By Matthew Ehret-Kump

While Canadian foreign policy has always followed the British lead, there have been brief instances of resistance. The cases of the collaboration with the USA against the British and French during the Suez crisis, the sanctioning of Apartheid South Africa in the 1970s, and Canada’s non-participation in the precursor of the British Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Iraq War in 2002 spring immediately to mind. However, under Prime Minister Stephen Harper who took power in 2006 and now leads a majority government with those near unchallenged powers enjoyed with such majorities, the unquestioned obedience to British endgame geopolitics has never been so strong.

Though Canada’s cooperation in the defence and cultivation of the Heroin production of Afghanistan’s Helmand province had already been underway from the beginning of the Afghan war, this overt military policy became significantly more aggressive with the Arab Spring in 2011. It was at this time that Canada committed its military to provide 10% of the air support and logistics during the UK-France-USA led Regime Change program that illegally killed Muamar Qadaffi under the umbrella of NATO. In hindsight, it was discovered that the greatest atrocities of this war were not to have been committed by the disposed head of state, but rather, by those moralizing forces who conducted the “humanitarian intervention”, armed radical Islamists and killed 70 000 innocent Libyan civilians. The official legal precedent for this war was the anti-nation state doctrine of R2P.

This program was continued with expelling Syrian diplomats and shutting down the Syrian embassy in March 2012, merely weeks after the Annan Peace Plan was begun (and later sabotaged), to the effect that all illusions of Canadian peacemaking and diplomacy was exposed to be an illusion. Before Canada, the only nation to shut down Syrian diplomatic missions was the UK. This aggressive policy was repeated with Canada’s shutdown of the Iranian embassy in early September 2012 modelled again after the British precedent.

Since Canada’s actions so obediently followed British geopolitical doctrine from 2006-2012, an overt branding as British property has been called for.

The Re-Branding of Canada

In April 2011, the British makeover officially began with the re-naming of the Canadian military. This policy saw Harper pass a law which re-inserted the “Royal” into all branches of the Canadian Military. Controversy briefly erupted as Constitutional Lawyers and Defence Specialists pointed out that Section 15 of the British North American Act of 1867 sites that the command of the Canadian military is not vested in Parliament, but rather in the Crown. This mandate was re-affirmed with Section 14 of the National Defence Act of 1985 with the words: “The Canadian Forces are the armed forces of Her Majesty raised by Canada and consist of one Service called the Canadian Armed Forces.”University of Ottawa Defence specialist Philippe Lagasse argued during this time that while the military is answerable to the Parliament, it is accountable and obedient only to ministers of the Crown. Any lingering denial of this control of the Canadian Military by Ministers of the crown was highly shaken.

This was followed immediately by Harper’s renaming the main wall in the Canadian Foreign Office Head Quarters the “Sovereign Wall”, deriving its name from the gigantic mural sized portrait of Queen Elisabeth. Not only was this unsightly portrait forced into public display in one Ottawa building, but an accompanying order was passed forcing portraits of the Queen to be mounted upon the walls of every Canadian embassy in the world. While many onlookers watched in bewilderment, the fanatic anglophile could still be heard shouting “but the Monarchy is only a symbol! The British Empire carries no real power!”

Embassies Unite

As of September 23 2012, many Canadian embassies the world over will no longer simply have Canadian flags hanging from their flag poles, but rather the Canadian  ambassadors and their respective staff within and the Canadian Maple leaf flag without will now be joined with British ambassadors and the Union Jack. Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the UK and Canada (John Baird and William Hague) have officially announced the melding of the embassies of both nations! Ostensibly, this measure is being undertaken to save money, but the true motive for such overt consolidation of the British Empire’s possessions can only be addressed if one let go of all popular illusions regarding the true workings of the shadow empire maintained by the London Centered oligarchy. This process is made the more dangerous as the Empire is not unawareness of the demise of its own monetary system.

During the context of the collapse of the British run world monetary system, these policies are intended to do nothing less then set fire to the entire African and Middle Eastern worlds, by fuelling what Samuel P Huntington dubbed the “Clash of Civilizations” doctrine, to the point of risking thermonuclear warfare with Russia and China.

The Creation of an Asian Junkie

In this geopolitical nightmare, a web has been constructed. Canada’s assigned role within this web, is to do nothing less than catalyze conflict by undiplomatic moralizing and outright lying, militarily supporting British conflicts, all the while serving as bait to an increasingly resource hungry China which needs immediate input of minerals, ores, gas and fuel for its pro-survival orientation. Any initiative which fragments those ties uniting Russia and China are of greatest value to the British geopolitical masters of Canadian foreign policy, and the unbeatably cheap resources to be found within the bountiful north provides just that.

Were China and Russia to recognize and act fully upon the principles of Hamiltonian Credit policies as outlined by Lyndon LaRouche, and released itself from any accommodations to British Monetary doctrine espoused by the World Trade Organization, then falling for such bait could be avoided, and no addiction upon Canadian resources could be developed, which would invariably be used to break the China-Russian “alliance for survival”.