Friday, December 11, 2020

Canada Toronto Protocol and Eugenics

Eugenics is the study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable. Developed largely by Sir Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race, eugenics was increasingly discredited as unscientific and racially biased during the 20th century, especially after the adoption of its doctrines by the Nazis in order to justify their treatment of Jews, disabled people, and other minority groups.

What is an example of eugenics?
Many countries enacted various eugenics policies, including: genetic screenings, birth control, promoting differential birth rates, marriage restrictions, segregation (both racial segregation and sequestering the mentally ill), compulsory sterilization, forced abortions or forced pregnancies) 

Toronto Protocol

This short but explosive text was first leaked by Serge Monast in Canada in 1995. It is reported to be the plan of an elite group who are manipulating the general public and governments across the world to bring about their long term goal of a world government. They cover in this document a wide variety of areas, including world food supplies and pollution, the question of parental rights as opposed to state rights over children, earthquake weapons, the overall media and economic climate which was planned to be favourable in order to lure into complacency the general public, etc etc. Could it be real?

Eugenics in Canada

Eugenics is a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the human population through controlled breeding. It includes “negative” eugenics (discouraging or limiting the procreation of people considered to have undesirable characteristics and genes) and “positive” eugenics (encouraging the procreation of people considered to have desirable characteristics and genes). Many Canadians supported eugenic policies in the early 20th century, including some medical professionals, politicians and feminists. Both Alberta (1928) and British Columbia (1933) passed Sexual Sterilization Acts, which were not repealed until the 1970s. Although often considered a pseudoscience and a thing of the past, eugenic methods have continued into the 21st century, including the coerced sterilization of Indigenous women and what some have termed the “new eugenics” — genetic editing and the screening of fetuses for disabilities.

Key Terms and Facts

EugenicsA set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the human population through controlled breeding.
“Positive” eugenicsA form of eugenics that encourages the procreation of individuals and groups who are viewed as possessing desirable characteristics and genes. Methods include baby bonuses and other financial incentives.
“Negative” eugenicsA form of eugenics that discourages and decreases the procreation of individuals and groups who are viewed as having inferior or undesirable characteristics and genes. Methods include sexual sterilization and institutionalization.
SterilizationA permanent medical procedure that prevents pregnancy. One example is tubal ligation, a surgical procedure in which the fallopian tubes are either cut or blocked.
Supporters/Proponents of Eugenic PoliciesDr. E.W. McBride, Professor Carrie Derick, Dr. Helen MacMurchy, William AberhartErnest ManningEmily MurphyLouise McKinneyNellie McClungHenrietta Muir EdwardsSocial Credit Party of Alberta, United Farmers of Alberta, United Farm Women’s Association, Eugenics Society of Canada, Tommy Douglas
Sexual Sterilization Act (Alberta), 1928–72This legislation created a Eugenics Board that could authorize the sexual sterilization of inmates of mental hospitals who had been proposed for release, if the Board determined that there was a risk that they could transmit “disability” to their children. Over 2,800 people were sterilized under this legislation.
Sexual Sterilization Act (British Columbia), 1933–73This Act closely resembled the Alberta legislation, but was applied more narrowly. It is estimated that between 200 and 400 people were sterilized under this legislation.

Eugenics: Beliefs and Goals

Eugenics is a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the human population through controlled breeding. The word "eugenics" is derived from the Greek word meaning "well-born." It was first used in 1883 by Sir Francis Galton (cousin of Charles Darwin), who is widely considered the founder of the eugenic movement in England. The movement focused on both “positive” and “negative” eugenics, though with greater emphasis on the latter. “Positive” eugenics included the encouragement of procreation by individuals and groups who were viewed as possessing desirable characteristics and genes, thereby attempting to improve and strengthen the overall gene pool of society. “Negative” eugenics involved discouraging and decreasing procreation by individuals and groups who were viewed as having inferior or undesirable characteristics and genes. The goal of “negative” eugenics was pursued through several different methods aimed at limiting the capacity and opportunity for procreation, including sexual sterilization, marriage prohibition, segregation and institutionalization.

Social and Scientific Assumptions of Eugenics

The eugenics movement was based on certain social and scientific assumptions. One such assumption, based on the work of German scientist and friar Gregor Mendel (1822–84), was that certain characteristics and traits were thought to be hereditary. Another was that these characteristics and traits were believed to be socially undesirable. Hence it was thought to be in society's interests to reduce the spread of these undesirable traits by limiting the reproductive power of those individuals and groups who possessed them.

Eugenicists believed that the following “undesirable” characteristics were almost exclusively hereditary: intellectual disability, mental illness, alcoholismpoverty, criminality, and various types of “immoral” behaviour, including prostitution. Supporters of eugenics also believed that these groups had a higher reproductive rate than other people. One of the most dominant and recurrent themes of eugenics philosophy in the late 19th and early 20th century was the emphasis on a link between intellectual disability and criminality, and the consequent "menace" which intellectual disability posed to society.

Support for Eugenics in Canada

In the early 20th century, eugenic policies were considered progressive among many Canadians, including some socialistsfeminists, farmers and psychiatrists. Their assumption was that Canadian society could be improved by encouraging reproduction among certain groups — particularly Anglo-Saxon Protestants — and discouraging or limiting reproduction among other groups, including Eastern European immigrants and, increasingly, Indigenous people. (Similarly, immigration policies like the Chinese head tax were aimed at limiting the population of Asian Canadians.)

