Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act (S.C. 2000, c. 24) [Link]
Testimony
TWELVE Years of Context | FOUR Years of Abuse | ONE Scandal
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: Toward an Understanding of Cognitive Liberty Crimes
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.
Fast-forwarding to February 2021, and in accordance with the detailed observations in UN Resolution A/HRC/57/61 (here), and germane to articles published in recent years in TIME Magazine (here), the Harvard Gazette (here), and other publications (ie., here), I infer to be the victim of a Cognitive Liberty crime. I make this inference under the guidance of the test in Sherman Estate v. Donovan, 2021 SCC 25 at paragraphs 97-98, in relying on a comprehensive dataset that precludes the reasonable consideration of less-likely explanations.
The Definition & Context of Cognitive Liberty
With respect to an adequate definition, Neuroethicist Dr. Nina Farahany describes it as follows in the aforementioned Harvard Gazette article;
“Cognitive liberty is the right to self-determination over our brains and mental experiences, as a right to both access and use technologies, but also a right to be free from interference with our mental privacy and freedom of thought,” said Farahany. [...] Corporations and governments are already hacking into people’s brains. [...] There is a very Orwellian vision of this future that’s ahead of us if we don’t make some radical changes now. I am optimistic in this moment that those kinds of radical changes are possible, and that we have the political will and the collective consciousness to do so. But if we don’t make those choices, it won’t be good.”
UN General Assembly Resolution A/HRC/57/61 was adopted by the Human Rights Council in response to A/HRC/RES/51/3, which recognized at its first page the severe repercussions Cognitive Liberty crimes pose, in "connecting the human brain directly to digital networks through devices and procedures, among other things, to access, monitor, and manipulate the neural system of the person" (here). Per A/HRC/57/61 at paragraph 5;
“Neurotechnologies are unique and socially disruptive because they generally: (a) enable the exposition of cognitive processes; (b) enable the direct alteration of a person’s mental processes and thoughts; (c) bypass the individual’s conscious control or awareness; (d) enable non-consensual external access to thoughts, emotions and mental states; (e) are nurtured by “neurodata”, which are needed for their own functioning, calibration and optimization; and (f) collect, analyse and process large personal datasets of a highly sensitive nature.”
Dr. Yuval Noah Harari writes at paragraph 306 in Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow (here);
"At the beginning of the third millennium, liberalism is threatened not by the philosophical idea that ‘there are no free individuals’ but rather by concrete technologies. We are about to face a flood of extremely useful devices, tools and structures that make no allowance for the free will of individual humans. Can democracy, the free market and human rights survive this flood?"
Finally, Dr. Klaus-Gerd Giesen writes in Transhumanism as the Dominant Ideology of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (here);
“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.”
Dr. Giesen 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.” [...] There is every reason to fear that the world will launch into the fourth industrial revolution without too much debate over what is waiting in the wings: the global political project that is transhumanism. Today, it is as if the metamorphosis, via the “NBIC Great Convergence,” to a posthuman being, technologically enhanced and fully integrated with the machine, were already written in stone.”
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.”
The Appropriate Test Criteria
Although novel in the opinion of most, the UN Resolution and recent publications like those aforementioned preclude a summary preemptive dismissal of cognitive liberty crime as fanciful, similar to the fact that one is unable to dismiss credible allegations of tax fraud, without actually looking at the records. The aforementioned test in Sherman Estate v. Donovan, 2021 SCC 25 at paragraphs 97-98 requires that inferences involving harm need not be shown to be likely, but must be more than negligible, fanciful, or speculative. The text reads;
“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 licence 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) [...] Where the feared harm is particularly serious, the probability that this harm materialize need not be shown to be likely, but must still be more than negligible, fanciful or speculative.”
Likewise per R. v. Loewen, 2010 ABCA 255 at paragraph 32 concerning the police test for reasonable grounds; a subject need only demonstrate that an allegation is objectively reasonable to believe; not that it is probable or certain. As such, in the absence of hard scientific evidence, one must rely on the guidance of the same legal tests, in concert with a grounding in the factual evidence concerning contextual background and circumstances. As a preliminary consideration, the otherwise right-minded victims of a cognitive liberty crime can be approached in exploring subject baseline behaviors as measured against extreme outliers and related events.
Compelling Behavioral Outliers
In February 2021, I was compelled to call an ambulance during a blizzard, in response to an anomalous health incident that could not be reasonably attributed to a natural cause. I was at home at the time. The localized pain endured at the same intensity for roughly 90 minutes before I called 911. I received an injection of pain medication in the ambulance on the way to the ER. The Doctors were at a loss for an explanation as to the cause. I consider this event noteworthy of mention insofar as it bore the hallmarks of an electronic attack, for lack of a better term (see commentary on the Havana Syndrome here).
