
30-40% of new Permanent Residents are from just 3 countries (India, China, Philippines). Also, a lot are brought in from Muslim areas. Consider the UN Convention on preventing and punishing genocide.
Article I
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Under this declaration, forcibly pushing multiculturalism and population replacement should be considered genocide. And against another group, they would be. As for previous (and predicted) census data, on the European population in Canada:
1971: 96% European
2016: 72% European
2036: 50% European (projected)
2100: <20% European (projected)
In less than 150 years, Canada will have gone from 96% European to less than 20%. These are government predictions. This is white genocide.
5. Millions Of Visitors Came In 2018
To be totally fair, the overwhelming majority of visitors to Canada (using Temporary Residence Visas and Electronic Travel Authorizations) likely caused no trouble in Canada and left when they were supposed to. Still 6 million people is an awful lot to have entered Canada in 2018.
6. More “Inadmissibles” Let Into Canada
Broadly speaking, there are two provisions within IRPA, the Immigrant and Refugee Protection Act, that allow people who were previously deemed inadmissible to Canada to be given Temporary Resident Permits anyway. Here are the totals from the Annual Reports to Parliament on Immigration. Note: the first one listed only started in 2010.
YEAR
TRP Issued
2010
17
2011
53
2012
53
2013
280
2014
385
2015
1,063
2016
596
2017
555
2018
669
From 2010 to 2018, a total of 3671 people who were otherwise inadmissible to Canada were allowed in anyway under Rule 25.2(1) of IRPA. This is the category that Global News previously reported on. As for the other one, under Rule 24(1) of IRPA, Global News leaves that out:
Year
Permits
Cumulative
2002
12,630
12,630
2003
12,069
24,699
2004
13,598
38,297
2005
13,970
52,267
2006
13,412
65,679
2007
13,244
78,923
2008
12,821
91,744
2009
15,640
107,384
2010
12,452
119,836
2011
11,526
131,362
2012
13,564
144,926
2013
13,115
158,041
2014
10,624
168,665
2015
10,333
178,998
2016
10,568
189,566
2017
9,221
198,787
2018
7,132
205,919
From 2002 to 2018 (inclusive), a total of 205,919 people previously deemed inadmissible to Canada were given Temporary Resident Permits anyway. This has almost certainly been going on for a lot longer, but is as far back as the reports go. Now let’s consider the reasons these people are initially refused entry.
SEC = Security (espionage, subversion, terrorism)
HRV = Human or International Rights Violations
CRIM = Criminal
S.CRIM = Serious Criminal
NC = Non Compliance
MR = Misrepresentation
YEAR
Total
SEC
HRV
Crim
S.Crim
NC
MR
2002
12,630
?
?
?
?
?
?
2003
12,069
17
25
5,530
869
4,855
39
2004
13,598
12
12
7,096
953
4,981
20
2005
13,970
27
15
7,917
981
4,635
21
2006
13,412
29
20
7,421
982
4,387
18
2007
13,244
25
8
7,539
977
4,109
14
2008
12,821
73
18
7,108
898
4,170
17
2009
15,640
32
23
6,619
880
7,512
10
2010
12,452
86
24
6,451
907
4,423
36
2011
11,526
37
14
6,227
899
3,932
11
2012
13,564
20
15
7,014
888
5,206
18
2013
13,115
17
10
6,816
843
5,135
8
2014
10,624
12
2
5,807
716
3,895
14
2015
10,333
3
3
5,305
578
4,315
28
2016
10,568
8
4
4,509
534
2,788
20
2017
9,221
10
5
5,035
591
3,412
121
2018
7,132
5
3
4,132
559
2,299
131
The original work for this section was done back in December 2019, but the findings as just as valid today.
7. Students & Temporary Workers
Canada’s International Student Program has also seen great demand in recent years . Canada’s standing as a destination of choice for international students has improved in the past few years, ranking in the top 4 international study destinations in 2018, up from seventh place in 2015. In 2018, there were more than 721,000 international students with valid study permits in Canada at all levels of study. Of this total, over 356,000 study permits were issued to international students in 2018, up 13% from 2017 . The increases in the number of post-secondary international students to Canada since 2008 represents relatively rapid growth as compared with other OECD countries
Moreover, 53,805 individuals who ever held a study permit in Canada were admitted as permanent residents, a 20% increase from 2017. Of these, 10,949 held their study permit in 2018, with the majority entering as economic immigrants.
