U.N. Death Cult: 73 Million Abortions Annually Worldwide

The World Health Organization openly posts and discusses some pretty disturbing and messed up data on abortion worldwide. (See archive).

This expands on a recent Canuck Law article, which estimates that there have been over 4.2 million abortions just in Canada since 1970. This averages out to approximately 20% of pregnancies being willfully terminated. Few are aware of just how big this problem is.

Here are some claims W.H.O. promotes:

  • Abortion is a common health intervention. It is safe when carried out using a method recommended by WHO, appropriate to the pregnancy duration and by someone with the necessary skills.
  • Six out of 10 of all unintended pregnancies end in an induced abortion.
  • Around 45% of all abortions are unsafe, of which 97% take place in developing countries.
  • Unsafe abortion is a leading – but preventable – cause of maternal deaths and morbidities. It can lead to physical and mental health complications and social and financial burdens for women, communities and health systems.
  • Lack of access to safe, timely, affordable and respectful abortion care is a critical public health and human rights issue.

And this one is a doozy:

Around 73 million induced abortions take place worldwide each year. Six out of 10 (61%) of all unintended pregnancies, and 3 out of 10 (29%) of all pregnancies, end in induced abortion

This claim is based on work from Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, Moller A-B, Tunçalp Ö, Beavin C et al, which covered estimates from the years 1990 through 2019. They used a “Bayesian framework”, meaning dta on pregnancy intentions and abortion were compiled from country-based surveys, official statistics, and published studies found through a literature search. So, it’s not just a straight compilation, but estimates as well.

Of course, if this figure of 73 million, per year, is even remotely accurate, it would be somewhere between 2 and 5 billion children have been aborted since the 1970s, when the movement really took off.

Restrictive abortion regulation can cause distress and stigma, and risk constituting a violation of human rights of women and girls, including the right to privacy and the right to non-discrimination and equality, while also imposing financial burdens on women and girls. Regulations that force women to travel to attain legal care, or require mandatory counselling or waiting periods, lead to loss of income and other financial costs, and can make abortion inaccessible to women with low resources.

Estimates from 2006 show that complications of unsafe abortions cost health systems in developing countries US$ 553 million per year for post-abortion treatments. In addition, households experienced US$ 922 million in loss of income due to long-term disability related to unsafe abortion. Countries and health systems could make substantial monetary savings by providing greater access to modern contraception and quality induced abortion.

A set of scoping reviews from 2021 indicate that abortion regulations – by being linked to fertility – affect women’s education, participation on the labour market and positive contribution to GDP growth. The legal status of abortion can also affect children’s educational outcomes, and their earnings on the labour market later in life. For example, legalization of abortion – by reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies and thus increasing the likelihood that children are born wanted – can be linked to greater parental investments in children, including in girls’ schooling.

Does W.H.O. condemn the hundreds of millions — if not billions — of lives that are lost through this? Not exactly. The rights of the unborn never seem to factor into the equation.

W.H.O. attempts to make several economic arguments as to why abortion should be legal and as accessible as possible. Of course, they don’t seem to bother with addressing the long term physical and psychological impacts of women who do abort their children.

The World Health Organization also has its own division on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research (SRH). (See archive). It’s funded both by various governments and private companies, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (See archive). They always seem to be around whenever there are population reduction programs involved.

5.6 Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the Programme of Action of the International Conference on population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences

Enshrining abortion is also written right into Agenda 2030, which was signed by “Conservative” Stephen Harper in 2015. (See archive). It’s item #5.6 on the Treaty.

One might think it strange that population control groups are interested in keeping abortion legal and readily available. Then again, once one realizes the scale of this mass infanticide, things start to make a whole lot more sense.

Furthermore, the W.H.O. and U.N. link to the U.N. Population Fund, their 2014 Programme of Action, and to the Beijing Declaration And Platform For Action. (See archive). In a sick twist, abortion is promoted as women’s rights, and pregnancy an often unwanted evil.

Of course, 50% or so of the babies who are killed would have grown up to become women. This is something that many women’s rights groups don’t get, or at least pretend they don’t.

It’s interesting that groups like the United Nations claim to be against child exploitation and human trafficking. That said, they support encourage practices that ensure the deaths of countless unborn, while their remains can be sold off for a variety of purposes.

It’s even more disturbing that the U.N. keeps detailed and up-to-date records of abortion regulations across countries. Guess it’s one way of tracking where the most victims are likely to come from.

Has abortion been stopped, or slowed over the last 2 1/2 years during this so-called pandemic? Not at all. In fact, it’s one of the few things that were still available in Canada the entire time. Sure, weddings, churches, and funerals were “non-essential”. However, abortion, weed and liquor were still accessible.

