Global Migration – Yellow Vests of Canada

(It’s a constantly repeated lie that temporary workers are only temporary. They will return home once their visas expire, and not become permanent residents.)

(It’s also a lie that students will return home. In most cases, they are eligible for the PGWP, and many transition directly to permanent residents.)

(International Mobility Program, essentially an extension of TFWP, but no labour shortages actually are required. Open work permits)

(If immigration grows our economy, then why is so much money being sent out of the country? Shouldn’t that money be spent here?)

(Making Northern towns unrecognizable is the goal.)

(Agriculture workers have pathway to PR)

(Program launched in July: PR-Path for illegals)

(Program launched in July: Domestic violence ==> PR-Path)

(CANZUK, possibly the biggest open borders and globalist free trade deal in history, is official CPC policy.)

1. Important Links

Other Canuck Law Articles
CLICK HERE, for CANZUK: open borders, free trade.
CLICK HERE, for true scope of mass migration in Canada.
CLICK HERE,for CDA immigration rate: 1M/year.
CLICK HERE, for more detail On replacement migration programs.
CLICK HERE, for replacement migration since 2003/04.
CLICK HERE, for domestic violence as perm res path.
CLICK HERE, for International Mobility Program: TFWP 2.0.
CLICK HERE, for remittances and brain drain.
CLICK HERE, for data on global remittances.
CLICK HERE, for mass migration during high unemployment.
CLICK HERE, for TD Bank article on population boom.
CLICK HERE, for amnesty for illegals program launched.
CLICK HERE, for students: grads/families become PR.
CLICK HERE, for business start up visa — purchase PR status
CLICK HERE, for “ghosts” using student visas to immigrate.
CLICK HERE, for (net) birth rate data since 1991.
CLICK HERE, for 186,000 “inadmissibles” getting Temp Res Permits.

2. Context For This Article

As has been reported many times on this site, immigration is nowhere near what is reported in the media. Specifically, when students and so-called “temporary” workers are factored in, it is double or triple what we are led to believe.

Why does this matter? For a number of reasons. First, it is misleading to omit that these groups are eligible for permanent resident status. That means, most can and will remain in Canada much, MUCH longer than originally stated. It artificially low-balls the immigration rate. Yes, not everyone stays, but many will, especially if they have built roots here.

Second, most people head to the larger cities, which strain to accommodate more and more people. This results in overburdened social services, congestion, and overcrowding. And contrary to conservatives and libertarians, there is a huge financial cost to these influxes.

Third, large scale mass migration has the effect of drastically changing the culture, the societal makeup, demographics (yes, race) and the voting patterns in elections. For example, importing large numbers of people who want hate speech laws, strong gun control, and socialist rule means that voting starts trending that way. Problem is, that no one ever voted to have their societies so changed.

Fourth, it brings incompatible cultures together, again, with no mandate from the host population. Islamic Hijrah (conquest by immigration) is the most obvious, but not the only one. There’s also Chinese expansion, Sikh nationalists, and replaying of ethnic conflicts, just to name a few.

In short, mass migration completely remakes a nation, and a lot of it in negative ways. Problem is (again), no one voted for it. And repeatedly lying to minimize the scale of it only serves to make things worse.

3. Annual Reports To Parliament

CLICK HERE, for the 2004 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2005 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2006 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2007 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2008 report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2009 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2010 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2011 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2012 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2013 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2014 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2015 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2016 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2017 Report to Parliament.
CLICK HERE, for the 2018 Report to Parliament.

CLICK HERE, for archived listings.

Note: From the 2004 to 2018 reports (which cover 2003-2017) we can take the “temporary” migration data as well. For this, “temporary” refers to:
(a) Temporary Foreign Worker Program;
(b) International Mobility Program;
(c) Student Visas

Here’s a snapshot of these “temporary” programs from the years 2015 to 2017. Source is the 2018 Annual Report to Parliament on Immigration.

Year	TFW	Int Mobility	Student
2015	73,016	175,967	218,147
2016	78,402	207,829	265,111
2017	78,788	224,033	317,328

Above are the “temporary” categories listed in the Annual Immigration Reports to Parliament. Now, let’s take a look at all of it in context. Data is compiled from the 2004 to 2018 Annual Reports (which covers the years of 2003 to 2017)

Report Year	Stated Imm	Temporary	Actual Imm
2004	221,352	143,444	364,796
2005	235,824	147,204	383,028
2006	262,236	156,622	418,858
2007	251,649	174,361	426,010
2008	236,758	229,834	466,592
2009	247,243	272,028	519,271
2010	252,179	263,618	515,797
2011	280,681	278,433	559,114
2012	248,748	289,225	537,973
2013	257,887	318,383	576,270
2014	258,953	333,175	592,128
2015	260,404	420,708	681,112
2016	271,845	468,126	739,971
2017	296,346	551,342	847,688
2018	331,226	620,149	951,375

The public is (wrongly) told that the annual averages were about 250K during the Harper years (2006 to 2015) and creeping up to 300 under Trudeau, and expected to hit about 350K in a few years. Big problem is that these claims deliberately leave out the pathway-to-PR students and “temporary” workers.

While these programs are touted as “temporary” this is extremely misleading, as an awful lot of people from all streams will remain in Canada. Either they will transition to permanent residents, or remain in some other capacity.

4. Surge In Student Visas

(UBC Promoting post-graduate options to students)

(University of Calgary and options for foreign students.)

