Business
‘Controligarchs’ lays bare a nightmare society the globalist elites have in store for humanity
From LifeSiteNews
Journalist Seamus Bruner has published new details on globalist plans to dominate every aspect of our lives, including our food, movement, and transactions
A newly released book gives a fresh, well-documented look into the nightmarish, dystopian society that billionaire globalists are shaping for humanity, in which our every movement and transaction will be tracked, our food will be restricted, and our perception of reality will be heavily manipulated.
Controligarchs: Exposing the Billionaire Class, their Secret Deals, and the Globalist Plot to Dominate Your Life is a thoroughly researched book by investigative journalist Seamus Bruner detailing the global game plan of what he refers to as a new class of oligarchs. They are distinguished from ultra-wealthy elites of the past by the unprecedented level of control they can exercise over the masses through technology, not just over one nation, but over the whole world.
Bruner shows how the globalist elites plan to impose a new kind of serfdom by controlling nearly every facet of our lives, with different billionaires specializing in different areas, beginning with what is most personal to us — our bodies.
After giving a bird’s eye view of the globalists’ plans through the lens of the Great Reset, Bruner dives into each of the globalists’ main levers of power over society, which exert control, respectively, over what goes into our bodies; over home energy use and transportation; over local politics and law enforcement; and over information access and perception.
The journalist first shows how Bill Gates, who already exercises massive sway over world health policy through the World Health Organization (WHO) and investments in vaccines, is also heavily investing in a root source of health: the food supply.
Bruner explains in his book that the “takeover of the food” is accomplished by “controlling the intellectual property of food production through trademarks, copyrights, and patents.” This has already been seen in Gates’ funding and control of seed patents, and in his push for patented synthetic fertilizers, discussed by Bruner, which have caused considerable damage to health and small farms around the world.
The next phase of Gates’ food power grab, which has already begun, involves tighter control over farming through land and water grabs, as well as a push to replace meat consumption with that of synthetic and bug protein.
Bruner emphasizes in his book the importance of control over the water supply, writing, according to the New York Post, “When Gates buys tens of thousands of acres, he is not just buying the land — he is also buying the rights to water below ground. In addition to farms (and the irrigation) and fertilizer, Gates has been hunting for sizable interests in water and water treatment — a crucial component when seeking to control the agricultural industry.”
The journalist also examines how Gates and the “tech oligarchs” are pushing meat alternatives, ostensibly for the sake of the climate.
“I was horrified to learn about the lab-grown hamburgers, fermented fungi protein patties, and even insect-based protein shakes they are hoping the public will consume,” wrote Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) and senior editor-at-large of Breitbart News, in his foreword to the book.
Gates has invested millions in companies like Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods, which have already received more than two dozen patents for their synthetic meat and dairy products, and have more than 100 patents pending, according to Bruner. The alternatives aren’t popular now, but about two-thirds of Americans are reportedly willing to try it.
Breitbart reports that Controligarchs also documents the efforts of Mark Zuckerberg to make the Metaverse, a virtual reality platform linked to the internet and operated by Zuckerberg’s Meta Platforms, Inc. (formerly Facebook), “the most addictive product in history.”
Meta and three of its subsidiaries have already been sued by the attorneys general of dozens of U.S. states for having “knowingly designed and deployed harmful features on Instagram and Facebook to purposefully addict children and teens.”
In comparison, the Metaverse, which has been described by the World Economic Forum’s Cathy Li as a kind of virtual world that will “become an extension of reality itself,” and which is designed to feel real with the help of virtual reality (VR) headsets and sensors, has the potential to become far more addictive than mere social media.
While it is still in the process of being developed, progress is steadily being made toward its widespread use. For example, last Thursday, Meta announced a new strategic partnership with China’s Tencent to make VR headsets cheaper and more accessible, according to Breitbart.
And this summer, Apple announced that it would release its own set of augmented reality glasses, called Apple Vision Pro, next year in the U.S.
The plans for the Metaverse get wilder — and for some, creepier. Meta AI researchers are working on a synthetic “skin” “that’s as easy to replace as a bandage,” called ReSkin, as well as “haptic gloves,” so that Metaverse users can “literally feel and grasp the metaverse.”
If it indeed becomes commonplace, as is planned, the Metaverse has enormous implications for society. Perhaps the most serious is that, as John Horvat II has observed, people will feel free to carry out “every fantasy, even the most macabre,” and perceive that they can do things to others “without consequences.”