SOURCE MATERIAL
(1) https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/abortion
(2) https://canucklaw.ca/eugenics-in-canada-20-of-babies-aborted-in-pro-choice-movement/
(3) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32710833/
(4) https://www.who.int/teams/sexual-and-reproductive-health-and-research-(srh)/human-reproduction-programme
(5) https://archive.ph/uyd8J
(6) https://www.who.int/teams/sexual-and-reproductive-health-and-research-(srh)/human-reproduction-programme/donors
(7) https://archive.ph/7tb5Q
(8) https://www.un.org/ohrlls/sites/www.un.org.ohrlls/files/2030_agenda_for_sustainable_development_web.pdf
(9) 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development web
(10) https://www.unfpa.org/publications/international-conference-population-and-development-programme-action
(11) https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/CSW/PFA_E_Final_WEB.pdf
(12) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/UN-Beijing-Declaration-And-Platform-For-Action.pdf
(13) https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/related-health-issues
(14) https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331561/WHO-2019-nCoV-essential_health_services-2020.1-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
(15) WHO-2019-nCoV Essential Health Services 2020 March 2020
(16) WHO-2019-nCoV-essential_health_services June 2020
(17) https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/policy/AbortionPoliciesReproductiveHealth.pdf

Millions Got Rental Subsidy, CERS, Imposed Masks & Vaccine Passports

This article focuses on CERS, the Canada Emergency Rental Subsidy. Unlike the wage program, it doesn’t appear that there is a database to just search names. That said, we can still get some information from the statistics that are compiled.

To start with the obvious: some 2 million applications have been approved. Considering that Canada is (supposedly) a country of 38 or 39 million people, that would suggest that a majority of businesses here got something.

From the data presented, it appears that the median (50% above, 50% below) amount given would be a little over $1,500. Seems to be pretty cheap to sell out for.

INDUSTRY APPROVALS
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 860 $1,393,000 5,710
Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction 180 $452,000 540
Utilities
Construction 2,670 $2,410,000 3,230
Manufacturing 3,470 $4,781,000 4,450
Wholesale Trade 2,530 $2,815,000 3,780
Retail Trade 7,780 $7,020,000 11,680
Transportation & Warehousing 3,210 $3,681,000 3,930
Information & Cultural Industries 800 $1,181,000 1,640
Finance & Insurance 700 $904,000 1,510
Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 1,960 $2,510,000 2,750
Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 5,030 $4,305,000 6,190
Management of Companies & Enterprises 140 $264,000 310
Administrative Support, Waste Management & Remediation Services 2,880 $3,004,000 3,740
Education Services 2,150 $2,419,000 2,600
Health Care & Social Assistance 3,810 $2,424,000 4,790
Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 2,620 $3,874,000 3,370
Accommodation & Food Services 13,690 $17,368,000 16,200
Other Services, except Public Administration 9,530 $6,184,000 11,460
Public Administration
Not Assigned 4,370 $4,643,000 4,910
Total – Period 14 68,400 $71,645,000 92,800
Total since launch 2,001,670 $7,557,399,000

Wonder why so many companies are willing to go along with vaccine passports and mask mandates? It’s reasonable to assume that the handouts, which include CERS, played a large role in that. This is how the Government is able to keep its hands — somewhat — clean. If they don’t impose mandates, but simply subsidize businesses to do it, then it’s viewed as private enterprise.

This continues the list of institutions that are getting funded to shill the “pandemic” narrative. These include: restaurants and hotels, political parties, law firms, more law firms, churches, trucking associations, chambers of commerce, financial institutions, the publishing industry, and gyms, just to name a few of them.

Remember: things often don’t make sense until you see the entire picture. This site tries to show you as much of it as possible, and money seems to always be the driving factor.

(1) https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/serv-info/tax/business/topics/cers/statistics/cers_tbl2.pdf
(2) Canada Emergency Rental Subsidy
(3) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/wage-rent-subsidies/emergency-rent-subsidy/cers-statistics.html
(4) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(5) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch?request_locale=en
(6) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(7) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch

(A.1) Hotel, Restaurant Groups Getting Wage/Rental Subsidies
(A.2) Liberals, Conservatives, NDP All Getting Bailout Money
(A.3) Lawyers, Bar Associations Receiving CEWS Money
(A.4) Conflicting Out? Lawyers Getting More Than Just CEWS
(A.5) Churches Are Charities, Getting CEWS, Subsidies & Promoting Vaccines
(A.6) Trucking Alliance Grants Raising many Eyebrows
(A.7) Chambers Of Commerce Subsidized By Canadians, Want Open Borders
(A.8) Banks, Credit Unions, Media Outlets All Getting CEWS
(A.9) Publishing Industry Subsidized By Taxpayer Money
(A.10) Gyms, Fitness Centres Getting CEWS As They Mandate Masks, Vaxx Passports

(B.1) Unifor, Media, In Bed With Gov’t, $595M
(B.2) Government Subsidizes Media To Ensure Positive Coverage
(B.3) Postmedia Subsidies/Connections, Lack Of Real Journalism
(B.4) Latest “Pandemic Bucks” Grants In 2021, Lorrie Goldstein
(B.5) Nordstar; Torstar; Metroland Media; Subsidies & Monopoly
(B.6) Aberdeen Publishing Takes Handouts, Ignores Real Issues
(B.7) More Periodicals Taking Grants, Parroting Gov’t Narrative
(B.8) Tri-City News, LMP Pulls Bonnie Henry Article; Pandemic Bucks
(B.9) Black Press Group; Media Outlet Doxing Of Convoy Donors
(B.10) Subsidized Fact-Check Outlets Run By Political Operatives
(B.11) Digital Citizen Contribution Program: Funds To Combat “Misinformation”
(B.12) Counter Intelligence “Disinformation Prevention” Groups Are Charities
(B.13) CIVIX, More Grants To Combat “Disinformation” In 2021, Domestic, Foreign
(B.14) PHAC Supporting #ScienceUpFirst Counter Intel Effort
(B.15) Rockefeller Spends $13.5 To Combat Misinformation
(B.16) Media, Banks, CU, Getting CDA Emergency Wage Subsidies (CEWS)
(B.17) John Tory’s Sister Board Member At Bell; CEWS; Subsidies