(University of Regina promoting permanent residence)

CLICK HERE, for Provincial Nominee Seminar at UBC.
CLICK HERE, for permanent resident information from UCalgary.
CLICK HERE, for URegina on the Sask Immigrant Nominee Program.

The above are just the first 3 that I checked out. In fact, in seems that ALL colleges and universities are offering guidance for their international students on how to remain in Canada after they graduate.

But why would they do that? The powers that be repeatedly assure us that these students are in the country temporarily, and that they will return home afterwards. It’s almost as if these student visas were a form of backdoor immigration.

Report Year	Numbers
2004	61,293
2005	56,536
2006	57,476
2007	61,703
2008	64,636
2009	79,509
2010	85,140
2011	96,157
2012	98,383
2013	104,810
2014	111,865
2015	127,698
2016	219,143
2017	265,111
2018	317,328

In 2003, Canada issued 60,000 student visas (rounded down) and in 2017 issued 315,000 student visas (again, rounded down). This is more than 5 times the amount, in just a 15 year period.

Sources are the 2004 to 2018 Annual Reports to Parliament on Immigration. They are listed in Section #3. Now, not everyone will stay in Canada after they are done school. But many will, and our Government makes that very easy.

5. Surge In “Temporary” Workers

Note: in 2014 there was a public scandal regarding the Temporary Foreign Worker Program. Word got out as to just how wide spread the program was, and just how many people were being “imported” into jobs that Canadians could do, but who had to be paid more.

The “solution”, if you can call it that, was to break up the TFWP into 2 categories: one where a Labour Market Impact Assessment was needed (LIMA), and one that was not (an open work permit).

In this case, the TFWP required the LIMA, whereas the previously existing International Mobility Program was scaled up (no LIMA required). To summarize, rather than fix the underlying problem, the Government decided to split up the program and call it fixed.

Temporary Foreign Worker Program

Report Year	Numbers
2004	82,151
2005	90,668
2006	99,146
2007	112,658
2008	165,198
2009	192,519
2010	178,478
2011	182,276
2012	190,842
2013	213,573
2014	221,310
2015	95,086
2016	73,016
2017	78,402
2018	78,788

International Mobility Program

Report Year	Numbers
2004	included
2005	included
2006	included
2007	included
2008	included
2009	included
2010	included
2011	included
2012	included
2013	included
2014	included
2015	197,924
2016	175,967
2017	207,829
2018	224,033

Split Up Of TFWP

To offer greater clarity and transparency, the current TFWP is being reorganized and new International Mobility Programs (IMPs) are being created. The TFWP will now refer to those streams under which foreign workers enter Canada at the request of employers following approval through a new Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA). The new IMPs will incorporate those streams in which foreign nationals are not subject to an LMIA, and whose primary objective is to advance Canada’s broad economic and cultural national interest, rather than filling particular jobs. These reorganized programs will improve accountability, with Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) being the lead department for the TFWP, and Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) the lead department for the IMPs. In addition, ESDC will publicly post data on the number of positions for temporary foreign workers approved through the TFWP on a quarterly basis, and will post the names of corporations that receive permission to hire temporary foreign workers through LMIAs.

Source is right here.

For some context, consider that in 2003, about 80,000 temporary workers were admitted into Canada. That contrasts with over 300,000 in 2017 (when TFWP and IMP both factored in). That is nearly 4 times the amount in just 15 years.

CPC Supports Temp-To-PR Pipeline
The Conservative Party of Canada supports both: creating new immigration pilot programs, and transitioning temporary workers into permanent residents. That is listed in Article 139 of their Policy Declaration (found under Governing Documents)

Also worth noting that CANZUK is official CPC policy as well, Article 152 of their Policy Declaration. CANZUK, when fully implemented would allow free trade and free travel between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Effectively, it would erase the borders between those nations. Aside from the obvious problems, other nations like India, Pakistan, and the rest of the Commonwealth could potentially join. Would all of those “temporary” people be PR eligible as well?

To be fair, the People’s Party of Canada, which claims to “open the Overton window” on immigration, never addresses any of the following:
(a) True scale of mass migration;
(b) Temps/Students transitioning to PR;
(c) Importing the 3rd World;
(d) Rapid demographic change;
(e) Changes in voting trends, less conservatism;
(f) CANZUK being implemented

It would be nice if these Annual Reports to Parliament were more detailed in which programs/streams people were transitioning into permanent residents. It would also help for more information on how many people remain in the country but don’t become citizens. Alas, such useful data is lacking.

To address the elephant in the room: not all of the temporary workers do stay in Canada. Similarly, not all students stay in Canada after they graduate. But an awful lot do. Unfortunately, the Canadian Government doesn’t easily provide that information, so it has to be pieced together.

6. Remittances Sent Back Home

The Bank estimates that officially recorded annual remittance flows to low- and middle-income countries reached $529 billion in 2018, an increase of 9.6 percent over the previous record high of $483 billion in 2017. Global remittances, which include flows to high-income countries, reached $689 billion in 2018, up from $633 billion in 2017.

Among countries, the top remittance recipients were India with $79 billion, followed by China ($67 billion), Mexico ($36 billion), the Philippines ($34 billion), and Egypt ($29 billion).

The Brief also reports progress toward the SDG target of reducing the recruitment costs paid by migrant workers, which tend to be high, especially for lower-skilled migrants.

The World Bank estimates that $689 billion was sent in remittances globally in the year 2018. Globalist politicians repeatedly say that immigration brings wealth to the country, but it seems to be a source of draining it.

Global Remittances In Recent Years

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

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.