“Such a lonely world disconnected from reality and the nature of things can feed the unfettered passions that hate all moral restraint. A space like this can quickly go from Alice in Wonderland to insane asylum,” Horvat noted.
Activities performed “in” the Metaverse would also be monitored by the platform’s administrators, drastically diminishing privacy for all Metaverse users.
The assimilation of everyday activities into the World Wide Web via the Metaverse also raises the question of whether any speech performed while “plugged in” to the Metaverse can be regulated by its administrators. Such unprecedented regulatory power would resemble that of a global government, which is an explicit goal of the World Economic Forum, a major supporter of the Metaverse.
The Metaverse may very well be a consolation prize for the restriction of real-life movement and activity, which is planned for all human beings regardless of their participation in the virtual world, according to Bruner.
Bruner shows that the globalists envision a world in which “your every movement” is “tracked and traced by electric vehicles and a smart power grid,” according to Schweizer, with which your thermostat can be turned off without your consent.
In fact, Bruner unveils a $1.2 billion plan by Jeff Bezos to “spy” on citizens using their “smart” homes, which have already been launched by Amazon.
Worse, all “transactions and affiliations” are to be “linked to digital currencies and IDs,” notes Schweizer, plans that have been in the works for years by global bodies such as the European Union (EU) and WHO, as well as nations worldwide.
Most recently, the Group of 20 (G20) — the 19 most influential countries on earth plus the European Union — has endorsed proposals to explore development of a “digital public infrastructure,” including digital identification systems and potentially a centralized digital currency.
Bruner’s description of the globalist plan for our lives is not speculation by any stretch but is based on thorough documentation, including financial filings, corporate records, and admissions from the very globalists themselves. This makes his book a valuable tool not only for those already acquainted with the Great Reset and its accompanying tyranny but for skeptics.
Bruner has advised, “jealously guard your wallet,” “jealously guard your personal data, especially that of your kids,” and “talk to your legislators and Congressmen and tell them to ban your taxpayer money from funding these initiatives.”
Business
StatsCan Confirms Canada’s Middle Class Is Disappearing Under Liberal Mismanagement
A new Statistics Canada report reveals widening income inequality and a shrinking middle class, all while Trudeau’s Liberals push policies that benefit the wealthy and punish working Canadians.
A newly released report from Statistics Canada on household economic accounts for the third quarter of 2024 confirms what many Canadians have long suspected—while the wealthiest continue to rake in profits, middle- and lower-income families are left struggling under the weight of economic policies that seem designed to work against them. The report, released today, paints a stark picture of a country where financial inequality is not just persisting, but growing.
The numbers don’t lie. Income inequality has increased, with the top 40% of earners pulling even further ahead of the bottom 40%. The gap in disposable income between these two groups expanded to 46.9 percentage points, up from 46.3 just a year ago. The highest-income households saw their disposable income rise by 6.8%, largely driven by soaring investment gains, while the poorest Canadians saw only a 3.7% increase, barely enough to keep up with the cost of living. Meanwhile, middle-income earners experienced sluggish wage growth of just 2.7%, well below the national average.
Despite declining interest rates, lower-income households found themselves paying more on mortgages and consumer credit, while the wealthy reaped the benefits of higher investment yields. The data shows that middle-income households, who are already feeling the squeeze from inflation and stagnating wages, saw their share of national income shrink.
The most revealing statistic is in net worth distribution. The top 20% of wealthiest Canadians control nearly two-thirds (64.7%) of the country’s net worth, averaging an eye-watering $3.3 million per household. Meanwhile, the bottom 40% hold just 3.3%, barely scraping by with an average of $83,189 in assets.
However, the real estate market has provided a rare silver lining for some lower-wealth households, as they were able to take advantage of slightly more favorable conditions to buy homes, increasing their net worth at the fastest pace. But even that gain is tempered by the reality that housing costs remain unaffordable for many, and young Canadians under 35 continue to pull back from homeownership altogether.
Let’s be clear—this isn’t happening by accident. This is what happens when you let a government of self-serving narcissists run the country into the ground. Justin Trudeau and his Liberal Party have spent nearly a decade dismantling the Canadian economy, pushing a radical, ideologically driven agenda that benefits their elite donor class while leaving working Canadians behind. And now, as the country crumbles under the weight of their incompetence, Trudeau is running for the exits, leaving the mess to whoever’s foolish enough to take the job.
And what do they do on the way out? Do they work to secure our economy? To make life more affordable? To protect Canadian workers? No. Instead, they decide to pick a fight with the United States. Donald Trump, who actually puts his country first—imagine that—announces a 25% tariff on Canadian imports, a move meant to address drug trafficking and illegal immigration, and what’s the Liberals’ response? Do they try to work out a deal? Do they negotiate in good faith to protect Canadian jobs? No. Instead, Chrystia Freeland comes out swinging, proposing retaliatory tariffs that will hurt Canadian businesses just as much, if not more, than they’ll hurt the U.S.
This isn’t about protecting Canada. This isn’t about securing the border or fighting for our economy. This is about pure, partisan politics. The Liberal base wants conflict with the U.S. Not because it’s good for the country, but because their fragile, self-righteous worldview depends on it. They hate Trump, and they hate that his America-First policies are actually working for American workers. So instead of finding a solution, they escalate. They antagonize. Because their base loves it. Not because Canada benefits, but because Liberals benefit.
Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
And meanwhile, what’s Jagmeet Singh doing? The man who loves to talk about standing up for the working class? He could pull the plug on this corrupt government today with a non-confidence motion. But he won’t. Because, like every other member of the political elite in this country, he’s more interested in protecting his own position than actually doing his job. He makes noise about fighting for Canadian workers, but when the moment comes to act, he folds—again.
So here we are. The economy is in shambles. The wealth gap is growing. The middle class is getting squeezed to death. And the people in charge are too busy playing partisan games to do anything about it. Trudeau is leaving, but his legacy of economic destruction, division, and incompetence will live on through the same out-of-touch Liberal elites who put us in this mess.
But here’s the thing—Canada is better than this. We are a nation built on hard work, freedom, and opportunity, not on government control, reckless spending, and endless excuses. We are a country that thrives when its people—not bureaucrats in Ottawa—decide their own future.
It’s time for Canadians to take their country back. It’s time to put an end to this cycle of economic ruin and government failure. We don’t need more empty promises, more excuses, or more Liberal arrogance. We need an election. We need leaders who believe in the strength of Canadians, not the power of government.
Enough is enough. If we want a future where hard work is rewarded, where families can afford to buy a home, and where our economy is built to benefit all Canadians—not just the elite—then we must act. This country belongs to you, not the Liberal Party, not the special interests, and certainly not the self-serving political class in Ottawa.
Canada deserves better. And the time to demand it is now.
Business
Long Ignored Criminal Infiltration of Canadian Ports Lead Straight to Trump Tariffs
Sam Cooper
Briefings to Liberal Government on Chinese Infiltration of Vancouver Port and Canada’s Opioid Scourge Ignored
Trump Tariffs Loom as Critics Decry Ottawa’s “Fox in the Hen House” Approach to Border Security
As President Donald Trump readies sweeping tariffs against Canada on Saturday—citing Ottawa’s failure to secure its shared North American borders from fentanyl originating in China—The Bureau has obtained a remarkable December 1999 document from a senior law enforcement official, revealing Ottawa’s longstanding negligence in securing Vancouver’s port against drug trafficking linked to Chinese shipping entities.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
The letter, drafted by former Crown prosecutor Scott Newark and addressed to Ottawa’s Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC), urged the body to reconsider explosive findings from a leaked RCMP and CSIS report detailing the infiltration of Canada’s “porous” borders by Chinese criminal networks.
Titled “Re: S.I.R.C. Review in relation to Project Sidewinder,” Newark’s letter alleges systemic failures that enabled Chinese State Council owned shipping giant COSCO and Triads with suspected Chinese military ties to penetrate Vancouver’s port system. He further asserts that federal authorities ignored repeated briefings and warnings from Canadian law enforcement—warnings based on intelligence gathered by Canadian officials in Hong Kong, who initiated the Sidewinder review.
Newark also warned that Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien’s decision to dismantle Canada’s specialized Ports Police and privatize national port control had left the country dangerously exposed to foreign criminal networks, noting he had personally briefed the Canadian government on these concerns as early as 1996.
Addressing his letter to SIRC’s chair, Quebec lawyer Paule Gauthier, Newark wrote:
“As the former (1994-98) Executive Officer of the Canadian Police Association, I was assigned responsibility for dealing with the issue of the federal government’s changes to control of the national ports and policing therein.”
“This involved close examination of matters such as drug, weapon, and people smuggling through the national ports and, in particular, both the growing presence of organized criminal groups at ports and the ominous hazard control of those ports by such groups represented.”
