Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act (S.C. 2000, c. 24) [Link]
EVENTS
Sophisticated Harassment & Denial of Recourse to Authorities
VISION
PRECEDENT
PsyOps, InfoOps, CIMIC, & the Gosselin Reports concerning the CAF
2030 Canada Agenda National Strategy, the WEF,
& Shared Blueprint
BELIEFS
4IR Capabilities, Esoteric Themes, Cognitive Liberty, & Human Rights
COHERENCE
Transhumanism, Postmodernity,
Cultural Zeitgeist,
& Safe Spaces
Prologue
In 2013, I had the privilege of meeting the CEO of a prominent international consulting firm headquartered in the United States. This person is also a prominent deacon in the Roman Catholic Church. During a face-to-face conversation that was otherwise casual, this person made preemptive reference to an unsettling amount of personal details germane to my person, suggested my thought life was accessible, and suggested I was a “guinea-pig in an international project by influential people who wanted to live forever”. He further referenced a specific invasive surgery procedure I had previously undergone; one that the same surgeon later deemed to be unnecessary. Although I emerged from the conversation unsettled, I thought little of it thereafter, believing the man to be eccentric. At the time I was living an otherwise normal life.
Proximate Historical Events
In October 2021, I emerged from a shareholder dispute with the Director of a NATO Commercial and Government Entity (the “CAGE Director”), as is detailed in the Litigation page. Shortly following this in November 2021, my life changed dramatically. I was beset by on-heels stalking in public on a daily basis. I began experiencing multiple home invasions and vehicle break-ins each week. My devices were hacked (laptop and phone), as detailed in direct cyber attacks, one of which included video footage of the interior of my Surrey, BC condo residence, alongside a caricature of the CAGE Director. My internet access was also evidenced to be sandboxed by means of algorithms, and suffused with content from a coordinated group of online actors engaged in criminal harassment.
Alongside caricatures of the CAGE Director, these actors made appearances through online (hijacked) computer access and via Youtube and TikTok accounts as is shown in the Zersetzung page. These actors telegraphed events involving my day-to-day life, both inside and outside my residence. Accompanying their continued harassment activities, this group disseminated narratives germane to my preliminary comments concerning 2013, in addition to the shareholder settlement. This abusive mechanism, which has persisted to the time of this posting, is characteristic of Zersetzung, best known from the Stasi programs of the East-German Cold War era. Many of these activities parallel admissions by Canadian Armed Forces (“CAF”) leadership furnished in the Gosselin Reports, first referenced in the Ottawa Citizen in 2021 in regard to social listening, PsyOp, CIMIC, and information warfare operations (“InfoOps” or “IO”) conducted against Canadian citizens. By means of the nature of harassment alone, these actors are subject to criminal prosecution under section 83.221(1) of the Canadian Criminal Code ("CCC").
The scope, consistency, and characteristics of these “Zersetzung” activities were severe since inception. Concurrently, practical aspects of my life, which I had consistently maintained for the majority of my adult life, were cast into disarray. Existing relationships and new business opportunities were compromised, and likewise new professional engagements with prospective work opportunities went awry through no mistake or misstep, and whereas a number of new opportunities had evaporated in an a-priori capacity. The newness and distinction of this trend should likewise be compared to the consistency of my BIO and living habits as a law-abiding citizen who quietly focused on his work and hobbies.
Shortly following the inception of these events, I made diligent attempts to seek safe avenue from a local RCMP detachment in Surrey, BC, not far from where I was domiciled. I was eventually able to meet with an officer, who greeted me outside the building, clad in a "Mental Health Division" uniform. This officer listened intently to my account, complimented me on detailed articulation of the events, but declined to open a file or act in any capacity in response. The ciminal harassment and mischief continued unabated.
On February 8th, 2022, following another remote PC interface event featuring a caricature of the CAGE Director alongside physical threats, and in the absence of help from the RCMP despite diligent efforts, and as a cautionary act, I filed a draft petition in the BC Supreme Court ("BCSC") alongside an Affidavit I had commissioned a month earlier. This Affidavit exhibited proof of perjury in the earlier settlement dispute. Although ethics required a reconsideration of the troubled settlement pursuant to Hawitt v. Campbell, [1983] CanLII 307, I had no intention of opening a new file beset by life-threatening conditions, and as an unemployed and unrepresented litigant. This file is BCSC S-220956 at the Vancouver Registry, currently under a sealing order. Similar to the manner in which business opportunities had been compromised, I was unable to secure new legal counsel at that time, or thereafter, including ProBono support I had met the prerequisites for. Incidentally, and as likewise detailed in the Litigation page, my previous counsel had jeopardized the shareholder dispute through an act of gross negligence; a palpable mistake trained lawyers are not expected to make.
On February 16th, 2022, following a series of home invasions and another remote (PC) hijack event threatening imminent abduction, I abandoned my rented condo residence that same evening, packed whatever belongings I could fit into my car, and began driving. I traveled across Canada by car in mid-February 2022 to arrive in Nova Scotia, where I currently reside with a relative. The same day I departed, the windows of my condo unit had been completely covered by an opaque tarp depicting a Canadian flag; a feature which was likewise cited during the PC hijack event. I was repeatedly photographed in the elevator and parking lot as I departed.
In the days that followed my arrival in Halifax, NS, I was preemptively referred to as a “political target” by the owner of a specialty computer shop, whom I approached to investigate my compromised laptop. I was unable to get my PC investigated at any specialty shop. Shortly after my arrival, stalking began in a similar capacity as it had manifested in Surrey and New Westminster BC. I was likewise approached by an individual in plainclothes who identified as a member of the Canadian Armed Forces (“CAF”). This person preemptively disclosed details concerning the events in British Columbia, along with another individual speaking through a smartphone on a live phone call, who likewise identified as CAF. These individuals uttered threats, and photographs were taken of myself and my vehicle before departure.
I continued legal proceedings against the CAGE Director remotely in the BCSC via MS Teams. My affidavit records are suffused with court transcripts and materials which demonstrate systemic obstruction of justice throughout 2022 to present, following an order by a now-retired adjudicator on April 1st, 2022 to introduce privileged audit testimony from the Canada Revenue Agency ("CRA"), and three private entities related to the CAGE shareholder dispute. The Litigation page provides a complete review of what had amounted to a three-year scandal concerning the weaponization of Canadian courts and police agencies in three provinces, with redacted visuals. The materials are obvious. Notwithstanding the conditions that occasioned the filing of S-220956, a prima facie account of perjury in the CAGE Director's Settlement Affidavit, which the BCSC acknowledged on April 1st, 2022, was transitioned into a order of $445,489.50 in special costs payable to the CAGE entity. This amount is not compensatory, and is predicated on retainer fees involving just nine (9) short-chambers hearings with modest prep, each being less than one hour in duration. An Affidavit sworn by the CAGE entity's lead lawyer in BC shows seven (7) lawyers and two (2) paralegals assigned to overlapping tasks at egregiously large time blocks, and claims that 737.7 billable hours (like the passenger jet) were required to perform the work. This component of the scandal is compelling in its own right, as no reasonable litigant would agree to pay those retainer fees as measured against the scope of work, no reputable law firm would propose it, and no sensible adjudicator would certify it. By comparison, customary tariffs for hearings under an hour in duration are set at $500 per hearing inclusive of prep and filings. An Affidavit by CAGE counsel in an out-of-province court cites $6,518.50 for four (4) hearings under one hour including prep, which further elucidates the retainer fee scandal that occurred in BC. The scandal was enforced out-of-province by judges, as though nothing untoward had happened (see the Felony Affidavit for further details). Baffling court orders which misconstrue the true event chronology have likewise decimated my professional reputation. The Supreme Court of Canada refused to add my file to the docket, and the same palpable errors were replicated in the appellate courts, alongside overt rule violations facilitated by registry staff. Collection efforts are expected to render me homeless. As of the time of this update (October 10th, 2024), efforts to obtain fiduciary legal assistance were refused in a priori capacities since December 2021, both by private firms and provincial ProBono programs. Having said that, my academic background has assisted me in compiling a vast library of relevant jurisprudence, which when combined with factual evidence, likewise demonstrates a significant miscarriage in justice to fair-minded laypersons and legal professionals alike. See the Litigation page and the Felony Affidavit for further details, and the Authorities page for applicable legal tests, rules, and legislation.
Over the course to the past two years, Zersetzung actors continued their activity online and remain active at the time of this writing, and likewise, on-heels stalking has continued. In addition to foregoing narratives, including references to judicial interference, online actors would regularly communicate the activities I was involved in on a given day, in addition to referencing proximate themes in my thought life. These actors suggest the latter was possible by means of “human 3.0 technology”, which I later discovered possible by means of neural dust (see smart-dust, DARPA link) and quantum dot nanotechnologies. These modalities are echoed by WEF Founder Klaus Schwab as a component in his book, the Fourth Industrial Revolution ("4IR"). Smart-dust was initially developed in 1997 and is capable of translating brain waves to text and images, both transmissible via remote signal networks. However, remote neural modulation applications through wave frequencies and light have been available for some time, and brainwaves can be tracked without implants, precluding the need for neural particle dust. A plethora of other remote, non-invasive applications are available, including one's smartphone, an EEG device in its own right, whereas the same topic was broached as early as 2008. My fifth Affidavit, sworn in February 2023, outlines the foregoing groundwork in an information exhibit, and whereas similar concerns have been published recently in the London Guardian on March 4th, 2023. The 4IR Portal on this website explores this in more detail, and details the significant interest in these technologies by both commercial and public sector stakeholders.
Law enforcement agencies, whose task it is to protect citizens and uphold their rights as protected by the Charter in Canada, had consistently acted in a way antithetical to their function. All manner of law enforcement agencies contacted, including the Department of Justice, made concerted attempts to dismiss and/or discredit my requests for help. I was eventually able to secure a lengthy meeting with Halifax Regional Police (1 hour, 19 minutes), which appeared to gain traction. The officer acknowledged my evidentiary record, identified the CAGE Director by name and his implication with criminal harassment modalities, and proposed a path forward to begin an investigation. However, following that meeting, the same officer filed a report with an entirely different account of the meeting and declared me a “mentally-ill person”. The same report was obtained via FOIPOP request. This event concerning the fabrication of police evidence is actionable under CCC 137. However, I made a covert recording of this same meeting I had participated in, pursuant to CCC 183.1, and furnished the true audio transcript in an Affidavit alongside the FOIPOP report. The advance of MAID (Medically Assistance In Dying) for those suffering solely from mental illness makes this all the more sobering, whereas this was championed by Canada’s former Attorney General, David Lametti. MAID has also made its way into commercial advertising (link) in an attempt to invite cultural acceptance.
Estranged relatives are implicated in conjunction with a prominent actor involved in ongoing criminal mischief, as is pictured in the image below. The individual pictured in the middle is understood to be the biological mother of my estranged nephew (right), by means of egg donation at a fertility clinic. Three estranged relatives are implicated in related Affidavit evidence, first sworn in May 20th, 2022. Details concerning this are outlined in the Family Affidavit. Reference to the Freemasons, which might easily lend itself to conspiracy theories, may or may not be materially relevant to the scandal, although it does dovetail with the plethora of occult and esoteric references present in the overarching evidentiary corpus.
"Presents"
Police regulators refused to address these matters, and likewise, the scandal originating at the BCSC remained unchecked in the appellate courts, and was precluded from docket entry at the SCC, despite its gravity and the issues of public interest germane to the matter, and despite compelling evidence paired with jurisprudence and Constitutional Law, which informs an appropriate response framework. Because a single federally-sponsored CEO can't be expected to shape the disposition and conduct of five courts across three provinces, three police agencies, relevant regulatory bodies, and further, retain the support of CAF PsyOp contractors over a two-year period, an inexorable inference of third-party tampering is occasioned. Likewise, a robust third-party project interest must be present to inform a scandal of this scope, as applied to an innocuous law-abiding citizen. The scandal, generally considered, is a species of attempted murder. The framework evidenced in this scandal is likewise expected to impact a wide variety of other Citizens in varying degrees. As such, it informs the public character of the issues involved.
Who Initiated?
By way of an evidentiary record connecting the CAGE entity to zersetzung actors and the foregoing events, it might be reasonable to assume that the entirety of the matter might be predicated on the CAGE entity itself. Yet, the evidence does not support this hypothesis, nor would the scope, sophistication, and duration of events justify the cost of the state supporting just one company director. Instead, the evidentiary record suggests the CAGE entity acted in cooperation within a program.
The Gosselin Reports outline a troubling account of the Canadian state surveilling and profiling its own citizens, and moreover, utilizing its tools and resources, including enlisting the support of civilian actors, to conduct InfoOps and PsyOps on unaware and unsuspecting Canadian Citizens. Whereas there now exists an evidentiary record of state-sponsored social engineering, there are further records to consider by way of an examination of materials published by the Government of Canada, the United Nations, and the World Economic Forum (“WEF”).
2030 Canada Agenda National Strategy
The Government of Canada website describes its 2030 Agenda National Strategy as a “shared blueprint” with the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development it was predicated on. The text reads as follows: “In September 2015, Canada and all United Nations Member States adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (the 2030 Agenda), a shared blueprint for partnership, peace and prosperity for all people and the planet, now and into the future. The 2030 Agenda focuses on the commitment to "leave no person behind.” By way of a shared blueprint, there is no provision in the text to suggest that Canada, fundamentally, is an independent artificer of its policies and values. Further, this language does not suggest that the Canadian Government has adopted a discretionary approach to source good policy ideas from the UN as one might source their favorite appetizers at a buffet counter. This blueprint outlines that Canadian Policy Development and Values are tethered to the guidance of a global governance body. To this end, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which has its ultimate basis in the philosophy of 17th century philosopher and theist John Locke, is an official document, but its exercise is subject to external oversight. Today, the Charter, in accord with contemporary postmodern assumptions and in consideration of UN governance, is executed in a prejudicial capacity by way of contemporary thinking and by way of the UN accord. The Government of Canada's policy foresight engine, Policy Horizons Canada, is chaired by the WEF's former Head of Strategic Foresight, Kristel Van der Elst, who also currently serves as CEO of consulting firm The Global Foresight Group.
WEF As Enablement Partner
On June 19th 2019, the United Nations and the World Economic Forum (“WEF”) signed a Strategic Partnership Framework whose objective is to “jointly accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. This document positions the WEF, guided by its founder Klaus Schwab, as an enablement vehicle of the same United Nations 2030 agenda. By means of Canada’s shared blueprint in its own 2030 Agenda National Strategy, this positions a relationship between the WEF and the Government of Canada in the same capacity. Hundreds of civil rights agencies organized in protest (link).
WEF/UN Multi-Stakeholder Governance Model
Prompted by the uncertainties about the stability of globalization, in 2009 the World Economic Forum (WEF) convened an international expert group to formulate a new system of global governance. This project was led by the three most senior leaders of the World Economic Forum (WEF) – Klaus Schwab, its Executive Chairman; Mark Malloch-Brown, then its Vice-Chairman; and Richard Samans, its Managing Director. One of the concepts proposed by WEF for its aptly named Global Redesign Initiative (GRI) is a system of multi-stakeholder governance as a partial replacement for intergovernmental decision-making.
Over the 18 months of the GRI programme, WEF created 40 Global Agenda Councils and industry-sector bodies to craft a range of theme specific governance proposals. Each Council consisted of a mix of the corporate, academic, government, entertainment, religious, civil society, and academic worlds. Their 600-page report centers on these thematic proposals, plus a series of policy essays and organizing principles that lay out the WEF framework for a multi-stakeholder governance system.
Notably, the WEF multi-stakeholder governance proposal does not require approval or disapproval by any intergovernmental body. Absent any intergovernmental action the informal transition to MSG as a partial replacement of multilateralism can just happen.
In further regard to characteristics, the 2019 accord between the United Nations and the World Economic Forum has invited widespread scrutiny. An open letter was issued to Mr. António Guterres, Secretary General of the United Nations shortly after the accord was executed. Notable quotes characterize this agreement as follows:
“This agreement between the UN and WEF formalizes a disturbing corporate capture of the UN. It moves the world dangerously towards a privatized and undemocratic global governance”
- Gonzalo Berrón, Transnational Institute
“This strategic agreement is a coup for the corporate leaders at Davos, but what does it offer the UN and the international community? This gives some of the most controversial corporations unprecedented access to the heart of the UN, yet it has not even been properly discussed by the UN’s country members and certainly not by the broader public.”
- Harris Gleckman, former UN official & senior fellow at the University of Massachusetts
“The UN should acknowledge the different roles of private interest and of rights-holders that look after common goods and benefits…The WEF represents the interests of those who destroy the environment and abuse our human rights. It can not be considered a strategic partner in solving the world’s crises."
- Sofia Monsalve, FIAN International Secretary-General
Based on a consideration of these publications as written, formally promulgated and otherwise, contemporary philosophical underpinnings, and the availability of enabling technologies, it is reasonable to portend that Canada, in due course, will be indistinguishable from a privileged technocracy to the naked eye. Canada’s original founding documents are pristine, but they are antagonistic to contemporary postmodern assumptions. Postmodernists reject an objective basis for hope and dialogue by way of an adherence to relativism. Effective dialogue requires universally-accepted parameters to gain traction, which makes dialogue with postmodernist detractors nigh impossible in matters concerning core values. By way of the same, recourse for the postmodernist amounts to communities of like-minded people, whereas agendas are pushed forward at the expense of detractors, who are not perceived as Citizens with equal rights, but as obstacles. The same approach is contemplated in 20th Century postmodernist Richard Rorty’s Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity, a reliable guidebook for postmodernist political theory. Unity in the postmodern sense thus requires that ideological detractors and/or contrarians be marginalized, and whereas, this task detracts from its fundamental definition, and is antithetical to section 2 of the Charter. Under these conditions, Charter rights are upheld through the lens of prejudicial interest, or in other words, if the upholding of rights yields an innocuous and/or happy outcome in the opinion of the state. These documents reveal the authentic character of global governance as it is manifested at present and portends its intended trajectory. A global governance model is not to be construed as a creepy conspiracy, but rather a response to unsustainable socioeconomic concerns (ie., our fractional-reserve monetary system), as shaped by widely-held philosophical assumptions coupled with available enabling technologies. Likewise, the inherent disunity in a postmodern culture, where every Citizen is guided by their own sense of truth without respect for overarching categorical truths (unlike an assumed theism in past centuries), is one reason why 4ir applications are explored by the WEF as a social sustainability mechanism.
The Why: WEF Objectives and Roadmap
Since mid-2020, the WEF has been promoting its vision for a post-coronavirus future, which they call ‘The Great Reset’.
“The pandemic has exposed the weaknesses of our old system, and therefore presents an opportunity to ‘reset’ our world and start anew. What is striking about this plan, which the WEF has condensed into a virus-shaped mindmap, is its implicit endorsement of a philosophy called transhumanism.”
- The World Economic Forum. Phillips, Peter. Giants: The Global Power Elite. New York: Seven Stories Press, 2018. Kindle edition: Loc. 298 of 4928
Quoting from WEF Founder Klaus Schwab, One of the three main goals of the Great Reset agenda is “to harness the innovations of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to support the public good…” As the founder of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, explains,
“The Fourth Industrial Revolution will lead to a fusion of our physical, digital, and biological identities.” He specifically considers technologies that will change what it means to be human, because they will integrate into the human body and mind in order to overcome (‘transcend’) their limitations. As Schwab himself admits, these new technologies can also “intrude into the hitherto private space of our minds, reading our thoughts and influencing our behavior…”
- Schwab, Klaus and Davis, Nicholas. Shaping the Future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution: A Guide to Building a Better World. New York: Currency, 2018. Chapter 1
Notwithstanding universal adoption of the 2030 UN blueprint, Mr. Schwab has cited that the WEF “penetrates Cabinets”. Prime Minister Trudeau and, according to Klaus Schwab, over 80% of his Cabinet, are adherents to WEF doctrines by manner of interest in their own right, with Mr. Trudeau a graduate of Schwab’s Global Leaders For Tomorrow school in 1992 alongside Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy, and Tony Blair. Mark Carney, former Governor of the Bank of Canada, and Chrystia Freeland, Deputy PM and Finance Minister, are trustees on the WEF Board. The Board, WEF’s highest level governance body, is responsible for advancing the objectives of the WEF and acts as guardian of its mission and values.
WEF recognition spans across party lines. By means of Canada’s overarching blueprint shared by the United Nations member states, it is reasonable to assume that any fundamental distinction in parliament would be limited to predetermined parameters, if not cosmetic in nature. Many right-of-center (ie., Conservative, People’s Party) politicians are dismissive of the WEF and at times combative, though these contentions are immaterial compared with the actual text of the resolutions. A contrarian Prime Minister would make Canada a pariah state compared to the remainder of UN member states signed on to the UN blueprint who have aligned policy objectives in accord with the same. In other words, any hope that a reconfigured Parliament would stymie the overarching agenda of the UN and its WEF enablement mechanism in this country would be remote in the absence of widespread protest. It is more likely a miscarriage in justice such as this would be subsequently used to justify further change. In view of the shared UN blueprint, there is no material provision to suggest that the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (“SDG’s”) could be “uniquely Canadian” in a modality of expression that fundamentally detracts from the vision and implementation methods promulgated by the United Nations and its enablement partner, the WEF.
Fourth Industrial Revolution ("4IR") & Human Rights
As detailed in his writings, Mr. Schwab predicates the enablement of the United Nations 2030 mandate on the Fourth Industrial Revolution to the extent that its absence would render the same agenda untenable. This opinion is further validated in consideration of the 17 SDG metrics themselves, which in consideration of the entire planet as written, would be unable to be achieved without drastic changes to the lived reality we are currently accustomed to. To that end, the characteristics of the Fourth Industrial Revolution are believed to be inexorably entwined with the execution of the SDG’s themselves, and this is in fact the objective of the WEF. Whereas Mr. Schwab ascribes technological artifice associated with the same to be invasive (here, and by Dr. Harari here) this raises questions regarding the relationship between the Fourth Industrial Revolution (Ie, Transhumanism), and human rights.
Dr. Yuval Noah Harari, top advisor to WEF Founder Klaus Schwab, is considered to be a principal artificer and brain trust behind initiatives to further the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Dr. Yuval relies on biological reductionism as a basis for the determination of rights, rejecting the principle of intrinsic human rights as set forth in the Charter;
“There are no gods, no nations, no money and no human rights, except in our collective imagination…free will and liberty are myths…humans are simply hackable animals.”
Sapiens, ISBN 978-0062316097
Dr. Yuval predicates consideration of the fourth industrial revolution is best directed toward existential and sustainability challenges;
“The global order is now like a house that everybody inhabits and nobody repairs. It can hold on for a few more years, but if we continue like this, it will collapse – and we will find ourselves back in the jungle of omnipresent war. We have forgotten what it's like, but believe me as a historian – you don’t want to be back there. It is far, far worse than you imagine. Yes, our species has evolved in that jungle and lived and even prospered there for thousands of years, but if we return there now, with the powerful new technologies of the twenty-first century, our species will probably annihilate itself.”
Address to the WEF, Jan 24, 2020
Mr. Schwab expands on these sentiments in his address to the WEF concerning the fourth industrial revolution in further consideration of the capability and willingness of humanity to affect positive change in its own right;
“The 4th industrial revolution it doesn't change what you are doing. It changes you. If you take genetic editing as an example, it is you who are changed. Of course it has a big impact on your identity. The new industrial revolution offers us many new opportunities.”
WEF Founder Klaus Schwab (clip)
Mr. Schwab was joined in a WEF panel discussion by Google co-founder Sergey Brin in discussing the implementation of technologies germane to the fourth industrial revolution at scale, as an enablement mechanism to the UN’s sustainable development goals. Mr. Schwab opines;
“Can you imagine in 10 years when we are sitting here, we have an implant in our brains and I can immediately feel – because you all will have implants. I can measure your brain waves and I can immediately tell you how the people react, or I can feel how the people react to your answers,” Schwab said to Brin, who looked on with amazement. “You cannot stop it."
WEF Panel w/ Klaus Schwab & Google Founder Sergey Brin, 2017 (link).
Language in the Canada National Agenda 2030, mirroring the UN framework it is predicated upon, calls for a whole-of-society change, leaving “no person behind”. Dr. Yuval comments on the ultimate realization of a culture informed by the adjustments the UN calls for, following a “decade of unstoppable change” to achieve the “required transformations” (link).
Those who fail in the struggle against irrelevance would constitute a new “useless class” – people who are useless not from the viewpoint of their friends and family, but useless from the viewpoint of the economic and political system. And this useless class will be separated by an ever-growing gap from the ever more powerful elite.
Address to the WEF, Jan 24, 2020
Biodigital Convergence Testing ("Humanity+, or Life 3.0")
WEF publications, promulgated formally and otherwise, cannot be dismissed as casual table-talk. Discussion around transhumanist ideas as the enabler of the UN Sustainability Objectives invite serious consideration as to what that means today, tomorrow, and what our future might look like ten years from now and later. Ultimately, were it not for the power of enabling technologies, a complete fulfillment of the 17 SDG’s as written, similar to what one might envision when watching Star Trek, would be a pipe dream. This consideration must be coupled with a population that is generally used to the status quo, and have built lives around the same. The question remains how to reconcile these two realities in a way that can allow UN objectives to be fulfilled in a timely manner through widespread adoption. Many thinkers such as Dr. Jordan Peterson have opined about the need to “get transhumanism right”, as ultimately its manifestation and integration into society might be considered inevitable, and ultimately, such radical change gone awry can have catastrophic implications. By way of the same considerations, it is reasonable to assume new technologies would be tested. Policy Horizons now-deleted page on Biodigital Convergence is insightful, as are the articles compiled on the 4ir page.
"Common Sense"
Remote Brainwave Data Collection: Precognitive Evidence, DARPA Dust, and Human Guinea Pigs
A focus has been placed on the utility of precognitive brainwave data as it might be applied to judicial proceedings and the justice system. A WEF panel discussed this in the context of the judicial system in 2016 (link), and whereas, it is argued a precognitive evidentiary record might preclude miscarriage in justice. Further proponents of the use of AI in the justice system have suggested that the availability of precognitive data, either collected real-time or stored in DNA, would enable all people, regardless of socioeconomic class, to enjoy equal access to justice in such a way where records could not be falsified, outdated bureaucracy could not stifle justice, and likewise, concern over judicial bribery could be precluded. Of note, a study by Yale Law School outlined that over one million bribes are paid into the US judicial system per year, and a proportional amount in Canada (link). Still other proponents have suggested AI could replace the judiciary and law enforcement in due course. WEF Davos 2023 presenters promulgated the use of integrated brainwave (ie "Metaverse") applications recently (link), demonstrating the efficacy and applicability of an accessible thought life, and confirming the same framework as “already in use today”.
US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has gone so far as to suggest that conscious human testimony is at best unreliable, and whereas precognitive elements are a required component in law. DARPA has cited the same through their Neural Evidence Aggregation Tool (NEAT) program, and whereas DARPA’s neural dust program, a feasible enablement vehicle for the same, has been under research since 1997 (link). It is noteworthy to mention that the foregoing is just the technology the public is currently aware of. The “good stuff” always gets revealed to the public a decade or so later.
In terms of a precognitive evidentiary record in action, a suitable illustration can be found in this episode of Silicon Valley (see link, 1:00 - 1:55), whereas biometric memory storage could solve issues around evidence collection and be applied to all people, including those who may not have ready access to justice. My Fifth Affidavit in S-229680 explores why an aware and consensual test subject may not have been used.
In my own situation, and as chronicled in my Affidavit accounts, I have been precluded from any and all recourse, institutional and otherwise, throughout this account. Those I did retain compromised me through willful negligence (see Litigation page). My life has been systematically dismantled, whereas I have been without work for two years, harassed continually in person and online, and have suffered abuse through Canadian institutions that function in an opposite way to which they are intended. My international bank account was also hit. Whereas I am an otherwise innocuous person who once had a successful career and lived quietly minding my own business, the only way this would make sense, further considering the nature of surveillance and access to thought life, is through considering a preliminary test project conducted with the support of the Government of Canada.
My evidentiary record suggests I have been a data-collection mule for the past decade, and whereas, the Government of Canada is endangering my life through weaponized institutions and a systemic denial of safe avenue. Per the lengthy account on the Litigation page, and as further expounded at the bottom of that page concerning an inference based on the legal test in Sherman Estate, supra, at paragraphs 97-98, a critical discovery component in this scandal concerns the alignment of agencies in obstructing justice. The aforementioned study by Yale Law School suggests over 114,000 bribes are paid into the Canadian adjudicative apparatus each year, but the evidence in this scandal goes far beyond that. First, it would be cost-prohibitive to finance bribes over a three-year cycle, and second, it is likely such palpable misconduct would have been caught and remedied. That has not happened in this case, whereas, five Canadian courts have aligned themselves in a miscarriage of justice, and three police agencies have refused to assist, with one agency, Halifax Regional Police, producing a false report. Ultimately Canada has a morality crisis, or there are further matters to consider which may be extraneous. Affidavits linked to the site can be found here, and whereas, the foregoing reflections are expanded here. Had I not relocated from Surrey, BC on short notice in February 2022, I do not believe I would still be alive. Customary recourse has been exhausted (if indeed it were available to begin with), and whereas, the only reason I have been able to endure is my faith in God. Absent this, any practical hope in a livable future would be untenable in view of the circumstances.
As regards my BIO, prior to this episode, I had been content in living an otherwise ordinary life. Information germane to my BIO is included in my First Affidavit in S-229680, Exhibit I. I am not a political activist, nor am involved with any activist and/or political groups. I consider myself an innocuous centrist. I have no criminal record at the time of my latest update in January, 2024. My foregoing reflection is supported through the study of original materials available to the public as promulgated by the United Nations, the WEF, and the Government of Canada. Materials germane to my personal account are furnished in my Affidavit materials, and are true accounts of my personal experience. The remaining pages on this website expand upon the same in further detail.
Esoteric Themes are Evident in the Framework
The existence of a systemic, consistent, unconstitutional, and unnatural concurrence among stakeholders (adjudicators, public sector staffers, law enforcement officials, and regulators) is among the most compelling characteristics of the scandal, and must be an object of study among reasonable and well-meaning stakeholders in Canada’s justice system. The use of state-sponsored social influence, 4IR, and DEW technologies is further cause for alarm.
On the basis of a consistent three-year evidentiary footprint, the first question explores why and how this was able to unfold in a developed country that is understood to be civilized. Two explanations are possible on the evidence when applied to the reasonable inference test in Sherman Estate v. Donovan, 2021 SCC 25 @ paragraphs 97-98. The enabling modalities that could occasion an event such as this are;
a) A governance scandal concerning networks of stakeholder influence which are capable of shaping the conduct of agencies in the public service;
b) A mode of external influence affecting persons in the manner of cognitive liberty.
These two options are not mutually-exclusive, and the latter requires the existence of the former. The scope, consistency, and characteristics of the three-year evidentiary record likewise precludes inferences predicated upon the interests of the CAGE entity alone, if only by the fact that the cost of obtaining the unlawful support evidenced in the milestones would fail a cost-benefit analysis. It is well beyond reasonable doubt that the CAGE entity had acted in the role of an accomplice in support of a broader third-party ambition by that fact alone. The scope, consistency, and characteristics of the scandal likewise point to the importance of this effort in the minds of its perpetrators, as they too would need to consider the costs and the risks at stake. The scandal inexorably concerns a clandestine program concerning remote brain-computer interface and cognitive liberty, which further includes shared and complementary interests among perpetrators. The same would likewise support its scope.
The Necessary Consideration of Ideas & Beliefs
Whereas the consistent conduct of adjudicators and other stakeholders in the public service over the past three years has facilitated capital crimes, the same being precipitous of severe effects including palpable threats and damages to basic life and security germane to sections 7 and 8 of the Charter, and because the same effects are heinous and unnatural, investigators must infer the existence of firmly entrenched ideological beliefs within the stakeholder framework involved. These ideological principles must be understood to transcend any sense of basic ethics, decency, and duty to Canada’s Constitution, in the minds of cognizant stakeholder proponents. In simpler terms, the scandal involves a framework of sick people who are able to wield efficacious influence in the public service in a turn-key capacity. The visual exhibits below are suggestive of the same.
Firmly held ideological frameworks that act against basic ethics and decency are often predicated on “greater good” narratives, as was the case with Nazi Germany and other harmful ideological movements, which some scholars blame on leftist Hegelianism. A concurrence such as this is consistent with the observations of recent academics such as M. Foucault, R. Rorty, and previously F. Nietzsche, who have astutely commented on the impacts widespread postmodern assumptions would impose on the conduct and character of an institutional framework which was originally predicated on the supremacy of God (Ruffo v. Conseil de la magistrature, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 267 at paragraph 37, Constitution Act, 1982, Part I).
A Multifaceted Framework, or "Family" of Criminal Actors
The following brief collage of visual excerpts are buttressed with commentary and analyses at the Litigation, Zersetzung Guide, and QA pages. A number of these visuals are included in various Affidavits, including Affidavits sworn by the CAGE Director and his BC legal counsel. The bulk of evidence concerning shareholder fraud, collusion, and perjury is contained in the November 2023 Affidavit, alongside exhibits concerning police negligence, and evidence demonstrating consistent obstruction of justice in the courts. The Retainer Fee Felony and Family Implications are treated in their own Affidavits. If you have not yet familiarized yourself with the evidentiary milestones, the fastest way of doing so is through the bullet points at the bottom of the Links page. The following specific visuals are gleaned from various components of the scandal, as a demonstration of its breadth, and various esoteric (occultic) themes suffused throughout. The depictions align with the fruits. Irrespective of any specific designation, this scandal has demonstrated the existence of influential networks that are capable of adjusting the conduct of agencies and institutions in the public sector with relative ease. Prior to the onset of these events, I had lived under the assumption of a just and independent institutional framework. The evidentiary record, measured against legal tests, propose a reality that differs from widespread assumptions commonly held by everyday Citizens, and the Canadian Constitution. Canadian institutions were weaponized to facilitate capital crimes to satisfy a basket of interests. The QA Part II page approaches this phenomenon from multiple angles, with respect to project-centric and systemic capacities.
___ Feb, 14th, 2023
*CAGE Retainer Fee Claims*
Eight (8) 30-minute hearings w/ minimal prep.
Seven (7) lawyers assigned to overlapping tasks.
The customary tariff is $4,500 ($500 x 8 hearings).
One (1) 20-minute hearing w/ minimal prep.
Would a reasonable person pay those retainer fees?
S-228567, discontinued prior to S-229680 by way of an improper format, involved the same prep as its successor, and also involved one short hearing. S-228567 was billed at $1,601.60 pursuant to court tariffs. S-229680 was billed at $78,360.36 as above, in a scandal involving special costs. Ie., a "Cost Delta". Special costs align with reasonable lawyer retainer fees per the established legal tests.
"Special costs are fees a reasonable client would pay a reasonably competent solicitor to do the work described in the bill."
- Bradshaw Construction Ltd. v. Bank of Nova Scotia (1991), 54 B.C.L.R. (2d) 309 (S.C.), para 44
Is This Actually Happening?
Robust Coherence
My initial point of departure rests on an account of factual events. The redacted Affidavits appended to this website list these, as well as my Affidavits filed in the courts. UN/WEF and Canadian Public Sector source materials are gleaned from their original web pages, and likewise, technology articles detailing 4IR capabilities. This website further details systemic obstruction of justice in Canadian institutions involved in the matter over the past 18 months, and relentless InfoOps, citing CAF precedents. This website makes cursory reference to shareholder records connected to these matters, which in their own right, are an auditor's power keg. A discovery order was initially made regarding the latter in April 2022, but later bypassed through a series of procedural violations following the retirement of the same adjudicator shortly after the hearing. At no material time have these records been contested in a court of law. Rather, they have been pushed aside and sealed with unconstitutional protection orders. The BCI page contains an expanded testimony germane to my personal experiences, and the unconstitutional concurrence observed within the adjudicative framework. All of this is rooted in factual events, and whereas its scope and characteristics point to a compelling project interest.
Discussion of brain-computer interface ("BCI") and genetic editing as a means to curb the more visceral tendencies in human nature has been on the forefront of conversation in Silicon Valley for decades, and has long been a darling topic for influential research groups such as DARPA for a plethora of applications. The idea has gained acceptance by way of contemporary postmodern assumptions at the expense of nearly all other schools of thinking, and is fueled by robust commercial interests. 4IR is positioned as offering solutions to compelling existential and practical problems. It is not surprising that organized efforts would be made today by powerful private actors and governments to harness 4IR, if only for a precautionary measure in an uncertain world, as is cited by Policy Horizons Canada. Per Dr. Klaus Gerd-Geisen,'s paper, Transhumanism as the Dominant Ideology of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the driver of BCI applications, including Microsoft's patent for invasive bio-metric cryptocurrency mining, is driven by beliefs and big money.
For me, the culture shock consists in the willingness of people to connect a person's brain to the internet unknowingly, modulate their behavior, monitor and analyze their biometric data on an ongoing basis, use that data as a harassment tool, and earn cryptocurrency.
The Importance of Urgent Intervention
Truth often emerges in due course, and unfortunately, sometimes it emerges when it is too late. The urgency of whistleblowing is also underscored by the continued progress bad actors make towards their goals. Proponents of justice are expected to intervene if they are able, rather than allow perpetrators protected through bribes, services, blackmail, and/or an unfounded hope in social engineering to continue their work in destroying lives, and furthering an agenda that could result in the darkest phase of human history (assuming in accord with Dr. Yuval's comments that the future is still human). Legal protections are in place for witnesses.
I want to reiterate that I have exhausted every mode of customary recourse in seeking advocacy. I have fought for well over three years by myself in court, initially assuming I would get a fair trial. The resistance I have faced, including in the face of hard evidence and jurisprudence, speaks to a governance scandal in its own right. The courts will not rule in my favor, and police will not help. Having said that, there is enough evidence on this website to inform reasonable persons that these agencies had acted in the interest of a project, and not according to their Constitutional mandates. I put a 5,000 signature change.org petition before the Conservative Party of Canada, which was likewise ignored (further commentary in Q/A Part II). Because my copious efforts to gain awareness and advocacy have failed, I believe that justice hinges on the participation of whistleblowers who formally intervene. Although I, as a subject, am centrally featured on this site, this is a public problem. The framework of obstruction and harassment detailed on this website does not exist for the sake of one person, nor does the unlawful use of sophisticated technologies to commit crimes and advance commercial interests. Similarly, the conduct of public adjudicative agencies, and their proper governance, is an important issue for all Citizens (R. v. Lippé, 1990 CanLII 18 (SCC), [1991] 2 SCR 114).
A Systemic Problem
The Supreme Court of Canada has recognized that components of certain evidentiary records, including their contextual foundations, must be gleaned through logical inference. To this end I cite Sherman Estate v. Donovan, 2021 SCC 25, paragraphs 97 and 98:
"This Court has held that it is possible to identify objectively discernable harm on the basis of logical inferences (Bragg, at paras. 15‑16). But this process of inferential reasoning is not a license to engage in impermissible speculation. An inference must still be grounded in objective circumstantial facts that reasonably allow the finding to be made inferentially. Where the inference cannot reasonably be drawn from the circumstances, it amounts to speculation (R. v. Chanmany, 2016 ONCA 576, 352 O.A.C. 121, at para. 45). Para 98: The probability that this harm materialize need not be shown to be likely, but must still be more than negligible, fanciful or speculative."
Pursuant to the same test criteria, an assertion that the foregoing factual account evidences systemic Public Sector obstruction on the matters considered in this website is more than fanciful, and it is more than likely. Notwithstanding the serious nature of the subject matter considered, a systemic problem is a problem concerning our general public. The takeaway from this testimony is that our Government is willing and capable to make decisions on behalf of its Citizens concerning their right to privacy and well-being using sophisticated means (see Charter, section 7). The other takeaways are that our institutions can be effectively weaponized against Canadian Citizens to dismantle their lives, and that the state has adopted an intentional approach to social engineering. Whereas I might describe myself as a law-abiding centrist with a history of quietly working at my profession, I can suggest that any person in Canada can be targeted like this. The study in Sheridan et al., 2020 suggests a systemic problem.
WHY Should You Help?
A framework of this scope can be APPLIED to one individual, but it was not DEVELOPED for one individual.
The first and most basic concern is the conduct of adjudicative institutions and agencies, which have the power to make or break a person’s life. This is visible through the Affidavits, and detailed in the Litigation and Q/A pages. This matters to every Citizen regardless of their approach to personal ethics, as every Citizen is subject to the power of legitimate authorities, constitutional guardrails notwithstanding. When the powers that be act in a way antagonistic to their mandates, and a customary appeal process fails to fix problems which are obvious, it is a concern that every Canadian would reasonably share (R. v. Lippé, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 114).
Glaring police response gaps are evident in the scandal, including wilful obstruction by local police which is actionable under CCC 137. Citizens expect police to investigate what might be crime, whereas the response threshold is exceptionally low (Hill v. Hamilton‑Wentworth Regional Police Services Board, [2007] 3 S.C.R. 129, 2007 SCC 41 at paragraph 36).
A half-million dollar scandal concerning retainer fees was certified and pushed through the courts at warp speed, despite material evidence sufficient to land the CAGE Director and his legal counsel in jail. The matter evidences fraud, perjury, and collusion with my legal counsel. It involves provincial and federal registry staffers refusing to enforce procedural rules. It involves palpable disregard for rules and settled jurisprudence by almost a dozen adjudicators across three provinces, over a 2.5-year period. Palpable errors of law and fact in judgment, which include violations of our Constitution, were repeated and reinforced in appellate venues to disastrous effect. I was denied a hearing at the SCC despite these facts being painfully obvious. This is not just a negligence and obstruction matter. It is systemic evil.
People tend to address scandals that do not immediately affect them for various reasons. Some assist out of their beliefs and ethics. Others advocate out of concern that they may be adversely affected at some point by the same or similar enabling factors. The same is the basis for the statements in R. v. Lippé, Supra, in that the conduct of adjudicative agencies is of foremost importance to every Citizen. People depend on our institutions to uphold rights, preserve, peace, and shield our lifestyle against disruption. Without their proper function, Citizens are sitting ducks if beset by organized and sophisticated criminal actors with a bone to pick and an axe to grind.
Compelling Inferences & Compelling Victimhood
In accordance with the aforementioned test in Sherman Estate v. Donovan, Supra, thinking persons will look at the above-noted evidentiary corpus on this website, and will draw reasonable conclusions. The key observation concerns alignment among the stakeholders in the public service in acting against their constitutional mandates. Most reasonable persons would agree that it would be unusual, if not impossible, for a scandal such as this to escape remedy in five courts and three provinces over a three-year period, especially whereas the issues are glaring. Reasonable and like-minded persons would likewise infer that the same mechanisms used against me were disproportionate to the interests of a single CAGE entity. That much is evident on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis alone. Yet, this scandal had unfolded. How, and Why? The good news is that there are only two possible explanations occasioned by the evidentiary footprint, both of which are of immense importance to the everyday Citizen. These are;
(1) A governance scandal concerning external stakeholder influence which is capable of shaping the conduct of agencies in the public service;
(2) A mode of external influence affecting persons in the manner of cognitive liberty (see 4IR portal).
The latter requires the existence of the former, but may be required to facilitate the scope and characteristics as evidenced. The long form of this observation is contemplated at the BCI page.
Fundamentally, the evidentiary footprint demonstrates that the assumptions most ordinary Citizens have concerning our democracy, institutional framework, and governance are different from reality. The evidence more closely reflects the multi-stakeholder model detailed in the UN/WEF documents, which Canada had signed onto in September 2015. The beliefs held by these same stakeholders, as shown through visual representation and articles, is gravely concerning. This is likewise evidenced in the effects and damages of the scandal.
Without the guardrails of a Constitution and a Charter of rights that can be enforced when required, Citizens live under tyranny. Likewise, crimes against cognitive liberty, such as those evidenced to be at work in this scandal, are heinous, and must be answered under the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act (S.C. 2000, c. 24).
Organized state-sponsored hate crime, with an emphasis on online targeted criminal harassment, has been explored in earnest for the first time in Sheridan et. al., 2020. The study found that “The experience of being gang-stalked appears to be a widespread phenomenon that has been subject to little scientific examination.”. The data in Sheridan was initially gleaned from a staggering twenty million (20,000,000) online citations. Systemic harassment has likewise targeted municipal politicians in Canada leading to resignations and grief. Numerous suicides each year are predicated on targeted harassment. It is worthwhile to consider how many victims and potential victims could be helped if one well-organized criminal group was investigated and subsequently prosecuted and dissolved, let alone a framework of stakeholder corruption capable of wielding institutional power capable of ruining lives.
If you, the reader, had reason to believe Canadian governance was unduly influenced by an international enclave of Satan-worshiping technocrats, and that bad actors could have, or do have access to your biometric data, including your thought life via brainwave data, would you be rightly concerned? Both inferences meet the test criteria outlined in Sherman Estate v. Donova, Supra, on the basis of the three-year evidentiary record cited herein, as a matter worthy of earnest review. Likewise, how many Citizens would trade their Charter rights for a promise of comfortable living and economic security, as delivered by those who would countenance crime as a means to develop utopia? It is essential to remember that a postmodern think-tank will not grant the courtesy of a Citizen referendum on the issues that matter.
To those who might suggest this resembles a movie script, I would again point to the evidence and the applicable legal tests, which again, afford a very narrow scope of available inferences concerning how the scandal may be accurately construed, aside from very basic and palpable proofs of fraud, collusion, perjury, negligence, criminal mischief, and obstruction of justice. It happened in Canada.
I will close by quoting Klaus-Gerd Geisin in his recent work; Transhumanism as the Dominant Ideology of the Fourth Industrial Revolution:
“Transhumanist thought can be broken down into three main premises, each with an eminently political intent: Human beings in their ‘natural’ state are obsolete and ought to be enhanced by technology, which then becomes a means of artificially extending the hominization process. Thus, transhumanism sweeps human taxonomy into the political arena. An observation by Michel Foucault, written in 1976, comes to mind: ‘What might be called a society’s threshold of modernity has been reached when the life of the species is wagered on its own political strategies. [. . .] Modern man is an animal whose politics places his existence as a living being in question.’ In other words, transhumanists believe we have a duty to replace the category of human with a new creature, a post-sapiens sapiens.”
Professor Geisin continues in the text;
“If government agencies and international organizations — including the Council of Europe — are heavily involved in the infrastructure underpinning ideological dissemination, it is even less surprising to see that the Silicon Valley elite also ascribe to and promote transhumanist ideology. The same goes for the countless start-up entrepreneurs who gravitate toward these ideas. Carrying great weight in the societal debate are the unprecedented sums invested by, among others, the billionaires Elon Musk (one of Musk’s companies, Neuralink, aims to harness efforts toward the development of superintelligent cyborgs), Peter Diamandis, and Peter Thiel — not to mention the inescapable GAFAM (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft), well aware that their commercial interests in the high-tech space are directly at stake. These tech giants have already poured staggering amounts of money into the Fourth Industrial Revolution and are currently spending equally eye-watering amounts on political lobbying and social engineering initiatives.”
Finally, at the conclusion of his publication;
“This is not an equal struggle. The societal debate has barely begun, and the dice are loaded. Transhumanist ideology is driven by certain factions within the state and, above all, by mighty multinational corporations that, it is fair to say, have the most to gain from seeing the NBIC revolution unfold without a hitch. In this respect, transhumanism is already a dominant ideology, as it crushes all other ideological positions regarding technological change — particularly those of humanists of all stripes and subscribers to “deep ecology” — under the sheer weight of money.”
For clarity, NBIC is an acronym for Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology, and Cognitive Science.
Transhumanism as the Dominant Ideology of the Fourth Industrial Revolution
Klaus-Gerd Giesen
Journal international de bioéthique et d'éthique des sciences Issue 3-4, 2018, pages 189 to 203 | Translated and edited by Cadenza Academic Translations | Translator: Ruth Grant, Editor: Matt Burden, Senior editor: Mark Mellor
Applicable Tests
Sherman Estate v. Donovan, 2021 SCC 25, [2021] 2 S.C.R. 75 at paragraphs 97-98 | Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72 (CanLII), [2013] 3 SCR 1101 at paragraph 76 | R. v. Ahmad, 2020 SCC 11, [2020] 1 S.C.R. 577 at paragraph 38 | R. v. Wise, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 527 at paragraphs 534-538 | Nova Scotia Teachers Union v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General), 2023 NSCA 82 at paragraph 7 | Charkaoui v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2007 SCC 9 (CanLII), [2007] 1 SCR 350 at paragraphs 22, 23, & 27
Leviticus 5:1 | James 4:17 | Ephesians 5:11 | Proverbs 11:8, 20:10, 22:22-23, 28:13 | Matthew 7:21 | 2 Thessalonians 1:6 Sirach 4:28, 18:22 | Psalm 33:5, 94:20-23 | Habakkuk 1:4 | Zephaniah 1:12 | Isaiah 28:7, 51:21-23 | Ecclesiastes 9:11
HOW Can You Help?
Action Items
Whistleblowers and advocates are my only recourse, as the SCC has refused to hear the scandal. If this matter is new to you, please sign the Change.org petition and share this website widely among your networks, and take any other action you feel might be of help.
In keeping with the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act (S.C. 2005, c. 46), there are insiders who could present compelling evidence if they agree that state-sponsored crime is bad. Insider evidence might take the form of privileged information such as tax and financial transaction records and/or receipts. It might include notarized invoices. It might include photographs or video footage. It might include chat data. It might include Zoom footage. Whatever the case may be, if you are able to help, please consider helping. Tax records may be provisioned under section 241 of the Income Tax Act as is shown below. I need the help of advocates, as I have been blocked at every turn.
The trust accounts at Osler, Hoskin, & Harcourt LLP must be audited. By way of irony, the same judge central to the BC court scandal, Andrew Majawa, set the precedent for complete investigations in A Lawyer v. The Law Society of British Columbia, 2021 BCSC 914 at paragraph 63.
Finally, please save a copy of this website in HTML and PDF formats. Save it to disk in case the site goes down. This website has been saved on https://archive.ph and https://archive.org under the same URLs. Nonetheless, please save and maintain your own copies. The affidavit evidence I have compiled over the past two years is able to call Canadian Democracy into question. This is a big deal.
Follow the Money.
Imminent Danger & Future Harm:
Clarity on Subsection 3.1