Biggest Recipients Of US $ (2018)

Rank	Nation	Est. ($ Billions)
1	Mexico	30.019
2	China	16.141
3	India	11.714
4	Philippines	11.099
5	Vietnam	7.735
6	Guatemala	7.725
7	Nigeria	6.191
8	El Salvador	4.611
9	Dominican Republic	4.594
10	Honduras	3.769

Worth noting that reducing fees for remittances is a goal long held by the UN. It’s as if they expect and promote mass migration to the West.

7. “Inadmissibles” Still Allowed In Canada

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	107,384
2011	11,526	118,910
2012	13,564	132,474
2013	13,115	145,589
2014	10,624	156,213
2015	10,333	166,546
2016	10,568	177,114
2017	9,221	186,335

Using the 2004 to 2018 Annual Reports to Parliament on Immigration, we can see that 186,000 people who were previously deemed “inadmissible” to Canada” were still allowed Temporary Residence Permits since 2002. This is being done under Rule 24(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Global(ist) News recently reported about the 3,000 or so who were allowed in under a 2010 rule change, and Rule 25.1 of IRPA. However, they missed the bigger picture.

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	132,474	20	15	7,014	888	5,206	18
2013	145,589	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

This is correct. People being denied entry for criminal record, serious criminal records, human rights violations, security risks, terrorism, and the like, are still being given Temporary Residence Permits.

For all those who say “come legally” and it’s okay, guess what? These people are being let into Canada legally. It’s the system that’s broken. Virtually anyone can get into Canada, so should we just skip the formality of having a border?

8. Importing The 3rd World

The tables below are composed form data gathered in the Annual Immigration Reports to Parliament (see Section #3). While this data related to % of people gaining permanent residence, and which countries they originate from, it’s a pretty good indicator of where Canada is importing people from.

(Below: PR, top 10 countries of origin in 2004 Report)

Rank	Country	Percent (%)
#1	China	16.3
#2	India	11.1
#3	Pakistan	5.6
#4	Philippines	5.4
#5	S. Korea	3.2
#6	U.S.	2.7
#7	Iran	2.6
#8	Romania	2.5
#9	U.K. & Colonies	2.4
#10	Sri Lanka	2.0

(Below: PR, top 10 countries of origin in 2007 Report)

Rank	Country	Percent (%)
#1	China	13.2
#2	India	12.2
#3	Philippines	7.0
#4	Pakistan	4.9
#5	U.S.A.	4.3
#6	Iran	2.8
#7	U.K.	2.6
#8	S. Korea	2.5
#9	Colombia	2.3
#10	France	2.0

(Below: PR, top 10 countries of origin in 2010 Report)

Rank	Country	Percent (%)
#1	China	12
#2	Philippines	11
#3	India	10
#4	U.S.A	4
#5	U.K. & Colonies	4
#6	France	3
#7	Pakistan	2
#8	Iran	2
#9	S. Korea	2
#10	Morocco	2

(Below: PR, top 10 countries of origin in 2013 Report)

Rank	Country	Percent (%)
#1	China	12.8
#2	Philippines	12.7
#3	India	11.2
#4	Pakistan	3.9
#5	U.S.A	3.7
#6	France	3.2
#7	Iran	2.5
#8	U.K. & Colonies	2.5
#9	Haiti	2.2
#10	S. Korea	2.1

(Below: PR, top 10 countries of origin in 2016 Report)

Rank	Country	Percent (%)
#1	Philippines	18.7
#2	India	14.5
#3	China	7.2
#4	Iran	4.3
#5	Pakistan	4.2
#6	Syria	3.6
#7	U.S.A.	3.0
#8	France	2.0
#9	U.K. & Colonies	2.0
#10	Nigeria	2.0

Note: Of the top 10 countries of origin, only 3 are from European, Western nations (France, the U.S., and the U.K. & Colonies). However, every U.K. & Colonies is suspect, as it contains people from outside the U.K.

Who would have thought that mass migration of the 3rd World would lead to Canada becoming the 3rd World? This connection is obviously so difficult to make.

This isn’t everyone who stays in Canada, and certainly not everyone who enters Canada. However, it does provide a glimpse into WHERE people are coming from. Canada is importing the 3rd World, and becoming the 3rd World as a result.

(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

This 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.

9. White Genocide In Action

Year	Population	% of Canada
1871	3,433,315	98.5%
1881	4,146,900	95.9%
1901	5,170,522	96.0%
1911	7,005,583	94.35%
1921	8,568,584	96.0%
1931	10,134,313	97.7%
1941	11,242,868	97.8%
1951	13,582,574	96.83%
1961	17,653,864	96.8%
1966	–	96.8%
1971	20,763,915	96.3%
1981	22,402,000	93.0%
1986	–	–
1986	–	–
1996	24,531,635	86.0%
2001	24,678,880	83.3%
2006	25,000,155	80.0%
2011	25,186,890	76.7%
2016	25,111,695	72.9%

Based off the Wikipedia page, it’s sources are: here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

To point out the obvious, yes the data table is incomplete. There are a few years missing. However, the overall trend shows an undeniable pattern towards those of European descent declining as a percentage and losing voting power.

Euro Canadians will be a minority in about a decade or so. How well will we be treated then?

