War against the US? Chrystia Freeland says Canada, allies need to build ‘New World Order’ to combat Trump

During last night’s Liberal leadership debate, candidate Chrystia Freeland called for ‘democratic’ countries to ‘build a New World Order’ to combat Trump and his threat of making Canada the 51st U.S. state.

Former finance minister and deputy prime minister Chrystia Freeland has called on “democratic” countries to “build a New World Order” to combat U.S. President Donald Trump.

During the February 25 English-language Liberal Party leadership debate, Freeland, who is running for party leadership to replace Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, declared that Canada and its allies must “build a New World Order” to protect against U.S. President Donald Trump’s threat to turn the nation into the 51st U.S. state.

“We need to recognize President Trump has said dozens of times he wants us to be the 51st state,” Freeland stated around the 36 minute mark of last night’s debate. “I don’t think any of us wants to be the leader who was asleep at the wheel and didn’t get Canada defended, did not work with our democratic allies to protect our borders.”

“They want to work with us it’s time for us to step up at home to urgently reach out to them and build a New World Order where democracy and Canadian sovereignty is protected,” she declared.

Media outlets have long described talk of a “New World Order” as a conspiracy theory, but globalist organizations such as the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the United Nations (UN) continue to give credence to the concept, by publicly calling for and working towards a worldwide “Great Reset” or other similarly named agendas.

To that end, former WEF chairman Klaus Schwab has insisted for decades that “stakeholder capitalism” is the optimal form of global  governance  in a “reset” world, allowing the biggest corporations to partner with political leaders in deciding key policy agendas, and relegating the governments’  voice to “one among many, without always being the final arbiter.” 

Freeland is not the only politician to admit that plans to establish the New World Order are underway. As LifeSiteNews reported in 2021, during the height of the COVID “pandemic,” a senior Australian health officer said that authorities will consider what contact tracing looks like “in the New World Order.” The term has also been used by former U.S. President Joe Biden, former Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki and others.

Freeland’s comments caused a stir on social media, with many accusing the mainstream political sphere of hypocrisy for labelling the term “New World Order” a “conspiracy theory” while actively advocating for it.

“Liberals: ‘A New World Order is a conspiracy theory. Stop spreading misinformation,’” one user posted on X. “Also Liberals: ‘We need a new world order to protect ourselves from Donald Trump.’”

Liberal Party ties to the WEF and ‘New World Order’ ideology

During the last few years, during which time Freeland served as deputy prime minister and finance minister, the Liberal Party has routinely come under fire for its ties to globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum.

In fact, Freeland’s own ties to the WEF seem extensive, with her receiving a personal commendation from former WEF leader Klaus Schwab. 

Others have also pointed out that right around the time she announced her bid for Liberal leader, the WEF’s profile on Freeland disappeared from the group’s website.

Another Liberal leadership candidate, Mark Carney, also has ties to the WEF, as does outgoing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Up Next

Taxpayers launching court fight against CBC transparency

Don't Miss

Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers Releases Seven-Point Plan to Unleash Canada’s Energy Potential

Todayville

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

CIA mind control never ended – it evolved and went mainstream

Daily Caller / 10 hours ago

Daily Caller EXCLUSIVE: Trump’s Broad Ban On Risky Gain-Of-Function Research Nears Completion

Canadian Energy Centre / 10 hours ago

First Nations in Manitoba pushing for LNG exports from Hudson’s Bay

Canadian Energy Centre

First Nations in Manitoba pushing for LNG exports from Hudson’s Bay

Published on April 18, 2025

Todayville

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Will Gibson

NeeStaNan project would use port location selected by Canadian government more than 100 years ago

Building a port on Hudson’s Bay to ship natural resources harvested across Western Canada to the world has been a long-held dream of Canadian politicians, starting with Sir Wilfred Laurier.

Since 1931, a small deepwater port has operated at Churchill, Manitoba, primarily shipping grain but more recently expanding handling of critical minerals and fertilizers.

A group of 11 First Nations in Manitoba plans to build an additional industrial terminal nearby at Port Nelson to ship liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe and potash to Brazil.

Courtesy NeeStaNan

Robyn Lore, a director with project backer NeeStaNan, which is Cree for “all of us,” said it makes more sense to ship Canadian LNG to Europe from an Arctic port than it does to send Canadian natural gas all the way to the U.S. Gulf Coast to be exported as LNG to the same place – which is happening today.

“There is absolutely a business case for sending our LNG directly to European markets rather than sending our natural gas down to the Gulf Coast and having them liquefy it and ship it over,” Lore said. “It’s in Canada’s interest to do this.”

Over 100 years ago, the Port Nelson location at the south end of Hudson’s Bay on the Nelson River was the first to be considered for a Canadian Arctic port.

In 1912, a Port Nelson project was selected to proceed rather than a port at Churchill, about 280 kilometres north.

The Port Nelson site was earmarked by federal government engineers as the most cost-effective location for a terminal to ship Canadian resources overseas.

Construction started but was marred by building challenges due to violent winter storms that beached supply ships and badly damaged the dredge used to deepen the waters around the port.

By 1918, the project was abandoned.

In the 1920s, Prime Minister William Lyon MacKenzie King chose Churchill as the new location for a port on Hudson’s Bay, where it was built and continues to operate today between late July and early November when it is not iced in.

Lore sees using modern technology at Port Nelson including dredging or extending a floating wharf to overcome the challenges that stopped the project from proceeding more than a century ago.

Port Nelson, Manitoba in 1918. Photo courtesy NeeStaNan

He said natural gas could travel to the terminal through a 1,000-kilometre spur line off TC Energy’s Canadian Mainline by using Manitoba Hydro’s existing right of way.

A second option proposes shipping natural gas through Pembina Pipeline’s Alliance system to Regina, where it could be liquefied and shipped by rail to Port Nelson.

The original rail bed to Port Nelson still exists, and about 150 kilometers of track would have to be laid to reach the proposed site, Lore said.

“Our vision is for a rail line that can handle 150-car trains with loads of 120 tonnes per car running at 80 kilometers per hour. That’s doable on the line from Amery to Port Nelson. It makes the economics work for shippers,” said Lore.

Port Nelson could be used around the year because saltwater ice is easier to break through using modern icebreakers than freshwater ice that impacts Churchill between November and May.

Lore, however, is quick to quell the notion NeeStaNan is competing against the existing port.

“We want our project to proceed on its merits and collaborate with other ports for greater efficiency,” he said.

“It makes sense for Manitoba, and it makes sense for Canada, even more than it did for Laurier more than 100 years ago.”

2025 Federal Election

Allegations of ethical misconduct by the Prime Minister and Government of Canada during the current federal election campaign

Published on April 17, 2025

Todayville

Preston Manning

A letter to the Ethics Commissioner sent April 9th, 2025

On April 4, 2025, during the current federal election period, in which employees of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) report on all aspects of the election, the unelected Prime Minister, without any consultation with or authorization by parliament but apparently with the concurrence of the Minister of Heritage, promised an increase of $150 million in the budget of the CBC on top of its $1.38 billion budget for the current fiscal year.

The CBC consistently and for obvious reasons tends to share the ideological orientation of the governing Liberal Party and its political allies, and supports many of their policy positions. It tends to ignore or oppose those of the Conservative Official Opposition which proposes dismantling the CBC.

The unelected Liberal Prime Minister promising a $150 million bonus to the CBC in the middle of an election campaign would thus strike any objective observer as unethical, damaging to public confidence in our democratic institutions, and deserving of investigation and commentary by your office.

In particular, it is respectfully requested that you address the following questions:

1. Has the Prime Minister acted unethically by promising the state owned broadcasting corporation, sympathetic to the governing party, a $150 million increase in its budget, during a federal election campaign?

2. Is the promise of a $150 million increase in the budget of the CBC, during an election period in which the CBC is expected to give objective coverage to the campaign, in effect a defacto bribe and contrary to the spirit and the letter of the Conflict of Interest Code and Act?

In addition, on April 7, 2025, again during the current election period, the Prime Minister has announced that the federal government will distribute approximately $4 billion in carbon rebate payments directly to approximately 13 million Canadians, many of whom are eligible voters, and will do so prior to the election day of April 28.

This naturally raises the following questions which it is again respectfully requested that you address:

3. Has the Prime Minister and the federal government acted unethically by authorizing the distribution, prior to election day, of almost $4 billion in rebate payments to approximately 13 million Canadians, many of whom are voters, and doing so with the suspected intent of winning the support of those voters?

4. Is the promise and delivery, prior to election day, of almost $4 billion in rebate payments to approximately 13 million Canadians, many of whom are voters, in effect a defacto attempt to bribe those voters with their own money, and contrary to the spirit and the letter of the Conflict of Interest Code and Act?

To assist in the consideration of these allegations, suppose the UN were to ask Canada to supervise a national election in a third world country where democracy is frail and elections subject to abuse by those in authority. Suppose further that the unelected president of that country, during the election campaign period, endeavored to secure:

· The support of the state broadcasting corporation by promising it a huge increase in its budget, and,

· The support of millions of voters by ensuring that they received a generous personal payment from his government just prior to election day.

In such a situation, would not the Canadian monitoring authority be obliged to strongly censure such behaviors and report to the UN that such behavior calls into question the democratic legitimacy of the election subjected to such abuses?

If we as Canadians would consider such political behaviors anti-democratic and unacceptable if practiced in a foreign country, ought we not to come to the same conclusion even more quickly and certainly when they are regrettably practiced in our own?

Please respond to questions 1-4 above prior to April 25, 2025 and please ensure that your responses are made public prior to that date.

Thanking you for your service and your commitment to safeguarding public confidence in Canada’s democratic institutions and processes.

Your sincerely,

Preston Manning PC CC AOE