With the arrival of convoys of Albertan yellow vest protesters in Ottawa demanding an end to the zero-growth ideology dominating the Federal policy landscape and manifesting itself in the “Green New Deal” being advanced across Europe and North America, it is fair to inquire why Canada and other nations of the Trans-Atlantic abandoned a policy of industrial growth and progress that had once caused the greatest rates increase of living standards and population potential in human history. This trend towards de-industrialization not only destroyed the once full-spectrum national economies of the west but also crippled key industrial sectors which are so vital for national infrastructure creation. The current attacks on SNC Lavalin and the advanced energy sector are no exceptions to this trend.
Since the 1971 floating of the US dollar on the global markets, and the 1973 creation of the Petro dollar, the world has experienced a consistent collapse of productive manufacturing jobs, infrastructure investment, an long-term planning on the one hand, and a simultaneous increase of de-regulation, short term speculation, and low-wage retail jobs on the other. During this post 1971 process of decline, debt slavery became a norm both in developed countries and developing sector nations alike, while outsourcing caused the castration of national sovereignty and an ever greater reliance on “cheap labor” and “cheap resources” from abroad. The most concrete model of this collapse was unveiled to the world in 1996 by the late American statesman and economist Lyndon LaRouche, in what is known as the Triple Curve Collapse Function.
Some have called this collapse “a failure of globalization”. Executive Intelligence Review’s Latin American Desk Editor Dennis Small has repeatedly stated over many years that this characterization is false. Globalization should rather be seen as a complete success– in that when it is viewed from a top-down perspective, it becomes increasingly clear that the architects of this policy achieved exactly what they set out to do. That intention was to impose an artificial closed/zero-sum game paradigm upon a species whose distinguishing characteristic is its creative reason and the capacity for constant perfectibility both on the earth and ever more so beyond.
Introducing Maurice Strong
A primary figure in the oligarchy’s tool box of sociopathic agents who shaped this program for zero sum thinking over the years is a Canadian-born operative by the name of Maurice Strong. Despite having died in 2015, Strong’s life and legacy are worth revisiting as they provide the modern reader a powerful, albeit ugly insight into the methods and actions of the British-Deep State agenda that so mis-shaped world history through the latter half of the 20th century.
Having dealt in previous articles with Strong’s role as a recruit of Rockefeller assets in the 1950s, an oil baron, vice president of Power Corporation by 30, Liberal Party controller, Privy Councilor, and founder of Canada’s neo-colonial external aid policy towards Africa, we will focus here on the role Strong has played since 1968 in subverting the anti-entropic potential of Canada and the world at large. It was through this post-1968 role that Strong performed his most valued work for the genocidal agenda of his British masters, who seek to reduce the world population to a “carrying capacity” of less than a billion.
RIO and Global Governance
In 1992, Maurice Strong had been assigned to head the second Earth Summit (the first having been the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment also chaired by Strong). The Rio Summit had established a new era in the consolidation of NGOs and corporations under the genocidal green agenda of controlled starvation masquerading behind the dogma of “sustainability’. This doctrine was formalized with Agenda 21 and the Earth Charter, co-authored by Mikhail Gorbachev (pictured with Strong), Jim MacNeill and Strong during the 1990s. At the opening of the Rio Summit, Strong announced that industrialized countries had
“developed and benefited from the unsustainable patterns of production and consumption which have produced our present dilemma. It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class, involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing- are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns.”
In a 1992 essay entitled From Stockholm to Rio: A Journey Down a Generation, published by the UN Conference on Environment and Development, Strong wrote:
“The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred, principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. What is needed is recognition of the reality that in so many fields, and this is particularly true of environmental issues, it is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation-states, however powerful. The global community must be assured of environmental security.”
Two years earlier, Strong gave an interview wherein he described a “fiction book” he was fantasizing about writing which he described in the following manner:
”What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group’s conclusion is ‘no’. The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
When this statement is held up parallel to this man’s peculiar life, we quickly come to see that the barrier between reality and fiction is more than a little blurry.
The Destruction of Nuclear Power
It is vital to examine Strong’s role in crippling Canada’s potential to make use of nuclear power, one of the greatest beacons of hope mankind has ever had to break out of the current “fixed” boundaries to humanity’s development. Indeed, the controlled use of the atom, along with the necessary discovery of new universal principles associated with this endeavor, have always represented one of the greatest strategic threats to the oligarchic system, which depends on a closed system of fixed resources in order to both manage current populations and justify global governance under “objective” frameworks of logic. Fission and fusion processes exist on a level far beyond those fixed parameters that assume the earth’s “carrying capacity” is no greater than the 2 billion souls envisioned by today’s London-centered oligarchy. If mankind were to recognize his unique creative potential to continuously transcend his limitations by discovering and creating new resources, no empire could long exist. With Canada as the second nation to have civilian nuclear power, and a frontier science culture in physics and chemistry, the need to destroy this potential in the mind of the British Deep State of Canada was great indeed.
To get a better sense of the anti-nuclear role Strong has played in Canadian science policy, we must actually go back once again to Strong’s reign at the Department of External Aid in 1966.
Technological Apartheid for Africa
A key reason that Strong had been brought into Canada’s Civil Service to head up the External Aid office in 1966 was to sabotage the international efforts leading scientists and statesmen had achieved in making Canada an exporter of its original CANDU reactors. Since 1955, leading patriots within Atomic Energy Canada Ltd. (AECL) and the National Research Council, such as C.D. Howe and his collaborator C.W. Mackenzie, ensured that the export of advanced nuclear technology was made available to developing countries such as India and Pakistan. In Canada this policy was advanced vigorously by Prime Minister John Diefenbaker, who also saw atomic power as the key to world peace.
The banners under which this advanced technology transfer occurred were both the Columbo Plan and President Dwight Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace. This progressive approach to international development defined “external aid” not around IMF conditionalities, or simply money for its own sake, but rather as the transfer of the most advanced science and technology to poor countries with the explicit intention that all nations would attain true sovereignty. This is the model that China has adopted today under the Belt and Road Initiative.
When Strong got to work in External Aid, and later formed the Canadian International Development Agency, Canada’s relationship to “LDCs” (lesser developed countries) became reduced to advancing “appropriate technologies” under the framework of monetarism and a perverse form of systems analysis. After JFK’s assassination, a parallel operation was conducted in America’s USAid. No technology or advanced infrastructure policy necessary for the independence of former colonies were permitted under this precursor to what later became known as “sustainability” and “zero growth”. Under Strong’s influence, Canada’s role became perverted into inducing LDCs to become obedient to IMF/World Bank “conditionalities” and the reforms of their bureaucracies demanded by the OECD in order to receive money. Both in Canada and in developing countries, Strong was among the key agents who oversaw the implementation of the OECD’s strategy of “closed systems analysis” for national policy management.
Petrol and Pandas
In his role as President of Petro Canada (1976-78), Strong endorsed the national call to create a nuclear moratorium for Canada which had been carried out by the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility in 1977. This document not only demanded an immediate halt to the continuation of all reactors then under construction, but also made the sophistical argument that more jobs could be created if “ecologically friendly” energy sources and conservation methods were developed instead of nuclear and fossil fuels. Strange desires coming from an oil executive, but not so strange considering Strong’s 1978-1981 role as Vice-President of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), an organization founded by the British and Dutch monarchies as a Royal Dutch Shell initiative in 1963. Strong was Vice President during the same interval that WWF co-founder Prince Philip was its President.
In 1971, while still heading up the External Aid Department, Strong was a founding member of the 1001 Club, which was an elite international organization created by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands created to finance the emerging green agenda for world governance. The 1001 Club worked in tandem with Prince Bernhard’s other secretive club known as the “Bilderberg Group” which he founded in 1954. In this position, Strong helped to recruit 80 Canadian “initiates” to this elite society otherwise known as “Strong’s Kindergarten”, the most prominent being Lord Conrad Black, Barrick Gold’s Peter Munk (1927-2018) and Permindex’s late Sir Louis Mortimer Bloomfield (1906-1984). As documented elsewhere, the latter was discovered to be at the heart of the plot to assassinate President John F. Kennedy by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison.
Strong Decapitates Ontario Nuclear Energy
By 1992, Strong had completed his role heading the Rio Earth Summit in Brazil and had returned to his native land to attempt to finalize the dismantling of Canada’s nuclear program in his new assignment as President of Ontario Hydro, a position he held from 1992 to 1995 under the formal invitation of Bob Rae (pictured), then-NDP Premier of Ontario and brother of Power Corp.’s John Rae. Bob Rae later served as the leader of the Liberal Party from 2011-2013 in preparation for Justin Trudeau’s appointment to become the party’s new figurehead in April of 2013.