10. Truth About Birth Rates

Live Births in Canada: 2013 – 2017
Deaths in Canada: 2013 – 2017

Year	Birth	Deaths	Diff	Day
1991	402,533	195,569	206,964	567
1992	398,643	196,535	202,108	552
1993	388,394	204,912	183,482	503
1994	385,114	207,077	178,037	488
1995	378,016	210,733	167,283	458
1996	366,200	212,880	153,320	419
1997	348,598	215,669	132,929	364
1998	342,418	218,091	124,327	341
1999	337,249	219,530	117,719	323
2000	327,882	218,062	109,820	300
2001	333,744	219,538	114,206	313
2002	328,802	223,603	105,199	288
2003	335,202	226,169	109,033	299
2004	337,072	226,584	110,488	302
2005	342,176	230,132	112,044	307
2006	354,617	228,079	126,538	347
2007	367,864	235,217	132,647	363
2008	377,886	238,617	139,269	381
2009	380,863	238,418	142,445	390
2010	377,213	240,075	137,138	376
2011	377,636	243,511	134,125	367
2012	381,869	246,596	135,273	370
2013	380,323	252,338	127,985	350
2014	384,100	258,821	125,279	343
2015	382,392	264,333	118,059	323
2016	383,102	267,213	115,889	318
2017	379,450	276,689	102,761	281
2018	375,390	283,706	91,684	251

It’s a commonly repeated myth that the Canadian population is declining. In fact, it is growing by about an average of 300 people per day, and has for several years. That being said, this is not at the same across groups. Couples European descent have an average of about 1.5 children each, far below the replacement rate.

Truth is demographic replacement is already taking place, even without any immigration. And that leads to the next segment: a groups that WANTS to breed, in order to achieve its goal of world domination.

11. Muslims Taking Over The World

(Muslims man bragging that demographic change will lead to Sharia Law replacing Canadian Law at some point)

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.

12. UN Supports Replacement, White Genocide

This topic was covered previously, but time for a trip down memory lane. The United Nations has been holding “population conferences” since the 1950s. Interestingly, the solution is always the same: more migration from the 3rd World. Not higher birth rates. Not a decline may be okay. Not “piss off” as a response. More mass migration.

(UN considers replacement migration — not higher birthrates — to be the solution to declining populations)

(UN Population Division still hard at work)

(The UN Global Migration Group)

(Other important replacement migration meetings)

(Agreed outcomes on population)

UN webpages worth a read
CLICK HERE, for the UN Population Division website.
CLICK HERE, for the UN research into replacement migration
CLICK HERE, for Gov’t views & policies.
CLICK HERE, for participant contact info.
CLICK HERE, for Russian replacement migration.
CLICK HERE, for European replacement migration.
CLICK HERE, for Korean population decline.
CLICK HERE, for various conferences.
CLICK HERE, for the “About” page.
CLICK HERE, for “resolutions” from the UN Population Division.
CLICK HERE, for UN Convention on Prevention and Punishing Genocide.
CLICK HERE, for the UN Global Migration Compact.

UN Global Migration Group

Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)
International Labour Organization (ILO)
International Organization for Migration (IOM)
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA)
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women)
United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR)
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
United Nations Regional Commissions
United Nations University (UNU)
World Bank
World Health Organization (WHO)

Not much to add to this abomination, but it is plain and obvious that the replacement agenda is going on at a global level, and has been for decades.

Consider this: the UN was formed at the end of the Second World War in 1945. Less than a decade later, it is already holding population conferences. They continue even now.

13. Multiculturalism Is Genocide

This may seem strange, but consider the following: Forcibly remaking the population without their consent amounts to genocide, as defined by the United Nations. Check out the UN Convention On Prevention 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.

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

Article IV
Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

Article V
The Contracting Parties undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention, and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III.

Article VI
Persons charged with genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be tried by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed, or by such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction with respect to those Contracting Parties which shall have accepted its jurisdiction.

Article VII
Genocide and the other acts enumerated in article III shall not be considered as political crimes for the purpose of extradition.
The Contracting Parties pledge themselves in such cases to grant extradition in accordance with their laws and treaties in force.

14. Where To Go From Here

A moratorium on immigration is the only sensible answer. This “multiculti” experiment is a total failure, and it’s time to put a stop to it. Illegals need to be deported.

Stop Islamic immigration. Permanently. Deport whoever can be legally deported, and ban political Islam. Mosques need to be shutdown wherever possible.

This multicultural push also needs to go. If Canada (or any nation) is to survive, it must be united under one identity.

How did we get to the stage where replacing your population, your culture, language, traditions, and customs is valued as “diversity”? Shouldn’t we preserve what we have?

Put our own people first. Have our own children, more of them, and keep the culture (what’s left of it) intact. Stop sending money away with remittances, stop importing cheap labour, and driving down wages.

It is mind boggling that so-called “conservatives” keep pushing for mass migration from socialist and other left leaning nations. It never seems to dawn on them that importing liberal and socialist voters means that their own base will eventually be replaced. Idiots. But who cares, as long as the cheap labour keeps flowing.

Global Migration

Immigration: The Tipping Point

July 8, 2019 Unite The Right

Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to the member’s attention that Canada is a nation of immigrants. We are a nation of immigrants and we have one of the finest immigration policies anywhere in the world. Our policy is continuously evolving to respond to the needs of Canadians and to fulfill our commitment on the international scene in conformity with the United Nations.
– Mac Harb, Liberal MP, House Of Commons, October 2001

Is this accurate? Is Canada a nation of immigrants? Canada was first settled by pioneers who came to a largely uninhabited land, cultivated farms, built homes, established businesses and made something out of nothing. There was no receiving society into which they integrated; they made a society out of the wilds of a world where none existed for thousands of forested kilometres. To immigrate somewhere is to leave a society and join another existing society. Yes, many Canadians are immigrants, but the nation was built by settlers who fought against nature and starvation, established farms and cities and created a country. So, whether or not Canada is a nation of immigrants is debatable. Our prime minister in waiting, Andrew Scheer, has stated that it is (1), and I will not detract from his words except to insist on the difference between the hardy settlers of our great nation and the current migrants who freely benefit from our many social systems (2).