(C.1) Media, Facebook, Google, Tech Collusion To Create “Trust” Networks
(C.2) CommonTrust, Commons Project, WEF, Rockefeller, Health Passes
(C.3) C2PA; Project Origin; Content Authenticity Initiative; CBC-BBC-Microsoft
(C.4) Public Media Alliance, Global Task Force, Brussels Declaration
(C.5) Institute For Strategic Dialogue: Govt/NGO Funded Counter-Intelligence
(C.6) Institute For Strategic Dialogue: Open Source Intelligence Gathering

IMM #10(C): Review Of 2021 Annual Immigration Report To Parliament

Despite there supposedly being a global pandemic in 2020, the population replacement continues in Canada. However, it had to be slowed down (this year) to at least make things plausible. The mask is a nice touch: we need a constant reminder about this health crisis, otherwise we’d forget.

1. Mass LEGAL Immigration In Canada

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

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

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

2. Annual Immigration Reports To Parliament

2004.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2005.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2006.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2007.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2008.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2009.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2010.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2011.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2012.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2013.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2014.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2015.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2016.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2017.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2018.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2019.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2020.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2021.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament

The information in this article, and similar ones, comes directly from information provided by the Government of Canada in their annual reports. These numbers, while likely not truly accurate, are at least a good starting point.

3. Immigration Largely Controlled By Provinces

Concurrent Powers of Legislation respecting Agriculture, etc.
.
95 In each Province the Legislature may make Laws in relation to Agriculture in the Province, and to Immigration into the Province; and it is hereby declared that the Parliament of Canada may from Time to Time make Laws in relation to Agriculture in all or any of the Provinces, and to Immigration into all or any of the Provinces; and any Law of the Legislature of a Province relative to Agriculture or to Immigration shall have effect in and for the Province as long and as far only as it is not repugnant to any Act of the Parliament of Canada.

Contrary to popular belief, immigration is largely set by the Provinces. This is laid out in Section 95 of the Constitution. While Ottawa may impose laws from time to time, the understanding seems to be that the Premiers will be mostly the decision makers. While it’s understandable to get angry at Trudeau, he’s far from the only deserving target.

Additionally, there are talks underway to launch a Municipal Nominee Program, which will allow cities to directly bring people in, and to sponsor their bids to become permanent residents. It’s unclear at this point how large it will ultimately be.

4. Key Highlights From The Year 2020

AS stated before, it’s not entirely clear how many people are staying after some kind of temporary visa, v.s. how many leave. We also don’t have hard data on the “inadmissibles” who don’t leave, and on the visitors who overstay. Consequently, take this as a rough estimate:

184,606 new permanent residents
-51,101 temps transitioning to PR
=133,505 new permanent residents brought into Canada

Temporaries Brought Into Canada
256,740 (Student Visas Issued)
+84,609 (Temporary Foreign Worker Program)
+242,130 (International Mobility Program)
= 583,452 (in the temporary classes)

2,044 “inadmissibles” allowed under Rule 24(1) of IRPA
115 “inadmissibles” allowed under Rule 25.2(1) of IRPA

648,789 eTAs (electronic travel authorizations)
257,330 TRV (temporary resident visas)

How many people remained in Canada? Who knows?

The Government brags about expediting work permits for “essential workers”, even as Canada experienced record high unemployment. They even created a program for “refugees” to get accelerated permanent residence if they work in health care settings. This comes at a time when Canadian workers are being let go for refusing the experimental shots.

Foreign students (under a rule change) became exempt from the 20 hour/week work limit that their visas typically imposed. Supposedly, this was to enable them to provide essential services. Again, this seems screwed up given how many Canadians were forced out of work.

Foreign students also received emergency benefits designed for Canadians, although the full extent of this is not yet published.

In January 2020, the G.T.A./IIRC started their program to give out permanent residencies to 500 people — and their families — who had overstayed their initial visas. This could be interpreted as an amnesty-for-illegals program, and we’ll have to see how much it expands.

IIRC also extended the Interim Federal Health Program, or IFHP, which is a plan that also covers so-called asylum claimants. This applies also to people who’ve illegally entered from the United States. Some 14% of claimants in 2020 had entered the country illegally, primarily via Roxham Road.

There’s also an initiative underway to bring in large numbers of people from Hong Kong, who claim to be fleeing persecution. Interesting, as Canada doesn’t seem to be run much better these days.

The Rainbow Refugee Assistance Program is supposed to grow from 15 to 50. This is to resettle people alleging they are persecuted because of their questionable behaviours.

Canada also will allow people (women primarily) fleeing domestic violence to get a temporary permit, with a the possibility of becoming a permanent resident. There isn’t any information given about whether the abuser will be deported.

There is, of course, the usual GBA+ nonsense in the report.

5. Continued Population Replacement

(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)

(Page 36 of the 2019 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 33 of the 2020 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 36 of the 2021 Annual Report to Parliament)

Ever get the sense that people are European descent are being replaced? It’s no coincidence. The plan for decades has been to bring in large numbers of people from the 3rd World (mostly Asia and Africa), to remake society.

