Though we see through a glass darkly, there are some hints as to what Mr. Martin has planned for Canada. Here in Canada, we have a few notables who are Bilderbergers or have attended their meetings. Jean Chretien (Prime Minister) Ralph Klein (Premier of Alberta), Preston Manning (Former Leader of the Opposition), Mark Steyn (National Post), Conrad Black (National Post), Andrew Coyne (National Post) Heather Reisman (Chapters-Indigo books). Of immediate interest is the Bilderberg membership/involvement of Paul Martin (Liberal candidate for PM, and former Finance Minister) as well as Mr. Stephen Harper (Current Leader of the Opposition).
Recently, Mr. Stephen Harper attended the Bilderberg conference at the Trianon hotel in Versailles, France, over our "May Long" weekend. The question we should be asking is, if the Bilderbergers are made up of the top 130 Western European and North American governing (public and private/corporate) elite, why would they choose the Leader of the Opposition over the Prime Minister, or even Mr. Martin himself?I have contacted Mr. Harper about his attendance, and he stated that he attended the conference in the capacity of a private person. Mr. Harper was both candid and open in his response to my inquiry. He stated that issues pertaining to global policy were discussed, but no plan of action was defined, and no conclusions reached. Furthermore, he was ''honored'' to have been invited (Which is what he told the Toronto Sun). After receiving correspondence back from Maja Banck-Polderman, the Executive Secretary of the Bilderberg meetings, I have come to understand that the Bilderbergers of the home country pay for the hotel, but the individuals themselves pick up the tab for a flight.If you ''google'' the two words "harper bilderberg" you will find what I have posted on the various Indymedia websites across Canada, in hopes of raising some awareness about the Bilderbergers and Canada. For example: http://maritimes.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=5896 The only other news source to cover this was Edmonton''s See Magazine ( http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/news/2003/06/7035.php )Why do the Bilderbergers care about Mr. Harper? I have two hypotheses:1) Mr. Harper''s stance on the war on terror falls roughly in line with the hawkish camp of the Bilderberg, whom I''m sure Mr. Black falls into, and this year''s attendance is more or less Harper''s ''reward''. Mr. Chretien''s stance, on the other hand, falls inline with the more dovish European camp of the Bilderberg. (For more on this, see Pepe Escobar''s article: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EE22Ak03.html ). If Chretien would have been too much of an embarrassment, it makes sense that Harper represents the pro-war faction associated with North America. Mr. Black is simply giving Harper a glance at what he could attain if he toes the line correctly.2) Mr. Harper is just a backup plan, or future plan in the odd chance of an upcoming Post-Martin Era, assuming that there is a merge between the PC and CA parties, or that Martin''s plans create a backlash in Ontario, or that Mr. Martin gets too old.Martin seems to have something up his sleeve concerning his plans as Prime Minister, and perhaps Manley has dropped out to try his hand at a later date. Mr. Martin appears to be a master of dialectical planning. He behaves as though he understands two things: Pearson''s federal policy process (Martin used to work for him) and the historical tendency for people to assign blame to the government of local jurisdiction for federal transfer cuts.Pearson''s process was to find a program such as healthcare, declare it a national issue and commit to funding half the efforts. Over time, transfers were cut to these programs, while new program frontiers were being opened in other areas. The provinces shouldered more of the fiscal responsibility while the Federal government was able to determine standards and conditions, creating one aspect of a ''fiscal imbalance''. (over half of the federal cuts were borne by 12% of expeditures – transfers to the provinces).When the provinces received cuts in transfers, they did not absorb the shocks, but transferred these to municipalities, who have the greatest role in Canadian''s lives. The 1995 Federal Budget cuts were felt most by cities in Canada. Martin has now come full circle to direct his party and Canadians to solve the very issue he helped create ( http://www.paulmartintimes.ca/where-paul-stands/stories_e.asp?id=567 ) Part of the core of Martin''s platform is resolving the urban issues he helped create, which would imply that he knows the solution.Since the Bilderberg meeting in May, there have some very interesting developments.A Financial Post article from July 30th has detailed that Maurice Strong is moving closer to Martin (literally), and the two are connected vis-a-vis their involvement with a UN joint-chair commission. Lorne Gunter, writer for the Edmonton Journal detailed this relationship (It is posted on this organization''s website http://www.fathersforlife.org/articles/gunter/Strong_Martin_1.htm )Regardless of Mr. Gunter''s Opinions, why is Mr. Strong moving to Ottawa, as the National Post article details? Likely, it is to assist on the UN commission, but will Mr. Strong''s pull in the UN aid Martin somehow?Another noteworthy announcement is MP Dennis Mill''s proposal to Bring the UN to Toronto ( http://www.herald.ns.ca/stories/2003/08/07/fCanada114.raw.html )if he is re-elected.Is this what''s up Martin''s sleeve? Is he going to do something with or to the UN to bring it to Canada?Then, I find this article: http://www.quebecoislibre.org/030118-6.htmNote that Paul Martin''s Father attended the 1967 Bilderberg conference (according to Maddock). If this is true, then Martin has Bilderberg in his Blood.One excerpt states: "Thus it was not very surprising to read the speech by the late Paul Martin Sr''s son at the University of Toronto convocation address on Tuesday 17 December 2002. The younger Mr Martin, heir apparent to the Chrétien legacy of governmental incompetence, believes that Canada is the only country on the planet able to shape the future of global government. Many may have found this surprising since we don''t seem to be doing all that well when it comes to governing ourselves as a nation-state, a form of government which Mr Martin seems to believe is no longer adequate in a globalized world. He admits that the USA is not interested in a new model of global governance, the Europeans are too busy building Europe, the countries of the Far East are too busy with old rivalries and Latin America is mired "deep in economic problems" and "poverty and misery." Hence his view that Canada is the one country with the capacity to understand the direction in which the world must go. MrMartin believes that immigration in Europe and the US has not changed their "core identities" whereas in Canada the immigrants "are in the process of changing and enriching fundamentally" Canada''s identity.These are just glimpses into what seems to be on the horizon. Maddock argues that Martin and his kind are "Tranzis" or transnational progressives. Canada is in a unique position to host the UN - it is ethnically diverse (Toronto is 40% non-native born Canadians. Moving the UN to Canada would not be a problem for Canadian values. The UN is not popular in the US because it requires that Americans re-define their value system of individualism (Maddock).Just last night, CBC Rough Cuts aired a re-run of its amazing documentary “Crash-Course Alberta� which details the aspects of Western Alienation as experienced in Alberta stemming mainly from the National Energy Program under Trudeau. The documentary tapped into the deep-seated anger in Alberta towards this program, and how another remake could trigger an uprise of separatist sentiments in Alberta which could devastate or weaken Confederation.For years, the elite plan seemed to have been to screw up the east-west patterns of trade upon which our transfer mechanisms rested by means of NAFTA and get Quebec to separate, but now it is focusing on other resource-rich provinces. Whatever Strong has planned, rest assured it will resemble a redistributive mechanism like the NEP. Strong is an anti-capitalist – a silver-spoon socialist – or whatever label Albertans attach to him. While some readers of indymedia news sources would applaud the dawning of a post-capitalist era in Canada, what is planned could be the destruction of our economy under the guise of caring for “Gaia�. Remember that Strong wants his Earth Charter to replace the Ten Commandments.by Harper-Martin FanSource: http://vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2003/08/63985.php