Canada has had a chequered attitude towards immigration, going through phases of non-receptivity to openness, depending on the labour requirements of the country (3 )(4). As Canada became more socialist, the waters have become more muddied. In 1988 with the passing of the Multiculturalism Act, all immigrants received the right to benefit from all social programs in Canada. As far back as the National Medical Care Act of 1967, immigrants became eligible for free healthcare at the expense of the taxpayer. A while before that, Unemployment Insurance Act (1940)(5) was passed and shortly after the granting of ‘baby bonuses’ (1945) began (6). These are only a few of the many social welfare systems, some of which are specifically designed for new-comers, that are in place in current-day Canada – all at the expense of the taxpayer (free English courses, social welfare, start-up funds, preferential free housing, etc.). Fraser Institute did a monumental study in which they analysed the cost of immigration on the Canadian economy. They determined that the total fiscal cost to the government (or the taxpayer) of recent immigrants ranges from $16.3 billion to $23.6 billion annually as of 2011(7). Since 2017, what is the real cost? It would be illuminating to find this out!

With the advent of the Syrian war with thousands of refugees flooding the country, and Trudeau’s ill-advised tweet in January of 2017, the problem became exacerbated.

The inflow of refugees and migrants began to represent a substantial amount of taxpayer dollars. As of January, of last year, Canada has accepted nearly 50,000 Syrian refugees with another 20,000 waiting for approval (8). Fully 60% of these do not speak English or French. By April of this year, some 40,000 so-called ‘irregular migrants’ have walked across Canada’s southern border via illegal entry points such as the infamous Roxham Rd. (9). Now here is the monumental question: how much is this costing taxpayers through our social systems? Some follow-up questions would be: how many actually obtain gainful employment? How many actually have learned one of our official languages? Can they become contributing members of society if they don’t learn English or French and therefore do not obtain employment?

Canada is heading into a recession (10). We have seen tens of thousands of jobs flee the province of Alberta with the downturn in the Canadian oil industry. Thousands of jobs have left Ontario with the mis-handling of the USMCA and various tariffs being applied on our exports to our largest trading partner. The situation as it stands shows a much higher population of job-seekers with fewer jobs being available. A Federal carbon tax and higher taxes on small businesses represents higher financial burdens on the working Canadians. The Canadian dollar is being devalued, our economy is slowing perceptibly, and interest rates are increasing substantially. All these are factors of an incipient recession.

The policy of the government is to foster the growth of the population of Canada by the encouragement of immigration. The government will seek by legislation, regulation and vigorous administration, to ensure the careful selection and permanent settlement of such numbers of immigrants as can be advantageously absorbed in our national economy. It is a matter of domestic policy […] The people of Canada do not wish as a result of mass immigration to make a fundamental alteration in the character of our population.
-William Lyon Mackenzie King (1947)

Concurrent with the previous red flags, the signing of the UN Compact on Migration by the Trudeau government in December of 2018 has been the cause of enormous dismay to taxpayers, viewing it as an attack on our sovereignty, handing our immigration over to the UN. Agenda 2030 makes it very clear that borders are unimportant, and Canada is slated for a huge influx of migrants, all of whom have the right to all our social systems. Along with this, Canadians have seen attacks on their freedoms through M-103 which curtails the right to speak ill of Islam specifically (11). Agenda 2030 also makes it clear that the receiving country must make every effort to adjust to newcomers. Suddenly William Lyon Mackenzie King’s words become very pertinent. The very fabric of our society is being forced to adjust to newcomers. As far back as 1907 Sir Wilfred Laurier stated:

What is the fallout of all these factors?

Canadians are among the most generous and welcoming people in the world – or they used to be. While I was growing up in Quebec and Ontario, we saw many immigrants move into our neighbourhood and generally found that a novel and interesting occurrence with no anti-immigrant emotion. My mother would invite the new family over or bring them some of her preserves to make them welcome and many of the neighbours would do the same. In the classroom, the children would make friends with the newcomers and we barely noticed the colour of their skin or their differences.

This is who we used to be. This is who we should be.

But how can this idyllic situation continue? The tide is turning. The influx of illegals, the advent of sanctuary cities in Canada, the buy-out of the media by the Trudeau government (12)… so many factors, so many attacks on our tolerance and human kindness are causing a quiet rage to begin building. We are reaching our limit.

So, what is happening? The rage is being misdirected, the real issue is lost and more and more Canadians are becoming anti-immigration (13). They become unable to see that the problem is not immigration, the problem is ILLEGAL migration. Furthermore, the problem is too many social systems that encourage refugees to NOT work and merely produce child after child to receive more and more Child and Family benefits while contributing nothing. Bought media rhetoric enflames the rage as do the words of virtue-signalling leftists and all those who quietly and respectfully protest illegal migration and the UNMCA and loss of our freedoms through legislation are being calumnied as white nationalists and far-right. Leftist politicians take to Twitter and attack dissenters as racists and bigots and supremacists. Polarization becomes exacerbated.