As usual, the top 3 are: (a) India; (b) China; and (c) The Philippines. No surprise that the enclaves in Canada are growing. More data from the recent census will be released later this year, and the results shouldn’t be a shock to anyone.

6. Temporary Visitors To Canada

TRV = Temporary Resident Visa
eTA = Electronic Travel Authorization

YEAR TRV Issued eTA Issued Totals
2016 1,347,898 2,605,077 3,952,975
2017 1,617,222 4,109,918 5,570,197
2018 1,898,324 4,125,909 6,024,233
2019 1,696,871 4,077,471 5,774,342
2020 257,330 648,789 906,119

Travelers entering Canada dropped by 85% in 2020, compared to 2019, according to the Government’s data. Now, if we could just do that to visa holders, and make it permanent.

7. 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.

Those allowed in under Rule 25.1(2) of IRPA

YEAR TRP Issued Cumulative
2010 17 17
2011 53 70
2012 53 123
2013 280 403
2014 385 788
2015 1,063 1,851
2016 596 2,447
2017 555 3002
2018 669 3,671
2019 527 4,198
2020 115 4,313

From 2010 to 2020, a total of 4,313 people who were otherwise inadmissible to Canada were allowed in anyway under Rule 25.1(2) 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
2019 6,080 211,999
2020 2,044 214,043

From 2002 to 2020 (inclusive), a total of 214,043 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
2019 6,080 2 0 3,202 546 2,139 175
2020 2,044 2 1 666 131 1,000 37

In 2020, only 2,044 people barred were allowed in under Rule 24(1) of IRPA, which is the lowest it’s been since this legislation was enacted. Nonetheless, ZERO of these people should be coming in.

Interestingly, even though the Government has wide discretion to let people into the country under 24(1) and 25.1(2) of IRPA, it chose not to use its discretion to prohibit anyone from entering.

Even if people are excluded from Canada — for a variety of valid reasons — often they will still be given temporary entrance into Canada. Will they ever leave? Who knows?

8. Students & Temporary Workers

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

2019 402,427 98,310 306,797 807,534

2020 256,740 84,609 242,130 583,452

Stu = Student Visa
TFWP = Temporary Foreign Worker Program
IMP = International Mobility Program

Even during a “global pandemic” there were still 583,452 international student and temporary worker visas issued. This does represent a drop of about 28% from the 807,534 that came in 2019. Still, this is a staggering large number.

There are, of course, a number of pathways to remain in Canada longer and/or transition in permanent residence. Let’s not pretend that they’re all leaving afterwards. In fact, recent changes have allowed students to remain in their home countries while collecting time towards a PR designation here.

9. Illegals Entering Via U.S./Canada Border

Although the report focused primarily on LEGAL immigration into Canada, the illegal brand is still worth talking about, since so few actually do. The United Nations gives detailed instructions and guidance on how to go about circumventing the border. The result, quite predictably, is that people keep trying to cross over.

YEAR: 2019
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA British Columbia OTHERS TOTAL
January 871 1 16 1 888
February 800 1 6 2 808
March 967 13 22 0 1,002
April 1,206 15 25 0 1,246
May 1,149 27 20 0 1,196
June 1,536 26 5 0 1,567
July 1,835 23 15 1 1,874
August 1,712 26 22 2 1,762
September 1,706 19 17 0 1,737
October 1,595 18 8 1 1,622
November 1,118 9 21 0 1,148
December 1,646 2 5 2 1,653
TOTAL 16,136 180 182 9 16,503
YEAR: 2020
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA British Columbia OTHERS TOTAL
January 1,086 7 7 0 1,100
February 976 2 2 0 980
March 930 7 18 0 955
April 1 0 5 0 6
May 17 0 4 0 21
June 28 1 3 1 33
July 29 2 17 0 48
August 15 3 0 0 18
September 30 4 7 0 41
October 27 0 4 0 31
November 24 0 8 0 32
December 26 2 8 0 36
TOTAL 3,189 28 84 1 3,302
YEAR: 2021
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA British Columbia OTHERS TOTAL
January 28 1 10 0 39
February 39 0 1 0 40
March 29 5 2 0 36
April 29 2 2 0 33
May 12 3 13 0 28
June 11 0 6 0 17
July 28 5 6 0 39
August 63 2 11 0 76
September 150 0 19 0 169
October 96 0 17 0 113
November 832 1 12 0 845
December 2,778 0 33 0 2,811
TOTAL 4,095 19 132 0 4,246

Although not listed in the Annual Immigration Report to Parliament, this is worth a mention. Illegal crossings from the U.S. did drop quite drastically in the Spring of 2020. Of course, the Government had to play along and make this “pandemic” seem real. In recent months, however, it seems the numbers are creeping back up again.

Keep in mind, the text of the Safe Third Country Agreement requires both Canada and the U.S. to consult with the UNHCR on refugees, and to get input from NGOs. We haven’t had meaningful borders in a long time.

As a reminder: the Trudeau Government scrapped the DCO, or Designated Country of Origin, back in 2019. This would allow for claims from “safe” countries to be denied much more quickly. However, with things the way they are, it seems nowhere is really safe. While the issue was very mainstream from 2017 to 2019, it seems to have disappeared.

In June 2020, a new policy kicked in to finally track who is leaving the country. Even more strange that a Trudeau would bring it in when he did. Probably to make it harder for people fleeing his regime.