The above passages are from page 7 of the 2019 report. Now, for a look at it since 2003:
Year
Stu
TFWP
IMP
Total
2003
61,293
82,151
–
143,444
2004
56,536
90,668
–
147,204
2005
57,476
99,146
–
156,622
2006
61,703
112,658
–
174,361
2007
64,636
165,198
–
229,834
2008
79,509
192,519
–
272,028
2009
85,140
178,478
–
263,618
2010
96,157
182,276
–
278,433
2011
98,383
190,842
–
289,225
2012
104,810
213,573
–
318,383
2013
111,865
221,310
–
333,175
2014
127,698
95,086
197,924
420,078
2015
219,143
73,016
175,967
468,126
2016
265,111
78,402
207,829
551,342
2017
317,328
78,788
224,033
620,149
2018
356,876
84,229
255,034
696,139
For some context: Canada went from admitting 60,000 student visas in 2003 to almost 360,000 in 2018. That is nearly 6 times as large over a 15 year span. Additionally, we went from about 80,000 temporary work visas in 2003 to over 320,000 (TFWP and IMP combined) in 2018.
8. Costs Of Illegal Aliens Via Roxham
In 2018, Canada received over 55,000 in-Canada asylum claims, the highest annual number received on record . Of these, approximately 35% were made by asylum claimants who crossed the Canada-U.S. border between designated ports of entry. To respond to these pressures, Budget 2018 provided $173.2 million over 2 years, starting in 2018–2019, to support security operations at the border and to increase decision-making capacity at the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. In addition, a deputy minister-level Asylum System Management Board was established in the spring of 2018 to improve coordination between organizations responsible for the asylum system.
Recognizing that provinces have faced pressures associated with the influx of irregular migrants, on June 1, 2018, the Government of Canada pledged an initial $50 million to assist the provinces that have borne the majority of costs associated with the increase in asylum claimants. This was followed by the establishment of the Interim Housing Assistance Program in early 2019, to support provinces and, if necessary, municipalities that incurred extraordinary interim housing costs in 2017 through 2019. As of September 2019, the government has provided provinces and municipalities with over $370 million to address pressures resulting from the increase in asylum claims. Maintaining border integrity, ensuring public safety and security, and treating asylum claimants with dignity and compassion continue to be key guiding principles for the Government of Canada.
Page 23 of the report gives some information about the costs that illegal aliens (fake refugees) are incurring on Canadians. This of course is in addition to the loss of sovereignty, danger to society, and watering down of our culture and heritage.
9. Workers Being Replaced By Foreigners
In 2018, the top 5 invited occupations were: software engineers and designers, information systems analysts and consultants, computer programmers and interactive media developers, financial auditors and accountants, and administrative assistants, Also in 2018, Canada admitted more than 92,000 new permanent residents through the Express Entry system, an increase of 41% over 2017
That is from page 8 of the report. Considering how man STEM graduates struggle to find work in their field, flooding the country with more of these workers makes it even harder. There should be other considerations besides simply the bottom line.
10. Wages Being Depressed
If poverty is increasing, and wages are going down, I don’t know why we need millions of people to be coming into this country as guest workers who’ll work for lower wages than American workers, and drive wages down even lower than they already are.
This video is from 2007. Bernie Sanders told Lou Dobbs that mass economic immigration leads to wages being driven down. There is nothing humanitarian about this, but rather about importing cheap foreign labour. However, since running for President, he has completely reversed himself.
This happens in Canada and elsewhere as well. Wages are a large part related to supply and demand. If you jack up the supply of something, its relative value drops. Programs like the Temporary Foreign Worker Program and the International Mobility Program flood Canada with cheap labour. The same is true with letting international students work while in school. It further adds to the supply.
Not only are wages stagnant or depressed, but the surplus labour means that Canadian citizens will have a harder time finding work. However, business interests will love it.
Also, to address the elephant in the room, these aren’t necessarily “temporary” migrants, as an awful lot of them will stay in Canada.
Even CTV News, was willing to address the issue, at least in 2007.
11. Remittances Sent Abroad
(Statistics Canada actually estimates this stuff)
(Who says the Government isn’t good for anything?)
Year
Total ($B)
To 1st World
To 3rd World
Diff.
2013
$581B
$177B
$404B
$227B
2014
$592B
$162B
$430B
$268B
2015
$582B
$142B
$440B
$298B
2016
$573B
$144B
$429B
$285B
2017
$613B
$147B
$466B
$319B
2018
$689B
$161B
$528B
$367B
Sources For The Chart CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2013. CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2015. CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2016. CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2017. CLICK HERE, for World Bank, remittances in 2018.
As for Canada specifically, there is this finder.com/ca posting which estimates that $30 billion was sent out of Canada in 2017 as remittances. We are always told that immigration strengthens the economy. Yet when tens of billions are shipped abroad annually, it blows a hole in that theory.
12. Economic Value Over Social Cohesion
Page 5 of the report goes on about how diversity makes the country stronger, and that economic value is what the Canadian Immigration system should focus on.
