Connect with us

National

Liberals Welcome Mark Carney Into Their Elite Circle, Because Another Globalist Is Just What Canada Needs

Published

2 months ago

12 minute read

The Opposition with Dan Knight

From The Opposition News Network

By Dan Knight

Why Carney’s WEF Ties, Carbon Taxes, and Reckless Economic Policies Spell More of the Same for Canadians Under the Liberal Leadership

Let’s break it down, folks. Mark Carney, the supposed “economic savior” for the Liberal Party, was just announced as an advisor to Trudeau’s sinking ship. We’re told he’s here to focus on “economic growth” and help the middle class. Really? Does anyone actually believe that? This guy is the definition of globalist, woke, elite policy, and the idea that he’s going to be the one to turn things around is a joke.

Whether Mark Carney can salvage the sinking Liberal brand is questionable at best, but what’s undeniable is that the party is in free fall, and people are jumping ship. Just last week, the Liberal campaign director Jeremy Broadhurst who was a significant member of the liberal party called it quits, signaling deeper chaos within the ranks. And this all leads back to Carney. I’ve thought this through since last year: nobody within the current Liberal party can lead. It’s detestable, riddled with failure, and there’s zero charisma left in that sinking ship.

If you take a look at Mélanie Joly, she’s been an utter disaster with foreign policy—just look at the Israel debacle, where her inconsistent stances have hurt Canada’s credibility. Then there’s Anita Anand, who promised big savings for Canadians in her role at the Treasury, but where are the results? Nowhere to be seen. Canadians are still waiting for those elusive “big cuts.”

And finally, Chrystia Freeland—she’s presided over one of the worst economic periods in recent history, with soaring debt, inflation, and out-of-touch policies like bragging about biking to work while ordinary Canadians are struggling to pay for gas and groceries. It’s failures all around, and voters see right through it.

Justin Trudeau is headed for a Titanic-like disaster in the next election. As 338Canada’s polling numbers make clear, Trudeau’s ship is going down. And when it does, Mark Carney will be waiting in the wings to take over. The Liberal deep state is banking on Carney being their fiscal savior, hoping he can stand as a counter to the fiscally responsible Pierre Poilievre. But let’s be real: Mark Carney is just Justin Trudeau 2.0. Whether he can succeed or not is anyone’s guess, but it’s clear the Liberals are doubling down on the same disastrous ideology that got them here in the first place.

And believe me Mark Carney isn’t some independent economic genius who’s going to swoop in and save the Liberal Party. No, he’s the ultimate globalist insider, with deep ties to the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the same out-of-touch elites who have been shaping Trudeau’s disastrous policies from day one. The WEF is all about a top-down, centralized control of the economy, and Carney’s their man in Canada. He’s been a leading voice in pushing for the Great Reset—you know, the one where “you’ll own nothing and be happy”—a world where personal freedom and national sovereignty take a backseat to global control.

Carney’s been in bed with the WEF for years, rubbing shoulders with Klaus Schwab and the rest of the Davos crowd who think they know better than regular Canadians. They’re obsessed with their climate agenda, which sounds great on paper until you realize it’s nothing more than an excuse to impose carbon taxes and regulations that cripple businesses and raise the cost of living for everyone except the rich. Carney was one of the loudest voices behind the ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) movement, which forces corporations to prioritize social justice and climate goals over profitability and jobs. And who suffers? Middle-class Canadians who just want to put food on the table and keep the lights on.

Look, this isn’t speculation. Carney’s record speaks for itself. As Governor of the Bank of England, he was the architect of quantitative easing, which means printing more money out of thin air. The result? Inflation skyrocketed, and who got hurt? Not the global elites, not the bankers, but the regular folks whose savings became worthless and whose cost of living exploded. This is exactly what we’ve been seeing under Trudeau’s watch, and Carney is here to push more of the same failed policies.

And let’s get something straight: Mark Carney isn’t just indifferent to tax cuts—he actively opposes them. During his time at the Bank of England, Carney consistently pushed back on fiscal conservatism, instead advocating for higher taxes to fund massive government programs, particularly around climate initiatives. His World Economic Forum (WEF) ties reinforce this mindset. The WEF’s agenda is all about redistribution under the guise of climate action and “equity,” and Carney is right at the forefront. He promotes policies that prioritize environmental and social goals over economic freedom, and tax cuts simply don’t fit into that agenda.

Carney’s support for carbon taxes is one of the clearest examples. He’s been a vocal supporter of these taxes, which disproportionately hurt middle- and lower-income families while doing next to nothing to meaningfully reduce emissions. But here’s why Carney doesn’t care about tax cuts: they don’t fit his globalist vision of top-down control. Instead of allowing Canadians to keep more of their money and spur private sector growth, he’s all in on higher taxes and more government intervention to meet global targets that come straight from the WEF playbook.

And let’s be crystal clear here: these carbon taxes that Trudeau and Carney love so much haven’t stopped a single wildfire, tornado, or hurricane. All they’ve done is drive jobs and manufacturing out of Canada and into countries like China and India, where carbon emissions and pollution are an afterthought. It’s virtue-signaling at its finest.

If you don’t believe me, go to any store in Canada—go to Canadian Tire, check out where that toaster is made. China. Your Dyson vacuum? China. Head over to Mark’s Work Wearhouse, try finding a single sock not made in China. Good luck. You won’t find it. Because what the Trudeau government and Mark Carney’s woke climate agenda have done is force our industries to offshore to places where environmental regulations don’t exist. We’ve exported our emissions, our jobs, and our economic power to countries that don’t give a damn about carbon or pollution.

Meanwhile, here in Canada, we’re being told that we have to pay more for gas and groceries because we need to do our part for the environment. All while Trudeau flies to Davos in his private jet to rub elbows with the global elite, pretending he’s saving the planet on the tax payers dime. It’s a complete farce. The carbon tax isn’t saving the environment; it’s driving up the cost of living and destroying Canadian manufacturing. It’s a scam designed to make elites like Carney and Trudeau look virtuous while the rest of us pay the price.

So, let’s end with this: Canadians, it’s time for real change. This government has failed every generation, from students struggling to find jobs and buy homes, to retirees facing new capital gains taxes. The Liberals have been a disaster for everyone. They’ve crushed opportunities for young people and are now squeezing older generations with their reckless economic policies.

If you think Mark Carney is going to offer something different from Justin Trudeau, think again. He’s just an older, more polished version of Trudeau, with the same World Economic Forum (WEF) ties, the same reckless “spend, spend, spend” approach through quantitative easing (QE), and the same disdain for lowering taxes. Carney isn’t the change we need—he’s more of the same, doubling down on failed globalist policies that harm everyday Canadians.

And oh, by the way—don’t let Chrystia Freeland in on the secret that Mark Carney’s circling her job. She’ll have to bike herself right on out of Parliament! Maybe she can find a new gig lecturing us about climate change from her taxpayer-funded chauffeur. But seriously, folks, Canada deserves better than this circus of failed leadership.

It’s time we broke free from this disastrous, virtue-signaling government and got back to basics—hard work, opportunity, and good old-fashioned freedom. Let’s reclaim our country, rebuild an economy where every generation can actually thrive, and put Canadians first again. Enough of the elite lectures from the likes of Trudeau, Carney, and Freeland. Time to chart a new course!

Dan Knight
Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
International / 31 mins ago

Elon Musk praises families on X: ‘We should teach fear of childlessness,’ not pregnancy

Frontier Centre for Public Policy / 4 hours ago

It’s Time To Stop Church Arsons And What Fuels Them

DEI / 12 hours ago

University System of Georgia to ban DEI, commit to neutrality, teach Constitution

Energy

Global fossil fuel use rising despite UN proclamations

Published on November 23, 2024

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari

Major energy transitions are slow and take centuries, not decades… the first global energy transition—from traditional biomass fuels (including wood and charcoal) to fossil fuels—started more than two centuries ago and remains incomplete. Nearly three billion people in the developing world still depend on charcoal, straw and dried dung for cooking and heating, accounting for about 7 per cent of the world’s energy supply (as of 2020).

At the Conference of the Parties (COP29) in Azerbaijan, António Guterres, the United Nations Secretary-General, last week called for a global net-zero carbon footprint by 2050, which requires a “fossil fuel phase-out” and “deep decarbonization across the entire value chain.”

Yet despite the trillions of dollars already spent globally pursuing this target—and the additional trillions projected as necessary to “end the era of fossil fuels”—the world’s dependence on fossil fuels has remained largely unchanged.

So, how realistic is a “net-zero” emissions world—which means either eliminating fossil fuel generation or offsetting carbon emissions with activities such as planting trees—by 2050?

The journey began in 1995 when the UN hosted the first COP conference in Berlin, launching a global effort to drive energy transition and decarbonization. That year, global investment in renewable energy reached US$7 billion, according to some estimates. Since then, an extraordinary amount of money and resources have been allocated to the transition away from fossil fuels.

According to the International Energy Agency, between 2015 and 2023 alone, governments and industry worldwide spent US$12.3 trillion (inflation-adjusted) on clean energy. For context, that’s over six times the value of the entire Canadian economy in 2023.

Despite this spending, between 1995 and 2023, global fossil fuel consumption increased by 62 per cent, with oil consumption rising by 38 per cent, coal by 66 per cent and natural gas by 90 per cent.

And during that same 28-year period, despite the trillions spent on energy alternatives, the share of global energy provided by fossil fuels declined by only four percentage points, from 85.6 per cent to 81.5 per cent.

This should come as no surprise. Major energy transitions are slow and take centuries, not decades. According to a recent study by renowned scholar Vaclav Smil, the first global energy transition—from traditional biomass fuels (including wood and charcoal) to fossil fuels—started more than two centuries ago and remains incomplete. Nearly three billion people in the developing world still depend on charcoal, straw and dried dung for cooking and heating, accounting for about 7 per cent of the world’s energy supply (as of 2020).

Moreover, coal only surpassed wood as the main energy source worldwide around 1900. It took more than 150 years from oil’s first commercial extraction for oil to reach 25 per cent of all fossil fuels consumed worldwide. Natural gas didn’t reach this threshold until the end of the 20th century, after 130 years of industry development.

Now, consider the current push by governments to force an energy transition via regulation and spending. In Canada, the Trudeau government has set a target to fully decarbonize electricity generation by 2035 so all electricity is derived from renewable power sources such as wind and solar. But merely replacing Canada’s existing fossil fuel-based electricity with clean energy sources within the next decade would require building the equivalent of 23 major hydro projects (like British Columbia’s Site C) or 2.3 large-scale nuclear power plants (like Ontario’s Bruce Power). The planning and construction of significant electricity generation infrastructure in Canada is a complex and time-consuming process, often plagued by delays, regulatory hurdles and substantial cost overruns.

The Site C project took around 43 years from initial feasibility studies in 1971 to securing environmental certification in 2014. Construction began on the Peace River in northern B.C. in 2015, with completion expected in 2025 at a cost of at least $16 billion. Similarly, Ontario’s Bruce Power plant took nearly two decades to complete, with billions in cost overruns. Given these immense practical, financial and regulatory challenges, achieving the government’s 2035 target is highly improbable.

As politicians gather at high-profile conferences and set ambitious targets for a swift energy transition, global reliance on fossil fuels has continued to increase. As things stand, achieving net-zero by 2050 appears neither realistic nor feasible.

Authors:

Julio Mejía
Policy Analyst
Elmira Aliakbari
Director, Natural Resource Studies, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

Another Mass Grave?

Published on November 23, 2024

By

No. One outrageous lie was quickly discounted, yet another lives on, to the detriment of everybody involved.

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Brian Giesbrecht

The  Kamloops claim didn’t come out of the blue. The TRC’s well-publicized “missing children” wild goose chase thoroughly indoctrinated indigenous communities. It convinced foolish people, like Casimir, Leah Gazan and Kimberley Murray, that thousands of “missing children” had been secretly buried  all across Canada.

“My brother Rufus saw them take all those children and stand them up next to a big ditch, and then the soldiers shot them all and they all fell into that ditch. Some of the kids were still alive and they just poured the dirt in on top of them. Buried them alive.”

This mass murder happened in 1943 — not in Nazi-held Europe, but in Brantford, Ontario.

So, there you have it — the personal story of a residential school “survivor” describing the day the Canadian Army lined up 43 Indian children in front of a residential school at Brantford, Ontario, shot them and dumped their bodies into a mass grave. The May 27, 2021 announcement that the remains of 215 former students of the Kamloops residential school wasn’t the first time that a claim  about sinister residential school deaths and clandestine burials had been made.

This Brantford story is obviously untrue. Any reasonably well-informed person with a lick of sense would know that at a glance.

But that didn’t stop the claim from making the social media rounds for years. According to the fact-check tens of thousands of people have read this bogus claim over the years, and many appear to have believed it completely. In fact, despite the fact checks proving that the claim was entirely false it continues to circulate today.

Both the Kamloops and Brantford claims came basically from the same place — the strange mind of a defrocked United Church Minister, Kevin Annett. It was Annett who created the bogus Brantford claim. In a strange twist, the picture at the top of the page — said to be from Brantford — is actually a photo of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School, as it looked in the 1920s. 

And it was Annett who inspired the TRC’s misguided “missing children/unmarked graves” wild goose chase that, in turn, inspired Chief Rosanne Casimir to make the Kamloops claim. Both claims were equally and obviously false: The Kamloops claim was that the “remains of 215 children were found.” In fact, only radar blips (anomalies) were detected- blips that turned out. to most likely be from previous excavations, and not graves. Casimir and Annett both knew that they were making false claims.

Annett’s bogus claims come from his imaginative reworking of stories of “survivors” that he publicized in his blogs, books, interviews and movies.

His most famous movie is Unrepentant. This movie has been viewed by tens of thousands of Canadians, particularly in indigenous communities, such as the Tk’emlups community at Kamloops.

It has won awards, and been praised by eminent people, such as Noam Chomsky. Despite being every bit as false as the claim that the Canadian army shot 43 indigenous children, it actually convinced Member of Parliament, Gary Merasty, that it was accurate history. It is nothing short of amazing that this highly suggestible MP  was then able to convince the equally gullible, and newly appointed TRC commissioners that there were many thousands of such “missing children”, as Annett alleged.

The TRC commissioners then launched their “missing children/unmarked graves” campaign despite having no mandate from the federal government to do so. (Independent researcher, Nina Green, describes this in detail here.)

You see, the  Kamloops claim didn’t come out of the blue. The TRC’s well-publicized “missing children” wild goose chase thoroughly indoctrinated indigenous communities. It convinced foolish people, like Casimir, Leah Gazan and Kimberley Murray, that thousands of “missing children” had been secretly buried  all across Canada. 

Indigenous people became hooked on these stories.

Annett’s most famous book is his 393 page opus, “Hidden No Longer.” That book introduced the idea that the deaths of these thousands of “missing children” (his estimates range from 50,000 to 250,000, depending on the telling) constituted  genocide. It is absolutely shocking that our MPs actually voted to condemn Canada of genocide based essentially on Kevin Annett’s bogus claims.

Based on those same bogus claims Annett was hired by the Brantford Mohawk community in 2011 to dig up the graves that he claimed existed in the apple orchard area of their residential school. According to Annett, these were the graves of indigenous students who had been secretly killed and buried in the apple orchard at the school, with the forced help of fellow students. 

Sound familiar? It should. That was essentially the same grisly tale repeated by Chief Rosanne Casimir years later in Kamloops. (See above.)

Except that the wiser folks within the Brantford Mohawk community twigged on to Annett’s tricks. And when Annett was found on the streets of Toronto, waving around chicken bones, and pretending that they were the bones of children he had unearthed at Brantford, the Mohawk elders came together and publicly denounced Annett as a fraud at a community meeting.  They then banished him from their community. 

Unfortunately, Casimir became a useful idiot for Annett — just as the gullible TRC commissioners did — and no such leadership has yet come forward from the wiser elements within the Kamloops indigenous community. Those folks are silent, while the more vocal contingent are still sticking to their story that the  soil anomalies are the “remains of 215 children,” and not what they almost certainly are — 1924 septic excavations. 

So, the questions should be asked: Is the claim that the Canadian army shot 43 indigenous children, and dumped them in a mass grave, any more or less believable than the claim that priests killed and secretly buried 215 children at Kamloops, (or any of the copycat claims that followed it?)

What is it about that Mohawk claim that gives it appeal to only the most gullible among us, while the equally improbable Kamloops claim is still taken seriously by so many people?

On the surface, both claims are outrageous, and have no real evidence to support them. Quite the contrary, every Canadian history book ever written is cogent evidence  that both stories are false. But the Mohawk claim was dismissed as the nonsense it obviously was, while the Kamloops claim lives on.

At least part of the answer to those questions appears to be in the response of the government in power, and the media to the claims. If the Brantford claim had been met by a prime minister who immediately ordered that flags be lowered, and offered hundreds of millions of dollars to any other indigenous communities who wanted to make similar claim, no doubt that Brantford claim would have been taken seriously.

Or, if the Brantford claim had been made in a time when a highly ideological CBC would ask no questions, and blindly promote the claim, the results might have been entirely different. As it is, the Brantford claim died a merciful death, while the equally specious Kamloops genocide claim still languishes like a stinking albatross around the neck of every Canadian.

Although the international community is increasingly broadcasting the obvious fact that the Kamloops claim is bogus Canada’s media remains asleep. That is not likely to change until leadership changes in Ottawa, and at the CBC. Pierre Pollievre, when questioned on this topic, stated clearly that he stands for historical truth, accuracy, and a full investigation into all questions pertaining to claims about residential school deaths. Hopefully, that means that excavation and a full inquiry will follow.

But Tk’emlups indigenous elders better wake up, like the Mohawk elders did. You are not doing your communities a favour by letting politicians and journalists treat you like children, by pretending to believe your bizarre claims. These false claims are already doing great damage.

Fortunately, there are many thoughtful indigenous people who do not blindly accept the claims about murderous priests and secret burials.

Here is one such wise indigenous person. He is a priest, and he is willing to do what our federal government and our CBC failed to do from the beginning namely to intelligently discuss the issue.

Thoughtful people like this need to be involved in a full investigation that will clear the air about the Kamloops claim, and get Canada back on track.

Brian Giesbrecht, retired judge, is a Senior Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X