Many prominent Canadians of that era were advocates of eugenics philosophy and eugenic sterilization, including Dr. E.W. McBride, Professor Carrie Derick and Dr. Helen MacMurchy. Support for eugenic sterilization was also expressed in the 1920s by many prominent Alberta women, including Emily Murphy and Nellie McClung. Maternal feminists like McClung, for example, argued that women were the mothers and guardians of their “race.” They therefore championed legislation, including sterilization, which aimed to curtail prostitutionalcoholism and “mental defectiveness.”

Other Canadian individuals and institutions, however, opposed eugenic policies. For example, the Roman Catholic Church in Canada was vehemently opposed to sexual sterilization legislation.

Did You Know?
Tommy Douglas — the father of socialized medicine in Canada and one of the country’s most beloved figures — at one time endorsed eugenic policies. In 1933, he received a Master of Arts in sociology from McMaster University for his thesis, The Problems of the Subnormal Family. In the thesis, Douglas recommended several eugenic policies, including the sterilization of “mental defectives and those incurably diseased.” However, by the time Douglas became premier of Saskatchewan in 1944, he had abandoned his support for sterilization. When Douglas was presented with reports that recommended legalizing sexual sterilization in the province, he rejected the idea. Instead, he adopted a different approach, including therapy for people with mental illnesses and vocational training for those with intellectual disabilities. (See Tommy Douglas and Eugenics)

Sexual Sterilization Laws

Eugenics philosophy was highly influential in the enactment of sexual sterilization laws in North America in the early part of the 20th century. This type of legislation was passed in 32 states in the United States, and in two Canadian provinces: Alberta (in 1928) and British Columbia (in 1933). Countries around the world passed similar legislation, including Nazi Germany.

Eugenic Legislation in Alberta

In 1928, the Alberta government passed the Sexual Sterilization Act. There was broad public support for this legislation, which was passed by the United Farmers of Alberta under premier John Edward Brownlee. The Act established a Eugenics Board with the power to authorize the sexual sterilization of certain individuals who had been institutionalized under the Mental Diseases Act and Mental Defectives Act and recommended for release. According to the 1928 Sexual Sterilization Act, patients could be sterilized if “the board is unanimously of opinion that the patient might safely be discharged if the danger of procreation with its attendant risk of multiplication of the evil by transmission of the disability to progeny were eliminated." Consent was required, either from the patient or his/her parent, guardian or spouse.

In 1937, the Act was amended, removing the need for informed consent from those considered “mentally defective.” According to the 1937 amendments, such persons could be sterilized to prevent the transmission of “mental disability or deficiency” or to avoid the “risk of mental injury, either to such person or to his progeny.” Similarly, “psychotic” patients could be sterilized to prevent the transmission of mental disease or the risk of “mental injury.”

In 1942, the Act was altered yet again, expanding its scope to include candidates who had not been institutionalized. Both amendments were passed by the Social Credit government led by William Aberhart. The Alberta legislation was repealed in 1972 by Peter Lougheed’s Progressive Conservative government. During the 44 years in which the legislation was in effect, the Eugenics Board approved 4,725 cases for sterilization, of which 2,834 were carried out.

In 1996, an Alberta court awarded approximately $740,000 in damages to Leilani Muir, who had been wrongly sterilized at age 14 while she was a patient at the Provincial Training School for Mental Defectives. Hundreds of other sterilization survivors have since come forward and settled out of court with the province.

Leilani Muir speaks at an Alberta Eugenics Awareness Week event (22 October 2011). (GrammarLab/Wikimedia CC)

Eugenic Legislation in British Columbia

In 1933, the British Columbia government under Conservative premier Simon Fraser Tolmie passed its own Sexual Sterilization Act. It closely resembled Alberta’s legislation but was applied more narrowly. Under the Act, a Board of Eugenics could order the sterilization of any institutionalized patient who “if discharged… without being subjected to an operation for sexual sterilization would be likely to beget or bear children who by reason of inheritance would have a tendency to serious mental disease or mental deficiency.” There was broad support for the Act in British Columbia, including political support from the Liberal Party of British Columbia. In contrast, the Roman Catholic Church loudly protested the legislation.

According to historian Angus McLaren, a few hundred people were sterilized in British Columbia, far fewer than in Alberta. As records were destroyed, the exact number is unknown but is estimated to be between 200 and 400. The British Columbia legislation remained relatively narrow in scope compared to the Alberta Act, which was twice amended and enlarged. According to historian Amy Samson, many of the individuals sterilized through the program had come through Riverview Hospital (formerly Essondale Hospital). British Columbia’s Sexual Sterilization Act was repealed in 1973, under the NDP government of David Barrett. In 2005, nine women who were sterilized at Riverview Hospital between 1940 and 1968 were awarded $450,000 in an out-of-court settlement.

Eugenics in Other Canadian Provinces

Although Alberta and British Columbia were the only two provinces to pass sexual sterilization legislation, most provinces considered implementing eugenic policies in the early 20th century. SaskatchewanManitoba and Ontario all drafted sexual sterilization legislation, but these were defeated in the 1930s due to increased resistance, particularly from Catholics.

Moreover, as historian Erika Dyck points out, other provinces have engaged in eugenics as well. Beginning in the 1960s, Quebec practised “positive” eugenics, establishing baby bonuses and other financial incentives for large families, in the hope of increasing its population. In the Atlantic provincesNova Scotia institutionalized women considered unfit for motherhood.

Eugenics and Indigenous Peoples in Canada

Indigenous populations have been targeted by eugenic legislation, particularly sexual sterilization, since the 1930s (see Sterilization of Indigenous Women in Canada). In the first few decades of Alberta’s sterilization program, Eastern Europeans were the group most affected by the legislation. Under the province’s mental health campaigns, many Eastern Europeans were institutionalized and therefore subject to the Sexual Sterilization Act. But by 1972, First Nations and Métis people represented over 25 per cent of those sterilized under Alberta’s sexual sterilization legislation.

Even since the repeal of sexual sterilization laws in the early 1970s, Indigenous women have been coerced into sterilization, some of them pressured to sign consent forms for tubal ligation while in labour or on the operating table. According to Dr. Karen Stote, about 1,200 Indigenous women were sterilized in the 1970s alone, about half of them at “Indian hospitals” operated by the federal government between 1971 and 1974.

Coerced sterilization has continued into the 21st century. In July 2017, a report titled “Tubal Ligation in the Saskatoon Health Region: The Lived Experience of Aboriginal Women,” revealed that some Indigenous women in the Saskatoon area had been pressured into sexual sterilization. According to co-authors Yvonne Boyer, then Canada Research Chair in Aboriginal Health and Wellness at Brandon University, and Dr. Judith Bartlett, an Indigenous physician and former associate professor of community health science at the University of Manitoba, many of the women were pressured to sign consent forms while in labour. The same year, some of the affected women launched a class-action lawsuit against the Saskatoon Health Region, Saskatchewan government, federal government and individual medical professionals. Since the report’s publication, more women have come forward, alleging similar treatment in other regions, provinces and territories.

In November 2018, Amnesty International brought the issue to the United Nations Committee Against Torture. The following month, the UN committee made two recommendations: that all allegations of forced or coerced sterilization be impartially investigated, and that concrete measures be taken to prevent and criminalize involuntary sterilization.

The New Eugenics?

Many Canadians assume that the eugenics movement is a thing of the past, particularly after it was discredited as a pseudoscience following the Second World War and the eugenic policies of the Nazi regime in Germany (see Canada and the Holocaust). However, this ignores the fact that sexual sterilizations continued in Canada, even after sterilization legislation was repealed in the 1970s.

Moreover, some experts warn that Canada is sliding into a new form of eugenics in the 21st century. In 2004, for example, professor Tanis Doe of the University of Victoria argued that prenatal testing of fetuses is akin to Nazi-style eugenics, a purging of the disabled from society. According to Doe, there is a widespread acceptance among Western societies that disabled fetuses should not be brought to term, with many parents choosing to abort fetuses diagnosed with Down syndrome, for example. Whether genetic screening and genetic engineering constitute a “new eugenics” is a matter of debate, one which raises pressing questions about scientific ethicshuman rights, and (dis)ability (see also Disability Rights Movement in CanadaPopulation GeneticsGenetics, Ethics and the Law).

Further Reading

  • Diane B. Paul, John Stenhouse and Hamish G. Spencer, eds.,Eugenics at the Edges of Empire: New Zealand, Australia, Canada and South Africa (2017).

  • Erika Dyck, Facing Eugenics: Reproduction, Sterilization and the Politics of Choice (2013).

  • Karen Stote, An Act of Genocide: Colonialism and the Sterilization of Aboriginal Women (2015).

  • Leslie Elaine Baker, “Institutionalizing Eugenics: Custody, Class, Gender and Education in Nova Scotia’s Response to the ‘Feeble-Minded,’ 1890–1931,” University of Saskatchewan, Doctoral Dissertation, (2015).

  • Angus McLaren, Our Own Master Race: Eugenics in Canada, 1885-1945 (1990).

  • Claudia Malacrida, A Special Hell: Institutional Life in Alberta's Eugenic Years (2015).

External Links

Eugenics” comes from the Greek roots for “good” and “origin,” or “good birth” and involves applying principles of genetics and heredity for the purpose of improving the human race. The term eugenics was first coined by Francis Galton in the late 1800’s (Norrgard 2008). Galton (1822-1911) was an English intellectual whose body of work spanned many fields, including statistics, psychology, meteorology and genetics. Incidentally, he was also a half-cousin of Charles Darwin. Galton’s first academic foray into eugenics analyzed the characteristics, such as superior intelligence, of England’s upper classes and concluded they were hereditary; therefore, desirable traits could be passed down through generations (Norrgard 2008). Galton advocated a selective breeding program for humans in his book Hereditary Genius (1869): “Consequently, as it is easy, ….. to obtain by careful selection a permanent breed of dogs or horses gifted with peculiar powers of running, or of doing anything else, so it would be quite practicable to produce a highly-gifted race of men by judicious marriages during several consecutive generations.”

Eugenics was not only the purview of academics, and it became a popular social movement that peaked in the 1920s and 30s. During this period, the American Eugenics Society was founded, in addition to many local societies and groups around the country (PBS 1998). Members competed in “fitter family” and “better baby” competitions at fairs and exhibitions (Remsberg 2011). Movies and books promoting eugenic principles were popular. A film called The Black Stork (1917), based on a true story, depicted as heroic a doctor that allowed a syphilitic infant to die after convincing the child’s parents that it was better to spare society one more outcast.

The English eugenics movement, championed by Galton, promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits. In contrast, the eugenics movement in the US quickly focused on eliminating negative traits. Not surprisingly, “undesirable” traits were concentrated in poor, uneducated, and minority populations. In an attempt to prevent these groups from propagating, eugenicists helped drive legislation for their forced sterilization (Norrgard 2008). The first state to enact a sterilization law was Indiana in 1907, quickly followed by California and 28 other states by 1931 (Lombardo n.d.). These laws resulted in the forced sterilization of over 64,000 people in the United States (Lombardo n.d.). At first, sterilization efforts focused on the disabled but later grew to include people whose only “crime” was poverty. These sterilization programs found legal support in the Supreme Court. In Buck v. Bell (1927), the state of Virginia sought to sterilize Carrie Buck for promiscuity as evidenced by her giving birth to a baby out of wedlock (some suggest she was raped). 


Thursday, December 10, 2020

Land Ownership Taxes Homlesnes and Money in Canada

Canadian Crown corporations (French: sociétés de la Couronne du Canada) are corporations wholly owned by the Crown and most are agents of the Crown with each ultimately accountable, through a relevant minister, to Parliament for the conduct of its affairs.

Canadians are now paying more per capita to support the Queen than the British are. According to the latest figures out of Buckingham Palace, while Canadians are shelling out $1.53 per capita, the British are only paying about $1.32.Jul 14, 

It cost Canada $43 million to support the royal family in 2015

While it can be hard to accurately tabulate the number of Canadians experiencing homelessness, the State of Homelessness in Canada 2016 -- which Richter co-authored -- estimated that at least 235,000 Canadians experience homelessness in a year and 35,000 Canadians experience homelessness on a given night.Aug 12, 2020

About Toronto Homelessness

Homelessness is a complex, urgent and growing issue in Toronto. There are approximately 8,700 people in Toronto who are experiencing homelessness, many more are experiencing “hidden homelessness”, and thousands of others are on the wait list for supportive housing.

The chronically homeless, those who are homeless for six months or more within the past year, are the hardest to house as they are often also dealing with other issues such as addictions and mental health. A person of no fixed address faces major barriers to finding a primary physician, social support, or keeping in touch with family.

Toronto has a shortage of affordable housing. Many individuals experiencing homelessness rely on temporary shelters, emergency services or a friend’s hospitality. Others live “rough” in the city’s parks, ravines, and alleys.

Finding a safe, affordable place to live can be difficult. Homes First is here to help.

Statistics on Homelessness*

  • On any given day over 8,700 people in Toronto are experiencing homelessness.
  • For every 10,000 people in Toronto, 30 are homeless.
  • In 2018, nearly half of Toronto’s homeless population reported being homeless for over 6 months, which makes them chronically homeless.
  • Over 30 per cent of Toronto’s homeless live with a mental health issue, and over 25 per cent live with an addiction.
  • 94 per cent of those experiencing homelessness in Toronto want permanent housing, but face barriers in securing it.
  • 80 per cent said they need more affordable housing options.
  • In the past 10 years, average market rent for a one-bedroom has increased by 33 per cent. In that same time, Ontario Works shelter benefits have increased only 10 per cent.

Does England own Canada?
In 1982, it adopted its own constitution and became a completely independent country. Although it's still part of the British Commonwealt.

Prior to the formation of Crown corporations as presently understood, much of what later became Canada was settled and governed by a similar type of entity called a chartered company. These companies were established by a royal charter by the ScottishEnglish, or French crown, but were owned by private investors. They fulfilled the dual roles of promoting government policy abroad and making a return for shareholders. Certain companies were mainly trading businesses, but some were given a mandate (by royal charter) to govern a specific territory called a charter colony, and the head of this colony, called a proprietary governor, was both a business manager and the governing authority in the area. The first colonies on the island of Newfoundland were founded in this manner, between 1610 and 1728.

Can you truly own land in Canada?
The second largest country in the world by total area, Canada, is one of the most highly urbanized globally. However, none of its citizens have the right to own physical land in the country. Land in Canada is solely owned by Britain's Queen Elizabeth II, who is also the head of state as pet Sep 19, 2019

Does the British royal family own land in Canada?
Crown land (sometimes spelled crownland), also known as royal domain or demesne, is a territorial area belonging to the monarch, who personifies the Crown. ... Today, in Commonwealth realms such as Canada and Australia, crown land is considered public land and is apart from the monarch's private estate.

Crown land (sometimes spelled crownland), also known as royal domain or demesne, is a territorial area belonging to the monarch, who personifies the Crown. It is the equivalent of an entailed estate and passes with the monarchy, being inseparable from it. Today, in Commonwealth realms such as Canada and Australia, crown land is considered public land and is apart from the monarch's private estate.

In Britain, the hereditary revenues of Crown lands provided income for the monarch until the start of the reign of George III, when the profits from the Crown Estate were surrendered to the Parliament of Great Britain in return for a fixed civil list payment. The monarch retains the income from the Duchy of Lancaster.


87% of the province is Crown land, of which 95% is in northern Ontario. It's managed by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry and is used for economic development, tourism and recreation.

The majority of all lands in Canada are held by governments as public land and are known as Crown lands. About 89% of Canada's land area (8,886,356 km²) is Crown land, which may either be federal (41%) or provincial (48%); the remaining 11% is privately owned.

Canada has three levels of government:
  • federal.
  • provincial or territorial.
  • municipal (city)
Who is part of local government?
Local governments generally include two tiers: counties, also known as boroughs in Alaska and parishes in Louisiana, and municipalities, or cities/towns. In some states, counties are divided into townships.

What are the 5 types of local government?
The ICMA has classified local governments into five common forms: mayor–council, council–manager, commission, town meeting, and representative town meeting.
local tax is an assessment by a state, county, or municipality to fund public services ranging from education to garbage collection and sewer maintenance. Local taxes come in many forms, from property taxes and payroll taxes to sales taxes and licensing fees. They can vary widely from one jurisdiction to the next.

Municipalities also pay wages and benefits to government workers above those of comparable private sector positions.

This is about more than just economics. It seems unfair for government workers to receive a premium paid for by private sector workers who receive less overall compensation for similar work.

A final indicator of the dramatic difference between the government and private sectors: the rate of absenteeism. In 2013, full-time employees in Ontario’s private sector were absent due to personal reasons an average of 7.2 days throughout the year while the average government worker was absent 10.4 days.

Ontario (provincial) tax rates for the 2020 tax year
  • 5.05% on taxable income of C$44,740 or less.
  • 9.15% on taxable income between $44,742, and $89,482.
  • 11.16% on taxable income between $89,482 and $150,000.
  • 12.16% on taxable income between $150,000 and $220,000.
  • 13.16% on taxable income over $220,000.

What are the federal taxes in Canada?
The 10% rate applies to income from $1 to $10,000; the 20% rate applies to income from $10,001 to $20,000; and the 30% rate applies to all income above $20,000. Under this system, someone earning $10,000 is taxed at 10%, paying a total of $1,000.

In March 2019, there were 287,978 employees in the Federal Public Service.

How many Ontario government employees are there?
Overview. The Government of Ontario includes ministries, agencies and Crown corporations. Its workforce of 60,000+ public servants is called the Ontario Public Service ( OPS ).

Employment in the public sector accounts for 20% of employed Canadians. The public sector employed 3.6 million people in 2010, an increase of almost 46,000 jobs (1.3%) from 2009. In 2010, the wages and salaries of public sector employees totalled $191.8 billion, a 4.4% increase from $183.7 billion in 2009.

Ontario There are three types of sales taxes in Canada: PST, GST and HST. As of July 1, 2019 the PST rate was reduced from 8% to 7%. As of July 1, 2016 the HST rate increased from 13% to 15%.

Individuals in Canada generally pay income taxes on employment and investment income to the province in which they reside on December 31 of the tax year.

 $12-billion in unspent contingency funds as COVID-19′s second wave hit, report says

December 2020

The Government of Ontario is falling far short when it comes to financially supporting people and public services, says CUPE Ontario, drawing on a new report by the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario (FAO).

The report reveals that the provincial government’s share of direct support measures compared to the federal government is only three per cent. Additionally, out of two funds to support COVID-19 response measures, a Health Sector Response Fund and a Support for People and Jobs Fund, the majority ($6.7 billion) remains unused. This is also the case for the majority of the Safe Restart Fund, $3.1 billion, and half of the Safe Return to School Fund.

“Doug Ford keeps telling Ontarians that he’s willing to do anything to support our communities and keep us safe,” said Fred Hahn, President of CUPE Ontario, representing 280,000 public sector workers. “But this report is exposing that spin.

Taxation in Canada is a prerogative shared between the federal government and the various provincial and territorial legislatures.

 is a country in the northern part of North America. Its ten provinces and three territories extend from the Atlantic to the Pacific and northward into the Arctic Ocean, covering 9.98 million square kilometres (3.85 million square miles), making it the world's second-largest country by total area. Its southern and western border with the United States, stretching 8,891 kilometres (5,525 mi), is the world's longest bi-national land border. Canada's capital is Ottawa, and its three largest metropolitan areas are TorontoMontreal, and Vancouver.

Largest cityToronto

Although responsible government had existed in Canada since 1848, Britain continued to set its foreign and defence policies until the end of the First World War. The passing of the Statute of Westminster in 1931 recognized that Canada had become co-equal with the United Kingdom. After the Constitution was patriated in 1982, the final vestiges of legal dependence on the British parliament were removed. Canada currently consists of ten provinces and three territories and is a parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy with Queen Elizabeth II as its head of state.

The first major Canadian experience with directly state-owned enterprises came during the early growth of the railways. During the earlier part of the century, many British North American colonies that now comprise the Canadian federation had Crown corporations, often in the form of railways, such as the Nova Scotia Railway, since there was limited private capital available for such endeavours. When four British colonies joined to create the Canadian federation in 1867, these railways were transferred to the new central government. As well, the construction of the Intercolonial Railway between them was one of the terms of the new constitution. The first section of this entirely government-owned railway was completed in 1872.

Western Canada's early railways were all run by privately owned companies backed by government subsidies and loans. By the early twentieth century, however, many of these had become bankrupt. The federal government nationalised several failing Western railways and combined them with its existing Intercolonial and other line in the East to create Canadian National Railways (CNR) in 1918 as a transcontinental system. The CNR was unique in that was a conglomerate, and besides passenger and freight rail, it had inherited major business interests in shipping, hotels, and telegraphy and was able create new lines of business in broadcasting and air travel. Many of the components of this business empire where later spun off into new Crown corporations including some the most important businesses in the mid-twentieth century economy of Canada, such Air Canada, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), Via Rail, and Marine Atlantic.

Provincial Crown corporations also re-emerged in the early twentieth century, most notably in the selling of alcohol. Government monopoly liquor stores were seen as a compromise between the recently ended era of Prohibition in Canada and the excesses of the previous open market which had led to calls for prohibition in the first place. Virtually all the provinces used this system at one point. The largest of these government liquor businesses, the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (founded 1927), was by 2008 one of the world's largest alcohol retailers. Resource and utility companies also emerged at this time, notably Ontario Hydro in 1906, Alberta Government Telephones in 1906, and SaskTel in 1908. Provincial governments also re-entered the railway business as in Northern Alberta Railways in 1925 and what later became BC Rail in 1918. A notable anomaly of this era is Canada's only provincially owned "bank" (though not called that for legal reasons) Alberta Treasury Branches, created in 1937.

New crown Corporations were also created throughout much of the mid-century. A government-owned bank, Business Development Bank of Canada was created in 1944. The federal Post Office Department became a Crown corporation as Canada Post Corporation in 1981, and Canada's export credit agencyExport Development Canada, was created in 1985. Perhaps the most controversial was Petro-Canada, Canada's short-lived attempt to create a national oil company, founded in 1975.

Not only the federal government was involved, but also the provinces, who were in engaged in an era of "province building" (expanding the reach and importance of the provincial governments) around this time. The prototypical example is undoubtedly Hydro-Québec, founded in 1944 and now Canada's largest electricity generator and the world's largest producer of electricity. 

Civid 2019

Four Crown corporations account for roughly $236 billion in loans or deferrals handed out since the start of the pandemic to make it easier for businesses to manage costs.

Crown corporations have handed out an estimated $422 billion in “liquidity support” to businesses since the start of the coronavirus pandemic.

The measures are mostly to be repaid, with just some portions of loans being forgivable, meaning they are unlikely to have a large impact on the federal deficit.

Friday, December 4, 2020

2020 Pandemic

  Dr. Anthony Fauci said: “We predict that sometime by the end of this year, let’s say November or December, we will know whether or not these are safe and effective.”


Right. Less than one year to design, develop and plan study protocols; to create an adverse event tracking system; to move through three trial phases to win FDA approval; and to push the vaccines into the market. Indeed, that would be a world record for the 150-year history of immunization science. Despite more than ninety manufacturers and academic institutions entering the race, the rush to deliver a vaccine makes the pharma tagline, “safe and effective,” questionable at best.

Professors Peter Doshi and Eric Topol took the question a step further, publishing an Op-Ed in the New York Times on three leading COVID vaccine manufacturers in Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca, writing:

“According to the protocols for their studies, which they released late last week, a vaccine could meet the companies’ benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild Covid-19, but was never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death.”

Operation ‘Warp Speed’—a name inspired by Star Trek for hyper-space travel—brought unlimited resources to the pharmaceutical industry. After all, it is a race against a deadly virus. Yet, the multi-trillion-dollar industry acts more like a cartel. For decades, Big Pharma has stifled vaccine innovation, stunted competition, and concentrated power. It controls all U.S. health agencies, hospital systems, and institutions of higher education. It has greased politicians on both sides of the aisle at every government level.


This month, the FDA paused AstraZeneca’s phase three trial when a pair of individuals suffered “severe neurological symptoms,” including temporary, polio-like paralysis. Then Moderna, which has never brought an FDA-approved vaccine to the market, ran into problems in its first two trials: scores of people developed side-effects. Moderna was working on a genetic-altering mRNA technology to deliver synthetically-coated lipid nanoparticles inside human cells.

As the human experimentation continues, more problems become exposed and more questions are raised about vaccine safety. After years of silence, professionals – medical doctors, epidemiologists, and immunization scientists – who have rarely spoken out about the negative side of vaccines are doing so now. Notably, they work in Big Medicine.

Why have the industry professionals started to speak out? The public’s eroding trust in the healthcare industry is at stake. They are evaluating the available science and are coming to the conclusion that no vaccine developed in record time, one that could injure thousands of people, would be worth the risk. What if massive side effects occur? A revolt by the people, whose tax money is paying for the gargantuan program, could shrink Big Pharma fast. That is why Fauci implored Americans to “trust” science.

But should the public trust be placed in the conflicted Dr. Fauci, who has a vested interest and part patent holder in COVID vaccines?


Follow the Money! Fauci Holds 4 COVID-19 Related Patents

The four patents on which Fauci is named as an inventor are the following:

  • Patent Number: 9896509, patent granted August 3, 2016. “Use of antagonists of the interaction between HIV120 and ?4?7 integrin.
  • Publication Number: 20160333309, patent application filed August 3, 2016. “Use of Antagonists of the Interaction Between HIV GP120 and A4B7 Integrin.
  • Patent Number: 9441041, patent granted September 13, 2016. “Use of antagonists between HIV GP120 and ?4?7 integrin.”
  • Publication Number 2016007586, patent application filed September 21, 2015. “Use of antagonists of the Interaction Between HIV GP120 and A4B7 Integrin.”

An article published by a group of medical scientists in India in the medical science journal BioRXiv in January 2020 was entitled “Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCov spike protein to HIV-1 and Gag.”


Xinhua: On Sep 18, 2019, Wuhan Held an Emergency Response Drill for Novel Coronavirus

Xinhua reported that, on September 18, 2019, in preparation for the upcoming Military World Games, Wuhan held a drill about the novel coronavirus infection.

The Emergency Response Exercise, jointly organized by Wuhan Customs and the Executive Committee of Military World Games, was held at the Tianhe Airport in Wuhan. It simulated two situations: an arrival of baggage was found to have excessive nuclear radiation and a passenger was found to be infected with the novel coronavirus. The coronavirus drill included multiple steps, such as epidemiological investigations, medical inspections, setting up a temporary test area, quarantine and testing, patient transfer, and sanitary treatments.

But when one probes deeper, one finds the Shadow Plan, a plan that wasn’t designed to extinguish the virus or help citizens recover economically from the outbreak. The globalists’ Warp Speed seeks to erect a new global order.

The same UN, which hosted the Event 201 emergency pandemic session last year, sent out its leadership to announce the ‘First Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator Facilitation Council Meeting.’  Secretary-General António Guterres began with the obligatory remarks about a “common enemy” and the will to “save lives over the next twelve months…” before he threw a hard curveball. In plain, innocuous language, he blithely warned:

“I know many pin their hopes on a vaccine—but let’s be clear: there is no panacea in a pandemic. A vaccine alone cannot solve this crisis; certainly not in the near term.”

 The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act provides complete immunity to companies that make products, devises, or devise components known as “countermeasures.” They are given complete liability protection unless a harmed party can prove the injury was a result of “willful misconduct,” a legal term that is nearly impossible to prove. The EUA for COVID19 is scheduled to expire in October 2024, unless it is extended. Obviously, this Plandemic isn’t going away any time soon.

Sweeping Provisions Against Americans

Passed in, Senator Frist (a medical doctor) handed the drug companies (a special interest group) more immunity than any bill that has ever been passed by Congress. The legislation provides at least four sweeping provisions:
  1. Immunity from all liability for all drugs, vaccines or biological products deemed as a “covered countermeasure.”
  2. Immunity from all accountability, no matter what a drug company did wrong. Even if the company’s dirty facility created a batch of contaminated vaccines that resulted in deaths or injuries to thousands of people, the drug company will remain immune from liability.
  3. Immunity from all liability for any product used for any public health emergency declared by the Secretary of HHS.
  4. Immunity from all lawsuits. A person who suffers any type of loss will be legally prohibited from suing the drug companies; they now have immunity from almost everything, perhaps even murder.

In simple terms, if a claim is filed by a plaintiff it can only go forward if the injured party can prove that the company performed an act of willful misconduct. In other words, the injured party would have to prove the vaccine maker created a product that intentionally caused them harm.

Unbelievably, even then the drug company is still immune from accountability. Even if a pharmaceutical company knowingly harms people, the company will be immune from legal prosecution unless the U.S. Attorney General initiates enforcement action against the drug company in the name of the claimant. This means the U.S. government would have to go to bat for the plaintiff against the drug company for the lawsuit to move forward.

The Time for Mass Vaccination in Adults Has Arrived

The National Vaccine Plan (NVP) for adults was released in February 2010. It lays out the strategy to vaccinate all adults with all approved vaccines and “any vaccine that is approved, now and in the future.

The plan established four key goals. Each goal has objectives and strategies to guide implementation through 2020:

  • zGoal 1: Strengthen the adult immunization infrastructure
  • aGoal 2: Improve access to adult vaccines
  • Goal 3: Increase community demand for adult immunizations
  • cGoal 4: Foster innovation in adult vaccine development and vaccination-related technologies

Let’s look at a little closer at what the Plan has to say about Goal #3:

  • Educate and encourage individuals and healthcare professionals to promote adult vaccination programs
  • Leverage group influence (faith-based groups, etc.) to promote and demand access to adult vaccinations
  • Create more robust EHRs to include standing orders, reminder calls, and reminder mailings
  • Encourage the development of “adult immunization champions” in communities and across all sectors

All forms of media and communication continually remind the general public that a “vaccine for the virus that causes COVID-19 is on the way” and “it’s coming soon.” 


The implied message is to anticipate it, wait for it and then, as soon as it arrives, go get your vaccine. The listener’s subconscious is being prepared to demand to be vaccinated.


This is mind control in my opinion.



Friday, November 27, 2020

Claire Edward


I believe Claire Edwardt  has pertinent information regarding 5G

1. Doctors receive no training on the symptoms of exposure to electromagnetic radiation.


2. The cell phones themselves are extremely sinister.  Not only are they incredibly dangerous in terms of what they do to the human body, and we have the evidence for the health outcomes now, but I think they are used in many other ways, including mind control. 


3. All the research on microwave radiation was kept secret by the US military so that weapons could secretly be developed and no one would realise.  They thought that if they called this new generation 5G, everyone would just think it was another generation of wireless technology and nothing much to worry about.   


4.these technologies are extremely sinister and include mind and emotional control, including by HAARP.  In fact, I suspect that the 5G satellites are HAARP gone digital. 

5.Vaccines have for some time contained nanoparticles and these plus electromagnetic radiation together make a binary weapon. Each particle is a micro antenna that picks up the radiation and this then explodes cells within the body. The first use of this weapon resulted in Gulf War syndrome (Tom Bearden).  


6.The Bretton Woods agreement and the delinking of the dollar from gold in 1971, which led us into the fictional economics of game theory, which was adopted in the 1970s.  We are now fully in a game of poker, and the conspirators are bluffing us with their “laws” and illusory control of everything, hoping to be the winners that take all.


7. This microwave radiation is bringing in entities – the Archons / Jinn / demons – whatever you want to call them and it is they that have taken over most of the politicians.   


8. Harp technology is turned on at night. when is affecting sleeping pattern of peoples. 


Claire Edwards bio (in her own words):

…”You asked me to write some sort of bio and this seems to be particularly challenging when it comes down to it.  There are very many threads to this story and it is humongous, going back at least to Darwin.

I have a degree in French Language and Literature and a master’s degree in Intercultural Competence. I am a former United Nations editor and gave trainings at the UN in intercultural writing. While at the UN, for many years I edited all the documents of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and its Legal and Scientific and Technical subcommittees (such that I am familiar with space law and the particular issues of concern regarding use of the space orbits).

I am bicultural (English/Irish) and have lived in six different countries (England, France, Czech Republic, Japan, Thailand and Austria) and speak English, French, Japanese and German, in that order of competence.

I worked at the UN for 18 years as an editor, correcting and fact-checking official documents and publications, which included the topics of terrorism, drugs and space.  I was alarmed when they put up public access points with very high levels of electromagnetic radiation in the Vienna International Centre in December 2015.  No one listened to my warnings so I ended up confronting the UN Secretary-General about it on 14 May 2018, after I had retired ( – 6 minutes).

That led to my contribution to the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space, co-authoring and editing it and administering its translation into 30 languages.  It was the first appeal about EMR that gained traction with the public.  So I became something of a lay expert on 5G and the dangers and history of electricity, which led to my understanding that 5G is a weapon, and that in fact wireless technology as a whole has been a weapon right from the beginning.  The person who first set the so-called safety guidelines was a Nazi scientist (Operation Paperclip) who previously worked at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics

The Appeal was hijacked, effectively by the Club of Rome, last December precisely because it had been so successful.  That then led to my finding out about depopulation and eugenics – which of course dates right back to Darwin and the Fabian Society – and Agenda 21/2030 and “sustainable development”, which in my view really means “sustainable rapaciousness” for the predatory oligarchs.  Club of Rome is also responsible for the climate change hoax, of course, and this is used as the pretext for the “Green New Deal”, which is actually about the monetization of nature or the theft of the planet, which is the ultimate goal.

The Appeal was hijacked by a subsidiary organization of Club of Rome, called Worldshift, and it is Worldshift that explains exactly what “The Great Reset” is all about, which is a Maoist Cultural Revolution, which entails the destruction of everything: the family, communities, societies, nation-states, religion, and humanity itself.  This is what we have seen enacted this year and it is why the Democrats in the US are now seeking civil war.

And then came the “Covid” scam, which I immediately recognized as the cover for the use of the electromagnetic weapon.  So I looked at what happened in Wuhan and Milan, and then I watched the murder of the old and the sick during the first half of this year.  So they are now fully embarked on their genocide and I drafted and delivered this “genocide” document on 2 November, which someone turned into a short video:

The coming “Covid” vaccines are about depopulation and the genetic modification of humanity – in effect the deletion of humanity and the imprisonment of the remainder of humanity – the cyborgised ones – in “smart” cities.  All the research on microwave radiation was kept secret by the US military so that weapons could secretly be developed and no one would realise.  They thought that if they called this new generation 5G, everyone would just think it was another generation of wireless technology and nothing much to worry about.  But in fact, as I am sure you are well aware, all of these technologies are extremely sinister and include mind and emotional control, including by HAARP.  In fact, I suspect that the 5G satellites are HAARP gone digital.

The cell phones themselves are extremely sinister.  Not only are they incredibly dangerous in terms of what they do to the human body, and we have the evidence for the health outcomes now, but I think they are used in many other ways, including mind control.  They are addictive for one thing.  They can also be used to transmit simulated pathogens to the user. Thus you can imitate contagion, and that is how the hoax is played.  Just think “contact tracing”.

No one realizes that electromagnetic radiation is so dangerous as it has been kept hidden through regulatory capture and military secrecy.  Doctors receive no training on the symptoms of exposure to electromagnetic radiation.  And of course everyone lives in a Western materialist-reductionist paradigm and thinks that the world around us is solid, so when you try to explain that the body is not solid and consists entirely of frequencies – each organ has its own frequency and each emotion has a frequency, for example – no one believes you.  I basically think that the 20th century is the lost century because quantum physics should have changed our perception of everything, but instead we descended into a complete fiction of everything: money, economics, medicine, education.

Vaccines have for some time contained nanoparticles and these plus electromagnetic radiation together make a binary weapon. Each particle is a micro antenna that picks up the radiation and this then explodes cells within the body. The first use of this weapon resulted in Gulf War syndrome (Tom Bearden). This could account for the old people, who had received flu vaccines in Wuhan and Milan, having died in such large numbers.  This binary weapon is already in use for cancer treatments, so what does that suggest about the upcoming “Covid” “vaccines”?

What doctors in general fail to realize is that the symptoms of “Covid” are in fact the symptoms of exposure to electromagnetic radiation. I made a table comparing these symptoms in an article entitled “Our Children Are Now in Grave Danger”:

Next they plan to cut off the food supply and introduce a digital currency.  All of that implies the end of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency and therefore the destruction of America, which is what we are looking at now with this election because the conspirators behind this want civil war in the US. One thread of all this is the banking thread.  You can go way back to the Federal Reserve and the bankruptcy of America, but I prefer to go back to the Bretton Woods agreement and the delinking of the dollar from gold in 1971, which led us into the fictional economics of game theory, which was adopted in the 1970s.  We are now fully in a game of poker, and the conspirators are bluffing us with their “laws” and illusory control of everything, hoping to be the winners that take all.

I’ve now got to that depth in the rabbit hole where I am realising that all this microwave radiation is bringing in entities – the Archons / Jinn / demons – whatever you want to call them and it is they that have taken over most of the politicians.  I spent six years before getting involved in stopping 5G looking into the nature of reality and studying mediumship and all of that now comes into play. “–Claire Edwards