Canada has long benefited from immigration and continues to welcome newcomers for economic, social and humanitarian reasons. While immigration to Canada benefits the country by filling in gaps in the labour market and boosting many sectors of the economy, our immigration system also fosters the reunification of families and provides protection to those at risk, including through the resettlement of refugees from outside Canada. In addition, our immigration system helps maintain the size of the working age population at a time when Canada’s overall population is aging and the need for skilled talent is increasing. Immigration works to counter these challenges, while enriching the social fabric of Canada.
Forget having bigger families. The way to maintain your working population is to import a replacement population, mainly from the 3rd world. What can possibly go wrong?
(From page 12 of the report, it continues….)
The global environment is evolving more rapidly than ever, introducing potentially significant changes to the labour market, from the way people work to the types of skills in demand and the integration of new technologies . Canada’s future economic success will depend, in part, on an immigration system that helps ensure that people with the right skills are in the right place, at the right time, to meet evolving labour market needs. Moreover, for immigration to be a continuing success, Canada’s approach will have to address factors such as labour market requirements, the impacts of automation, as well as region- and sector-specific needs. Given this, Canada is working to ensure that an evidence-based understanding of evolving labour market needs informs its approach to immigration.
Immigration has strengthened, and will continue to strengthen Canada as it helps to keep our country globally competitive by promoting innovation and economic growth through its support of diverse and inclusive communities.
What about an economic system that maintains the cultural and demographic makeup up the nation? How is a commitment to diversity a good thing when it leads to the fracturing of society? All that these people care about is money, and virtue signalling.
13. Canada Still Not Tracking Exits By Air
What really helps skew the data is the fact that Canada still does not have an entry/exit tracking system in place. We do keep exit records for people leaving for the U.S. but not flights to other countries. Consequently, we have no idea how many people illegally overstay their allotted time in Canada.
Despite a pledge in 2016, Trudeau still hasn’t fully implemented the system 4 years later. He’s clearly not serious about border security. But to be fair, successive Conservative Governments haven’t seen fit to do it either.
14. Conservative Inc. Supports Status Quo
Not entirely sure why Rempel would lie about something so easy to factcheck. Of course the TFWP is a potential pathway to permanent residence. Perhaps she knows few people will call her out on it.
Consider this for a moment: Michelle Rempel nearly became Immigration Minister. She supports putting Canadians to work in agriculture ONLY if it’s not possible to import a foreign work force. Nice to see a conservative finally being honest about this though.
It’s nice (in some sense) to see Rempel come out and admit that these “temporary” workers are in fact driving wages down, but she seems to support the idea.
Yes, temporary workers in Canada (and other Western nations) will often send money back home? But it’s no big deal, right? It won’t have any harmful effect? Perhaps not.
Article 139 of the CPC Policy Declaration is to convert temporary workers to permanent residents where possible. Rempel, as Immigration “Shadow Minister” or “Critic” presumably would have known that.
Beyond supporting mass migration, “Conservative Inc.” also supports partially erasing the Canadian border. CANZUK, as shown here, is the official CPC platform, in article 152.
15. Moratorium Needs To Be Seriously Discussed
Given all of the information available, a very serious public discussion needs to be had on putting a moratorium on immigration in Canada. This means we should talk about shutting it down completely, at least for a while.
In 2018, nearly 700,000 people came to Canada (or 696,132 to be exact), under student visas, and temporary work visas. While many will leave, an awful lot won’t. Yet these groups aren’t part of the discussion. When other categories are factored in, it is at least 900,000 people, and likely more.
Immigration in Canada is talked about in terms of the number of permanent residencies at a time, not how many people are actually entering. It distorts and obfuscates the real numbers. It’s also likely why there are large backlogs in applications.
Diversity is praised, and any expressed want for demographic and cultural stability is seen as bigotry. But there is nothing wrong with wanting to preserve our society as it is. It needs to be said: ethnicity, culture, heritage, language, religion and customs are what bond people. It is a common IDENTITY unites us, not abstract values and ideas.
Aside from virtue signalling, the focus in on the financial benefits employers and corporations can get. Flooding Canada with a surplus of labour drives down wages and forces extra competition on Canadian youth and graduates. Of course, these are the same people who support globalized trade (offshoring) of industries. This double tap results in INCREASED DEMAND for jobs and work, with a DECREASED SUPPLY. This leads to stagnant, and even declining wages.
Despite all the praise heaped for immigration growing the economy, remittances is a topic that rarely gets discussed. Tens of billions of dollars is sent abroad annually, typically to family members. How does that make us wealthier?
Since an entry/exit system is not fully implemented, we really have no way of knowing how many people are overstaying their welcome and remain here illegally.
Conservative Inc. — globalists who pretend to care about these topics — differ little than liberals. Those differences are mostly just rhetorical and meant for grandstanding.