Overall, the replacement agenda slowed down in 2020, but it’s about to be kicked back into overdrive. Not a good situation to be in.

Ottawa’s Bipartisan Love Of Giving Aga Khan Money

It’s all just an act.

Remember the times in recent years when Members of Parliament pretended to be outraged about Trudeau being so close to Aga Khan? Maybe they were just upset about not getting invited themselves.

One would think that there’d be more of a stink about the sheer amount of money the public was handing over without any sort of democratic mandate or referendum. This isn’t to defend Trudeau in any way, but this trip isn’t exactly the the worst of it.

Strange that the so-called “conservative” media would never write about what was really going on. Guess they need to prop up their side.

Note: there were 2 different search engines used to compile this article, which gave overlapping, albeit different results. One was from Open Search, and the other from the Federal Lobbying Registry. Both will be included to show all figures.

DATE BODY ISSUING AMOUNT
Oct. 29, 2014 Global Affairs Canada $12,000,000
Mar. 18, 2015 Global Affairs Canada $293,892
Mar. 30, 2015 Global Affairs Canada $1,500,000
Apr. 21, 2015 Global Affairs Canada $10,625,000
Nov. 30, 2015 Global Affairs Canada $71,914
Dec. 22, 2015 International Development Assistance Program $55,000,000
Feb. 22, 2016 Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada $125,985
Mar. 31, 2016 Global Affairs Canada $10,533,873
Mar. 31, 2016 International Development Assistance Program $24,964,678
Mar. 31, 2016 Global Affairs Canada $1,250,000
Mar. 31, 2016 Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada $312,838
Oct. 27, 2016 Canadian Heritage $12,837
Jan. 11, 2017 Global Affairs Canada $7,000,000
Jan. 12, 2017 Global Affairs Canada $12,000,000
Oct. 1, 2018 Global Affairs Canada $19,380,037
Apr. 1, 2019 Canadian Heritage $60,052
Jun. 29, 2019 Canadian Heritage $8,790
Dec. 6, 2019 Global Affairs Canada $59,792
Feb. 21, 2020 Global Affairs Canada $47,000,000
Apr. 1, 2020 Canadian Heritage $40,000
Jun. 30, 2020 Canadian Heritage $6,590
Nov. 18, 2020 Global Affairs Canada $2,000,000
Nov. 20, 2020 Global Affairs Canada $27,785
Mar. 29, 2021 Employment and Social Development Canada $100,000
Apr. 1, 2021 Canada Arts Presentation Fund $25,000

Next, we come to the Federal Lobbying Registry. It outlines amounts handed out annually, and where they came from, but doesn’t specify the specific assignment of project involved.

YEAR BODY ISSUING AMOUNT
2010 Canadian International Development Agency $19,838,431
2011 Canadian International Development Agency $16,912,457
2011 Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada $180,949
2012 Canadian International Development Agency $21,997,201
2012 Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada $1,575,197
2013 Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada $410,481
2013 International Development Research Centre $169,000
2014 Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada $50,513,370
2014 International Development Research Centre $594,190
2015 Global Affairs Canada $46,796,700
2015 International Development Research Centre $578,585
2016 Global Affairs Canada $48,966,065
2016 International Development Research Centre $396,299
2017 Global Affairs Canada $36,737,220
2017 International Development Research Centre $1,425,000
2018 Global Affairs Canada $31,354,539
2018 International Development Research Centre $560,972
2020 Global Affairs Canada $22,735,954
2020 International Development Research Centre $363,718

The Lobbying Registry, likely through a gap in registration records, doesn’t list anything for 2019. And information for 2021 isn’t yet available. However, it does still show $200 million since 2010. And it doesn’t stop there.

According to the Canada Revenue Agency, the grants go back to 2003, although it doesn’t specify how much. What has this group gotten in total? It’s over $200 million, but unclear how much more. Strange, it’s not like Canadians could have used that or anything.

Wild idea: but maybe politicians in Ottawa feign outrage over a $200,000 trip so that the public won’t notice that they’ve handed out some $200 million to a foreign NGO. Just putting it out there.

(1) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(2) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/?sort=score%20desc&page=1&search_text=aga%20khan#
(3) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch
(4) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch?V_SEARCH.command=refineCategory&V_TOKEN=1234567890&V_SEARCH.scopeCategory=solr.facetName.documentType%3D
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-giving/other-organizations-that-issue-donation-receipts-qualified-donees/other-qualified-donees-listings/list-foreign-charities-that-have-received-a-gift-majesty-right-canada.html
(6) https://twitter.com/erinotoole/status/1470506345455628290
(7) https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/justin-trudeau-vacation-to-aga-khans-island-broke-ethics-rules-1790408

FOR SOME EXTRA READING
(A) https://www.civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2020/04/23/the-united-nations-aga-khans-throne-part-i-money-laundering/
(B) https://www.civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2019/04/12/the-aga-khans-stranglehold-on-alberta/
(C) https://www.civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2020/05/22/the-united-nations-aga-khans-throne-part-2-pluralism-and-banking/

CANImmunize: Working With Big Pharma On National Vaccination Certification, Medical Research

In Nova Scotia, as well as other areas, you can use CANImmunize to book your vaccine appointment. Do you think you need to? Well, perhaps reading through this information of their partners will be enlightening.