An article that appeared in MSN news on April 21, 2019 is one such polarizing article, entitled The Rise of Uncaring Canada (14). The writer seeks to portray Canadians as white nationalists and illegal border-crossers as helpless victims of an uncaring system. Andray Domise enshrines Ahmed Hussen, Canada’s immigration minister, as a compassionate man, full of generosity to helpless refugee populations and Somalia as a country torn apart by decades of western exploitation and political destabilisation. Domise draws on an example of one individual purporting to be denied a job opportunity because of his Somali origins to stoke sympathy in his reader. He proceeds to attack Michelle Rempel, Lisa MacLeod and Doug Ford for not being kind or generous enough to poor refugees. This article is full of misdirection and leftist rhetoric to support his premise that Canadians are becoming bigoted and racist.

I beg of you, all you Conservatives of Canada: do not let yourselves be manipulated! This polarization is part of the attack on our freedom! Canada NEEDS immigrants like Salim Mansur, CPC candidate for London North Central, Dr. Zulfiqar Bhutta, a prominent physician in Toronto, Hamdi Ulukaya, founder of Chobani Yogurt and other such contributing immigrants. Our country is huge, with large empty spaces. There is room for all who wish to come and CONTRIBUTE, and become CANADIAN in every sense of the word! Do not give in to the politics of division and exclusion. We must fight against socialism. We must fight against the hijacking of our sovereignty by the UN. We must take care of those already in our country: our veterans, our homeless and our First Nations people THEN we extend our compassion to those outside our country. After this, WE choose who comes! WE set limits on help provided. WE keep the control and turn the tide of anger through constant refocusing of our energies on the real issues.

Maybe if we keep our heads, we can keep Canada from reaching the tipping point where everything falls into chaos. We do not want the globalists to win. We do not want Agenda 21 to be realized and Agenda 2030 to take control. We are Conservatives, but most of all we are Canadians.

References:

Global Migration

Soros and the Canadian Connection to the Migrant Caravan on the US Border

March 7, 2019 Unite The Right

Background on Social Solidarity Economy

Globalization has paved the way for an historic deterioration of national sovereignty slowly being replaced by one world governance with Marxist ideologies. The rise of the “Social and Solidarity Economy” movement has taken root and flourished. What started off in the 19^th century as a labour movement had resurfaced in France in 1968 with the reshuffling of the relationship between the State, corporations, and civil society (1)(2). The phrase “Social Solidarity Economy” originated in France in the late 90s by an association called Réseau des l’économie alternative et solidaire (REAS) that advocated for the restructuring of economic alternatives. REAS members included people involved in Green party politics and disillusioned communists or socialists throughout France (3).

By 1995, the expression “Social Solidarity Economy” gained acceptance in Quebec after an appeal for a solidarity economy was published in Le Monde, a large newspaper in France (3). In 1996, the Quebec government decided to reduce the budget deficit to zero at a time of high unemployment. Quebec was predominantly a welfare state, and one of the reasons for the deficit was the interest on public debt, which was higher per capita than in any other Canadian province.

Premier Lucien Bouchard, of the Parti Québécois, called a Socioeconomic Summit and for the first time in history, social and community organizations along with government, corporations, and unions met as partners to adopt the Social Solidarity Economy as a priority for job creation and to reduce poverty (3). The unions agreed to freeze wages while the government and private corporate sector agreed that the social economy would be supported by both federal and provincial government policies. To coordinate the implementation of the program, the government created the “Chantier de l’économie sociale du Québec“, a non-profit corporation whose mandate was to promote the social economy in Quebec (3).

So where exactly will Quebec get the money required for these programs? The Social Solidarity Economy refers to the third sector of our economy, the relationship that exists between corporations and foundations, non-profits, NGOs, charities, cooperatives, and organized labour. This sector operates at a loss and relies heavily on government subsidies, grants and tax credits (4). These programs cost billions of dollars each year to implement (25% of our budget) and produce very insignificant returns.

In 1996, the Liberal government under the leadership of Jean Chrétien approved these programs (Figure 1). So basically, Quebec was allowed to reduce its deficit to zero and employ thousands in this “false economy” all on the backs of the Canadian taxpayer. The Social and Solidarity Economy is indeed a true Marxist utopia where citizens share in the wealth of the nation, while our globalist puppet masters control the workings of the government, activists groups, labour groups and the very citizens they employ. Welcome to Canada comrade!

Soros, Tides Canada and the Social Economy

Several organizations within the Social and Solidarity Economy are engaged in political and social crusades where corporations use their foundations as “activism portals” to influence public opinion and government policy (4). George Soros, billionaire founder of the Open Society Foundation and donor to Tides Foundation, considers this new network of foundations as a “cross between a foundation and a movement” that can directly benefit the agenda of a small but powerful group of wealthy globalists determined on steering the sociopolitical framework of nations in their favour (5). Here are just a few examples of this corruption:

Tides Foundation was behind the push to restore voting rights for felons in Virginia in order to influence the US elections in 2016(6)
US Foundations (Tides) campaign to kill the Albertan Oil Sands (7)
Soros’ Tides Foundation Canada under investigation by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) for election interference (8)
Non-Profit of terrorist bomber received Tides Foundation funding (9)
Soros’ Open Society sponsored immigration network exposed in Italy (10)

Between 2002 and 2007, the Social Solidarity Economy movement had spread to other parts of Canada and into the United States. The Canadian Community Economic Development Network (CCEDNet) that formed in Quebec in 1999, consisted of community-based organizations, co-operatives, social enterprises, researchers and active citizens; it promoted the nation-wide implementation of the social economy and was instrumental in launching the Intercontinental Network for the Promotion of the Social Solidarity Economy (RIPESS) (11). The North American Chapter consisted of three working agencies who advocated for the social economy: Chantier de l’economie Sociale (Quebec), CCEDNet (Quebec) and the United States Solidarity Economy Network (US SEN) (12).

Today, the globalization of the Social Solidarity Economy includes six international chapters of RIPESS: Africa & the Middle East, Latin America, North America, Asia, Europe, and Oceana. Yvon Poirier from CCEDNet (Quebec) is president of RIPESS (13) (14). RIPESS works closely with the United Nations (13) and International Labour Organizations all supporting left leaning agendas. Quebec, Quebec politicians, and their globalist counterparts therefore played an integral role in what has materialized today as United Nations Agenda 2030.

In 2004, Prime Minister Paul Martin included a social economy initiative in the federal budget to fund these programs under the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) umbrella (15). In the fall of 2005, prior to the election, it was feared that the change in government would eliminate these programs along with contracts so there was a haste to speed up the process and sign these deals.

After the Liberals lost the elections, the new Conservative government led by Stephen Harper abolished these programs in September 2006, leaving only the research portion, a five year plan, in place (4). When the Harper conservatives took office, the SSHRC, under the direction of the Deputy Director Johanne Mennie and current People’s Party of Canada (PPC) Campaign Coordinator, warned social economy groups and academic researchers “to frame their productions as research not advocacy activities” (Figure 2) in order to obtain funding (16).

On October 19-20 2006, Ms. Mennie attended a private meeting sponsored by Tides Canada Foundation (Figures 3 & 4). The meeting was called “Scaling up the Canadian Social Finance Sector: Strategy Session”, the very same programs Stephen Harper’s government defunded just a month earlier. At this meeting the following recommendations were made: (4) (17)

It was agreed by all the attendees that social economy initiatives would continue under the leadership of Tides Canada Foundation
It was agreed that these programs would require the development of a national institution that would act as a Social Investment Bank (similar to Trudeau’s Infrastructure Bank)
Attendees agreed that they would get involved in political lobbying in order to “seed” a social finance agenda
It was agreed that attendees would position these programs as an “investment opportunities” rather than “government grants and incentives” programs (to overlook the fact that these programs were operating at a loss and depended almost entirely on government grants and tax credits)
It was agreed that there was a critical need to develop a public policy agenda

Note: The minutes from this meeting do not indicate that there was any opposition on record to these initiatives by Ms. Mennie, who was the Deputy Minister of HRSDC/SSHRC. Prime Minister Stephen Harper was clear in voicing his opposition to these programs prior to the election, he cut the funding and put restrictions on what the Foundations could and could not do (4). So what then is a government official doing at this meeting? Was there usurpation in Harper’s government? And who exactly were the attendees present at this meeting? Tim Draimin founding CEO of Tides Canada Foundation (18), David LePage of CCEDNet (19), Nancy Neamtan President of Chantier de l’economie Sociale (20), Tim Brodhead CEO J.W. McConnell Foundation (current mentor and previous Director of the Trudeau Foundation)(21).

By 2010, in spite of the federal cuts to these programs these same individuals set up The Canadian Task Force on Social Finance. This time one of their founding members included the Rt. Hon. Prime Minister Paul Martin of the Liberal Party of Canada (Figure 5) (22), and their funding partner was the Ontario Liberals led by Dalton McGuinty. One might call this a conspiracy theory but, is it a conspiracy theory if the events and the planning actually took place?

Who exactly is Johanne Mennie? For a person who has been in government since the Chretien Liberals she doesn’t have a huge internet presence. We know Ms. Mennie was Deputy Director of the Social Sciences Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) & Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC), Director of the Heritage Foundation, and worked for the Policy Research Initiative which was created by the Privy Council to broaden the research community of the SSHRC (Figure 8).

Johanne Mennie is also Deputy Director responsible for policy development in government, and when one is sitting at a corporate board meeting and pressuring for policy this goes way past employee. The connections are here; the very same corporations pushing the social economy agenda got Deputy Director responsible for policy development in government to do their bidding! (23)

One month later on November 21 2006, the same group of attendees from the Tides Canada meeting, were called as witnesses by a House of Commons committee meeting investigating the value of the “social economy” in Canada. This is the statement of Ms. Carol Hunter executive director of the Canadian Coperative Association (CCA) promoting “Johanne Mennie’s shop”: (24)

Johanne Mennie is also listed as Director of Canada Inc. (Figure 7) who has over 8,000 employees and a budget of 2.4 million which she launched between January-March of 2018 (just before Maxime Bernier officially launched the PPC) through the acquisition of an office from the Canadian Security Intelligence Services (CSIS). Canada Inc. manages 12, 802 Government companies, 175,961 Charitable Organizations and Foundations, and an additional 548,848 Organization Companies (25). Is this the “Social Economy” Hybrid Universe: the relationship that exists between Government, Corporations, and Foundation & Charities? (4) Is “Johanne Mennie’s shop” the home office for the social economy? Or is it the home office for a one world government? Apparently, Canada may very well have a deep state after all!

Canada’s Connection to the Caravan

The Chicago group involved in the Caravan movement at the Mexican border was led by Inneo Mujica of the Pueblo Sin Fronteras (People Without Borders), a Chicago-based non-profit organization that follows a Marxist-Leninist ideology and believes in a world without borders. They are committed to trade union work and other international missions (26) (27)(28). Since 2010 they have been organizing caravans of migrants to illegally cross into Mexico and the United States including the Caravan of 2018. Pueblo Sin Fronteras was created alongside other radical Mexican-American activists groups in order to establish a migrant pipeline across the US-Mexican border (26). They are members of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) a left-wing coalition for immigrant activists group (26)(28)(40).

Other coalition members of NDLON include CASA de Maryland and Centro Legal de la Raza (37)(38). Tax returns filed by Tides Foundation for 2017 (36) show funding to CASA de Maryland Inc. Joel Garcia, second director of Centro Legal de la Raza and founder of Clinica de la Raza Inc. (39) received funding by Tides Foundation funding for Clinica de la Raza Inc. (36).

NDLON has a partnership and is funded by AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labour-Congress of Industrial Organization) (29) (30). The AFL-ICO is the largest federation of labour unions and is actively involved with the Social Solidarity Economy (31)(32)(33). The AFL-CIO was part of the national planning committee that helped to develop the USSF (US Social Forum) consisting of big labour groups and social activists groups which was used to create the US-SEN, part of the North American Chapter of RIPESS (34) which was founded by Quebec.

Both AFL-CIO and RIPESS are listed members of Union for Radical and Political Economies (URPE) (35). Members from this organization promote the Social Solidarity Economy and are left political economists who advocate for Marxism. Many of these organizations actively campaigned for left-leaning politicians such as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Other Groups that Received Funding from Tides Foundation Include:

American Friends of Service Committee:

America Friends of Service Committee is a Quaker organization that helped fundraise for Pueblo Sin Fronteras (28). They received direct funding from Tides Foundation (36).

The Immigration Justice Campaign:

The Immigration Justice Campaign (coalition members of American Friends of Service) promoted pro bono legal representation for persons detained by US immigration authorities (42). Immigration Justice Campaign is administered by Center for Popular Democracy (43) which merged with Center for Community Change (44) was also funded by Tides Foundation (36).

BAMN: By Any Means Necessary

The communist group By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) voiced its support for the caravan and published a manifesto accusing the Trump administration of being “lawless and repressive.” BAMN wrote: “Open it up or we’ll shut it down! Everyone must be let in! MEXICANS and AMERICANS stand with us!” (28)

BAMN is a Revolutionary Workers League. UEAALDF (United for Equality and Affirmative Action League Defense Fund) coordinated BAMN’s legal defense and is the tax-exempt affiliate of BAMN. Both organizations share the same two leaders and both are identified as national coordinators. UEAALDF received funding support from Southern Poverty Law Center which is directly funded by Tides Foundation(36). BAMN also has ties to NABLA (North American Man/Big Boy Love) and Revolution Workers League (RWL) (41).

The Tides Foundation is structured like a money-laundering operation. Financers who wish to remain anonymous can make contributions through Tides, which avoids the tax-based requirement to report its own donors by structuring itself as an organization with broad-based support (45). On the first page of their 2017 tax returns (Figure 6) is written:

Tides Foundation primary exempt purpose is grant making. We empower individuals and institutions to move money efficiently and effectively towards positive social change

For those of you that have been confused with the alphabet soup, all of these movements have emerged from the same groups that were designed in Quebec to promote the Social Solidarity Economy. So, that Tides Canada Foundation meeting that took place on October 19-20 2006, which involved all the principle stakeholders of this movement, was not as innocent as many would like us to believe (4). Historians refer to this as the “Not-So-Quiet Revolution.”(46)

The RIPESS network, consisting of Chantier de l’economie and CCEDNet with headquarters in Quebec, advocates for “Open Borders”. On February 4, 2019, the European Chapter of RIPESS released a guide for campaigners, communicators and activists called “How to talk about the societies we want in Europe.” (47) (48) (Figure 9)This guide advocates for open borders and makes recommendations on how to phrase the narrative on open borders so as not to upset Europeans:

We recommend using this imagery of the shared and continuous land and waterways of Europe, but without explicitly mentioning borders… emphasize that borders are invisible.

Friends of the Earth and the Europeans Woman’s Lobby financed this RIPESS guide also received funding from Tides Foundation (Figure 9)(36). In addition Nancy Neamtan (President of Chantier de l’economie sociale) and David LePage (CCEDNet) , both organizations within RIPESS were also present at that October 2006 Tides Canada Foundation meeting(17). It appears therefore, that Ms. Johanne Mennie’s (Executive Director of Maxime Bernier’s PPC) attendance at a Tides Foundation meeting was not so innocent at all; it was a meeting of the “Collaborators of Mass Migration”.

So Canada has a very serious problem; it’s called Quebec. Regardless if the UN Global Compact on Migration is ratified or not, under the “Canada-Quebec Accord” Quebec regulates its own immigration separate from the Federal Government and essentially has a back door into Canada (49). So for those of you concerned about mass migrations, the true question is not who is in power in Ottawa, but rather who is in power in Quebec?

Make no mistake, the “Social and Solidarity Economy” is a Global Communist Movement where Foundations are acting as conduits for money transfers to support their cause. These are movements are fueled by the corporate elites along with larger labour unions and social advocacy groups collectively promoting the social economy while advocating for social justice, but whose ultimate intention is “control of the people”.

To our American friends and neighbours, Canada’s role, or rather Quebec’s role in the destabilization of the North American Continent goes beyond a mere “sorry”. Western civilization and the preservation of our society is truly dependent on the actions of one person and to him we say, “Mr. President, build that wall!”

References: