“Student test scores data are generally contrary to the notion that public schools are systemically racist against visible minorities,” the study notes.
“An analysis of educational attainment and economic outcomes shows limited evidenceof broad systemic racism in Canadian society, despite what anti-racism activists and the mandate letters from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to his cabinet might insist.”
It is in no way an abstraction to state that our Liberal government’s proclamation of “systemic racism” in Canadian society qualifies as a calculated misnomer. Straight from the horse’s mouth at Statistics Canada arrives an initial piece of evidence:
“Median wage of economic immigrant principal applicants surpassesthat of the Canadian population one year after admission.”
“In 2019, applicants of economic categories in 2018 had a median wage of $43,600, 12.4% higher than the Canadian median wage in the same year ($38,800).”
We begin to speculate on motivation for what amounts to a false assessment from government bodies on the topic of “social equity” in Canadian society. Additional data adds to the theory that “the pot has called the kettle black.” In fact, it may be fair to say that if systemic racism is endemic in Canada it’s actually being directed at citizens of Anglo-European heritage.
“Data On Education And Wages Don’t Show Systemic Racism In Canada: Study”
“If you take various minority groups, some of them earn more than the white population, some of them earn less. And that’s roughly what you would expect to see if Canada was a society that did not favour the white population.”
What’s up with this, Jagmeet Singh? In June, 2020 the New Democratic Party leader was quoted as saying “I think if you refuse to acknowledge that systemic racism exists, you certainly do not have an open mind to address this issue.”
Yet, if Mr. Singh drilled down on issues relating to immigrant-racialized community education and income, he would discover that Anglophones do not sit atop a “white privilege” totem pole. Why bash these communities regardless?
“If all of our institutions and the way our institutions are set up, set up on this notion that we discriminate against minorities, you would expect to see white people with the highest weekly average earnings.”
“The paper points to weekly earnings of Canadian-born men and women in 2016. White Canadians are at the middle of the pack, earning $1,530 for men and $1,120 for women.”
Well, what do you know? Turns out that whitey is, generally speaking, “your average Joe.” Naturally, that won’t do for the current prime minister of Canada.
In 2020, PM Justin Trudeau stated that “his administration will tackle ‘systemic racism,’ and break down the ‘systemic barriers’ that exclude people of colour from full participation in Canadian life.”
Sounds to CAP as if these folks are doing just as well, if not better, than white Canadians.
Why the vilification? This question has haunted Cultural Action Party [est. 2016] since the day an under-qualified politician darkened the door of the PMO in Ottawa.
Trudeau, Singh, and a host of other politicians have indulged in this practice, including omni-present Liberal MP Ahmed Hussen, a politician who has held more Cabinet files than properly-fitting outfits hanging in Chrystia Freeland’s closet:
“Hate and discrimination have no place in Canada. This is why the Government of Canada will continue to support and advance policies and programs to tackle systemic racism, secure equitable access to justice and healthcare, increase access to education and job training, and promote human rights informed by the lived experiences of peoples and communities.”
Speaking of education, we contrast half-Somalian citizen MP Hussen’s statement with a quote from a recent article published by the National Post:
“40 Canadian university professors have recommended to the House of Commons that Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies in federally funded research be abolished.”
“The head of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, which oversees the racial-quota-bound Canada Research Chairs Program, told the committee that he has no plans to stop identity-based hiring, even though its quota for non-white researchers has been surpassed.”
Bingo. We come to the what should be understood as a pivotal element of the social equity debate in Canada. For effect, we repeat: “has been surpassed.”
After which CAP offer up a fundamental of our thinking. If the racial quota element has been achieved, and the program continues, what message can be extracted? Furthermore, what’s to stop this structure from being replicated in every educational institution across the country?
In this we see the shifting of socio-political tides that we believe constitute the very essence of Liberal-NDP-Trudeau-Singh politics in Canada.
It is not equality, but surpassment, that motivate the political powers that be in Justin Trudeau’s “no core identity” Canada.