This company openly admits that your health data may be sold or used for research purposes. Now, identifying details will likely be removed, but it’s still pretty underhanded. Not only is it receiving Government (or taxpayer) funding, but your data is likely worth money. In other words, the public financing its own invasion of privacy. More on that later.

CANImmunize is also part of the Vaccine Safety Network, which was established by the World Health Organization. It’s a mixture of various Government agencies and pro-vaccine NGOs pushing the big pharma agenda. You will find an awful lot of overlapping names here.

CANImmunize describes itself as “Ottawa-based technology company specializing in immunization software. It developed the CANImmunize app, a pan-Canadian digital immunization tracking system that helps Canadians keep track of their vaccinations with a mobile app and web portal”. In short, it’s laying the ground work for a vaccine passport, despite how harmless this sounds. Interestingly, this was set up in 2012, long before this so-called “pandemic”.

Incidently, PHAC, the Public Health Agency of Canada, isn’t a Canadian entity. It was created by an Order In Council in 2004 to serve various World Health Organization functions.

For a walk down memory lane, the Vaccine Credential Initiative has been hard at work trying to get a global vaccine passport. The Government of Ontario is a partner organization. There’s reason to fear that this is going to be the new ID required to move around.

It’s also recognized by the European Centre for Prevention and Disease Control, their equivalent of the CDC. That’s just lovely. Now who else is responsible for advancing, funding, and promoting CANImmuize?

1. Pfizer A Major Sponsor/Endorser Of CANImmunize

Pfizer is a prominent sponsor and endorses of CANImmunize. This is a significant conflict of interest, considering that it’s likely the biggest financial benefactor of the mass vaccination agenda. That said, this is only the tip of the iceberg.

2. Sanofi Pasteur Also Interested In This Venture

It’s worth mentioning that Sanofi also provides indirect funding to CANImmunize, by financing and supporting their other partners. Perhaps this is a way to make it more difficult to see just how much money is coming in.

3. I-Boost-Immunity Endorser Of CANImmunize

IBoostImmunity has ties to UNICEF and the BC Public Health Association. It’s sponsored by: London Drugs, Sanofi Pasteur, and Merck. London Drugs is a large chain in the West, and has immunization clinics in virtually every location.

4. Kids Boost Immunity Funded By Big Pharma

Kids Boost Immunity is partnered with UNESCO and the U.N. It also is sponsored by companies by GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer and Sanofi Pasteur. Are we seeing the common thread here?

5. Immunize Canada Funded By Pharmaceutical Companies

Immunize Canada is financed by the usual suspects. And taking a quick through its “member organization”, many of them also receive money from those same groups.

6. Vaccines411 Anonymous Referral Service For Vaccination

Who We Are
Vaccines411.ca is an online vaccination clinic locator which also includes reliable immunization resources for Canadians to easily find the vaccination resources they need. The website was officially launched in May 2011. This free online service was created in order to facilitate the process of vaccination for the many Canadians who do not know where to turn to for this kind of information.

Vaccines411® is managed by a dedicated team of professionals, which includes writers, researchers, translators, and developers. The content and resources provided on Vaccines411 is selected and reviewed by our team based on clarity, objectivity, and the credibility of its sources (i.e. government sourcing, medical reviews etc). However, please note that we are not healthcare professionals and that the information provided on Vaccines411.ca is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between a patient and his/her healthcare professionals.

This is supposed to an online referral service, for people looking to get their shots. Although the names seem to be kept hidden, it’s not difficult to imagine where the money comes from.

7. Society Of Obstetricians And Gynaecologists: Pregnant Women

This was covered in an earlier article. The Society Of Obstetricians And Gynaecologists is supposed to be concerned with promoting the health and well being of women and children. Instead, its Pfizer money has likely contributed to the absurd recommendations with pregnant women.

8. Canada Immunization Research Network

CIRN, the Canadian Immunization Research Network, is another group that has been previously covered on this site. Like the others, it supports CANImmunize too. This organization takes money from the public, and is supposed to be neutrally investigating and researching how safe and effective vaccines are. However, given the cash they also get from drug companies makes that suspicious.

9. Federation of Medical Women Of Canada, Funded By Pharma

The Federation of Medical Women of Canada (FMWC) is funded by by drug companies. That’s pretty twisted, considering that pushing harmful medications on women will lead to far fewer of them alive.

10. Meningitis Foundation Canada, Funded By Pfizer

Now, this group, Meningitis Foundation Canada, probably has many donors. However, Pfizer has presumably contributed enough that it merits displaying it prominently across that main page. But don’t worry, that won’t impact whether or not certain therapeutics are recommended, or how often.

Enough about the donors and sponsors. The available information about the technology itself and the company is pretty chilling.

Kumanan Wilson, the CANImmunize Chief Executive Officer, say in his biography:

An internal medicine physician, scientist and expert in digital health, Dr. Wilson is an internationally, widely published expert in public health and immunization and the founder of the CANImmunize project. Currently funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Health Organization Dr. Wilson’s vision is to use technology to solve public health problems

In other words, his project is at least partially funded by WHO and the Gates Foundation. It’s not like they have an agenda or anything.

If all of this isn’t creepy enough, CANImmunize provides plenty of promotional material promotion their App, and vaccines in general. Some of this seems clearly targeted to children.