In July 2021, as a Nova Scotia resident, I hired a British Columbia law firm to act on my behalf in the shareholder dispute detailed (here) in brief, and in an expanded format at the Litigation page (here), concerning a Federally-sponsored Commercial and Government Entity ("CAGE"). Irrespective of the characteristics that had unfolded concerning the CAGE, the outlier resides in the fact that I had listed my newly-renovated home for sale, packed my bags, and relocated to BC in further support of the same lawsuit, without any objectively reasonable explanation. I am not at all given to disproportionate extremes such as these, which were entirely unnecessary and without merit in view of the circumstances at that juncture. Those familiar with me would suggest I am often loath to drive across town to attend a function I enjoy, let alone drive across the country to pursue a legal matter that was being handled by a law firm in the same area, and list my dream home for sale on MLS. Similarly, as my lifelong BIO would suggest, I am not easily shaken by new and upsetting circumstances. Finally, I had adopted a cautious approach in considering legal action against the CAGE for over ten months as a shareholder, and only after the evidence was found to be insurmountable, in collaboration with counsel (here).
With respect to further context, I had worked for years to develop my personal real estate, which was at that time fully paid for and renovated. I had two motorcycles in the garage, a specialty sports car in the driveway, an exotic pet, all paid-for, and a six-figure bank account. That required a lot of work to achieve, and I did it through discipline and smart choices over the span of several of years. Because the law firm I retained in BC could have handled the matter while I remained in Nova Scotia, there was no merit nor value in the excursion, or the home sale. On arrival in BC in late July 2021, I remained in a Condo from August through October while coordinating with the law firm on the shareholder dispute. My home sold in late September that year. Following the close of the settlement in October 2021, I drove back to Nova Scotia from British Columbia by car to reside with a family member.
Two weeks following my return to Nova Scotia, during the first week of November 2021, I found myself once again driving to British Columbia. I had no distinct plan in mind; only that I was under the impression that the shareholder matter remained unresolved, and that I had to return to BC again in person to address it. Having said that, I made no plans nor preparations to visit the court. I arrived in Surrey, BC on November 10th, 2021 to a condo I had rented through Craigslist. The disruptive events described in the Zersetzung, Guide, and Q/A pages began within two weeks after the move. To reiterate, I signed a one-year lease without a vision, without employment, and drove across Canada again after emerging from a perilous shareholder dispute. That is about as far removed from my typical decision-making as ice is to fire. These actions are just as absurd as the adjudicative concurrence detailed in the related civil proceedings, and the actions taken by various public servants in the scandal (see Blog).
I submit I would not have sold my home nor embarked on two cross-country excursions were my cognitive liberty intact. Likewise, the law firm I had hired was expected to manage the legal matter on my behalf, which had formally begun in August 2021. Prior to the onset of these events, I had lived quietly my entire life and had focused on the career I had nurtured through my skill-set in enterprise sales. I have no criminal record, I was never in debt, and I have avoided bad decisions that lead to destructive outcomes. I am careful by nature, and I avoid conflict where possible. I have three degrees, including a postgraduate liberal arts degree, and am a bit of a homebody. A reckless and/or self-destructive person would have had to have won the lottery to achieve what I did though hard work, patience, and discipline over many years. By way of my BIO alone, investigators will recognize that the scenario I described just does not add up. Click the button below to view the travel records.
A Comprehensive Evidentiary Corpus
Although these events are extraordinary, they alone may not suffice to adequately ascertain the existence of a clandestine and harmful state-sponsored project interest. However, the remainder of the materials on this website, concerning a totality of events that have transpired since 2021 and their characteristics, certainly satisfy the criteria in the Sherman Estate test within the same contextual ecosystem. R. v. Kahsai, 2023 SCC 20 at paragraph 67, citing R. v. Wolkins, 2005 NSCA 2, 229 N.S.R. (2nd) 222, at para. 89, held that scandals are predominantly ascertained by way of appearance, as deduced by reasonable and objective persons having insight into their context. In relying on the same epistemology of coherence, it appears clear that actors in the Canadian Public Sector are alleged to be involved in human experimentation in the sphere of cognitive liberty, in partnership with influential private sector commercial interests. Crimes such as this, notwithstanding their damaging effects, are actionable under the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act (S.C. 2000, c. 24) [Link].
Cognitive Liberty Crimes are Easy to Execute for Sophisticated Actors
In July 2025 I began using machine-learning models as audit tools concerning the evidence in the scandal, and the results have corroborated what I had been saying since inception. You will note AI outputs suffused throughout the site, and at the dedicated AI pages (here & here). I asked ChatGPT-5 PRO about technical mechanisms concerning cognitive liberty crime as applicable to this matter. The output was shut down quickly, though I have added non-technical outputs to the 4IR Portal (here). I was able to snag this capture before it was removed seconds later. The bottom line is that cognitive liberty crimes are easy to execute for the right actors, at a presumably low expenditure. As helpful as the following output is, in my opinion as based on my experiences, I am beset by something newer and more sophisticated. It should also be noted that GPT-5's training cut-off was June 2024, and that it only has access to open source data, and any inputs from the end user.
Policy Horizons Canada Mirrors The Engagement Below [Here]
Proximate Historical Events
Sophisticated Criminal Mischief
Shortly after my second relocation to BC, 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. It became evident that my devices were hacked (laptop and phone), and I had begun experiencing direct cyber attacks, one of which included video footage of the interior of my Surrey, BC condo residence, alongside a distinct 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 (see Guide page; Sheridan et al., 2020; and BAE Systems Detica and London Metropolitan University, 2012).
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. An example of this is pictured further down this page. 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 present, 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 (here). 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, and refused to obtain CCTV footage from the building I was domiciled in. The criminal harassment and mischief continued unabated.
In mid-January 2022, I experienced an "electronic attack" through my smartphone while viewing content delivered through the aforementioned criminal cohort. I experienced an acute flash that elicited a physical sensation in my eyes that resembled a non-contact tonometry test that one might experience during a routine visit to an optometrist (ie., the "air puff test"). That happened only once, and I am unable to identify any analogues. A subsequent check-up revealed anomalies in my retina that were not present in any previous records.
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. It is currently under an unconstitutional blanket sealing order (here). 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 (here). Incidentally, and as likewise detailed in that link, my previous counsel had jeopardized the shareholder dispute through an act of gross negligence, by filing confidential shareholder records at the Vancouver public court registry without applying for a sealing order; a palpable mistake trained lawyers are not expected to make, and one that opened the door to a bad-faith notice of shareholder default one week after a consensual sealing order remedy was entered (here).
On February 16th, 2022, following a series of home invasions and another remote (PC) hijack event threatening imminent abduction, I evacuated my rented condo residence that same evening, and packed whatever belongings I could fit into my car. I traveled across Canada by car in mid-February 2022 to arrive in Nova Scotia, where I currently reside with a relative at the time of this update. 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. I could hear persons in the adjacent condo describing a real-time PC hijack as it was taking place, shouting and hollering loudly. Again, the RCMP had refused to obtain CCTV video footage upon being asked, as is described in the apology letter of RCMP Superintendent Bill Parmar shown. The RCMP continues to preclude support, despite applicable standards, and the CRCC turned a blind eye. The incriminating RCMP and CRCC letter correspondence and reports are cited (here).
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, and new CIMIC activities had began. 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. It may or may not be relevant (but likely is) that the CAGE lead counsel is a uniformed legal advisor to the CAF.
A Post-Constitutional (Weaponized) Court Experience
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. A truncated version is posted (here). 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. Paragraph 10 of the CAGE Affidavit states the entire amount was billed to the CAGE (here).
The same 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. Similarly, an assumption must be made that the perpetrators had received some measure of assurance that a crime such as this would go unpunished, by a person or entity capable of providing that assurance. By comparison, customary tariffs for hearings under an hour in duration are set at $500 per hearing inclusive of prep.
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. 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. Preemptive rejections of fiduciary legal support had continued. 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. An obvious and persistent appearance of injustice (R. v Wolkins, 2005 NSCA 2 at paragraph 89) is supported by the library of caselaw I had compiled (here).
Biometric Data & the Dark Web
Over the course to the past three years, the crimes in the Guide page have continued unabated. The modality of certain crimes require modalities of real-time, or near-real-time surveillance. Key insights derived from this were likewise leveraged in the legal proceedings concerning the CAGE (here). As is detailed in the aforementioned UN Resolution, remote neuromodulation applications through wave frequencies and light have been available for some time. Brainwaves can be tracked without implants, and nanoscale graphene quantum dots ("GQD") can bypass the blood brain barrier, and are undetectable via MRI scan. 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. Remote cognitive liberty hacks are easy for sophisticated actors, and can leverage readily available tools such as smartphones. 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. Microsoft's patent (here) enables bitcoin and other forms of cryptocurrency to be mined using biometric data. The patent leverages nanotech delivered via vaccine, which "turns people into antennas or transmitters" (here). A typical bitcoin mining rig consumes 1000 watts of power. The human brain requires 12 watts by comparison, without an electric bill. Likewise, our fractional-reserve monetary system will collapse in due course, and perhaps in the not so distant future. Policy Horizons Canada has described BioDigital Convergence with a terrifying ease (here). The 4IR Portal details copious findings concerning nanotech and the existence of graphene oxide in Covid-19 vaccines (here). Dr. Klaus-Gerd Geissen had recently presented a research paper concerning overarching private and public-sector interests in BioDigital convergence (here). As Dr. Farahany had indicated, it is easy for big tech and bad state actors to hack Citizens, and some would argue there is ample reason for doing so. The Fourth Industrial Revolution ("4IR") is the biggest event on humanity's doorstep that you may not have heard of.
Consistently Denied Help by Police
Law enforcement agencies, whose task it is to protect citizens and uphold their rights as protected by the Charter in Canada, have consistently acted in a way antithetical to their function. All manner of law enforcement agencies contacted have made concerted attempts to dismiss and/or discredit my requests for help, to the extent that false reports were filed. This data point is extremely compelling. Despite an obvious appearance of injustice, I have been careful in ensuring the standards I rely on concerning police response align with the standard legal tests listed (here).
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, mindful of the fact that I had been consistently denied recourse in other venues, I had executed a covert recording of this same meeting, 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. The applicable records concerning my engagement with HRP are found (here). The obstruction is easy to see.
A Family Connection
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. Suffice it to say, I am contending with persons and entities of influence. A project interest is accompanied by peripheral interests that seek to capitalize on the same. Regardless of modality, these are criminal interests.
"Presents"
Police regulators refused to address these matters, and likewise, the scandal originating at the BCSC remained unchecked in appellate venues. It was likewise precluded from docket entry at the SCC despite the applicable test criteria (R. v. C.P., 2021 SCC 19 at paragraph 137). Because a single federally-sponsored CEO cannot be expected to shape the disposition and conduct of five courts and three police agencies, relevant regulatory bodies, and further, retain the support of over fifty (50) PsyOp contractors over a three-year period, an inexorable inference of third-party tampering is occasioned. Likewise, a robust third-party project interest is required 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, judging by the findings in Sheridan et al., 2020.
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”).
Visual Evidence & Precedents You Can't Ignore [See Guide]
As above per the embellished HRP report that was provided to EHS.
Full details at the HRP Page (Here).
May 13, 2023 Live Audio Recording Hfx QE II
_1.png)
Could it be That State-Sponsored Scandals no Longer Happen..? [See Whistleblowers]
The Scandal Remains Sealed in All Court Files [Click the BLOG]
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
Value(s): Building a Better World for All [Link] Prime Minister Mark Carney, 2021, ISBN 0008485240, P. 36, 95, 494
[36] “Moral sentiments are not inherent. To use the modern terminology of Richard Dawkins, they are social memes that are learned, imitated and passed on. Like genetic memes, they can mutate, in behavioural cascades and tipping points."
[95] “Magna Carta was a desperate and probably disingenuous attempt at a peace treaty that failed almost immediately. Brokered by the Church, and issued by King John in June 1215, the Charter sought to placate the disgruntled barons. [...] If Magna Carta was such a product of its time, how did it become to be so venerated? And once we cut through the legend, what is its significance for economic governance today?"
[494] "The world is being reset. Now we are on the cusp of what some have called a Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR). Applications of artificial intelligence are spreading due to advances in robotics, nanotechnology and quantum computing. Our economies are reorganising into distributed peer-to-peer connections across powerful networks – revolutionizing how we consume, work and communicate. Solidarity will determine the success of the 4IR, where the need for new institutions that live the value of solidarity is the greatest.”
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 contents accessible through the Blog contribute to a comprehensive thesis of state interference, in partnership with a robust project interest. The bulk of evidence concerning shareholder fraud, collusion, and perjury is contained in the November 2023 Affidavit, and in the blog articles 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, and are also contained in the blog articles. A number of the visuals, especially those on the Guide page, demonstrate the breadth of the scandal, and are likewise suffused with esoteric themes. By and large, 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. It demonstrates a post-democratic, or post-constitutional Canada (see Dr. Colin Crouch, Post-Democracy here). The Politics page approaches this phenomenon from multiple angles, with respect to project-centric and systemic capacities.
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 Giesen,'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 Giesen 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 Giesen 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