Chrystia Freeland’s Anti-White & Anti-White Male Budget
Chrystia Freeland’s budget is woke by stealth
[The Liberals and, to a lesser extent, the Conservatives are committed to the replacement and displacement of the European founding/settler people of Canada via mass immigration — the Liberals are now aiming for 500,000 immigrants a year, over 85% from the Third World. Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s recent budget escalates the anti-White campaign. Her budget includes many measures to dispossess Whites, using our money to actively discriminate against Whites, especially White males. — Paul Fromm]
The words ‘diversity,’ ‘equity’ and ‘inclusion,’ do not appear in the budget but they are very much apart of it Author of the article: Jamie Sarkonak Published Apr 03, 2023 • Last updated Apr 03, 2023 • 5 minute read 416 Comments Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland speaks during a news conference before delivering the federal budget, Tuesday, March 28, 2023 in Ottawa. Photo by Adrian Wyld /The Canadian Press
Identity-based hiring for the coast guard, tens of millions for Black employees in the public service and mandatory diversity reporting at Canadian banks were some of this year’s identity-politics-infused budget measures.
The words “diversity,” “equity” and “inclusion,” do not appear at all in Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s budget speech; feminism was mentioned, but only in the context of Canada’s record-high labour force participation for women. It was an interesting retreat for a party that regularly champions diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).
Perhaps it’s a sign that some communications strategists in Ottawa are starting to realize that DEI doesn’t have universal appeal. DEI is unavoidable though, since identity-based spending has been enshrined in Canadian law with the Canadian Gender Budgeting Act.
Another $55 million for housing was added to the National Housing Strategy. On top of housing need, the program prioritizes projects by identity.
The federal Student Work Placement program was given $197.7 million for 2024-25. The feds noted that the program will be aimed specifically at “students with disabilities, Black and racialized students, Indigenous people, and/or women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.” This isn’t surprising — the program already discriminates by providing greater wage subsidies for students who check off the diversity box, so we’re getting more of the same.
The Canadian Coast Guard is getting $120 million over the next five years to reinforce the fleet and hire more personnel. It’s a great initiative, considering the job implications for Atlantic Canada and the assistance it will give to the defence against illegal fishing. However, hiring will have “distinct considerations for Black and racialized people” — an unnecessary consideration that undercuts merit.
A grant program for Canadian colleges was expanded with $108 million over the next three years. Another important investment, but the grant program has a DEI component which asks applicants to demonstrate how projects will affect various identity groups.
The Canadian Media Fund received $40 million over two years “to make funding more open to traditionally underrepresented voices” by supporting the creation of jobs and content for “equity-deserving” communities. The Canadian Media Fund already offers numerous programs with preferential treatment to women, disabled persons, Indigenous people, visible minorities and sexual minorities.
Similarly, $160 million was allocated to “organizations in Canada that serve women.” It looks like another boost to non-profits and charities to balance out the budget measures that the government deems to benefit primarily men.
The budget also created a new Anti-Racism, Equity and Inclusion Secretariat, which is getting $1.5 million over the next two years. The role is that of an ideological commissar, ensuring that DEI is taken into account when crafting federal policy. It appears to be similar in size and scope to two identity positions created in last year’s budget: the Special Envoy on Combatting Antisemitism and the Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia.
What makes these positions objectionable is that representation of citizens should happen on the floor House of Commons. The people should choose who represents them in government, not the Liberal Party of Canada.
Spending on a planned Action Plan to Combat Hate, as well as continuing Canadian Heritage’s Anti-Racism Strategy, was $75 million (interestingly, less than the $85 million allocated last year). The trouble with these plans is that they tend to use very expansive definitions of “racism” and “hate” that aren’t shared by the general public.
This year, the feds are spending the anti-hate money on things like security upgrades for places of worship, which isn’t objectionable if all religions get equal treatment. However, the development of an Action Plan to Combat Hate has been troubled: the Department of Canadian Heritage was caught biasing the results of feedback surveys to favour voices that agreed with Liberal policy goals. Meanwhile, the department’s Anti-Racism Action Program (one of the “arms” of the larger Anti-Racism Strategy) has funded an anti-racism tool kit that labelled Canada’s old flag, the Red Ensign, a hate symbol. It also funded a series of consultations carried out by Laith Marouf, an anti-racism activist known for his antisemitism.
The budget has some race-specific lines as well. One initiative set aside $25 million specifically for “Black-led and Black-serving” community organizations. Another initiative set aside $45.9 million for Black federal public servants to have a dedicated mental health fund and career development program — last year, $3.7 million was set aside to make a mental health fund for Black federal public servants, so the program has increased more than 10 times in size.
Regarding government procurement, $80 million has been dedicated to “social procurement.” The Liberals are increasingly tying federal contracts to diversity; this latest batch of funding will go towards the collection of demographic data of potential contractors to assist with the project.
Finally, the budget will also expand requirements for corporations to disclose the diversity of governance boards. In 2020, amendments to the Canada Business Corporations Act from Bill C-25 took effect, requiring federally-incorporated distributing corporations to disclose the demographic composition of governing boards and senior management. The 2023 budget requires federally regulated financial institutions to make the same disclosures. Amendments will be made to the Bank Act, Insurance Companies Act, and Trust and Loan Companies Act accordingly.
Diversity disclosures are quick to come with strings attached. In 2020, Navdeep Bains (then-Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry) told tech news website BetaKit that companies that achieved greater diversity would have preferential access to government contracts and programming.
Canadians should be skeptical of the feds picking and choosing favourites based on identity, like they’ve done with this budget. It distracts from what the real goal should be: improving the quality of life for all Canadians, no matter who they are.
National Post
Chrystia Freeland’s Anti-White & Anti-White Male Budget
Chrystia Freeland’s budget is woke by stealth
[The Liberals and, to a lesser extent, the Conservatives are committed to the replacement and displacement of the European founding/settler people of Canada via mass immigration — the Liberals are now aiming for 500,000 immigrants a year, over 85% from the Third World. Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s recent budget escalates the anti-White campaign. Her budget includes many measures to dispossess Whites, using our money to actively discriminate against Whites, especially White males. — Paul Fromm]
The words ‘diversity,’ ‘equity’ and ‘inclusion,’ do not appear in the budget but they are very much apart of it Author of the article: Jamie Sarkonak Published Apr 03, 2023 • Last updated Apr 03, 2023 • 5 minute read 416 Comments Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland speaks during a news conference before delivering the federal budget, Tuesday, March 28, 2023 in Ottawa. Photo by Adrian Wyld /The Canadian Press
Identity-based hiring for the coast guard, tens of millions for Black employees in the public service and mandatory diversity reporting at Canadian banks were some of this year’s identity-politics-infused budget measures.
The words “diversity,” “equity” and “inclusion,” do not appear at all in Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s budget speech; feminism was mentioned, but only in the context of Canada’s record-high labour force participation for women. It was an interesting retreat for a party that regularly champions diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).
Perhaps it’s a sign that some communications strategists in Ottawa are starting to realize that DEI doesn’t have universal appeal. DEI is unavoidable though, since identity-based spending has been enshrined in Canadian law with the Canadian Gender Budgeting Act.
Another $55 million for housing was added to the National Housing Strategy. On top of housing need, the program prioritizes projects by identity.
The federal Student Work Placement program was given $197.7 million for 2024-25. The feds noted that the program will be aimed specifically at “students with disabilities, Black and racialized students, Indigenous people, and/or women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.” This isn’t surprising — the program already discriminates by providing greater wage subsidies for students who check off the diversity box, so we’re getting more of the same.
The Canadian Coast Guard is getting $120 million over the next five years to reinforce the fleet and hire more personnel. It’s a great initiative, considering the job implications for Atlantic Canada and the assistance it will give to the defence against illegal fishing. However, hiring will have “distinct considerations for Black and racialized people” — an unnecessary consideration that undercuts merit.
A grant program for Canadian colleges was expanded with $108 million over the next three years. Another important investment, but the grant program has a DEI component which asks applicants to demonstrate how projects will affect various identity groups.
The Canadian Media Fund received $40 million over two years “to make funding more open to traditionally underrepresented voices” by supporting the creation of jobs and content for “equity-deserving” communities. The Canadian Media Fund already offers numerous programs with preferential treatment to women, disabled persons, Indigenous people, visible minorities and sexual minorities.
Similarly, $160 million was allocated to “organizations in Canada that serve women.” It looks like another boost to non-profits and charities to balance out the budget measures that the government deems to benefit primarily men.
The budget also created a new Anti-Racism, Equity and Inclusion Secretariat, which is getting $1.5 million over the next two years. The role is that of an ideological commissar, ensuring that DEI is taken into account when crafting federal policy. It appears to be similar in size and scope to two identity positions created in last year’s budget: the Special Envoy on Combatting Antisemitism and the Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia.
What makes these positions objectionable is that representation of citizens should happen on the floor House of Commons. The people should choose who represents them in government, not the Liberal Party of Canada.
Spending on a planned Action Plan to Combat Hate, as well as continuing Canadian Heritage’s Anti-Racism Strategy, was $75 million (interestingly, less than the $85 million allocated last year). The trouble with these plans is that they tend to use very expansive definitions of “racism” and “hate” that aren’t shared by the general public.
This year, the feds are spending the anti-hate money on things like security upgrades for places of worship, which isn’t objectionable if all religions get equal treatment. However, the development of an Action Plan to Combat Hate has been troubled: the Department of Canadian Heritage was caught biasing the results of feedback surveys to favour voices that agreed with Liberal policy goals. Meanwhile, the department’s Anti-Racism Action Program (one of the “arms” of the larger Anti-Racism Strategy) has funded an anti-racism tool kit that labelled Canada’s old flag, the Red Ensign, a hate symbol. It also funded a series of consultations carried out by Laith Marouf, an anti-racism activist known for his antisemitism.
The budget has some race-specific lines as well. One initiative set aside $25 million specifically for “Black-led and Black-serving” community organizations. Another initiative set aside $45.9 million for Black federal public servants to have a dedicated mental health fund and career development program — last year, $3.7 million was set aside to make a mental health fund for Black federal public servants, so the program has increased more than 10 times in size.
Regarding government procurement, $80 million has been dedicated to “social procurement.” The Liberals are increasingly tying federal contracts to diversity; this latest batch of funding will go towards the collection of demographic data of potential contractors to assist with the project.
Finally, the budget will also expand requirements for corporations to disclose the diversity of governance boards. In 2020, amendments to the Canada Business Corporations Act from Bill C-25 took effect, requiring federally-incorporated distributing corporations to disclose the demographic composition of governing boards and senior management. The 2023 budget requires federally regulated financial institutions to make the same disclosures. Amendments will be made to the Bank Act, Insurance Companies Act, and Trust and Loan Companies Act accordingly.
Diversity disclosures are quick to come with strings attached. In 2020, Navdeep Bains (then-Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry) told tech news website BetaKit that companies that achieved greater diversity would have preferential access to government contracts and programming.
Canadians should be skeptical of the feds picking and choosing favourites based on identity, like they’ve done with this budget. It distracts from what the real goal should be: improving the quality of life for all Canadians, no matter who they are.
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?
Armed for Work: Dr. Theresa Tam arrives at meeting determined to impose Chinese-style health measures upon Canadians.
The official line is that she is the “Chief Public Health Officer” of Canada. With this position, she has become, in effect, the Canadian official behind the government’s COVID-19 containment strategy. But who is Theresa Tam, really? How did she acquire such a powerful position, with the ability to close down a whole nation based on such inconsequential statistics of 3-4% cases, which even the 2018 flu virus, with double the cases, wasn’t able to do?
Teresa Tam Locks Down Canada
Tam appears daily in the living room of Canadians reporting on the state of the virus on various television stations with her government colleagues, Minister of Health Patty Hajdu and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, telling Canadians to “practice physical distancing” to “fight” this “pandemic.”
Initially, Tam questioned the public health risks of the virus:
Right now, the cases are in China. Very few are exported. Yes, there’s human-to-human transmission, but those are generally for close contacts…for the general public…the risk is low in Canada.
But all this changed by late March, and Tam told Canadians in her April 3 television update:
There are now 11, 747 cases of COVID-19, including 152 deaths. Again this represents infections from previous exposures, and not what is happening right now. So our urge is that even if you’re not hearing about cases in your community, it doesn’t mean that there is no risk of exposure, and we must all consider that anyone could be infected and keep our two meter distance as the safest approach. [Tam’s full presentation is available here.]
Her message now is that anyone, and everyone, could be infected. This was her rationale for assisting in the nation-wide emergency alert to Canadians that they “Stay Home; Restez a la Maison.”
“So, of course, we owe it to everyone to not put Canadians at risk, and to do all we can to stop the spread of COVID-19 right now,” says Tam of her decision. Her prescription is to “practice social distancing, self-isolation, hand hygiene.” Her recommendations have indeed evolved into simplistic symbols, the images for which bear a strong resemblance to public health information on avoiding the flu, which are presented every year for the virus which, at its most lethal, killed 8,500 people in 2018. And the country has never shut down for fear of the flu.
The only item missing on the Corona-Checklist is “Get Vaccinated.” So far.
And from this information, a lockdown of dutiful, and guilt-ridden, Canadians became the reality. Across the country, dutiful citizens closed their shops, left jobs, shuttered schools and daycare centres, and stayed home, waiting for Tam’s daily updates, to urge them to participate in the next battle tactic against their invisible enemy, who could be lurking anywhere.
And they all obliged. Tam’s draconian “Stay Home/ Restez a la Maison” ordinance could be the beginning of much stricter enforcements to come, based on her premise that “anyone could be infected,” which means that we could all be infected.
Mississauga’s (Ontario) City Centre, with blocked off, empty parking lots, which are normally filled to capacity
As the Chief Health Officer in Canada, Tam provides the data, the analyses, and the recommendations on health care and enforcement to the government. Prime Minister Trudeau, clearly following the advice of his Chief Public Health Officer, officially stated in March 29 during his daily update that:
There are no plans to call in Canada’s military to enforce quarantine or self-isolation measures amid COVID-19.
Trudeau continues, with a hint of what might come for those who don’t follow these regulations:
The Canadian Armed Forces are there to help when Canada is in need…Right now we have not received any specific requests and there are no plans underway to have the army intervene.
“All Canadians must act now to reduce the spread,” orders Tam in her pre-taped video, which has the air of an infomercial, appearing periodically on the CBC and CTV. And her emphatic “now” has a clear subtext that there are serious consequences for those who don’t help to “reduce the spread” of this “serious public health threat.”
So here we are, in the midst of the “global health crisis.”
So Who is Dr Theresa Tam?
Who is this woman now in charge of providing the “chief” medical information concerning Canada’s lockdown? Where did she come from? There is very little available on her biography, very little personal (and even professional) information on Tam. Somewhere there was a post that she was 55 years old, but I couldn’t find:
Her date of birth
Her place of birth (other than “raised in Hong Kong”)
The dates of her various degrees – I even went into the UBC and UA websites looking for alumni profiles.
There are no listings of her theses and dissertation.
She is listed having expertise in immunization, infectious disease, emergency preparedness and global health security. Something more specific, and odd, is: “she is a graduate of the The Canadian Field Epidemiology Program” which looks like an internship or upgrades for employees in the Public Health Agency of Canada.
But I couldn’t find her medical school records to find her year of graduation, or any other post-grad qualifications.
I am usually pretty good at finding out some of this information, but to draw a blank on almost all the key components that make up a biographical profile is very strange.
Wikipedia states her birth place as Hong Kong, that she grew up in Britain, obtaining her medical degree in the University of Nottingham, with further studies at the University of Alberta for her residency, and the University of British Columbia under a fellowship.
A page on the Government of Canada website states that she is an expert in “immunization, infectious disease, and global health security.”
The World Health Organization’s international website lists her as “an international expert on a number of World Health Organization committees” including SARS, pandemic influenza and polio eradication.
Her associations with the World Health Organization (WHO), I believe, has brought her in contact with Tedros Ghebreyesus, the Eritrean Director General of WHO, who was key in starting the misinformation about the global coronavirus panic. Ghebreyesus downplayed the virus’ outbreak in Wuhan, China, defending China’s President Xi’s misinformation on the severity of the virus, and refusing to support President Trump’s travel bans and restrictions of flights from China.
Tedros Gebreyesus, Director General of the World Health Organization, (L) shakes hands with Chinese President Xi Jinping before a meeting at the Great Hall of the People, on January 28, 2020 in Beijing. China Politics
Tam has close links with the WHO as a consultant. I believe she personally knows Tedros Gebreyesus (the Eritrean Director General of WHO), who was key in starting the misinformation about the global panic. She is a feminist and a socialist, as Tedros is also a life-long Marxist, starting from his political positions in the various Ethiopian Marxist governments from the 1980s and the 2000s.
She has politicized her role in Canadians’ health and well-being. She declares, following the socialist mandates of the WHO, which is clearly her own political stance:
A healthy Canada requires us to level the [social] playing field.
And she was present at a conference in Vancouver in 2019 titled “Women Deliver,” presented by an organization which aims to indoctrinate young women, Canadian alike, with feminism, by advancing “Gender Equality and the health, rights and well-being of girls and women everywhere.”
She is also involved in the WHO’s various vaccinations (immunization) projects, working also under three of WHO’s emergency committees: Ebola, MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome) and poliovirus.
We learn from Carolyn Brown’s article, “WHO veteran heads up Canadian public health“, that, according to Tam, “emergency committee members do not represent their countries.” Brown explains that Tam “was selected for her background in field epidemiology, travel health, emergency medicine and pandemic preparedness.”
Tam is an advocate for vaccinations, pressing for the coronavirus vaccine, which requires $CAN 192 million for its development, despite the very low fatal cases from the virus, with the majority of those affected resuming full recovery. This puts her as an expert on vaccine preparation, which has been the topic of her latest updates on the conronavirus fight. But here is a report on the risks of a coronavirus vaccine, which Tam has not presented in any of her reports.
Tam has worked with other health emergencies before, including the Ebola outbreak, SARS and the H1N1 influenza, which helped her prepare her COVID-19 health strategy. Three years ago, discussing the SARS epidemic, Tam stated that her job would be all about “harnessing the efforts of the many to protect and promote the health of all Canadians, including the most vulnerable in our society.”
Outrageous. Drs across the country are facing urgent shortages of critical supplies. PM must explain why he sent 50,118 face shields, 1,101 masks, 1,820 goggles, 36,425 coveralls, 200,000 nitrile gloves and 3,000 aprons from Canada’s own gov’t reserves oversees in Feb.
The Media Says “A Star is Born”
This uncharismatic woman with the monotonous voice is being touted as “a new star is born” who “offer[s] clarity in the age of the coronavirus.”
“A Star is Born”: Emergency Fundraising T-Shirt (Dr. Theresa Tam), C$45.00
Tam downplays the China origins of the virus, attempting to silence those who hold views that link the virus to China, and Chinese in Canada, by warning Canadians to stop stigmatizing the Chinese in Canada. Her accusations of racist acts towards Chinese in Canada are largely anecdotal, which is strange as she is supposed to be an expert on epidemiology and data analysis,
Tam writes on her twitter page:
These actions create a divide of us versus them…Canada is a country built on the deep-rooted values of respect, diversity and inclusion.
I should add that there is a revealing item from CPAC on face masks which brings up Tam’s own reference to her Chinese background, and where I believe she sends subtle messages of the kind of draconian, perpetual, “imprisonment” of people behind masks, as she says people in China have become accustomed to.
It is a long video on an April 3 update, but the points she makes are at 36:21 – 36.26 (I’ve transcribed them):
I think we’re all learning, through, I think particularly Western societies that are not used to wearing masks in public, are sort of learning this as we are going along, and so, some of this information I think is in real time, undergoing evolution.
I wonder if she is a lesbian? Her whole demeanor, sometimes charming, at others draconian, and also the weird all-black legging and jacket she wore in one of her photos (I’ve put in the article), her unkempt hair, unlike Hajdu and Freedland who attempt at some femininity, suggests this.
All in all, Canada’s health is being overseen by a Chinese women we know very little about, with a very strange personality.
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland speaks during a news conference before delivering the federal budget, Tuesday, March 28, 2023 in Ottawa. Photo by Adrian Wyld /The Canadian Press