Newark’s letter goes on to allege widespread failures in Ottawa that facilitated Chinese Triad infiltration of Vancouver’s port, revealing federal authorities’ reluctance to act on warnings from RCMP officer Garry Clement and immigration control officer Brian McAdam—former Canadian officials based in Hong Kong who had sounded the alarm, prompting the Sidewinder review.
Newark explained to SIRC’s chair that, during his tenure as Executive Officer of the Canadian Police Association, he prepared approximately fifty detailed policy briefs for the government and regularly appeared before parliamentary committees and in private ministerial briefings.
“I can assure you that in all of that time, no clearer warning was ever given by Canada’s rank and file police officers to the national government than what was done in our unsuccessful attempt to prevent the disbandment of the specialized Canada Ports Police in combination with the privatization of the ports themselves,” Newark’s letter to SIRC states.
The letter continues, noting that in October 1996, Newark met with Chrétien’s Transport Minister David Anderson—later addressing the Transport Committee—to highlight the imminent threat posed by Asian organized crime’s infiltration of port operations. Newark’s written briefing to the Minister underscored the gravity of the situation with a blunt question:
“Who exactly are the commercial port operators?”
Citing the Anderson briefing document, Newark’s letter to SIRC states that Anderson had been warned:
“We are, for example, aware of serious concerns amongst the international law enforcement community surrounding the ownership of ports and container industries in Asia and, in particular, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and the People’s Republic of China. There is simply no longer any doubt that drugs like heroin are coming from these destinations through the Port of Vancouver, moved by organized criminal gangs whose assets include ‘legitimate’ properties.”
The Anderson briefing also referenced a British Columbia anti-gang unit report, titled “Organized Crime on Vancouver Waterfront,” which made clear that the Longshoreman’s Union had been infiltrated by the Hells Angels.
“The movement of goods through Canada’s ports requires an independence in policing that is impossible without public control,” the report warned.
It concluded:
“This report should be taken as a specific warning to this Government that, prior to downloading operational control over the ports themselves to private interests, Government be absolutely certain as to who owns what—and that it can continue that certainty with power to refuse acquisition of port assets in the future.”
Scott Newark’s letter to SIRC then turns to new intelligence—gathered from Canadian and U.S. officials—that further underscored the vulnerability created by Chrétien’s border policies.
“To now learn that law enforcement and public officials in Canada and the United States have linked a company (COSCO), granted docking and other facilities in Vancouver, to Asian organized crime, arms and drug smuggling is, to say the least, disturbing,” Newark’s December 1999 letter states.
“That this company, its principals, subsidiaries, and partners have been associated with various military agencies of a foreign government—agencies themselves identified by Canadian and American officials as having unhealthy connections to Triad groups—makes a bad situation even worse.”
Newark next addressed the broader implications of Canada’s failure to enforce border security, particularly in relation to the deportation of foreign criminals—a process he had sought to reform while serving with the Canadian Police Association.
Drawing on his experience, he described a deeply flawed immigration enforcement system, one that allowed individuals with serious criminal records to remain in Canada indefinitely. The problem, he wrote, was twofold: not only were foreign criminals able to enter Canada with ease, but authorities also failed to deport those with outstanding arrest warrants.
Newark recounted how, in 1996, a Cabinet Minister requested that he meet with Brian McAdam, a former senior foreign service officer in Hong Kong who had spent years uncovering organized crime’s grip on Canada’s immigration system. McAdam’s detailed revelations, he wrote, had directly led to the launch of Project Sidewinder.
Newark told SIRC that even after leaving the Canadian Police Association in 1998, he remained in contact with McAdam and other officials working to expose this vast and complex national security risk posed by foreign criminal networks.
It was this ongoing communication that led to an even more alarming discovery. Newark wrote that he was stunned to learn that Canada’s government had not only terminated Project Sidewinder but had gone so far as to destroy some related files.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Newark suggests SIRC’s chair, in her review of Sidewinder, should determine whether “Sidewinder should not have been cancelled … why such inappropriate action was taken and at whose direction this was done.”
He concludes that SIRC should also freshly examine why intelligence reporting from the Canadian officials in Hong Kong, Brian McAdam and Garry Clement had been ignored in Ottawa.
Newark’s letter to SIRC says these failures to act on intelligence included the “Inappropriate granting of visas to Triad members or associates” and “Granting of docking facilities with attendant consequences to COSCO”—and “Failure of CIC and Foreign Affairs to respond appropriately to the various information supplied by McAdam and Clement in relation to material pertaining to Sidewinder.”
In an exclusive interview with The Bureau, Garry Clement, who contributed to investigations referenced in Newark’s letter, corroborated many of its claims and provided further insight. Clement recalled his role in Project Sunset, a 1990s investigation into Chinese Triads’ efforts to gain control over Vancouver’s ports.
“I can remember having a discussion with Scott when he wrote that to SIRC because Scott and I go back a long time,” Clement said. “I knew about him writing on it, but I knew it was also buried.”
He described his own intelligence work during the same period:
“I wrote in the nineties when I was the liaison officer in Hong Kong, a very long intelligence brief on the Chinese wanting to basically acquire or build out a port at the Surrey Fraser Docks area. And it was going to be completely controlled by that time, with Triad influence, but it was going to be controlled by China.”
Clement expressed frustration that decades of warnings had gone unheeded:
“The bottom line is that here we are almost 40 years later, talking about an issue that was identified in the ‘90s about our ports and allowing China to have free access—and nothing has been done over that period of time.”
Newark’s urgent recommendation for SIRC to reconsider Sidewinder’s warnings on Vancouver’s ports was never acted upon.
“We still don’t have Port Police. We got nobody overseeing them,” Clement added. “The ports themselves, it’s sort of like putting a fox in the hen house and saying, ‘Behave yourself.’”
Finally, when asked about the Trudeau government’s claim this week that Canada is responsible for only one percent of the fentanyl entering the United States—a figure reported widely in Canadian media—Clement’s response was unequivocal.
“The fact that we’ve become a haven for transnational organized crime, it’s internationally known,” he said. “So when I read that, with the fentanyl—Trump is wrong in that there’s less than 1% of our fentanyl going to the United States. That’s a crock of shit. If you look at the two super labs that were taken down in British Columbia—I think there’s three now—the amount they were capable of producing was more than the whole Vancouver population could have used in 10 years. So we know that Vancouver has become a transshipment point to North America for opiates and cocaine and other drugs because it’s a weak link, and enforcement is not capable of keeping up with transnational organized crime.”
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
That opinion is evidently acknowledged by British Columbia Premier David Eby, according to documents from Canada’s Foreign Interference Commission that say Eby sought meetings with Justin Trudeau’s National Security Advisor.
A record from the Hogue Commission, sanitized for public release, outlines the “context and drivers” behind Eby’s concerns, including “foreign interference; election security; countering fentanyl, organized crime, money laundering, corruption.”
The documents state Ottawa’s Privy Council Office—which provides advice to Justin Trudeau’s cabinet—had recommended that British Columbia continue to work with the federal government on initiatives like the establishment of a new Canada Financial Crimes Agency to bolster the nation’s ability to respond swiftly to complex financial crimes.
Additionally, the PCO highlighted that Canada, the United States, and Mexico were supposedly collaborating on strategies to reduce the supply of fentanyl, including addressing precursor chemicals and preventing the exploitation of commercial shipping channels—a critical area where British Columbia, and specifically the Port of Vancouver, plays a significant role.
Eby acknowledged the concerns again this week in an interview with Macleans.
“I understood Trump’s concerns about drugs coming in. We’ve got a serious fentanyl problem in B.C.; we see the precursor chemicals coming into B.C. from China and Mexico. We see ties to Asian and Mexican organized crime groups. We’d been discussing all of that with the American ambassador and fellow governors. That’s why it was such a strange turnaround, from ‘Hey, we’re working together on this!’ to suddenly finding ourselves in the crosshairs.”
Yet, despite Eby’s claims of intergovernmental efforts, critics—including Garry Clement—argue that nothing has changed. Vancouver’s port remains alarmingly vulnerable, a decades-old concern that continues to resurface as fentanyl and other illicit drugs flood North American markets.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
-
espionage2 days ago
Democracy Betrayed, The Scathing Truth Behind Canada’s Foreign Interference Report
-
International2 days ago
Elon Musk calls for laws ‘short enough to be understandable by a normal person’
-
Alberta1 day ago
AMA challenged to debate Alberta COVID-19 Review
-
National1 day ago
All 6 people trying to replace Trudeau agree with him on almost everything
-
Business1 day ago
Tariffs Coming April 1 ‘Unless You Stop Allowing Fentanyl Into Our Country’
-
espionage2 days ago
CSIS Officer Alleged “Interference” In Warrant Targeting Trudeau Party Powerbroker
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Trump’s ‘Drill, Baby, Drill’ Agenda Will Likely Take On An Entirely New Shape
-
Alberta1 day ago
When America attacks