As for its privacy policies:

CANImmunize will use your information to send you communications about vaccinations and other healthy behaviours, including information from integration partners such as local health authorities, updates about outbreaks near you if you choose to use location services, and periodic updates about CANImmunize Inc and its platforms. You will be offered the ability to opt out or unsubscribe from these communications. If you have consented to sharing your information with one or more integration partners, CANImmunize will share it with them.

CANImmunize may transfer your personal information, excluding health information (except in cases where you send us unsolicited health information – which we delete – outside of the platform such as through support channels), to domestic or international third parties including, for example, IT services, for processing that furthers the purposes for which you consented to provide the personal information. These transferees will be required to maintain privacy and data security standards similar to our own. This sort of transfer is considered a use not a disclosure under Federal privacy legislation. For more information, see here: https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/airports-and-borders/gl_dab_090127/.

By creating an account and storing your immunization information in the app, you are also consenting to allow CANImmunize to use it in de-identified and/or aggregate form for research purposes in the health sector. De-identified information is information about you, but it has been stripped of identifiers such as your name or date of birth and cannot be associated with you as an identifiable individual. Aggregate information is data combined from several measurements; when data is aggregated, groups of observations are replaced with summary statistics such that the data cannot be linked back to an identifiable individual. This will happen only where the research has been approved by, and is protected by, the policies of a Research Ethics Board.

CANImmunize will also use aggregate information to inform its understanding of trends in vaccination, opportunities to improve immunization rates or to generate other insights and may share this aggregate information with third parties.

Before CANImmunize uses or discloses your personal information for any other purpose, we will always ask for your consent.

Whether you want it or not, your medical information is available to be sold to 3rd parties for the purposes of research. Sure, your name and contact details may be purged, but you are part of future data compilation. It seems that this may be one of the biggest data harvests in history in Canada.

Again, by taking part and using the app, you are presumed to have consented. Now, if this limited assurance isn’t enough for you, try out the terms of service:

Use of CANImmunize is governed by these Terms of Use. We may amend or modify these Terms of Use at any time, without notice. The current version of these Terms of Use will be available each time you access the website. By using CANImmunize, you agree to be bound by these Terms of Use and are responsible for reviewing these Terms of Use as well as the CANImmunize Privacy Policy. You also agree that you will comply with all applicable laws and regulations when using CANImmunize and are prohibited from attempting to violate the security of the website. You should not use CANImmunize if you do not agree to these Terms of Use and the Privacy Policy, understand what they mean, or do not consent for your data to be used.

In other words, CANImmunize can change their terms at any time, without notice. On the other hand, the people using this app are expected to read and understand what’s going on. Feels great, doesn’t it?

(1) https://novascotia.flow.canimmunize.ca/en/8675309
(2) https://www.vaccinesafetynet.org/vsn/vaccine-safety-net
(3) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-62g-public-health-agency-of-canada-created-as-branch-of-who-bill-c-12-phac-act/
(4) Vaccine Safety Net _ Vaccine Safety Net
(5) https://canucklaw.ca/vaccine-credential-initiative-passports-digital-health-passes-ontario-ford/
(6) https://www.vaccinesafetynet.org/vsn/network
(7) https://www.canimmunize.ca/en/partners
(8) Partners _ CANImmunize
(9) https://iboostimmunity.com/about/sponsors
(10) Sponsors _ I Boost Immunity
(11) https://kidsboostimmunity.com/about/how-were-funded
(12) Our Partners _ Kids Boost Immunity
(13) https://immunize.ca/member-organizations
(14) Member Organizations _ immunizecanada
(15) https://canucklaw.ca/society-of-obstetricians-and-gynaecologists-funded-by-pfizer-recommends-vaccines-boosters/
(16) https://canucklaw.ca/canadian-immunization-research-network-is-funded-by-big-pharma/
(17) https://fmwc.ca/about-us/sponsors-partners/
(18) Sponsors & Partners _
(19) https://meningitis.ca/en/Our-Supporters
(20) Our Supporters
(21) https://www.canimmunize.ca/en/promotion
(22) Promotion _ CANImmunize
(23) https://www.canimmunize.ca/en/about
(24) https://www.canimmunize.ca/en/privacy-policy?_ga=2.176174502.223015251.1524835199-502851710.1490895288#collect
(25) Privacy Policy _ CANImmunize

IMM #5(D): Remittances – Where Is The Money Actually Going?

It’s one thing to talk about remittances being sent abroad, but where is it going? A quick look at the top recipients shows an unsurprising result. The largest amounts of money are sent to places which bring the most people to Canada annually. This has China, India and the Philippines at the top of the list.

The exact formula for these projections isn’t released, but it’s likely due to limited surveys, information from financial institutions and organizations, and some extrapolation. The numbers can’t be taken as exact, but just a rough idea of what’s going on. StatsCan also has its own estimates.

