Is Trudeau's Canada the Globalists' Laboratory For Crushing Dissent

When Prime Minister Justin Trudeau combined tyranny with absurdity by invoking the Emergencies Act for what was essentially a parking and noise problem in downtown Ottawa created by Freedom Convoy 2022, he should have been called out by the media. Furthermore, the House of Commons should have nipped this gargantuan power grab in the bud by refusing to pass a motion to confirm it. Trudeau’s Liberal party, after all, forms a minority government, and a united opposition by all the other parties could have killed Trudeau’s version of “l’état, c’est moi.”  

But the NDP Members of Parliament, acting in their party’s and not Canada’s interest, supported the Liberal MPs, who were all whipped to be obedient to their Leader. The combined numbers of these two parties overcame the opposition of the Conservatives and the Bloc québécois, and the motion to confirm the Emergencies Act was passed in the House of Commons. It is not irrelevant that recently (March 22), the Liberal and New Democratic Parties announced a formal agreement of cooperation, in essence giving Trudeau a majority government. 

But what about the Canadian media? With rare exceptions, such as Rebel News and True North News, most Canadian media are little more than propagandists for the government, having been bought off with a $600 million “bailout package” that Trudeau rolled out in 2019. [Not to mention the $1.2 billion the CBC gets annually on top of advertising revenues.]

Peaceful protest meets militarized police

Most of us know the back story by now. Possibly the most peaceful mass protest in human history, instigated by truckers from across Canada who converged in the country’s capital on January 29, 2022, was crushed two weeks and six days later, on Friday, February 18. This was four days after Trudeau invoked the never before used Emergencies Act of 1988. 

By the time he did so on February 14, the solidarity protests and blockades at the two Canada/US border crossings in Ontario (including the Ambassador Bridge over which one-quarter of transborder transport occurs) had ended peacefully. The remaining two crossings in Manitoba and Alberta would be cleared the next day. There had also been no protest-related violence in Ottawa itself. There were no injuries, broken windows, vandalism, damaged statues, or assaults on police.  

What transpired on Parliament Hill for three weeks less a day was (to my knowledge) an unprecedented protest-plus party. Throngs of people draped in or carrying flags turned the Hill into a sea of red and white, especially on weekends. They decorated the palisades of the Parliamentary grounds with their signs. A perma-party with music and dancing took root near the Chateau Laurier Hotel, a short distance east of the Parliament buildings.  

• 

• 

The federal government and the City of Ottawa did everything in their power to make the truckers’ stay miserable – buying out hotel rooms to keep out-of-town supporters away, closing all businesses and restaurants to block access to food and facilities, and finally trying to cut off the diesel fuel that kept the trucks running and warm during bitterly cold temperatures (as low as -16F). But nothing they did could dampen the spirits of the truckers or the protesters. Food stalls and porta-potties popped up, hotel guests lent their rooms to truckers to shower and freshen up, and citizens showed up with jerry fuel cans. There were street hockey games, hot tubs, and even bouncy castles because many truckers had brought their families.    

The protest was crushed with a massive militarized police operation, which systematically cleared sections of downtown Ottawa and included officers from elsewhere who did not wear badges. Some protesters were beaten with rifles or were kneed or kicked in an unnecessary display of force. At one point, mounted police rode into a crowd, and horses ran over a woman in a mobility device. Some trucks left, others were towed away, and in some cases, truck windows were smashed and drivers dragged out of their beds in the truck cabs despite truckers peacefully complying with arresting officers. The newly cleared-out section of Ottawa had a grim Soviet look as construction fencing blocked off large segments of a now-deserted downtown core.

Three days later, on Monday, February 21, when the Emergencies Act could no longer be considered relevant, the House of Commons confirmed it, demonstrating the obsequiousness of Liberal MPs and the complicity of the NDP. The next step to keep the Act in force for 30 days would have been for the Senate to pass it. Thankfully, many Senators laid out convincing arguments challenging the legality of invoking the Act for the situation at hand, and the motion to confirm seemed headed for defeat in the Upper Chamber. This is likely what prompted Trudeau to revoke the Emergencies Act on February 23 before it came to a vote.    

Financial legerdemain to crush political opposition

While the needless use of brutality in ending the protest was appalling, the abuse of the Emergencies Act to apply draconian financial measures on Convoy donors (whose donations were retroactively made illegal) is possibly even more shocking. The government froze hundreds of bank accounts, targeting not only the organizers (inexcusable as that would be in itself) but ordinary people who had made financial donations through the platform GiveSendGo. The government had the names of all the donors from that platform because GiveSendGo’s website had been hacked and the names of donors published. The fact that these names were illegally obtained did not concern the government. (Nor did it bother Twitter, which allowed the names to be shared despite its policy against sharing hacked material.)

The government gave itself expanded financial powers crafted under the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to deploy its financial measures. However, the government didn’t get much support in linking the protest to terrorism from FINTRAC, the national financial intelligence service. On February 10th, Barry MacKillop, FINTRAC’s deputy director of intelligence, told a parliamentary public safety committee meeting that “What’s been happening in Ottawa has not been, to my knowledge, identified as ideologically motivated violent extremism.” “We have not seen a spike in suspicious transaction reporting related to this,” he said. MacKillop also pointed out that FINTRAC’s US counterpart, FinCEN, would be concerned if American funds were being used to sponsor extremism. The two agencies are in constant contact and share intelligence frequently.  (While about 60% of donors to the Freedom Convoy were Canadian, some 37% were American.) 

Nevertheless, using the “occupation” of Ottawa and the blockades that had occurred at four border crossings as justification, Deputy PM and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland announced on February 14, the day the Emergencies Act was invoked, that crowdfunding platforms and payment service providers must register with FINTRAC, and would now fall under “anti-money-laundering and terrorist financing rules.” The changes would cover all forms of transactions, including those in cryptocurrencies. Under the Emergencies Act, Canadian financial institutions would also be able to temporarily cease providing financial services to any account that they suspected might be being used to “further illegal blockades and occupations” and share their information with the RCMP or CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Service). In addition, financial institutions could immediately freeze or suspend an account affiliated with “these illegal blockades” without a court order. 

On February 16, further pushing the terrorism narrative, Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino said that the protests were driven by “a very small, organized group, driven by an ideology to overthrow the government through whatever means they wish to use” (presumably future insurgents will take note that 18-wheelers aren’t the most efficient tool for a coup d’état), while Emergency Preparedness Minister Bill Blair asserted that “we have strong evidence that it was the intention of those who blockaded our ports-of-entry in a largely foreign-funded, targeted, and coordinated attack, which was clearly and criminally intended to harm Canada, to harm Canadians, to interrupt vital supply lines, to idle our workers and close our factories” (apparently oblivious to the irony that he was speaking for a government that had been crashing the economy for two years precisely with the lockdowns and mandates that the truckers were protesting). That same day, Justice Minister David Lametti said in a CTV News interview that the principles and procedures applied for terrorism and money laundering would also be extended to funding the “illegal blockade.” Owners of tractor-trailers used in the Ottawa protest could and ought to lose their trucking license, Lametti said.      

On February 18, before Parliament had voted to confirm the Act, Freeland announced the government’s intention to retain the power to freeze and seize assets, even after the Act expired 30 days after being invoked. The measures to be made permanent would include having financial services review their accounts proactively and having immunity in doing so, and allowing the government to permanently suspend insurance on trucks that had been used in “illegal occupations and blockades.” However, Freeland did not say under what authority her government would make emergency measures permanent, presumably because it was unconstitutional. 

The facts (as if they mattered) were explained on February 24th  to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance (FINA) by FINTRAC’s MacKillop, who reaffirmed what he had told the public safety committee two weeks earlier. Most of the millions of dollars that poured in for the Freedom Convoy were from “people around the world who were fed up with COVID, who were upset, and saw the demonstrations against COVID [mandates], and I believe that they just wanted to support the cause…So it wasn’t money that funded terrorism, or that was in any way money laundering,” he said.   

As if the federal government wasn’t doing enough to stifle dissent through the use of financial measures, the Ontario government announced on February 25th that it was shutting down 39 independent trucking businesses for having taken part in the Freedom Convoy; twelve were based in Ontario, and 27 were from outside the province.  Then, in a further show of vengeance, additional and more serious charges against the Freedom Convoy organizers were laid on March 24, five weeks after the protest was crushed. 

While previous charges had been primarily mischief and counseling to commit mischief, the new charges included intimidation, obstruction of police, and counseling others to obstruct police.  Nor was the federal government in any hurry to unfreeze bank accounts. Many days after the Emergencies Act was allegedly revoked, bank accounts remained frozen. Some friends and I ate at a gelato shop in Ottawa whose owner had made a $250 donation to the Freedom Convoy and whose bank account was still frozen when we were there, long after the Act was supposedly revoked. The only reason she was still in business is that her case had received some publicity, due to which citizens made large cash donations. 

How can grassroots protest against Covid mandates and restrictions, involving honking horns, lots of flags and placards, and music and dancing, be equated with terrorism, where people get stabbed, shot, run over, blown up, or otherwise killed and maimed? Bouncy castles versus spilled blood? Pretty much the same to this prime minister, eh? And, as John Robson expounds on, when it comes to money, the amount raised by the Freedom Convoy (even were it laundered) is a pittance compared with the flood of actual dark money for which Canada has been a haven for years. As Robson notes, some of that laundered money is mighty useful to politicians, which might explain how, for example, Vancouver remains (citing Terry Glavin)  “a money-laundering hub for international swindlers, drug dealers, and well-connected high rollers.” Glavin’s source was a federal Criminal Intelligence Service report that estimated the amount of dirty money making its way into Canadian real estate and other ventures was perhaps $133 billion annually.  But a $250 donation to the truckers, which wasn’t even laundered? Freeze the donor’s account under the Emergencies Act! In Trudeau’s New Canada, demanding an end to vaccine mandates and lockdowns through peaceful protests amounts to terrorism, FINTRAC’s assessment be damned! In general, regimes that designate opposition to government policies as terrorism and freeze the assets of political opponents aren’t called democracies. But then again, when asked in 2013 which country he admired most, Trudeau chose China because its “basic dictatorship” could get things done so efficiently. And maybe, as Canada builds back better following the pandemic, we’ll become even more like China. 

European Parliamentarians slam Trudeau

And where is the Canadian media in bringing the public’s attention to this egregious abuse of power? Most Canadian mainstream media were bought off with a $600 million “bailout package” that Trudeau rolled out in 2019. Hence, they asked no serious questions about how the protest was put down or the constitutional legality of invoking the Emergencies Act to do so.  But when Trudeau went to Europe to call on European leaders to “strengthen our democracies” in standing up to Vladimir Putin regarding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, his reception on the part of some Members of the European Parliament was almost as brutal, metaphorically speaking, as the treatment Freedom Convoy protesters received from his militarized police. They recognized Trudeau as being one of the “rising threats to our democracies” that he came to talk to them about. 

Among the Members of the European Parliament at the Plenary Session on March 23^rd who were eager to let Trudeau know their take on the situation in the Great White North was German MEP Christine Andersen, who called him “a disgrace to democracy” and noted that a “prime minister who openly admires the Chinese dictatorship, who is violating fundamental rights by persecuting and criminalizing his own citizens as terrorists simply because they stood up to his twisted idea of democracy, should not address this Parliament.” 

Croatian MEP Mislav Kolakusic said that under Trudeau’s “quasi-liberal boot,” Canada, once a symbol of the modern world, had become a symbol of human rights abuses. “We’ve seen how you trample women with horses, how you block single parents’ bank accounts, so they don’t even get school fees and their children’s medicines; gas, water, and light; and be able to pay their mortgage,” he said. Citizens could fight this “dictatorship of the worst kind” by uniting, he concluded.   

Romanian MEP Cristian Terhes also tore into Trudeau, calling him “exactly like a tyrant, like a dictator. He’s like Ceausescu in Romania.” After criticizing the way “science” was being abused to promote the vaccine, Terhes said he had been in contact with truckers in Canada and congratulated and thanked them. “I hope this movement for freedom and rights is spreading all around the world. Because at the end of the day, we have to make sure that all these elected officials understand that they were elected in those offices to work for the people, not to behave like masters of slaves.” (Of course, “masters of slaves” is precisely what the globalists are striving for.)

Speaking to Breitbart, Terhes said that,

“Justin Trudeau cannot come to lecture Putin on democracy in the European Parliament when he walks with hobnail boots over the fundamental rights of the Canadians. People are made now to choose between the Russian imperialist tyranny, promoted by Putin, and the Neo-Marxist tyranny promoted hypocritical leaders such as Trudeau, in which people are deprived of their rights and freedoms and become objects of the state.”  

A total of six Members of the European Parliament criticized Trudeau for his suppression of a peaceful protest. In addition to the above three, German MEP Bernhard Zimniok, Finnish MEP Laura Huhtasaari, and French MEP Virginie Joron (who showed up in a Freedom Convoy T-shirt) also blasted Trudeau.

Independent Irish Senator Sharon Keogan chastised the Irish Parliament for not condemning Trudeau’s suppression of the Freedom Convoy.  She described Trudeau’s militarized police’s use of excessive force as “…like something we’d see from Russia, or actions which we’ve condemned in Hungary and Poland, but instead it is happening in the supposed liberalist democracy of Canada.” She condemned the use of the Emergencies Act as a justification for the use of force and freezing the finances of individuals and companies involved in the protest:

These are people who committed no crime, who have not been convicted lawfully in court, and who the government decided to punish anyway because it might have been connected to a protest which was inconvenient to the government. It was an unprecedented act by the state against its citizens, which should be roundly condemned.”

She asked the Leader to write the Canadian ambassador “to condemn the excessive force used by the government on the overreach that is happening there to its citizens.”  “Authoritarianism is a threat to democracy no matter whose foot the boot is on,” Keogan concluded.  (Would those colorful progressive socks Trudeau loves be found under his jackboot?)

After such a thorough trashing of their country’s leader, you might think that Canada’s mainstream media would have something to say about it. You’d be wrong. As reported by True North, while the international press reported what some EU parliamentarians actually said, Canada’s media presented Trudeau’s trip as a success and his speech as well received. The government-funded (above and beyond the “trusted media” bailout package) CBC even reported that Trudeau received a standing ovation from the EU politicians, even though there was almost no one in the plenary where he spoke. 

But as Candice Malcolm concludes, Trudeau’s international reputation will never be the same.

Malcolm could be right. Christine Anderson’s Tweet about her view of Trudeau received (as of March 25) 125K likes and 2.4 million views, much to the dismay of Trudeau’s friend and former principal secretary Gerald Butts. Rex Murphy wrote in the National Post that “Justin Trudeau has become a punchline on the world stage.” “It is a brazen thing to go to other countries like some John the Baptist for the democracies, shortly after having trampled all over the rights of those involved in a largely peaceful democratic protest,” he said.  

But however much his critics may bark, Trudeau’s globalist caravan will keep moving on unless it is stopped. 

Did Trudeau’s overreach “awaken the masses” to a WEF scheme?

Trudeau’s reckless invocation of the Emergencies Act had unintended consequences beyond his shellacking in Europe. Right here at home, his invoking the Act and Freeland saying the draconian financial measures would become permanent created a run on the banks and shook confidence in Canadian banks domestically and internationally. Furthermore, unfortunately for Trudeau, this bank run happened when the Canadian Bankers Association (CBA) was trying to sell Canadians on a Digital ID. A video surfaced of Neil Parmender, president and CEO of the CBA, promoting this “revolutionary innovation.” He claimed that It would eliminate the need for those pesky passwords and plastic cards, like driver’s licenses and health cards. And Parmender also tells us that the World Economic Forum agrees that “banks and financial institutions should lead the path forward for digital ID.” Increasing regulatory compliance would be one of the benefits. 

But it seems that Canadians had become a bit skittish about the enforcement of regulatory compliance after experiencing the Emergencies Act and frozen bank accounts. If the Digital ID were in place, people targeted by Trudeau’s use of the Emergencies Act could have not just their bank accounts but their entire identity blocked by the same government measure.  Become more like China? Heck, we might even become more like North Korea!

As Sundance points out, if the government can work with the RCMP to target people based on an arbitrary political decree and control your bank account while simultaneously giving financial institutions liability protection for their participation, the confidence in the banking system is undermined. Banks can start having serious issues after not too many withdrawals due to fractional banking and deposits rules. Sundance notes that Freeland is visibly agitated in a video of February 22nd, in which she stands behind and to the right of Trudeau as he holds a press conference. Sundance suggests that “someone in the international financial world, IMF, World Bank or other affiliates in the world of collective finance had just had a very serious talk” with her. People in the WEF, IMF and central bankers would not be happy about the Canadian government showing “just how easy it is to snatch money out of the hands of citizens.” This broke the “financial code of Omerta” of central bankers and financial control agents about the tools of citizen control, Sundance said. Spilling the beans that even cryptocurrencies were not safe from seizure was also a big no-no. 

Also, on February 22^nd, Freeland’s assistant deputy, Isabelle Jacques, told a committee of MPs that up to 210 bank accounts holding $7.8 million were frozen under the financial measures contained in the Emergencies Act. These accounts were in the process of being unfrozen, she said. Toward the end of her presentation, Jacques says that while the federal government does have the power to freeze bank accounts in certain limited circumstances without using the Emergencies Act, in cases of suspected terrorism or financial crimes, it did not do so in this instance. “There’s no other venues to freeze the accounts in view of the…illegal blockades that were ongoing,” she said. 

Protecting Our Democracy – Trudeau-Style

Did Assistant Deputy Finance Minister Jacques make an inadvertent admission when she said on February 22^nd (one day after the House of Commons passed a motion to confirm the Emergencies Act invoked by Trudeau on February 14^th) that the only way to freeze the bank accounts of Freedom Convoy organizers was through that Act? If FINTRAC had concluded that the Freedom Convoy was involved in terrorism or money laundering, financial institutions could simply have frozen accounts while an investigation was conducted. Uncovering suspicious activities are, after all, FINTRAC’s purpose. But since the Freedom Convoy was so clearly not involved in terrorism or money laundering, the only way to freeze the accounts of anyone associated with it was through the Emergencies Act. And the Emergencies Act can be invoked only under any of four specific categories. The first, third, and fourth are prima facie inapplicable to the Convoy protest, being a public welfare emergency (natural disaster such as an earthquake, flood, outbreak of disease, or an accident or pollution), an international emergency, and a war emergency. The second category, a public order emergency, is the only potentially legitimate category through which the government could invoke the Emergencies Act. 

But the Act is not to be invoked for public order situations (even if noisy and annoying) that could be handled under the regular powers of the appropriate authorities. It is to be invoked only when there are threats to the security of Canada as defined under Section 2 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act.  Section 2 of SISA lists four categories of threats to Canada. They are (a) espionage or sabotage, (b) foreign-influenced activities, (c) activities in support of serious violence to achieve a political, religious, or ideological objective (in other words, terrorism), and (d) activities directed toward the destruction or overthrow by violence of the constitutionally established system of government in Canada. In addition, SISA specifies that threats to the security of Canada do not include “lawful advocacy, protest or dissent unless carried on in conjunction with any of the activities referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d).” 

Now the persistence of Trudeau and his ministers in repeatedly referring to the Freedom Convoy in terms of terrorism, foreign influence, and wanting to overthrow the government begins to make sense. They somehow had to make the Freedom Convoy protest meet the criteria of Section 2 of the Security Intelligence Services Act. But FINTRAC’s Barry MacKillop didn’t play ball, telling that public safety committee on February 10, four days before Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act, that “What’s been happening in Ottawa has not been, to my knowledge, identified as ideologically motivated violent extremism,” and “We have not seen a spike in suspicious transaction reporting related to this (protest).”

And yet, four days after MacKillop spoke those words, Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act. Is it even possible that Trudeau and Freeland, the prime minister and his deputy, were not informed about what MacKillop said? That would suggest a staggering lack of communication between the Prime Minister’s Office and Canada’s security services. A much more likely explanation is that Trudeau and his ministers were so determined to freeze the financial assets of those involved with the Freedom Convoy that they were willing to illegally invoke the Emergencies Act while trying to spin a narrative of terrorism, foreign influence, and insurrection around the Convoy. That scenario would also explain the more serious charges against Convoy organizers that were laid, seemingly out of the blue, five weeks after the Convoy was dispersed.  Having “mischief” and “counseling mischief” as the only charges underpinning the invocation of the Emergencies Act wouldn’t do.  

Which raises the question: Why were Trudeau and co. so determined to freeze the accounts of so many people associated with the Convoy? Trudeau had previously attacked those who declined the vaccine in the most vicious terms, labeling them as often racist and misogynist, and has not backed off on forcing vaccines on all federal employees even though provinces have lifted vaccination mandates for institutions and public venues. Why are Covid vaccines so important to him? Perhaps it is for the sake of the QR codes that constitute proof of vaccination. Universal QR codes are a plausible stage one of the Digital ID that Neil Parmender of the Canadian Bankers Association promoted so enthusiastically. It would probably be fairly easy to transition the proof of vaccination QR code into a Digital ID QR code. This hypothesis is consistent with the push to vaccinate children as young as five and the marginalization and stoking of hostility toward the unvaccinated. The federal government has enough power to make the lives of its citizens (or, more accurately, its subjects) difficult by impeding travel, for example, such that over time the percentage of the unvaccinated would fall toward zero as life without a Digital ID became impossible: no travel is already in place; no job, no driver’s license, no health care, and no pension are all future possibilities.

But then the Freedom Convoy came along and lit a flame of resistance to vaccine mandates and lockdowns across the country. Trudeau not only refused to meet with anyone associated with the Convoy either directly or through a representative, but actively attempted to portray anyone associated with or supporting it as a threat to national security because their demands were incompatible with his objectives. But in invoking the Emergencies Act and announcing the government’s intention to make permanent the financial powers it gave them, Trudeau and Freeland spooked Canadians and the international banking system. They may even have let the cat out of the bag about the modus operandi that a globalized Digital ID initiative would take. 

One wonders if Trudeau and Freeland acted on their own, pulling out the Emergencies Act to crush the Freedom Convoy or whether they botched an operation planned in consultation with the WEF and other globalist institutions? Either way, it’s probably safe to assume that Trudeau had a private meeting or two with Klaus Schwab and other globalist poohbahs while he was in Europe. In fact, his trip to Europe to exhort European Parliamentarians could actually have been a pretext to go to Europe so he could consult directly with the globalist managerial class about the Freedom Convoy debacle. Perhaps Trudeau got trounced not just by the MEPs but also by his globalist bosses, albeit for very different reasons.  

Ukraine and Canada – Twin Branches of a Beta Test in Globalism? 

Canada and Ukraine could both be testing laboratories for the new world order that the globalists have planned for us. Both Justin Trudeau and Ukraine’s leader Volodymyr Zelensky are graduates of Klaus Schwab’s Forum of Young Global Leaders. And so is Chrystia Freeland, who was also named a trustee of the WEF in 2019. As it happens, Freeland is of Ukrainian descent, with family ties to fascist groups in that country. Yet, for someone who tried to portray the Freedom Convoy as a far-right fascist group based on a single Swastika flag of suspicious provenance, Trudeau seems remarkably uncurious about the ties of his deputy PM to fascist movements in Ukraine. 

Biographies of both Trudeau and Zelensky are found on the WEF website. Zelensky has said that Trudeau is one of the reasons he entered politics.

Shortly after taking office in 2019, Zelensky introduced the Ministry for Digital Transformation to create a government platform for smartphones. The Diia app launched in 2020 includes several forms of ID (e.g., driver’s license, vaccine passport, student ID), the ability to set up a business, apply for insurance and receive social benefits. In addition, digitization is being pushed with a monetary reward to any citizen who shows proof of vaccination on Diia. Two weeks before Diia went live, Zelensky was the guest of honor at the World Economic Forum. He spoke of a “new normal,” urged a rethinking of international institutions, and promoted investment in his country.

Interestingly, in July 2020, the Canadian government launched a contact-tracing app for Covid. But when Canadians failed to embrace it enthusiastically, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) secretly tracked 33 million phones (pretty much all cell phones in Canada) to assess “the public’s responsiveness during lockdown measures. They plan to continue tracking population movements for at least the next five years to control “other infectious diseases, chronic disease prevention, and mental health.” (Does it matter if that is even legal?)

Ukraine seems eager to be a Beta Test for the Great Reset of Klaus Schwab’s dreams. It is rushing into digitization with various IT partnerships. Apple will help Ukraine transition to paperless mode with various priority projects. A “Diia City” was announced in 2020, with significant incentives to attract foreign IT companies. Ukraine is leading a digital currency revolution. A digital currency might not be far behind the Digital ID, led by the financial system no less, that Neil Parmender was promoting for Canada.  

There is no doubt that Trudeau is an enthusiastic globalist, and it is not a stretch to believe that he would like Canada to be a Beta Test for a globalized digital ID and currency. Klaus Schwab has boasted of the WEF’s influence on Trudeau and his cabinet. Mere months after being elected in 2015, Trudeau changed the name of the foreign affairs department to Global Affairs Canada. And shortly after he was elected in 2015, he referred to Canada as the “first postnational state,” which he claimed had no mainstream or core identity. Trudeau seems on track to make this a reality by pursuing a policy of mass immigration and not missing any opportunity to disparage the Canada of old. He is a perfect tool for the puppeteers of the Great Reset. But now, the debacle with the Freedom Convoy may have reduced Trudeau’s value as an asset for his globalist masters. 

What happens now?

Regardless of whether the orchestrators of the Great Reset view the Freedom Convoy as a Great Setback (having ignited copy-cat convoys around the world) or a minor hiccup, there will be no letting up on the push to make a sovereign Canada a thing of the past. The government will pass bills, some already before Parliament to establish government control of the internet and silence opponents through hate speech regulations. All while pushing even more digitization of Canadians because digitized Canadians are easier to control. 

Is resistance futile? Perhaps, perhaps not. But either way, resistance is undoubtedly a duty for anyone who believes in freedom. A good place to start would be to challenge the legality of the government invoking the Emergencies Act and conduct an investigation of how it was used to crush peaceful dissent and punish dissenters by freezing their bank accounts and laying criminal charges for activities that at most constitute “mischief” as legally defined. Let us hope that most Canadians wake up to what is happening in their country before they find themselves in the digital gulag of their globalist overlords.