Strong was brought in to this position at the time that Ontario had the most ambitious nuclear program in North America and was proving to be a thorn in the side of the zero-growth agenda demanded by the British Empire. The completion of the massive Darlington system in Ontario had demonstrated what successful long-term science planning could accomplish, although the utility found itself running far over budget. The budgetary problems (which occurred during a deep recession in 1992) were used by Strong to “restructure” the provincial energy utility.
The “remedies” chosen by Strong to solve Ontario Hydro’s financial woes involved immediately canceling all new planned nuclear energy development, firing 8 of the 14 directors, and downsizing the utility by laying off 14,000 employees, many of whom were the most specialized and experienced nuclear technicians in Canada.
Before leaving his post in 1995 with the fall of Bob Rae’s government, Strong ensured that his work would continue with his replacement Jim MacNeill (pictured with Strong) who headed Ontario Hydro from 1994 to 1997. MacNeill was co-architect of both the Earth Charter and the genocidal Agenda 21 during the Rio Summit and a long time Deep State agent. Under MacNeill, Strong’s mandate to unnecessarily shut down eight reactors for refurbishment and one permanently was effected in 1997, while Ontario Hydro itself was broken up into three separate entities. With the irreparable loss of specialized manpower and skills, Strong and MacNeill left Ontario Hydro and AECL mortally wounded for years to come.
Surprising all observers, AECL and the Ontario utilities were able to remobilize their remaining forces to pull together the successful refurbishment of all reactors– the last of which came back online in October 2012. While Canada’s moratorium on nuclear power continued, with SNC Lavelin’s 2011 takeover, an approach for cooperation on international nuclear construction in partnership with China began in July 2014, much to Strong’s chagrin .
Strong’s Failed Attempt to Infiltrate China
For much of the 21st century, Strong’s talents were put to use in an attempt to subvert the aspirations of Asian development, and of a Eurasian alliance formed around the driving economic grand design of the emerging Belt and Road Initiative. Strong was deployed to Beijing University where he acted as Honorary Professor and Chairman of its Environmental Foundation and Chairman of the Advisory Board of the Institute for Research on Security and Sustainability for Northwest Asia.
In the face of the meltdown of the Trans-Atlantic economy, the Chinese have successfully resisted the Green New Deal agenda that demanded the submission of their national sovereignty to the “New World Order” of zero-growth and depopulation. In spite of this pressure, a powerful tradition of Confucianism and its commitment to progress has demonstrated its powerful influence in the various branches of the Chinese establishment, who see China’s only hope for survival located in its strategic partnership with Russia and long term mega projects to lift its people out of poverty and into the 22nd Century. This was made fully clear when China rejected the “special relationship” with Canada in December 2017.
Speaking of the importance of the Belt and Road Initiative which had combined with the Eurasian Economic Union and BRICS, President Xi Jinping (see featured image) stated in 2017:
“We should foster a new type of international relations featuring win-win cooperation; and we should forge partnerships of dialogue with no confrontation and of friendship rather than alliance. All countries should respect each other’s sovereignty, dignity and territorial integrity, each other’s development paths and social systems, and each other’s core interests and major concerns… In pursuing the Belt and Road Initiative, we will not resort to outdated geopolitical maneuvering. What we hope to achieve is a new model of win-win cooperation. We have no intention to form a small group detrimental to stability, what we hope to create is a big family of harmonious co-existence.”
The Belt and Road Initiative has arisen as a true opposition to the bipolar insanity of Western right wing militarism/monetarism on the one side, and left wing depopulation under “Green New Deals” on the other. Trillions of dollars of credit in great infrastructure projects across Eurasia, Africa and Latin America have resulted in the greatest burst of cultural optimism, productivity; and if the population and leadership of the West act with the proper passion and wisdom, there is a very good opportunity to rid humanity of the legacy of Maurice Strong.
 Even more surprising is that the key argument which the 1977 moratorium used to justify the cancellation of Canada’s nuclear builds was that nuclear waste was impossible to manage by any other means other than million year burial while the plutonium-238 by-product created by nuclear power could be used for weapons. With the SNC-Lavalin/China agreements a strategy for implementation of both the closing of the fuel cycle using recycled and reused fuel was unleashed on the one hand while the CANDU designs were now enabling the use of the more plentiful Thorium as an alternative to Uranium which creates no plutonium and thus no threat of weapons use.
Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our main websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … TLB