Pew Research On Remittances From Canada In 2017 (Top 60)

RANK DESTINATION ESTIMATED AMOUNT RUNNING TALLY
1 China $4,144,000,000 $4,144,000,000
2 India* $2,877,000,000 $7,021,000,000
3 Philippines $2,370,000,000 $9,391,000,000
4 France $1,297,000,000 $10,688,000,000
5 Italy $1,072,000,000 $11,760,000,000
6 Vietnam $953,000,000 $12,713,000,000
7 Lebanon* $853,000,000 $13,566,000,000
8 Germany $810,000,000 $14,376,000,000
9 United States $662,000,000 $15,038,000,000
10 United Kingdom $569,000,000 $15,607,000,000
11 Pakistan* $562,000,000 $16,169,000,000
12 Sri Lanka $488,000,000 $16,617,000,000
13 Belgium $459,000,000 $17,076,000,000
14 Hungary $436,000,000 $17,512,000,000
15 Nigeria $436,000,000 $17,948,000,000
16 Portugal $409,000,000 $18,357,000,000
17 Poland $341,000,000 $18,698,000,000
18 South Korea $327,000,000 $19,025,000,000
19 Jamaica $315,000,000 $19,340,000,000
20 Bermuda $285,000,000 $19,625,000,000
21 Egypt $269,000,000 $19,894,000,000
22 Netherlands $181,000,000 $20,075,000,000
23 Czech Republic $177,000,000 $20,252,000,000
24 El Salvador $157,000,000 $20,409,000,000
25 Mexico $156,000,000 $20,565,000,000
26 Japan $153,000,000 $20,718,000,000
27 Haiti $144,000,000 $20,862,000,000
28 Guatemala $142,000,000 $21,004,000,000
29 Romania $139,000,000 $21,143,000,000
30 Hong Kong $136,000,000 $21,279,000,000
31 Austria $133,000,000 $21,412,000,000
32 Kenya $123,000,000 $21,535,000,000
33 Croatia $119,000,000 $21,654,000,000
34 Morocco $114,000,000 $21,768,000,000
35 Colombia $113,000,000 $21,881,000,000
36 Ukraine $108,000,000 $21,989,000,000
37 Spain $107,000,000 $22,096,000,000
38 Denmark $101,000,000 $22,197,000,000
39 Australia $98,000,000 $22,295,000,000
40 Switzerland $91,000,000 $22,386,000,000
41 Iran $90,000,000 $22,476,000,000
42 Ghana $82,000,000 $22,558,000,000
43 Thailand $79,000,000 $22,637,000,000
44 Bangladesh $78,000,000 $22,715,000,000
45 Uganda $76,000,000 $22,791,000,000
46 Israel* $71,000,000 $22,862,000,000
47 Sweden $66,000,000 $22,928,000,000
48 Serbia $62,000,000 $22,990,000,000
49 Slovakia $62,000,000 $23,052,000,000
50 Guyana $59,000,000 $23,111,000,000
51 Russia $59,000,000 $23,179,000,000
52 Peru $57,000,000 $23,227,000,000
53 Tanzania $57,000,000 $23,284,000,000
54 Qatar $54,000,000 $23,338,000,000
55 South Africa $52,000,000 $23,390,000,000
56 Jordan $48,000,000 $23,438,000,000
57 Algeria $45,000,000 $23,483,000,000
58 Bosnia-Herzegovina $41,000,000 $23,524,000,000
59 Ecuador $39,000,000 $23,563,000,000
60 Finland $38,000,000 23,601,000,000
n/a All Others $958,000,000 $24,559,000,000

*Indicates not all transactions between certain countries can be estimated.

Pew Research is just one group that tracks and estimates remittances by country in a particular year. They put that figure for money leaving Canada in 2017 to be about $24.6 billion. To be fair, these are calculated to a large degree by computer modelling, so take it with a grain of salt. Still, it’s a starting place to look.

Pew and the World Bank openly admit that remittances are used by many countries to prop up their economies to a large degree.

Now, an argument “could” be made that these remittances have an overall benefit globally, and there’s the poverty reduction aspect. But in that case, public officials should just be honest about it, and not pretend that the aim is all to benefit the host country.

The United States is believed to be the largest source of remittances, with about $150 billion sent abroad annually.

The World Bank has written in opposition to the idea of taxing remittances. They openly admit that it would significantly cut into the amount of money the destination country receives.

There’s more to it than simply sending money abroad. Keep in mind, restaurants and hotels are among the largest users of programs like for Temporary Foreign Workers. For the last 2 years, they have been heavily subsidized by the taxpayers. Chains are included in this list as well.

As for agriculture workers, Ottawa has been using public money to subsidize the quarantine costs of people entering the country. Now, we’re not going to actually stop the entry of people coming in during a “deadly pandemic”, with high unemployment levels. The Government will just use tax dollars to offset a financial burden imposed on employers.

Why would businesses be supporting these programs for all these years? It’s economical to. Simply put, increasing the supply of labour drives down the relative value, or wages. Also, it’s much easier to support a family in a country with a lower cost of living, even with the remittance fees.

Anyhow, just something to think about when it’s reported that we need more and more people to come here. There are other factors at play.

(1) https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/blog/cs/sending-money
(2) https://www.pewresearch.org/global/interactives/remittance-flows-by-country/
(3) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(4) https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/29/remittances-from-abroad-are-major-economic-assets-for-some-developing-countries/
(5) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/qp/id/aafc-aac,AAFC-2021-QP-00003
(6) https://blogs.worldbank.org/peoplemove/why-taxing-remittances-bad-idea
(7) https://canucklaw.ca/imm-5c-remittances-remain-high-even-as-unemployment-rates-soared-in-2020/
(8) https://canucklaw.ca/imm-5b-global-remittances-hidden-costs-of-immigration/

%d bloggers like this: