Au Contraire, It’s Not A “Toxic Environment”, It’s Righteous Questioning About Red Chinese Influence Peddling: They Can’t Stand the Heat — Trudeau Foundation president, board resign, citing ‘politicization’ of China-linked donation

Posted on by

Trudeau Foundation president, board resign, citing ‘politicization’ of China-linked donation

Social Sharing

Charity’s leadership cites controversy over Beijing-linked donor to explain the move

Richard Raycraft · CBC News · Posted: Apr 11, 2023 6:51 AM PDT | Last Updated: 5 hours ago

A red and yellow Chinese flag.
The Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation’s board of directors and president have resigned, citing the political controversy from a donation a Chinese government adviser made to the charity. (Thomas Peter/Reuters)

The Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation’s president and board of directors have resigned en masse, citing the charity’s entanglement in the ongoing foreign interference controversy.

In a statement, the foundation said that a $200,000 donation in 2016 from a businessman linked to the Chinese government “has put a great deal of pressure on the foundation’s management and volunteer board of directors, as well as on our staff and our community.” 

The charity announced last month that it would return the donation. The Conservatives criticized the government over the matter, saying the donation compromised a government report on the integrity of the 2021 federal election.

“The circumstances created by the politicization of the foundation have made it impossible to continue with the status quo, and the volunteer board of directors has resigned, as has the president and CEO,” the statement said.

WATCH Trudeau reacts to CEO, board resignations at Trudeau Foundation

Trudeau reacts to CEO, board resignations at Trudeau Foundation

7 hours agoDuration 0:55Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says the foundation will continue to make a positive impact on academic institutions across the country.

The foundation is independent and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has no involvement with it.

“The Trudeau Foundation is a foundation with which I have absolutely no intersection,” Trudeau told a news conference Tuesday.

“It is a shame to see the level of toxicity and political polarization that is going on in our country these days, but I am certain that the Trudeau Foundation will be able to continue to ensure that research into the social studies and humanities at the highest levels across Canadian academic institutions continues for many years to come.”

The charity, established in 2001 to honour former prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, funds scholarships, mentorships and fellowships.

Last month, Prime Minister Trudeau appointed former governor general David Johnston as a special rapporteur to investigate foreign interference in Canadian elections and institutions, including alleged meddling by the Chinese government.

The Conservatives have questioned Johnston’s impartiality, in part by pointing to Johnston’s former role as a member of the Trudeau Foundation. Foundation members are responsible for appointing the board of directors.

Johnston resigned from the foundation following his appointment as special rapporteur. Trudeau has defended the choice, citing Johnston’s long career in public service.

The statement said three directors will remain on an interim basis to continue the charity’s work while a new board is appointed. The foundation’s website currently lists six members of the board of directors.

Its president and CEO, Pascale Fournier, had been in the position for almost five years.

Poilievre calls for investigation

Reacting to news of the resignations Tuesday morning, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre called for an investigation into the charity.

“We need to investigate the Beijing-funded Trudeau Foundation,” Poilievre tweeted.

“We need to know who got rich, who got paid and who got privilege and power from Justin Trudeau as a result of funding to the Trudeau Foundation.”https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1

Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet said the resignations make the 2016 donation look more suspicious. He called on Johnston to step down as special rapporteur and for the government to call a public inquiry into foreign interference.

“Nothing else will do,” Blanchet said in a French statement.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said he won’t comment on the Trudeau Foundation specifically. He repeated his calls for a public inquiry.

WATCH Singh repeats call for public inquiry after Trudeau Foundation president, board resign

Singh repeats call for public inquiry after Trudeau Foundation president, board resign

6 hours agoDuration 0:57During a press conference at St. Clair College in Windsor, Ont., NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh is asked about the resignation of the president and board of directors of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation. A statement from the foundation said ‘the circumstances created by the politicization of the foundation have made it impossible to continue with the status quo.’

“What we’ve seen from both the Liberals and the Conservatives, they’re more interested in scoring political points, pointing fingers at each other,” Singh told a news conference.

“When it comes to something as serious as our democracy, the goal shouldn’t be to score points … We’ve been saying we need a public inquiry to get to the truth, to give Canadians confidence.”

Shocking Expose of How the Red Chinese Network of Influence and Subversion Works in CanadaCanadian Politicians Sign Letter to CCP Official Pledging to Promote Beijing’s Image in Fighting COVID-19: Report

Posted on by

Canadian Politicians Sign Letter to CCP Official Pledging to Promote Beijing’s Image in Fighting COVID-19: Report

Conservative Sen. Victor Oh in a file photo. (Becky Zhou/The Epoch Times)

Conservative Sen. Victor Oh in a file photo. (Becky Zhou/The Epoch Times)

Andrew Chen

By Andrew ChenApril 8, 2023Updated: April 9, 2023 biggersmallerPrint 0:006:49

Senator Victor Oh and former Ontario cabinet minister Michael Chan were signatories among those who signed a 2020 letter from an Ontario-based Chinese-Canadian business association to a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) official saying the association has been promoting China’s image in fighting COVID-19 and pledges continuing support of the “great motherland.”

Oh signed as the association’s honorary president as well as a Canadian senator and “chair” of the Canada-China Legislative Association (CACN). Oh’s biography on the Senate of Canada website indicates he is the “Vice-Chair” of CACN, though his name currently is not on the members page of the association.

Chan, for his part, signed as CACN’s honorary president as well as a former minister of international trade of Ontario and an honorary citizen of Jiangsu Province. https://fb9aa48ced4f4ea33ff145de51fa2d12.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-40/html/container.html

The correspondence was in response to a letter issued by the CCP official to Jiang Rui, president of Richmond Hill-based Jiangsu Commerce Council of Canada (JCCC), as reported in April 2020 by the Chinese-language media ccmedia.news, and first reported in English by the Found in Translation newsletter on Substack. The ccmedia.news website includes copies of the two letters.

The March 27, 2020, letter by the CCP official, Lou Qinjian, former secretary of the Jiangsu provincial committee, bears the letterhead of the Jiangsu Provincial Committee of the CCP. It is addressed directly to Jiang as well as all overseas Chinese from Jiangsu in Canada. It is co-signed by another CCP official, Wu Zhenglong, then-governor of Jiangsu. Jiangsu is a province on China’s east coast, north of Shanghai.

Neither Oh nor Chan responded to requests for comment from The Epoch Times.

‘Telling China’s Story Well’

In what Jiang described as a “letter from home,” CCP official Lou’s letter expressed care and concern toward the overseas Chinese in Canada amid the COVID-19 pandemic and said they will “resolutely implement [Chinese] President Xi Jinping’s instructions and requirements, and make the utmost effort to provide help and support for the health and safety of all overseas compatriots.”

Meanwhile, the letter also urged the JCCC to take advantage of its connections as a Chinese diaspora association to promote to Canadians a positive image of Beijing’s pandemic response.

“[We] hope that you will make use of overseas Chinese as a bridge to convey confidence, actively tell well the story of the fight against the pandemic at home [in China], promote the image of the motherland as a responsible major country, and demonstrate the good citizenship of overseas Jiangsu people,” the letter said.

“Telling China’s story well” is a phrase introduced by Chinese leader Xi in 2013, encapsulating his approach of messaging on the world stage to promote the image of the communist regime.

Response Letter

The ccmedia.news article included images of the three pages of Jiang’s response letter, dated April 10, 2020, addressed only to Lou and bearing Jiang’s signature on the second page and the signatures of Oh, Chan, and over a dozen other senior JCCC members on the third page.

In the response letter, Jiang expressed gratitude for the “special letter from home,” saying that following that lead, other Jiangsu government departments have also reached out to show their care and concern, including the Jiangsu Provincial United Front Work Department (UFWD). The UFWD functions as the CCP’s “primary foreign interference tool” working to co-opt international politicians and facilitate espionage, among other activities that endanger national security, says a 2020 report by Public Safety Canada citing research by think tanks.

Epoch Times Photo
Former Ontario cabinet minister Michael Chan speaks at a rally held to condemn protests in Hong Kong, in Markham, Ont., on Aug. 11, 2019. (Yi Ling/The Epoch Times)

Jiang also said his group has been committed to the cause of promoting China’s image in Canada since early in the pandemic.

“Since the early days of China’s fight against the pandemic, we’ve made use of the special resources and channels of many JCCC members to tell the story of China’s fight against the pandemic to the Canadian government and people,” Jiang wrote.

“Through extensive and in-depth publicity, China’s demeanour [image] as a responsible, courageous, competent, and cooperative great power … is receiving more and more understanding, support, and appreciation from the Canadian government, people, and overseas Chinese!”

The ccmedia.news article included photos of Oh and Chan signing the letter.

Oh, a Conservative senator representing Ontario, was appointed to the Senate in 2013.

Chan, who was a cabinet member in the previous Liberal government in Ontario, is now deputy mayor of Markham, Ont., a city that is part of the Greater Toronto Area. At the time of the signing of the letter, he was not a public office holder.

The Ontario provincial government was reportedly warned by CSIS in 2010 about its fear that Chan was under the influence of China, according to the Globe and Mail. Chan has said he is taking legal action against the Globe for its reporting.

As reported previously by The Epoch Times, Chan has spoken against anti-Beijing protests in Hong Kong, and supported the regime’s national security law for the region. Canada and other democratic countries have condemned the new law as suppressing freedoms.

Affiliation

The JCCC, established in 2002, says its goal is to promote trade and business collaboration between Ontario and Jiangsu. It has over 1,000 members, including elites in the business, government, and academic communities, according to its website.

Jiang Rui, who began serving as JCCC president in 2018, has also held positions in organizations associated with the CCP, according to reports in local Jiangsu media and state media in China.

Apart from being JCCC president, Jiang is also an overseas representative of the provincial-level Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, a political advisory body in the People’s Republic of China, and also a key body of the CCP’s UFWD, according to ourjiangsu.com, a Chinese website directly owned by the Jiangsu provincial branch of the UFWD.

The Epoch Times reached out to Jiang for comment via the JCCC but didn’t hear back.

According to a January 2021 JCCC report, Jiang was also elected vice-president of the Jiangsu branch of the China Council for the Promotion of Peaceful National Reunification (CCPPNR), a China-based organization directly supervised by officials in the Politburo, the CCP’s highest decision-making body.

The report included photos taken at a conference on the establishment of the Jiangsu CCPPNR, held on Jan. 9, 2020, in Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province. A number of senior CCP officials, including the vice governor of the province, members of the Jiangsu Provincial Committee of the CCP, and the head of the UFWD, attended the conference, according to an article posted on the Jiangsu provincial government website.

The CCPPNR has branches in many countries, including two in Canada and at least 20 in the United States. In October 2020, the U.S. State Department designated a CCPPNR branch, the Washington, D.C.-based National Association for China’s Peaceful Unification, as a foreign mission of the Chinese regime, describing it as a front organization of the UFWD.

Justin Trudeau, Jagmeet Singh And Sikh Nationalism: The Untold Story http://canadafirst.nfshost.com/?p=2729

Posted on by


Open in app or online
Justin Trudeau, Jagmeet Singh And Sikh Nationalism: The Untold Story

Canadians are being kept in the dark regarding the degree to which Sikh Nationalism has permeated our political environment.

Brad Salzberg

Apr 5










Open in app or online


Justin Trudeau, Jagmeet Singh And Sikh Nationalism: The Untold Story
Canadians are being kept in the dark regarding the degree to which Sikh Nationalism has permeated our political environment.






Brad Salzberg




Apr 5











 




































Save






▷  Listen






 









Pictured, Canadian prime minister, with one of his 3rd world priority communities.
Share
“The head of an Indo-Canadian organization in British Columbia has complained to local law enforcement about receiving death threats from Khalistani radicals after he organised a reception last month in honour of India’s High Commissioner to Ottawa.”

Due to media obfuscation, Canadians are being kept in the dark regarding the degree to which Sikh Nationalism has permeated our political environment.

Cultural Action Party liken it to a secret pact. As buried by CBC and corporate media, PM Justin Trudeau and political partner Jagmeet Singh are quietly backing Khalistani state independence in India.

New Democratic Party leader Singh is so deep in the mud that the government of India has banned his turbaned-self from entering their country. Lucky for him that Canadian media has successfully covered up the radical nature of the NDP leader, whose family emigrated from India a generation ago.

To place the situation in context, one must understand the nature of contemporary Canadian politics. The first lesson to learn is that the phenomenon is fervently non-Canadian. In our era of globalism, the needs of Canadian-born citizens take a back seat to the desires of globalist forces such as Sikhism, China and the nation of Islam.

“What did the promptness of NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, MP Sonia Sidhu, and others in tweeting about the Punjab situation after Amritpal Singh’s incident and ban on Internet services, say? It was done at the behest of radical votebanks,” says a Brampton Sikh entrepreneur, requesting anonymity.”

Picking up on the vibe, fellow Canadian patriots? In basic terms, both Trudeau and Singh are leveraging support of Khalistan independence to win the Sikh-Canadian vote. We stand aghast as irony drips from the brow of astute Canadians:

Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh are fully dedicated to independent Khalistan nationhood. Given the zealotry involved– not to mention the militancy– it is obvious that nothing less than a Sikh-dominated social and political environment is the intended outcome.

As in– no immigration, no multiculturalism, as well as monolithic religious identity. In other words, an independent state devoid of every fundamental Trudeau and Singh are forcing down the throats of Canadians..

Media say nothing. Not a drop of the inherent irony flows from the pens of our country’s leading journalists. There you have it– the press in Canada are:

Pro-communist China, pro-Sikh nationalism, pro-Islam. The only thing they are not is pro-Canada. In 2023, this is the condition of PM Trudeau’s “no core identity” society.  Trudeau is using Khalistani independence to win the support of Sikh communities from coast-to-coast.

According to Statistics Canada, Sikhism represents 1.4% of the Canadian population— in contradistinction to accumulated political power:

Premier of Yukon, Ranj Pallai.  Leader of NDP, Jagmeet Singh. Liberal Cabinet Members– Harjit Sajjan, Kamal Khera, .

Liberal MPs: Anju Dhillon, Bardish Chagger, George Chahal, Iqwinder Gaheer, Mahinder Sindu, Randeep Sarai, Ruby Sahota, Sonia Sidhu, Sukh Dahliwal, Parm Bains.

Mayor of Calgary, Jhoti Gondek. Mayor of Edmonton, Amarjeet Singh. 

Again, just 1.4% of our population is Sikh. Talk about GIANT over-representation in government. Media speak not a word about this reality.

Put it all together in a blender, shake and stir, and what is the final outcome? Sikh political power in Canada, including bi-lateral Liberal-NDP federal party support for an independent Sikh nation to be located halfway around the world.
Sensible Canadians know how to summarize the situation: this is Canadian politics in 2023.

Let us think back to the founding of the international state of “Canadastan.” CAP attribute this gem to none other than ex-Liberal PM, Pierre Trudeau. Communist in political orientation, this individual began our transition to a globalist nation-state. Or better put, a “non-state,” as communist philosophy advances.

Beginning with an opening of our national doors to the communist government of China, we note an affinity by which current PM Justin Trudeau runs our country.  In 2015, Trudeau Jr. began to integrate Islam and Sikhism into the fabric of our nation.

Is it overly simplistic to state that more than any force in Canadian history, it is the Trudeau family who destroyed Canadian nationalism? Is it not this communist-admiring Quebecois duo who transformed society into a condition no citizen ever asked for, or approved of?
“When events such as the arrest of Amritpal Singh happen, Khalistan supporters bombard the offices of mayors, MPs, MPPs and Ministers with messages, forcing them to issue hasty statements or tweet,” says an Indo-Canadian restaurant owner in Toronto.”

Which MPs, Mayors and Ministers? The ones listed above, in a political effort completely devoid of Canadian content? Does Canada now exist for the benefit of the Punjab?

Sadly, this is the case. Jagmeet Singh, golden boy of the Canadian press, is one privileged individual. While he prances around in Vaisakhi parades pushing Khalistan independence, CBC and corporate media have not a negative word to say about the man.

Working his buns off for Khalistan while branding Canadians racist is par for the course. “Not a worry, Mr. Singh. Justin Trudeau is paying our salaries, and we tow the globalist line accordingly.”

“Politicians must stop playing identity politics. A criminal is a criminal — not a Sikh or a Hindu or a Muslim. By supporting these elements, ministers and MPs are playing dangerous games and harming Canada which needs India more than ever now.”

Forget about it, buddy-boy. Woke liberalism specializes in carving up communities into distinct silos, only to get them fighting each other within general society. See Marx, Karl for details.

What this person is describing is not some fringe element of Justin Trudeau’s post-modern society. It is contemporary Canada, and thanks to the family Trudeau and traitorous politicians like Jagmeet Singh, it is here to stay.
 












Save


▷  Listen


 


Pictured, Canadian prime minister, with one of his 3rd world priority communities.Share“The head of an Indo-Canadian organization in British Columbia has complained to local law enforcement about receiving death threats from Khalistani radicals after he organised a reception last month in honour of India’s High Commissioner to Ottawa.”Due to media obfuscation, Canadians are being kept in the dark regarding the degree to which Sikh Nationalism has permeated our political environment.Cultural Action Party liken it to a secret pact. As buried by CBC and corporate media, PM Justin Trudeau and political partner Jagmeet Singh are quietly backing Khalistani state independence in India.New Democratic Party leader Singh is so deep in the mud that the government of India has banned his turbaned-self from entering their country. Lucky for him that Canadian media has successfully covered up the radical nature of the NDP leader, whose family emigrated from India a generation ago.To place the situation in context, one must understand the nature of contemporary Canadian politics. The first lesson to learn is that the phenomenon is fervently non-Canadian. In our era of globalism, the needs of Canadian-born citizens take a back seat to the desires of globalist forces such as Sikhism, China and the nation of Islam.“What did the promptness of NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, MP Sonia Sidhu, and others in tweeting about the Punjab situation after Amritpal Singh’s incident and ban on Internet services, say? It was done at the behest of radical votebanks,” says a Brampton Sikh entrepreneur, requesting anonymity.”Picking up on the vibe, fellow Canadian patriots? In basic terms, both Trudeau and Singh are leveraging support of Khalistan independence to win the Sikh-Canadian vote. We stand aghast as irony drips from the brow of astute Canadians:Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh are fully dedicated to independent Khalistan nationhood. Given the zealotry involved– not to mention the militancy– it is obvious that nothing less than a Sikh-dominated social and political environment is the intended outcome.As in– no immigration, no multiculturalism, as well as monolithic religious identity. In other words, an independent state devoid of every fundamental Trudeau and Singh are forcing down the throats of Canadians..Media say nothing. Not a drop of the inherent irony flows from the pens of our country’s leading journalists. There you have it– the press in Canada are:Pro-communist China, pro-Sikh nationalism, pro-Islam. The only thing they are not is pro-Canada. In 2023, this is the condition of PM Trudeau’s “no core identity” society.  Trudeau is using Khalistani independence to win the support of Sikh communities from coast-to-coast.According to Statistics Canada, Sikhism represents 1.4% of the Canadian population— in contradistinction to accumulated political power:Premier of Yukon, Ranj Pallai.  Leader of NDP, Jagmeet Singh. Liberal Cabinet Members– Harjit Sajjan, Kamal Khera, Anita Anand.Liberal MPs: Anju Dhillon, Bardish Chagger, George Chahal, Iqwinder Gaheer, Mahinder Sindu, Randeep Sarai, Ruby Sahota, Sonia Sidhu, Sukh Dahliwal, Parm Bains.Mayor of Calgary, Jhoti Gondek. Mayor of Edmonton, Amarjeet Singh. Again, just 1.4% of our population is Sikh. Talk about GIANT over-representation in government. Media speak not a word about this reality.Put it all together in a blender, shake and stir, and what is the final outcome? Sikh political power in Canada, including bi-lateral Liberal-NDP federal party support for an independent Sikh nation to be located halfway around the world.Sensible Canadians know how to summarize the situation: this is Canadian politics in 2023.Let us think back to the founding of the international state of “Canadastan.” CAP attribute this gem to none other than ex-Liberal PM, Pierre Trudeau. Communist in political orientation, this individual began our transition to a globalist nation-state. Or better put, a “non-state,” as communist philosophy advances.Beginning with an opening of our national doors to the communist government of China, we note an affinity by which current PM Justin Trudeau runs our country.  In 2015, Trudeau Jr. began to integrate Islam and Sikhism into the fabric of our nation.Is it overly simplistic to state that more than any force in Canadian history, it is the Trudeau family who destroyed Canadian nationalism? Is it not this communist-admiring Quebecois duo who transformed society into a condition no citizen ever asked for, or approved of?“When events such as the arrest of Amritpal Singh happen, Khalistan supporters bombard the offices of mayors, MPs, MPPs and Ministers with messages, forcing them to issue hasty statements or tweet,” says an Indo-Canadian restaurant owner in Toronto.”Which MPs, Mayors and Ministers? The ones listed above, in a political effort completely devoid of Canadian content? Does Canada now exist for the benefit of the Punjab?Sadly, this is the case. Jagmeet Singh, golden boy of the Canadian press, is one privileged individual. While he prances around in Vaisakhi parades pushing Khalistan independence, CBC and corporate media have not a negative word to say about the man.Working his buns off for Khalistan while branding Canadians racist is par for the course. “Not a worry, Mr. Singh. Justin Trudeau is paying our salaries, and we tow the globalist line accordingly.””Politicians must stop playing identity politics. A criminal is a criminal — not a Sikh or a Hindu or a Muslim. By supporting these elements, ministers and MPs are playing dangerous games and harming Canada which needs India more than ever now.”Forget about it, buddy-boy. Woke liberalism specializes in carving up communities into distinct silos, only to get them fighting each other within general society. See Marx, Karl for details.What this person is describing is not some fringe element of Justin Trudeau’s post-modern society. It is contemporary Canada, and thanks to the family Trudeau and traitorous politicians like Jagmeet Singh, it is here to stay.

WHAT ABOUT PUTTING CANADA & CANADIANS FIRST: China Foreign Ownership and BC Resources

Posted on by

China Foreign Ownership and BC Resources by Kevin Hinton and Ryan McKenzie – Date not provided https://www.bcbusiness.ca/china-foreign-ownership-bc-resources   Does allowing non-B.C. enterprises to buy increasing chunks of the companies producing our resource commodities result in a loss of control over how those resources are developed?

B.C.’s natural resources are being gobbled up by foreign entities at a record pace. Increasingly, those entities are controlled by governments, such as China’s, that may have motives beyond mere profits.

Former B.C. Premier Bill Bennett said in 1979 that B.C. was not for sale. He made that famous declaration in reaction to news that Canadian Pacific Investments Ltd., the Montreal-based subsidiary of the railway company, was seeking to increase its already large ownership position to a controlling interest in MacMillan Bloedel Ltd., the province’s number one forest products company.


That was too much for Bennett. At the time, CP was already a major player in the province and gaining control of MacMillan Bloedel would make it by far the biggest, with headquarters in Central Canada. Bennett vetoed the deal using the provisions of the B.C. Forest Act, which required government approval for any transfer of forest leases from one corporation to another.


“We’re clarifying government policy in declaring there is a point at which a company can be too large in a certain area,” Bennett told the legislature on June 25, 1979. “That’s the policy of this party and this government . . . that is public policy from the premier of the province of British Columbia.”


Fast forward a couple of decades and many would argue that the province is not only for sale, but large pieces have been sold – and this time with government acquiescence, if not approval. Consider the following:


• With the provincial government’s blessing, MacMillan Bloedel was bought for $US 2.45 billion in 1999 by Weyerhaueser Inc., a huge U.S. forest products company. There was nary a ripple of comment. 


• In 2002, North Carolina-based Duke Energy Inc. paid $US 8 billion for control of Westcoast Energy Inc., the company that runs the natural gas pipeline system from northeast B.C. gas fields to the rest of the province, and to export markets in the U.S. There was little public comment.


• Kelowna-based Inland Natural Gas, having just picked up BC Hydro’s natural gas distribution network and the Trans Mountain pipeline system, was bought in 2005 by U.S.-based Kinder Morgan and twice renamed, first BC Gas Inc., then Terasen Gas Inc. Kinder Morgan soon spun Terasen’s natural gas assets off to Fortis Inc., a Canadian company headquartered in Newfoundland. But Kinder Morgan kept the piece it wanted: Inland’s ownership stake in Trans Mountain Pipeline, the company that ships crude oil and refined products to Vancouver from Edmonton. There was no public outcry over this either.


• In a transaction still mired in controversy, the B.C. government in 2004 completed the sale of debt-ridden B.C. Railway Co. to Canadian National Railway Co. for $1 billion. As it is now structured, CN is as much an American company as it is Canadian. There is significant and ongoing public comment on this transaction, although the controversy has less to do with foreign control than it does with politics.


Globalization has expanded the reach of “national” companies everywhere, with many now taking on the more accurate “multinational” moniker. Of course nationalist sentiment still exists – witness the American reaction to a disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the British company, BP Petroleum, that was responsible for it. But governments now seem satisfied that they can control foreign-owned private companies through regulation.


Today, the focus of the debate has shifted from concern over a private-sector change in share ownership to concern over acquisitions and investments by state-owned enterprises and sovereign wealth funds. While a private-sector move is transparent – they all want to make more money – a state-controlled enterprise may have additional agendas that are contrary to the host nation’s interests. Increasingly, these state-owned enterprises are from the People’s Republic of China.


In the last two years, Chinese state investments in Canada have included a $1.9-billion investment by PetroChina Co. Ltd. in Athabasca Oil Sands Corp., a $4.65-billion investment by Sinopec Corp. in oilsands producer Syncrude Canada Ltd., a $1.25-billion investment by China Investment Corp. in Calgary-based Penn West Petroleum Ltd. and a $679-million takeover of Vancouver-based Corriente Resources Inc. by a Chinese consortium.


In addition, it was announced in January 2011 that Sinopec Corp. is among a group of investors providing $100 million to jump-start Enbridge Inc.’s proposed $5.5-billion Northern Gateway pipeline project, designed to carry oilsands crude from Alberta to a tanker port in Kitimat and on to Asian markets. 


These kinds of investments are taxing Canada’s foreign investment rules and have already sparked a review. At issue is whether or not the country needs to use different criteria in assessing the benefits of a state-owned company’s investment as opposed to a straightforward private-sector investment.


While there has been some debate on the question of ownership of Canada’s natural resources, nary a word was uttered by any of the political candidates running for office in the May 2 federal election. And very little work has been done to help explain to the general public what the issues are and why they should care.


John-Bruk_3.jpg

Image: Peter Holst
John Bruk broke with the Asia Pacific Foundation,
arguing that investments from Chinese state-
controlled companies must be better regulated.

The growing number of Chinese investments

In January 2011, Pascale Massot, a doctoral student in UBC’s political science department, prepared a paper for Vancouver’s Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada looking at the growing number of investments made by state-owned Chinese enterprises. She recommended that governments provide clarity around how such investments should be treated.


“Since the summer of 2009, at least five Chinese state investments in Canada in the energy and mining sectors have totaled more than $10 billion,” wrote Massot. “Those invest­ments were completed unhindered (most did not meet the minimum requirements for a review under the Investment Canada Act). Confirming a sustained interest in invest­ing in Canada, the China Investment Corporation (a sov­ereign wealth fund) unveiled plans to open its first over­seas corporate location in Toronto on January 12, 2010.”


Massot went on to call for changes to Canada’s review process to better reflect the new investment environment: “It is important for the Investment Canada Act to remain up to date in the face of the rapid evolution of state-owned investments globally. It is also particularly important to get this right, in light of the growing importance for Canada of Chinese state-owned and private investment.”


For B.C., there are three such investments that illustrate the debate. In July 2009, China Investment Corp. put $1.74 billion into Vancouver-based Teck Resources Ltd. for a 17.5 per cent equity stake. Then, in February 2011, PetroChina announced it was investing $5.4 billion in one of EnCana Corp.’s prolific shale gas properties in northeastern B.C.; rather than making an equity investment in EnCana, China elected instead to go the joint-venture route. The third investment, announced in the spring of 2011, has a private-sector consortium of Chinese companies putting up $1 billion to develop metallurgical coal from B.C.’s northeast. Although not a pure example of a state-owned enterprise, there is some state involvement, and the deal seems designed to do an end run around mining companies and lock up the coal supply for China’s steelmaking industry.


Whether or not all these investments from China are a good thing for B.C. is an open question. Is the $5.4-billion investment in EnCana’s shale gas designed to maximize returns from the sale of the gas to the highest bidder, or is it designed instead to lock up the supply of gas, at a relatively low price, and move it to China via a liquid natural gas plant in Kitimat? Only a month after announcing the Chinese investment, EnCana said it would acquire a 30 per cent interest in that LNG export terminal, now in its final planning stages.


It’s that potential for conflict of interest that has a few people worried. Jock Finlayson, executive vice-president of the Business Council of B.C., appreciates the “investment renaissance” that B.C. is now experiencing, but recommends a cautious approach.


“Canada needs to look at this,” he says. “I don’t know what the right answer is, but I do agree that the private-sector rules don’t apply to state-owned organizations, and it’s not just the Chinese. It requires an explicit look. Do we hold them to a higher test? They are going to have to do it sooner rather than later.”


John Bruk, who 27 years ago co-founded and headed the Asia Pacific Foundation, pulls no punches on this topic. He sees a need for some concerted action before too many horses have fled the barn. Bruk has prepared a comprehensive analysis of the track record of the foundation; he believes the government-funded organization needs to be re-energized in part because of China’s growing economic influence, and believes it needs to do much more to help Canada address an unsustainable trade deficit with China. (Disclosure: I provided editing services for Bruk on this paper.)


“Is trading our ownership and control of core assets for more consumer goods, resulting in unsustainable trade deficits, good for Canada?” Bruk asks in his report. “Are we jeopardizing prosperity for our children and grandchildren while putting at risk our economic independence? In my view, this is exactly what is happening.”


Bruk describes the EnCana investment as a good case in point: “It is just the latest in a series of investments by China that should spark a serious debate in this country about Canada’s willingness to accept what appears to be an asset purchase by an agency of a foreign government. It is perhaps the first transaction in which a sale of a natural resources asset is dressed up in the sheep’s clothing of a joint venture with a view to neutralize any opposition.”


Bruk has similar problems with the Teck investment, questioning why it was necessary to seek Chinese investment for a Canadian mining company (one of the few that hasn’t been taken over outright) when there is plenty of investment capital within our borders.


“Considering that Teck produces base metals and coal, commodities in great demand by China, was Canada in such a desperate state that Teck had to accept money from the China Investment Company to find the needed bridge financing? A number of our public employees’ pension funds had plenty of capital for such a promising investment. How promising? CIC bought 101.3 million Teck class B shares at $17.21; in less than two years, those shares increased to $53, a return of over 200 per cent. Instead, our public pension fund managers are going abroad seeking investments as if there were no opportunities in Canada. Is it any wonder foreigners would like to acquire more of our resource assets?”


Bruk is at odds on this topic with his old employer, the Asia Pacific Foundation. Kenny Zhang is a senior research analyst with the foundation and sees no cause for concern here.


“It doesn’t matter where [the investment] comes from – it always has positive and negative effects. We should treat [state-owned investors] equally as with any investment. They have to follow Canadian law. The state-owned company wants the high return for the investment, and also has a strategic need for resources. We must clear up the message. We are an open economy. The Chinese are watching this very closely.” 
 Foundation officials are sensitive to this topic, and worry about the public perception out there around investments from China. After the Harper government’s very high-profile rejection last fall of a bid by Australia-based BHP Billiton to take over Saskatchewan-based Potash Corp., the foundation commissioned Pascale Massot’s review of state-owned enterprises and their interest in Canada. Prime Minister Harper rejected the takeover bid on “national security” concerns, but only after the governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba all argued strongly that the takeover was not in the national interest. (B.C. took no position on this transaction.) One of Massot’s findings was that politics played a large role in Harper’s decision, and that that needs to change.

[pagebreak]
In April, the foundation released the results of a survey it had commissioned to assess Canadians’ comfort level with investment from a number of countries, including China. The results were unsettling for those who see Chinese investment in Canada’s resource sector as a good thing. It showed that more Canadians see China as a threat (57 per cent) than an opportunity (43 per cent), and that such sentiment is growing. More than 75 per cent said they were opposed to a Chinese state-owned company taking a majority position in a Canadian company.
  

“There is a yawning discrepancy between the sentiments that Canadians have for Asian countries and the role that they see Asia playing in Canada’s economic future,” said Yuen Pau Woo, the foundation’s president and CEO, in a press release accompanying the poll results. He went on to castigate federal politicians, in the middle of campaigning, for not paying enough attention to the issue: “In an election campaign that has largely been devoid of discussion on international issues, the poll findings suggest an urgent need for political leadership on a Canadian response to the shift in global power towards Asia. It is not enough to give lip service to the notion that Canada is an Asia Pacific nation. There is an urgent need for improved awareness, greater activity and better policy. We need a national conversation on Asia to better equip Canadians to respond to the rise of Asia, and to make Canada more fully a part of the Asia Pacific region.”


Whether people agree with the APF’s strong promotion of a green-light policy for state-owned investments or follow the more cautionary approach recommended by the Business Council of B.C., there is little help coming from federal politicians. They are largely silent on the issue.


Former federal industry minister Tony Clement was asked in April to comment on the Conservative government’s current thinking on how to treat investments from state-owned enterprises. The government in fact created a Competition Policy Review Panel in 2007 and published its recommendations in 2008. None of the recommendations have been implemented, including one calling for better communication on how the government makes decisions about these kinds of investments. Clement declined the interview request; he too was busy campaigning for re-election.


B.C.’s newly appointed energy minister, Rich Coleman, on the other hand, doesn’t hesitate to offer his opinion on Chinese state-owned investment in the energy sector. Asked if he has any concerns, Coleman responds, “I don’t think so. These companies, like China National Oil Corp., have established partnerships with industrial players here and elsewhere. They will advance development of our resources, and they’ll follow our rules and environmental regulations. We haven’t said to one company you’re not welcome, and another is.”


Coleman sees no conflict in a Chinese state-owned enterprise holding a large piece of a B.C. shale gas field: “Well, they would make the investment at the best price they could so they could get access to the gas at the best price they can. I don’t think state-owned corporations versus private ones have any other goal than that.” Coleman points out that the price paid for natural gas in China is three times higher than the North American price and that the province’s royalty take would increase with sales to China.


James Brander, Asia-Pacific Professor of International Business in UBC’s
Faculty of Commerce, shares Coleman’s view of the investments in general and the EnCana deal in particular. But he also has some cautionary notes.


“Of course there is a potential conflict. But strictly speaking, the terms on which they enter this agreement, under Canadian law, would require them to operate in the interests of the shareholders,” he says. “It’s not legal in Canada for a foreign government to, either directly or by proxy, own an asset and use it for the explicit benefit of the foreign country at the expense of the shareholders.


“But it’s not as though we have investment police looking into every single investment,” he continues. “They could exercise some pressure. But at this level I wouldn’t be concerned. We are talking about [with EnCana] a 50 per cent ownership. I’d be more concerned about majority ownership. It is important to keep our eye on that conflict of interest. We do have laws to prevent it, but we need to keep an eye on it.”


While John Bruk disagrees with the APF’s current position on Chinese state-owned investors, he agrees there’s a need for a national discussion on the topic. And he believes there’s some urgency for it. Canada’s trade deficit with China skyrocketed from $1.1 billion in 1995 to $31.2 billion in 2010, making it our largest by far. During those 16 years, exports to China have grown by a factor of less than four while China’s exports to Canada have grown by a factor of almost 10. This trend, says Bruk, is “a recipe for impoverishment of our country.”


“Is it any surprise that President Hu expressed China’s desire to double its bilateral trade with Canada by 2015?” Bruk asks. “Assuming that both exports and imports double, which is optimistic from a Canadian point of view, considering the above ratios, our trade deficit would grow from $31.2 billion last year to $62.4 billion by 2015 – a boon for China, not for Canada.”


Over the next decade, B.C. is pinning its hopes on a resurgence of interest from Asian nations looking for commodities – whether it’s coal for steel, natural gas and oil or forest products. But the province faces the same dilemma it has faced for most of its existence: Does allowing non-B.C. enterprises to buy increasing chunks of the companies producing our resource commodities result in a loss of control over how those resources are developed? 


Premier Bennett, nearly 35 years ago, decided that allowing out-of-province control of our economic engine was too great a risk to take – and back then, the out-of-province player in question was Canadian and privately owned. With state-owned enterprises now threatening to lock up those resources with perhaps a different agenda in mind, is there enough consideration being given by governments to all the ramifications? The simple answer, it would appear, is no.

CNP to protest Drag Queen storytime

Posted on by

Drag Queen storytime events are being held in public spaces such as libraries and funded directly or indirectly by all levels of government across the country.

There are now many books available in the library targeting children of a young age.

Drag is not for kids!

We need to start protesting these events to defend children whose parents do not and who can’t defend themselves from being introduced and indoctrinated to the Drag Queen lifestyle and confusion of Gender Identity Theory.

Even many from the LGBTQ community have spoken out against Drag Queen storytime events.

Drag Queen Kitty Demure says Drag Queen culture is not for kids!

Watch “DRAG QUEEN RESPONSE TO DRAG QUEEN STORY BOOK HOUR” on YouTube

The “Gays Against Groomers” group is against Drag and Pride events involving children.

If you are interested in participating in a Canadian Nationalist Party protest of Drag Queen storytime please contact me.

Anyone concerned about being anonymous will be encouraged to wear balaclava mask if necessary.

Other ways to help is by sharing this email or donating.

The Party is deregistered with Elections Canada right now so we can’t issue tax receipts.

You can etransfer to:

donations@cnp-nationalist.ca

or send cash and cheque to:

Gus Stefanis                                                                   PO Box 55588 Cedar Heights                       Scarborough, On                                                         M1H 3G7

I can also accept credit card here:

https://donorbox.org/gus-stefa…

Thank you,

Gus Stefanis
Leader
Canadian Nationalist Party

https://cnp-nationalist.ca/

Canadians Will Be Told to Celebrate Sikh Heritage Month in April

Posted on by

Canadians Will Be Told to Celebrate Sikh Heritage Month in April

by Dan Murray, Immigration Watch Canada – March 28, 2023 https://immigrationwatchcanada.org/  

Most Canadians are probably not aware that on April 1 of this year, they will be told to celebrate “Sikh Heritage Month”.   The following is a list of reasons why Parliament should have never even considered the celebration of a “Sikh Heritage Month” (the result of a law passed by Canada’s Parliament.).   (1)

The behaviour of some of the earliest Sikhs to arrive in Canada in 1914 was a foreshadowing and a warning. It demonstrated Sikh willingness to use fraudulent documents. It also showed their arrogant attitude. They believed that they had a right to enter Canada and that Canada had no right to oppose their entry. Current NDP leader Jagmeet Singh has the same arrogant attitude.   That 1914 incident helps to explain much of what happened later. Sikhs repeatedly use that event to proclaim victim status. They omit many facts including the fact that Sikhs assassinated a Canadian immigration agent. They also omit the fact that the leader of the 1914 Sikh expedition boasted that if he succeeded in landing his passengers, he would bring 25,000 more Sikhs soon after. This threat would have alarmed Canadians because if it had come true, it would have greatly changed Vancouver’s entire cultural make-up.   To show some context, consider this: around 1914, the City of Vancouver had a population of about 60,000. For details of the entire 1914 incident, see https://immigrationwatchcanada.org/2008/05/22/the-voyage-of-the-komagata-maru-a-review-and-a-short-summary/   (2)

Although many years of Sikh immigration peace followed, the Singh Decision of 1985 signaled the beginning of Sikh-caused refugee and immigration chaos in Canada. In doing so, Sikhs helped to turn Canada’s refugee system into a quasi-judicial body which soon became mired in tens of thousands of claims (most of them illegitimate). For details see: https://immigrationwatchcanada.org/2005/03/23/the-1985-singh-decision-disaster-vs-the-1985-air-india-disaster/    According to reliable sources, those claims have cost Canada billions of dollars and saddled Canada with people who have contempt for Canada. Is this supposed to be an example of the “Sikh Heritage” that Canadians are expected to celebrate every April?   (3)

The Sikh bombing (the murder of 329 people about an Air India plane in 1985) should have moved Canada to place severe restrictions on Sikh immigration. But it did not. That bombing incident (which originated in Vancouver where Sikhs placed bombs on two planes) was the largest mass murder in Canadian history. Instead for years, Trudeau has groveled to the Sikhs. Most important, none of the Sikh ringleaders of the 329 murders has been sentenced for that crime. https://immigrationwatchcanada.org/2016/04/25/dont-apologize-sikhs/   We repeat, Is this another example of the “Sikh Heritage” that Canadians are supposed to celebrate every April?   (4)

A major reason why the Sikh bombers have never been held to account is the culture of intimidation by militant Sikhs of other Sikhs. The identities of the Sikh perpetrators are quite likely known even by the Sikh members of Trudeau’s cabinet, not to mention Trudeau himself and hundreds of other Sikh politicians and professionals.   As a result, hundreds of the relatives of the 329 murdered victims have never received justice. Until the Sikh criminals are behind bars, the word “Sikh” will be a dirty word to those relatives and to millions of other Canadians. Most Canadians want nothing to do with those Sikhs – let alone celebrate “SIKH HERITAGE”.   (5)

Worse still, young and older male Sikhs have become significantly involved in drug industry criminality in Canada. However, when drug incidents are reported, our treacherous CBC and other media make a point of not disclosing the names of the Sikh murderers or Sikhs murdered. Most Canadians have come to expect that when the CBC or other media begrudgingly do reveal the names of the criminals, those names will be ones such as Parvinder, Balwinder or some other Sikh first name. In Metro Vancouver, Sikhs have complained that they needed more police to deal with drug-dealing and drug gang killings. Ironically, the truth is that many people in Metro Vancouver think that Metro Vancouver does not need more police. Instead, it needs fewer Sikhs and less Sikh immigration. In fact, Metro Vancouver residents have also thought that Sikh parents had to finally accept a “Canadian” cultural trait, that of being responsible for their delinquent offspring. Those parents should not be expecting the “gum’mint” to do that job for them. Again, is this very visible Sikh cultural defect what corrupt Sikhs want all Canadians to celebrate every April?   (6)

Canadians have become incredibly fed up with aggressive immigrants (both Sikhs and others) who demand that Canada adapt to immigrant customs. So far, no group has made as many demands for exemptions from Canadian laws as the Sikhs. In fact, Sikh demands to wear their turbans and their kirpans have been endless. If Sikhs really want to retain their customs, why are they here? Why would Canada want to create (A) another political mess such as India’s Punjab here and (B) an environmental disaster such as India in Canada through relentless Sikh immigration?   (7)

Sikhs have grossly abused Canadian PM Chretien’s naive decision to create an additional Canadian consulate in India’s Punjab. That consulate has become notorious for being the fraud capital of all of Canada’s consulates and embassies in the world. Tens of thousands of Sikhs have entered Canada as a result of fraud there. In other words, tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of Sikhs have entered Canada illegally. Why would Canada want to celebrate being defrauded by these people? The numbers are not an exaggeration. At recent Sikh festivals in the Vancouver and Toronto areas, some Sikh leaders have boasted that up to 500,000 Sikhs attended. Who else besides corrupt Liberal leader Trudeau and equally corrupt NDP leader Jagmeet Singh would want to celebrate a heritage of political sodomy and shameless fraud?   (8)

Political accommodation to the Sikhs has reached new levels of degradation under Trudeau. It is incredible that not a single MP voted against or abstained from voting when the “Sikh Heritage Month” bill was introduced in Parliament.   To summarize: Is it sane to accept Sikh political degradation as part of Canada’s “heritage”?   This list could be ten times as long.   To put the matter bluntly but truthfully, the passing of the Sikh Heritage Act in 2015 is an example of how Canada’s Parliament has descended into the most degrading acts of political sodomy and boot-licking.  

Our CBC and many politicians are proud to engage in such activity, but to recover Parliament’s dignity, here is what Parliament should do immediately :   REPEAL THE “SIKH HERITAGE MONTH” BILL .   IN ITS PLACE, INTRODUCE NEW BILLS TO PROTECT CANADA’S FRENCH AND UK HERITAGE AND PROTECT CANADA’S BORDERS !!   For details about Jagmeet Singh’s involvement in Sikh violence, see https://www.reddit.com/r/metacanada/comments/hen2eb/reminder_jagmeet_singh_is_banned_from_india_for/   Dan Murray, Immigration Watch Canada   \

Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182

David Johnston, Trudeau’s “Special Rapporteur’ on Red Chinese Election Meddling is a Close Family Friend, a Committed Sinophile With Long Contacts With Red China

Posted on by

JOHNSTON’S AFFECTION FOR [RED] CHINA RUNS DEEP

  • National Post
  • 23 Mar 2023
  • Terry Glavin
Former governor general David Johnston has been named a “special rapporteur” into China’s interference into federal elections, but his connections to the Asian power are extensive, Terry Glavin writes.

There are so many crazy things the Trudeau government has been expecting Canadians to believe about the partisan advantage the Liberals have accrued to themselves owing to their cosy relationships with China’s agents of influence in this country that it’s really difficult to decide which is the most objectively unbelievable and easily disprovable.

It’s a target-rich environment, as military tacticians would say. But I’m going to lay out the evidence against just one howler, which is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s proposition that “horrific, partisan attacks against a man of extraordinary integrity” is anything like a reasonable way to characterize doubts about former Governor General David Johnston’s independence in the matter of Beijing’s influence-peddling operations in Canada.

In the muddle of the playby-play coverage of House of Commons committee manoeuvres and the fate of a resolution calling for a public inquiry into Beijing’s well-documented interference operations in the 2019 and 2021 federal elections, there are two key things to keep your eye on.

The first is that Beijing’s influence operations in Canada went into hyperdrive after the Trudeau government came to power in 2015, and Beijing’s United Front Work Department undertook extraordinary clandestine measures in 2019 and 2021 to keep the Trudeau government in power. The second is that Trudeau has enlisted Johnston as his “independent special rapporteur” in the matter in order to avoid answering these straightforward questions: What did Trudeau know about what Beijing was up to, when did he know, and what did he do about it?

For argument’s sake, let’s set aside the relevance of the intimate relationship between the Johnstons and the Trudeaus — their neighbouring cottages in the Laurentians, the childhood ski trips the Trudeau boys and Johnston’s daughters went on together, and so on. You can even set aside Johnston’s role as one of the governing members of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, even though the foundation has been directly caught up in the scandal, owing to the clandestine donations the Foundation recently chose to return to a certain superrich Chinese benefactor following disclosures that the money was part of a Beijing-directed grooming operation targeting Trudeau himself, going back to 2013.

The unreported and unarguably pertinent facts to take into account involve Johnston’s own half-century of participation in Beijing’s strategy to draw Canada into its orbit of influence, and his own personal and ongoing association with figures deeply compromised by their collaboration with Chinese government institutions and by their own vested interest in the catastrophe of the Canada-china collaborations that were spun into high gear after the Trudeau Liberals came to power in 2015.

In the 1980s Johnston was laying the foundations of the Canada-china universities exchange program. Later, as president of the University of Waterloo, he oversaw the establishment of the Confucius Institute, a scandal-shredded arm of the Chinese Communist Party’s propaganda and espionage operations in western countries. Widely known in Chinese establishment circles by his nickname “Jiangshan,” Johnston was awarded an honorary doctorate by Nanjing University in 2012, by which time he’d already made more than a dozen visits to China.

Three of Johnston’s daughters attended university in China — one at Zhejiang University, Nanjing University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong, another at the Beijing Language and Culture University and Hangzhou University, and the third at Fudan University in Shanghai. During a luncheon speech to the Canada-china Business Council in 2013, Johnston said it would be “wonderful” if all Canadians learned to speak Chinese.

While the federal government has been recently forced to issue strict guidelines to Canadian universities regarding the threat of technology transfers and intellectual-property accommodations with Chinese institutions, as recently as 2017 Johnston attended a conference on “science, technology and innovation” at Chongqing University where he professed a “profound Chinese complex” and boasted that even his grandchildren teach him things about China.

It’s a multi-generational “complex” the Johnston family shares with the Trudeaus, going back to Pierre Trudeau’s service to Mao Zedong during the 1960s as one of the regime’s most valued propagandists in the west. Back then, Trudeau Senior co-authored a book with his friend Jacques Hébert about their time as the regime’s invited guests during the Great Leap Forward and the famine that killed perhaps 70 million people. Trudeau and Hébert sneered at western journalists’ efforts to report on the famine and claimed to have noticed nothing more than “controlled distribution of foodstuffs.” The pair dined well during their entire time in the country.

But set aside the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation entirely. The board of directors of Johnston’s own Rideau Hall Foundation — a “parting gift” from Justin Trudeau’s government upon his departure from the Governor General’s office — is a snapshot who’s-who of Beijing’s best friends and business partners in Canada.

A Rideau Hall Foundation director emeritus is Paul Desmarais III, from the Desmarais family, which founded the Canada-china Business Council. Then there’s Dominic Barton, who served as an adviser to several Chinese state-owned enterprises and whose Mckinsey and Company consulted with Chinese corporations involved in the construction of militarized islands in the South China Sea while Barton was chair of Trudeau’s blue-chip Advisory Council on Economic Growth. Barton was appointed Canada’s ambassador to China following the firing of the disgraced John Mccallum.

There’s John Manley, the Telus director and former deputy prime minister from the exuberantly Beijing-compliant Chrétien era. Manley’s contribution to the debates about Xi Jinping’s kidnapping of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor was to suggest the Canada Border Services Agency should have surreptitiously allowed Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou to evade a U.S. Justice Department extradition request.

There’s Beverley Mclachlin, who has refused to step down from her position on Hong Kong’s highest court despite Beijing’s evisceration of Hong Kong’s rule-of-law system. There’s John Montalbano, chief executive officer of the Royal Bank’s Global Asset Management arm, which manages Beijing’s global natural-resources acquisitions through China’s National Council for Social Security Fund, one of the world’s largest pension funds. On it goes like this.

Believe as much as you like that there is nothing untoward about Johnston’s appointment. And to be fair, he did a wonderful job as Governor General. A Governor General’s job is to make Canadians feel good about themselves, despite everything, and to make a convincing case that no matter how bad things look, everything’s OK.

And that is the job he’s been asked to do for Justin Trudeau in the matter of Beijing’s long and sinister reach into Canada’s democratic political institutions, and it should not be surprising if he does the job well.

WHAT DID TRUDEAU KNOW ABOUT WHAT BEIJING WAS UP TO?

15 Minutes to Save the World?

Posted on by

Throne, Altar, Liberty

The Canadian Red Ensign

The Canadian Red Ensign

Thursday, March 16, 2023

15 Minutes to Save the World?

The expression “15 minute city” is a little under ten years old.  It was about four to five years ago that it first began to circulate significantly and it really took off during the time when people everywhere proved themselves to be incredibly stupid by their willingness to submit to the all but total elimination of their most basic freedoms because of their naïve faith in medical experts who told them that they needed to stop living in order to avoid dying from the bogeyman of the bat flu.   Last month, however, 15 minute cities became big news as mainstream media outlet after mainstream media outlet began running op-ed pieces about how critics of the concept were engaged in “conspiracy theory”.  At the start of the last week in February I typed the words “15 minute cities” into Google and pressed the search button.   The top results, both on the news tab and the main Google page, were articles of this sort from sources like CNN, The Guardian, and even the Weather Network.  Indeed, the only one of the highlighted stories not to include the word “conspiracy” in the title was a piece from Bloomberg entitled “No, 15-Minute Cities Aren’t a Threat to Civil Liberties”, which, of course, was yet another denial of the “conspiracy theory” about 15 minute cities.   At the time I did this search these stories and many more were all fresh, having been released in the previous two days, most in the previous twenty four hours.   

Now, if someone wanted to convince people to take seriously the idea that there is some sort of nefarious international plot behind the latest buzzword expression in urban planning, one way to go about doing so would be to get the entire mainstream media to issue a denial in lockstep like this.  When media companies all begin saying the same thing like a horde of brainwashed cult members chanting a mantra it is usually best to consider the exact opposite of what they are saying to be the truth. Indeed, if people like our Prime Minister, that contemptible lowlife Captain Airhead and J. Brandon Magoo, that creep who gives off the strong impression of someone who wandered off from the geriatric ward of an asylum for the criminally insane only to find himself in the White House were to start using their state pulpits to denounce anyone opposed to 15 minute cities as fringe extremists we would know with a certainty from this the supporters of 15 minute cities are up to no good.

So what are 15 minute cities?   Are they part of a sinister plot to rob us of our freedom of motion and imprison us all within our own neighbourhoods?   Or is the idea behind them an innocent one, aimed at renewing neighbourhoods and reducing traffic congestion, upon which unfair suspicion has been thrown by the unsavoury associations of those promoting and defending it?

Back in the 1960’s the term “walkability” entered the vocabulary of those with an active interest in revitalizing big cities or at least hindering them from dropping to a lower circle of Dante’s abyss.   Making a city walkable meant making it as friendly and accessible to pedestrians as possible.    The opposite of walkability was urban planning aimed at maximizing the ease and speed with which one could get around a city by car which was one aspect of the “urban renewal” movement that had influenced much or most of the city planning of the previous few decades.  The 15 minute city is an adaptation of this concept of walkability or, to be more precise, a variation of an older adaptation the 20 minute city.  The basic idea of a 15 minute city is that of a city in which people have access to everything they would need on an ordinary day in their own neighbourhoods within a 15 minute walk or bicycle ride from where they live.   As with many ideas that generate heated controversies the heat comes more from the implications than from the basic concept.   If it were possible to transform a city into a 15 minute city where everyone has everything he needs within such a small radius from his home without in any way altering anything else about the city and the lives of its inhabitants this would undoubtedly be an improvement and a very good one at that.   If quality of life in a city were measured strictly in terms of convenience it would be an exponential improvement.  The problem is that it is not possible to transform a city in this way without making many other changes.   Since the advocates of 15 minute cities seem to be largely motivated by environmental concerns it would be appropriate here to cite Dr. Garrett Hardin’s First Law of Human Ecology “We can never do merely one thing.”   It is those other things that would need to be done to transform cities into 15 minute cities that have a lot of people’s dander up.

Take, for example, the plans for low traffic neighbourhoods which Oxford, the city in Oxfordshire, England that is home to Oxford University, recently announced its intention to implement on a trial basis starting next year.   A low traffic neighbourhood is a concept that is related to that of a 15 minute city and often promoted together with it, so much so that the two are sometimes mistaken as being synonymous with each other.  The difference is that a low traffic neighbourhood is designed to keep something out of the neighbourhood – traffic congestion due to through traffic – whereas a 15 minute city is designed to put something in the neighbourhood – the necessities of everyday life easily accessible by walking or cycling.  The Oxford city council has announced its intention, beginning next year, of dividing the city in to six districts and placing a limit of 100 on the number of times residents can drive from one district to the next, through certain routes between 7 am and 7 pm, to be enforced by licence-plate camera and fines.   Residents would be able – for a fee – to apply for an additional allotment of trips through the limited routes.

Now this does not amount to locking Oxford residents within their districts.   If Oxford goes ahead with this – and does not take it any further – Oxford residents will be able to pass between districts any time they wish and as many times as they wish if they do so on foot or by bike, and even by automobile if they take routes other than the more direct ones upon which the limits are being placed.   This whole thing does, however, give off too much of a vibe of a high-tech, updated, version of “show us your papers, comrade” and so it is not surprising that the Oxford announcement was met with a large and vehement protest, especially since people were already fed up with this sort of thing from the three years of public health emergency tyranny.  These measures do carry the potential for evolving into the permanent confinement of people within their own neighbourhoods through mission creep much like “14 days to flatten the curve” evolved into two and a half years of lockdowns, forced masking, and vaccine passports and mandates.   Indeed, not only do they have the potential for evolving in this direction there is a very high probability that they will do so.

One reason for this is because those who are promoting low traffic neighbourhoods based on the 15 city model are openly motivated by the goal of getting people to drive less.  When the earlier, more general, concept of walkability was conceived it was part of a response to several decades of urban planning based on utilitarian principles.   The kind of urban planning that involved houses, small businesses, parks and playgrounds, local schools, libraries, hospitals and the like being torn down, often through the means of entire city blocks being seized by governments and handed over to developers, to make way for large apartment complexes, office buildings, malls, and the like.   While large-scale urban planning on utilitarian principles went back to the nineteenth century, it had exploded around the middle of the twentieth century due to mass production’s having made motor vehicles increasingly available and affordable.   This factor also, of course, affected the way the designs of these planners as utility now included such things as parking lots and freeways.   A backlash against this sort of thing began in 1961 when Jane Jacobs published her The Death and Life of Great American Cities, which documented the negative side of “urban renewal”.   Jacobs did not just write about the subject but was also an activist who fought against this sort of urban planning both in New York where she lived when she wrote her book and Toronto where she moved about a decade later, in both cities fighting against the construction of freeways or expressways.   Among her criticisms of this kind of planning was that it was making cities into places for cars rather than for people.   Those who began to promote the concept of walkability owed much of their inspiration to Jacobs.   The promoters of the 15 minute city model would like us to think that they are following in these earlier footsteps and perhaps in a limited sense they are.   Their primary objection to automobiles, however, is very different.  

Jacobs and those whom she inspired in the 1960s objected to tearing down houses and digging up parks to make way for freeways and parking lots because these actions uprooted and dissolved communities and razed the neighbourhoods in which they had lived in order to replace these with dead, concrete, spaces made for machines rather than men.   The promoters of the 15 minute city model, such as Anne Hidalgo, mayor of Paris, France, and her Columbian born advisor, Carlos Moreno, the professor at Sorbonne University who seems to be the one who came up with the concept, by contrast, don’t want people driving cars because they want to see a radical reduction in the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere.   People like this think that the drastic reduction in carbon dioxide emissions they want is necessary to save the world.     People who think that the world is at stake are not people likely to accept or respect limitations on their efforts nor are they people likely to listen to reason coming from those who disagree with them. If, therefore, placing limits on the daytime use of high density routes fails to achieve a reduction in car use and simply diverts heavy traffic to other routes, the planners will be likely to revise the model – and keep revising it until they achieve their goal.   Such revisions will move the model closer and closer to something resembling people being permanently locked into their own neighbourhoods.

There is another difference between the original pushback against the large building/parking lot/freeway type of urban planning and the advocacy of the 15 minute city today which supports the conclusion that the concept is inherently flawed in such a way that its implementation, however, good the intentions of those behind it may be, would inevitably lead to urban life becoming more tightly controlled.    Prior to the invention and mass production of the automobile every city was a city in which every neighborhood had its local store, school, etc. so that there was no necessity for long daily commutes that were impractical before motorized transportation.   Transforming cities that were like this into cities where many if not most people live in one district, work in another, and do all their shopping in yet another and where the city’s infrastructure is designed to facilitate the fast motor vehicle transportation that makes such an arrangement feasible required city governments to expropriate private property and spend massive sums of money in imposing a redesign upon their cities dreamed up by engineers who had been given an unprecedented amount of centralized control over what their cities would look like.   In other words, the kind of urban transformation to which people like Jane Jacobs’ objected, in which older, traditional, more organic communities were bulldozed down and paved over to make way for concrete and asphalt edifices designed for machines rather than the people the machines were themselves built to serve, required government to insert itself far more actively and visibly in the everyday lives of urban inhabitants than it had before, which meant that this was a step away from a more free mode of life and towards a more controlled mode of life.  

Any serious attempt to transform a city into a 15 minute city would require a further step in the same direction.    This is because the model calls for all necessities to be available to people within a 15 minute walk or cycle ride from their home.   Obviously, if a city has to be transformed into a 15 minute city then these necessities are not already available this close.   Therefore, to remake a city according to this model would involve moving businesses and services into neighbourhoods that don’t already have them.  A government that wants a certain type of business in a neighbourhood has to do a lot more to achieve its goal than a government that wants to keep a certain kind of business out of a neighbourhood.  If a city, for example, does not want strip bars and casinos next to elementary schools, then all it has to do is pass a zoning restriction.   If, however, a city decides that it wants a bakery in a neighbourhood that does not have one, a simple change to zoning laws would not in itself accomplish this.  Somebody has to put the bakery in there.  Either the city would have to build and operate a bakery itself or, if it was dead set on having one, it would have to lure a private baker in with some sort of incentive.  A bakery is only one type of business.   To turn a city into a 15 minute city its government would have to do this not merely with bakeries but with every sort of business and service it deems essential, and in every neighbourhood.

While those promoting the 15 minute city model claim to be the heirs of Jane Jacobs they are in spirit far closer to the city planners she fought against in New York and Toronto.   As different as the two kinds of urban planners are in their attitude towards automobiles, they are united by a common belief that if you get the right urban engineers, with the right ideas, and sit them down together in a drawing room, they will be able to come up with a design for a city which if enacted would produce maximum happiness for the maximum number of the city’s inhabitants.   If, however, freedom is essential to human happiness, and it is, then this sort of thinking is counterproductive because it can only move cities in the direction of being more planned and less free.   Those who make pitches for the 15 minute city concept like to try and sell it to us as a restoration of an older, simpler, way of life.   That way of life, however, belonged to traditional communities which possessed at least one quality that was more conducive to happiness than that in modern cities and which cannot be reproduced artificially by planning.  That quality is that of being organic.   This is a quality that comes about in a community naturally, when families live together in the same place, working in the same businesses, shopping in the same stores, worshipping in the same churches, for several generations over the course of which a sense of social oneness grows.   This cannot be reproduced artificially by planning and attempts to do so will only produce ugly caricatures of natural, traditional, communities.

One does not have to speculate about sinister motives behind the 15 minute city concept – and without such speculation you do not have a “conspiracy theory” – to have serious misgivings about the idea.   Urban planning of this nature cannot recreate true organic communities, inevitably requires an increase in government control and a decrease in human freedom no matter how benign the motivation, and, being wedded to an environmentalist ideal of eliminating carbon emissions that has in recent years taken on the characteristics of a cult of fanatics is set on course to evolve into something far more unpleasant.    — Gerry T. Neal

Communications Between Finance Ministry & World Economic Forum Exploded After Freeland Became Minister

Posted on by

Communications Between Finance Ministry & World Economic Forum Exploded After Freeland Became Minister by Sheila Gunn-Reid, Rebel News – March 14, 2023 Duration of video is 7 minutes https://www.rebelnews.com/communications_between_finance_ministry_and_world_economic_forum_exploded_after_freeland_became_minister?

Our recent Access to Information filings revealed just how chummy the Liberals’ finance ministry is with the World Economic Forum (WEF).

The WEF, chaired by its founder Klaus Schwab, aims to influence governments worldwide to implement its vision and shape policies to comply with the organization’s agenda, which includes digital IDs, carbon budgets, no animal agriculture and a reset of the world economy.

Of course, this shouldn’t come as a surprise since our finance minister and deputy PM, Chrystia Freeland, sits as a board member of the WEF. Conflict of interest much?

In the documents we obtained thanks to donations at www.RebelInvestigates.com, we learned that while Bill Morneau served as finance minister for Trudeau, he only sent out a couple of communications to this ominous globalist front group.

But once Chrystia Freeland took over, the communications between her and the WEF exploded!

So what do our two-timing deputy PM’s office and the WEF have to talk about?


Comment

Canadian parliamentarians who work for the WEF: https://www.beyondthenarrative.ca/canadian-federal-politician-members-of-the-world-economic-forum/. Max Bernier (NOT INVOLVED WITH WEF) https://thecountersignal.com/maxime-bernier-addresses-world-economic-forum-visit/ “Yes, I was [at the WEF]. But when I was there in 2008, at that time, I was [the] foreign affairs minister and my only goal and only job when I was there was to meet other foreign affairs ministers to have a discussion about Canada and our role in Afghanistan,” Bernier said. “I did not participate in the debate and the presentation they had at the World Economic Forum. I did my meeting, and, after that, I left. And that was my job.” See full article.   Pierre Poilievre (HIS RESPONSES) https://www.beyondthenarrative.ca/poilievre-and-the-wef/

Obituary – Professor Roger Pearson M.Sc. (Econ), Ph.D., (London): 1927 – 2023 http://canadafirst.nfshost.com/?p=2699

Posted on by

[I knew Dr. Roger Pearson for half a century. He was a mentor and dear friend. I participated in the pivotal World Anti-Communist League Conference in Washington, D.C., held under his chairmanship. His decades of devotion to the publication of three academic journals which kept solid racial and political ideas in university libraries was a labour of love and self-sacrifice. To lessen the power of the rabid attacks by far left and Jewish censorship organizations, he avoided movement conferences and the contacts they might have afforded him. He was a brilliant and generous man. I usually lunched with him on my trips to Washington, D.C. He would call me about once a month when he received the newsletters I publish [The Canadian Immigration Hotline and the Free Speech Monitor]. I last talked to him in January of this year. He republished many important racial books including the prescient 1915 War and the Breed, which predicted the genetic catastrophe for European man of the fratricidal World War I. He told me sadly that World War II finished off the genetic destruction begun by WWI, killing off the best and brightest (fighter pilots like his only brother.) This giant, this scholar, this publisher, this friend is irreplaceable. — Paul Fromm]

Obituary – Professor Roger Pearson M.Sc. (Econ), Ph.D., (London): 1927 – 2023 by Mark Cotterill, Heritage & Destiny

Posted by admin978 on March 10, 2023 · Leave a Comment 

Dr Roger Pearson (above right) has died aged 95: he is seen here with his good friend Dr Ed Fields in Washington DC, in 2000, during the time when H&D editor Mark Cotterill worked at Dr Pearson’s office.

All of us at H&D were saddened to hear of the recent death of Dr. Roger Pearson, who was a long-standing subscriber to Heritage and Destiny magazine – in fact he was our eldest subscriber, aged 95, when he died in Washington DC, on 23rd February.

Dr. Pearson was a true English gentleman in every sense. He was born in London, in 1927, but spent much of his childhood in Yorkshire. In October 1944, towards the end of the Second World War, he joined the British Army, despite his entitlement to exemption from military service to attend University after completing his Higher School Certificate examinations.

He had volunteered for military service and was inducted into the British Army with a view to obtaining a commission in the (British) Indian Army. After completing basic infantry and corps training with the Queens Royal Regiment in Maidstone, Kent, Roger and his fellow cadets embarked for India to attend the British Indian Army Pre-Officer Training School (Pre-OTS) at Bangalore.

Dr Pearson as an officer in the (British) Indian Army in 1946.

In July 1946 he was commissioned from the British Indian Army OTS Kakul (which today is the Pakistan Military Academy) to serve as a 2nd Lieutenant with Indian troops in Meerut. However, with the approaching Independence of India and Pakistan, he was shortly transferred to service as a 1st Lieutenant with the British Indian Division in the occupation of Japan (Shikoku and Tokyo), from January 1947 to January 1948.

I remember him telling me of how shocked and saddened he was by the behaviour of the American GIs in occupied Japan, and their brutal treatment of the local people, including beatings, theft and numerous rapes of young Japanese women. I asked him about the conduct of our own squaddies over there and he said in general they were very well behaved, and he would have expected nothing less from them. Dr. Pearson always had a very low opinion of American soldiers, and hated their “hazing” tactics, which he described as “very unprofessional”.

His final military service was as a 1st Lieutenant with the British Army in Singapore and Malaya, from January to April 1948.

On leaving the army in 1948, Roger attended university in England. After obtaining a B.Sc.(honours) in economics and sociology, he returned to India in 1952 in a business capacity, first as an assistant accountant in Calcutta (now Kolkata), but eventually as the CEO of several companies in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), primarily in the tea industry – then Pakistan’s second largest export. During this period (1959-65) he served on the Board of the Pakistan Tea Association and was elected President, 1963-4. During that year he was ex officio a member of the Pakistan Tea Board, and the Managing Committee of the Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry.

During his service in India and East Pakistan, Roger retained a strong interest in cultural matters. While in Calcutta (1955-1959), he made numerous journalistic contributions to The Statesman and to The Hindustan Standard and a few short broadcast presentations on All-India Radio. He also wrote Eastern Interlude, a Social History of the European Community in Calcutta from 1649-1911, described by the Hindustan Times (India) as “a vivid picture of European social life in India free from prejudices and prepossessions”; by the Hindustan Standard (India) as “objective …brilliant”; by the Indian PEN “Exceptionally well-balanced”; and by The Times (London) as “most diverting and readable…amusing and vivid… it comes to life on every page”. While I was working for him at his DC office, he republished the book (the original was well out of print by then) around 1999 and sold a further couple of hundred copies.

He was invited to serve as a member of the Cultural Advisory Committee of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, but this honour was brief because he soon afterwards left India for Pakistan. Roger Pearson is also proud of having saved the historic and architecturally important South Park Street Cemetery (dating from 1765-1815 when Calcutta was the capital of British India) from demolition. On his offer to set up a restoration fund, the Christian Burial Board, which lacked the funds to restore the decaying monuments, agreed to halt demolition and allow him to establish a fund which, with the eventual support of the Calcutta architect Bernard Matthews, Aurelius David Khan, ICS, and Sir John Woodhead, former and last British Governor of Bengal, succeeded in restoring most of the monuments and having the cemetery declared a National Monument by the Government of India.

Having lost his only brother (a Battle of Britain pilot, killed in North Africa shortly after his 21st birthday), four cousins (three pilots/one aircrew) and two close school friends, all without offspring, to the Second World War, Roger was shocked by the massive dysgenic loss resulting from internecine war in Europe.

He was also saddened by the cultural destruction when he visited war-torn Europe as a student in 1950 and found inspiration at a student summer school in Aachen University in Germany, funded by several European governments with the goal of promoting healing across Europe. Roger instinctively perceived its value and four years later, when employed with a British bank in Calcutta, he founded Northern World, a cultural, non-political Journal of North European Friendship, with the particular goal of promoting reconciliation between the closely related nations of Northern Europe who had so recently been engaged in destroying each other in two “Brothers’ Wars”.

Northern World was favourably received in like-minded circles, including the famed author J.R.R. Tolkien (who also subscribed to AK Chesterton’s Candour journal) and the agrarian environmentalist, Rolf Gardiner, both of whom sent personal letters of congratulation. The success of this venture led Roger, now a rising business executive, to announce the formation of a society – along with Peter Huxley-Blythe, to promote North European friendship, called The Northern League for North European Friendship (more commonly known as The Northern League). Under Roger’s leadership the League remained mainly a cultural and essentially non-political organization. With his business responsibilities mounting rapidly, by 1961 he found it necessary to resign his membership and from all Northern League activities.

Following his withdrawal, the Northern League became more political and published a new journal called The Northlander. British members included Robert Gayre, Alistair Harper, Colin Jordan, and John Tyndall,

By 1965, the situation for old-established British firms operating in India and Pakistan was deteriorating. China had already fought a war with India over the borders of Assam, and India was shortly to invade Pakistan and convert East Pakistan into Bangladesh. Roger could see the tide was turning and sold his own commercial interests and moved to America. On his departure he received a farewell address from the Pakistani employees stating, “Your love, affection and sympathy for your staff are never to be forgotten and specially during the reorganization we have found that you have put yourself out to a great extent in finding the retrenched staff employment, which we feel, can only be equalled by a very few.”

Dr Roger Pearson

After leaving Asia East, Pearson returned to England for a few months before leaving to the United States, just before the infamous 1965 Immigration Act, which was aimed at stopping British and other Western Europeans from emigrating freely to America. Once, there he spent a year or so in California editing and writing articles and engaging in lecturing before embarking on a ten-month tour of the Caribbean and Southern Africa.

Returning to the United States, he joined the faculty of the Department of Sociology at the University of Southern Mississippi as an Assistant Professor (1968), wrote his Introduction to Anthropology (published in 1974 by what was then the largest Anthropology publishing house in the USA), accepted a position as Associate Professor and Department Head of the Sociology at Queen’s College, Charlotte (today Queens University of Charlotte), before returning to the University of Southern Mississippi (commonly known as ‘Ole Miss’) as Full Professor and Chairman of a new Department of Anthropology offering both Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees.

At ‘Ole Miss’ Dr. Pearson launched the the Journal of Indo-European Studies and the JIES Monograph series (1972) in collaboration with and under the guidance of the distinguished UCLA archaeologist Marija Gimbutas and University of Texas linguist and mythologist Edgar Polome. He continued to publish JIES via The Institute for the Study of Man until well into his late 80s. It is now edited by Emily Blanchard West (St. Catherine).

In the mid-1960s Dr. Pearson teamed up with Willis Carto (who would later go on to run Liberty Lobby and publish the Spotlight newspaper) for a while and they published a magazine called Western Destiny (1965-66), which was probably the first high quality journal the “American Right” had published since the end of WWII. They stayed friends up until the late 1990s when Willis Carto fell out with Dr. Pearson for not being extreme enough! From 1966 to 1967 under the pen-name “Stephan Langton”, Dr. Pearson published (via Noontide Press) The New Patriot, a magazine devoted to “a responsible but penetrating inquiry into every aspect of the Jewish Question”.

However, not content with standing still, in 1974, Dr. Pearson accepted a position as Dean of Academic Affairs and Director of Research at Montana Tech of the University of Montana in Butte, Montana, a mile high in the beautiful Rocky Mountains, in the course of which he also became ex-officio Secretary of the Montana Energy and Magnetohydrodynamic Research and Development Institute.

During his time in Montana he joined the World Anti-Communist League (WACL). Further adventures now called, and after one year Dr. Pearson again moved, this time to Washington, D.C. (1975) where he founded the Council on American Affairs as the new U.S. chapter. He went on to become Director of the North American Chapter of WACL and publisher and editor of a new journal entitled The Journal of American Affairs (founded 1975), which later changed its name to The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies). In the early years the journal published articles by both scholars, and senators and congressmen. Dr. Pearson continued to publish JSPS via Scott-Townsend until well into his late 80s.

Traveling widely to attend WACL conferences throughout the Far East, South and Central America, and Europe, Dr. Pearson conferenced face to face with several Heads of State, including King Faisal of Saudi Arabia. In 1978 he was elected World Chairman of the World Anti-Communist League in 1978 and hosted the 1979 World Conference of the League in Washington DC. The five-day proceedings were attended by upwards of a thousand WACL members and guests from free countries around the globe (including Lady Jane Birdwood from the UK). The Opening Ceremony was conducted with the aid of The U.S. Joint Armed Services Honour Guard and the Marine Corps Band and addressed by two U.S. Senators!

Delegates (including Lady Jane Birdwood from the UK) at a World Anti-Communist League conference in the 1970s, chaired by Dr Roger Pearson.

While Pravda in Moscow was ready to condemn the Conference out of hand, the left-wing Washington Post (WP), which had had a reporter at the Conference, totally ignored it for some thirty days while preparing a virtually full-page attack on both the WACL and its president, Dr. Pearson. Writing fancifully about “fascists” and South American “death squads”, the author of the Post article also levelled charges against Dr. Pearson’s alleged efforts to enrol “extremists” into WACL – surely not!

Indeed, it is a fact that, unlike the delegates from Taiwan, Korea, Japan and Central and Southern America, Pearson found the WACL European and Asian chapters replete with delegates who were almost soft on Communism (not including Lady Birdwood of course!). One Indian delegate constantly attacked “neo-colonialism”, but seemed never to mention the very real Communist threat to freedom in the 1960s and ’70s.

Dr Pearson chairing the WACL Conference

Dr. Pearson consequently promoted the recruitment of more genuine anti-Communists, such as the Italian Social Movement (MSI), at that time the fourth largest political party in Italy, whose successors – the Fratelli d’Italia (‘Brothers of Italy’) won Italy’s parliamentary elections in September 2022: their leader Giorgia Meloni became her country’s first female prime minister. I’m sure that brought a smile to his face!

After the WACL Dr. Pearson continued to work with the American Security Council, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, and the Journal of International Relations. But efforts by the liberal-left to frustrate his work continued. His scientific comprehension of Darwinian reality, and the importance of genetic, cultural, and environmental concerns for the survival of humanity, made him a target for those who care only about the present generation, and not those numberless generations hopefully still to come. His sociological and anthropological training meant that he never stressed the biological at the expense of the environmental, because biological organisms are dependent on the ecosphere – and also on a culture that supports both the biological and the environmental heritage. This the liberal-left hated, and they carried on a campaign against him and his work well into the 2000s.

Concerned about the future of the human race, Dr. Pearson became a Member of the British Eugenics Society, now known as the Galton Institute, as early as 1963, and was elected a Fellow in 1977. In 1979 he also assumed publication of Professor Robert Gayre’s Mankind Quarterly, which the latter had founded in 1960 with the aid of distinguished scholars such as Henry Vallois, S.D. Porteus, and Sir Charles B. Darwin. As the earlier generation of contributors passed on, he was able to recruit distinguished scholars to replace them, such as Joseph Campbell, Raymond B. Cattell, Hans Eysenck and William Shockley. Dr. Pearson continued to publish MQ via Scott-Townsend until well into his late 80s, and around 2010 passed it over to Prof. Richard Lynn, who publishes it via the Ulster Institute for Social Research.

Dr Pearson welcomed many delegates from around the world to anti-communist conferences

In 1990 Pearson founded the bi-monthly Conservative Review, an American version of Right NOW!, and published it via the Council for Social and Economic Studies. The magazine lasted almost seven years, but folded in 1997, due to lack of support from the “right-wing” of the GOP.

Not forgetting the importance of Universities to the rising generation, and concerned by the premeditated campus disruptions during the 1960s and 70s, Dr. Pearson joined the University Professors for Academic Order (UPAO), and served as its President 1980-84. Combining his credentials in the social sciences with his practical experience in the commercial world, his bank training in accounting, and his professional status as a former Fellow of the British Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators and member of the British Institute of Directors, he also served as a Trustee of the Benjamin Franklin University in Washington D.C. for a number of years before that respected institution, noted for the quality of its alumni, was absorbed into Georgetown University.

In 1984 Pearson received a Certificate of Appreciation signed by General Daniel O. Graham, Director of the Defence Intelligence Agency under President Reagan, and later of High Frontier, expressing “grateful appreciation for the important work you have done to prepare the way for a more secure world.” Also, a 1985 written accolade from the US Department of Education for “outstanding service to U.S. Education, and Education Reform Efforts”. But perhaps the most significant tribute, and one that annoyed Pearson’s critics most strongly, was a signed letter from President Ronald Reagan commending Pearson for “promoting and upholding those ideals and principles that we value at home and abroad …bringing to a wide audience the work of leading scholars who are supportive of a free enterprise economy, a firm and consistent foreign policy and a strong national defence.”
Later an embarrassed White House official asked Dr. Pearson not to use the letter for publicity purposes, after they had come under attack from the Washington Post!

Dr Pearson introduced genuine committed activists to strengthen anti-communist campaigns during the 1970s.

Dr. Pearson wrote over a dozen books including:

Eastern Interlude. Thacker Spink, Calcutta; Luzac and Co., London (1953) – republished by Scott-Townsend 1999.

Eugenics and Race. London: Clair Press; Los Angeles: Noontide Press (1958).

Blood Groups and Race. 2nd ed. London: Clair Press; Los Angeles: Noontide Press (1966).

Race & Civilisation. 2nd Ed. London: Clair Press; Los Angeles: Noontide Press (1966).

Early Civilizations of the Nordic Peoples. London: Northern World (1958); Los Angeles: Noontide Press (1965).

Introduction to Anthropology: An Ecological/Evolutionary Approach. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston (1974)

Sino-Soviet Intervention in Africa. Council on American Affairs (1977)

Korea in the World Today. Washington, D.C.: Council on American Affairs (1978)

Ecology and Evolution. Washington, D.C.: Mankind Quarterly Monograph (1981)

Essays in Medical Anthropology. Washington, D.C.: Scott-Townsend Publishers (1981)

Anthropological Glossary. Marla at, FL: Krieger Publishing (1985)

Evolution, Creative Intelligence, and Intergroup Competition. Cliveden Press (1986)

William Shockley: Shockley on Eugenics and Race: The Application of Science to the Solution of Human Problems. Preface by Arthur Jensen. Washington, D.C.: Scott-Townsend Publishers (1992).

Race, Intelligence and Bias in Academe. Introduction by Hans Eysenck.[47] Scott-Townsend Publishers, Washington, D.C., 1991. (2nd. Ed. 1994).

Heredity and Humanity: Race, Eugenics and Modern Science. Washington, D.C.: Scott-Townsend Publishers (1991) [2nd ed. 1998].

Dr Pearson in 1975 with distinguished Saudi, Yemeni and Taiwanese government ministers, ambassadors and university leaders

I first met Dr. Pearson in 1996 a year or so after I had moved from Devon in England to live the States. A mutual friend Carl Knittle, who was working for him at his down-town DC office at the time introduced us. Carl had just handed in his notice, and they were looking for his replacement, which turned out to be me!

I ended up working there for over six years, and only left when the US Government issued me with a ten-year exclusion order towards the end of 2002, so I had no choice but to leave and return to dear old Blighty.

From his DC office – which was only six or seven blocks from the White House – and only one block away from a black (now Hispanic) ghetto! – Dr. Pearson edited and published three journals, the Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies (JSPS), the Journal of Indo-European Studies (JIES) and his pride and joy the Mankind Quarterly (MQ). He also published numerous books and monographs, many sold through his mail order (and later online) book shop – Scott Townsend Books.

Dr Pearson’s home and office at 1133 13th Street NW, Washington DC. His office was on the ground floor, while he and his wife had a flat on the fourth floor.

Both Dr. Pearson and his wife Marion – who died around ten years before him – were very kind to me. In fact, if it had not been for them, I don’t think I would have survived so long Stateside. They had four children, two boys and two girls. The girls both married Europeans (a Frenchman and a German) and they were very proud to have a true pan-European family. Their eldest son Edwin was born (in India) on exactly the same day as me (in Worcester) on October 3rd, 1960, which they both found amusing. Sadly, Edwin died very young in his forties.

During those six years working at his office at 1133 on 13th Street, NW, I met so many interesting people, including to name but a few Dr. Philippe Rushton, Prof. Glayde Whitney, Attorney Sam Dickson, Paul Fromm, and the men with the deep pockets – Harry Weyher and Bill Regnery.

American Renaissance, which is run by Jared Taylor, used to hold their annual conference near to their office in Northern Virginia, not too far away from down-town Washington DC, so many conference attendees use to pop into the our office to say hello, and sometimes taking Dr. Pearson out for lunch, en route to the conference. It was always nice to meet new and old friends.

Two other “doctors” from time to time used to visit the office, when passing through DC – Dr. William L. Pierce and Dr. Edward R. Fields – they would normally go out with Dr. Pearson for either lunch or dinner depending on the time of the visit. I later found out that during Dr. Pierce’s last visit the FBI had staked out the building! They tailed them both to a local restaurant, sat inside at a table close to theirs while they ate and talked, then tailed them back to the office. It seems that every time Dr. Pierce left the National Alliance compound in West Virginia, to go out of town, the Feds went with him! Anyway, it was good to see American taxes were put to good use!

President Reagan’s controversial letter to Dr Pearson

And then there was “9-11”. On September 11th 2001, I got into the office on time, which was a couple of minutes before 9am and started to drink my coffee (I would do the typically American thing of eating my bagel while walking to work!). Up until then – as they say – it was just a normal day at the office!

Dr. Pearson was already in his office (which was the room next door to mine) hard at work. He normally got there before me, around 8.45am most mornings. However, he did not have very far to travel – as he lived in an apartment (flat) just above the office, on the 4th or 5th floor (I think). We said our usual pleasantries, and I then got on with going through the mail from the previous day (I did not normally work on a Monday) and from the weekend.

Looking back on it, around the time I was getting my breakfast, around 8.46am, New York was turning into a scene of devastation after the first of the two planes smashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. And around the time I was sitting down at my desk and starting to open the mail, around 9.03am the second plane was smashing into the South Tower.

Both 110 storey towers collapsed within an hour and forty-two minutes, leading to the collapse of the other World Trade Center structures including the 7 World Trade Center, and significantly damaging all the surrounding buildings.

Of course, Dr. Pearson and I were oblivious to all this, as we did not have a radio or TV on in either office, and it was just before the days of smart phones.

The first we knew that something was wrong, was when Dr. Pearson’s wife Marion rang him from their upstairs flat, where I guess she was watching the events unfold on TV. He told me what she had told him, but to honest it did not really sink in there and then what was going on. So, we just carried on working as normal.

I guess five minutes later, just before 9.20am we got another phone call which I answered this time. It was BNP leader Nick Griffin! He told us basically what Mrs. Pearson had just told us, that two hijacked planes had crashed into the Twin Towers at the World Trade Center, but then added that two more planes were now on their way to DC to blow up the White House and Capital Buildings, and that we needed to get out quickly!

Of course, even we wanted to get out – which we didn’t – where were we meant to get out to? However, Nick meant well, and I appreciate him warning us anyway, even though there was nothing we could do about it. I thanked him and told him we would not be moving from the building at this time, but if he could ring back with any updates, that would be very useful.

I talked over the situation with Dr. Pearson, and he said he did not think the planes would even reach DC, and even if they did, their targets were so far away from us that we would “probably be ok”! So, we sat back down at our desks and carried on working.

Dr Roger Pearson at his Washington office in 2013

However, we had only been back at our desks for a couple of minutes, when we heard a hell of a commotion going on outside our building. At 9:37am, the third of the hijacked planes crashed into the west side of the Pentagon (the headquarters of the American military, as well as a large underground shopping mall), which was just over the Potomac River in NW Arlington, Virginia, causing a partial collapse of the building’s west side.

To give you an idea of distance, The Pentagon is about three and miles south east of our office, maybe a ten-minute drive away. It’s just south of Arlington National Cemetery, and just north of Alexandria.

I can remember hearing an explosion, and then the noise of hundreds of other office workers, and locals outside our office on the streets. I said to Dr. Pearson that I was going outside to see what the heck was happening, because we had no windows in the office so I could not peer out. Once outside I could see all the smoke in the distance, and word got round that the Pentagon had been hit.

I can’t remember there being a panic, but a lot of my fellow DC workers were very concerned as word had got around that the 4th plane was on its way to DC!

However, the 4th plane – United 93 – never reached DC. And US authorities even to this day, don’t know for sure if the target was to have been the White House or the Capitol.

The story put about by President Bush’s spin-doctors that the passengers aboard United 93 decided to act once they realized all was lost – i.e. storm the flight deck, attack the terrorists and bring the plane down before it reached Washington DC – sadly did not happen. But why would it have done, it never happened on the other three hijacked flights, and they had many more passengers.

What did really happen, was that Bush ordered United 93 to be shot down before it got anywhere near DC. This flight was the only plane not to hit its intended target, instead after being shot down it crashed in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, about 170 miles from DC at 10:03 am.

Once the news spread around DC that plane number four had crashed and that there were probably no more hijacked planes up in the skies, most of the workers either returned to their offices – as I did – or they left and started to make their way back home.

Dr Pearson’s institute received funds from important American donors including the Pioneer Fund

I asked Dr. Pearson what we should do, and he said, “just carry on working Mark”! Which is what I did until around noon when I went for an early lunch. All public transport in DC was in the process of being stopped, but most of the bars and restaurants seemed to be open, with customers glued to the TVs. I found a Subway close by and got a meal and a soda (pop to you Brits!) and tried to check my cell phone, only to find it not working. The internet had also gone down, but landlines were still working.

I made my way back to the office, where Dr. Pearson was still working. He informed me he was then going up upstairs to his flat for his lunch. So, I just went back to work. Strange when you look back on it.

My girlfriend of the time (Jackie) was calling the office every half an hour or so, asking when I was going to get out of DC and come home. I told her the same thing each time: as soon as I can.

Dr. Pearson came back down to the office around 2pm I guess, and told me to pack up for the day, since it would take me ages to get home as there was no public transport. Even most of the ‘enriched’ taxi drivers had gone home by then. So, I called Jackie back from the office landline and said I was going to start to make my way back to Falls Church, but be prepared for a long wait as it may take a while!

A full report of the events from “9-11” can be found on the H&D website – click here for details.

There are so many incredible stories I could tell you about Dr. Roger Pearson and the goings on at the office and around DC, including our trips to the Martin Luther King Jr. Post Office, which used to run out of stamps!; our trip with Zach (who use to work part time at the office himself in the early days) to Burger King, where Dr. P. ordered off the cuff not from the set menu, which completely baffled the young black counter assistant!; the day Dr. Pearson telephoned Zach’s home and his brother Corey answered the phone and thought it was, and I quote “the King of England calling”! The day Dr. P. went for a lunch time drink with Zach and I in a bar near McPherson Square, and a lefty looking bloke with very long hair stood by us waiting to be served. Zach said to Dr. P. “what do you make of him”, to which Dr. P. replied “he’s probably a homosexual”! The day after Princess Diana died (I was at work even though it was a Sunday): Dr. P. and I went out for lunch near the White House and Yanks were coming up to us in the restaurant giving us their condolences, as if we knew her!

Of course, we had our ups and downs, but overall, I had six very enjoyable years working for Dr. Pearson, where I learnt not only how to run an efficient office (a well-oiled machine – you should see the H&D office now!), but so much more about race, eugenics, anthropology, history and American politics.

The last time I spoke to him was shortly before Christmas. I think my phone call had woken him up from an afternoon nap, and it took a couple of minutes for him to realise who I was. But after that he was fine, and we had a good old natter, chatting about old times in DC and the political situation in the UK. He was still very sharp even at 95.

I will sorely miss Dr. Roger Pearson, he was one of a kind. And if there is a Valhalla, he will surely have a place there.

From chapter 8 of Fagrskinna, one of the kings’ sagas, written around 1220. The composition is by an anonymous author from the 10th century and is referred to as Eiríksmál, and describes Eric Bloodaxe and five other kings arriving in Valhalla after their death. The poem begins with comments by Odin (as Old Norse Óðinn):

“What kind of a dream is it,” said Óðinn,
“in which just before daybreak,
I thought I cleared Valhǫll,
for coming of slain men?
I waked the Einherjar,
bade valkyries rise up,
to strew the bench,
and scour the beakers,

Wine to carry,
as for a king’s coming,
here to me I expect
heroes’ coming from the world,
certain great ones,
so glad is my heart
.”

There will also be an obituary in a future issue of Heritage and Destiny magazine.