China’s Seeking to Buy, Bribe, Seduce, Lend and Capitalistically
Extort Its Way Domino-Style to Superpower Status
© 2010 Brad Kempo B.A. LL.B.
Barrister & Solicitor
The only main difference between what the Soviets attempted and the Beijing leadership with its complicit Canadian partners are trying now is the methodology of expansion. The former was militarily. The latter is seeking to exploit weaknesses and vulnerabilities in democracy and capitalism and proliferating stealth cognition technologies. The first approach to building an effective defensive posture undertaken by the coalition was spreading knowledge in a non-public manner – through the diplomatic back-channel to those who had everything to lose from the spread of totalitarian political and corporate cultures and had the power, wealth and influence to do something about the Chinada threat.
If diplomacy had worked the public would never have heard about the secret economic war declared by dozens of governments and assisted by some of the largest corporations on the planet. Proving this is no nominal circumstance is the fact that every attempt to compel capitulation to what international law demands failed* and that various kinds of solutions not working only emboldened the Chinada High Command to push forward with its nefarious and unlawful agenda.
* Persuasive to coercive diplomacy; constructing The NATO Alliance The Sequel and various reform & accountability initiatives in Canada
The Fiefdom treatise research project began in March 2004 after the Custodian returned from the United States, having voluntarily withdrawn his political asylum application when achieving his two primary objectives: (i) preventing foul play by those where were angry at him aggressively prosecuting the Federal Court lawsuit and (ii) delivering his human rights complaint to the Bush administration on American soil hoping to trigger an international incident. Having not begun the research he didn’t know what American intel had been tracking for over three decades and wasn’t at that time privy to the President et al. embarking on a course that thought diplomacy alone would work.
Between March and August he’d concluded trans-generational nepotism and patronage and the Liberal Party of Canada having governed for some three-quarters of the 20th century produced a non-transparent authoritarian paradigm of governance operating by a cleverly manufactured façade of democracy. When Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau took office in the late 1960s his cabinet and the country’s wealthiest entered into a secret alliance with Beijing; and by the end of the next decade the communists enjoyed joint governance status in violation of the constitution and the international law of sovereignty.
These historical circumstances were observed and in many different ways confirmed to be the antecedents and conditions for a militarization of Article 7 violating human experimentation.
Between August ’04 and May ’07 the research examined China with an electron microscope, seeking to understand in comprehensive depth what this former closed agrarian hydraulic society consisted of and what its long-term plans were having entered the international arena in the late 1980s as the Soviet empire was imploding. General research on the subject is compiled in Academic Discussion and Debate on the Global Hegemony Threat Posed by China in the 21st Century (and Index).
It became undeniable that the swift rise to becoming a superpower-in-the-making was problematic because the Beijing leadership appeared to harbor a medieval political culture – neighbors and the world are there to be conquered; their populations to be subjugated and wealth plundered. From another perspective – the secret geo-political marriage with Canada’s rich and powerful – this thesis was demonstrable as the closet authoritarians had chattelized a lawyer and turned him into nothing more than a lab monkey measured in decades. They’d enslaved him to the program and then tortured him enthusiastically with its results. The research project concluded Canada’s elite, having achieved totally hegemony on all levels in its country (see for example the prosperity theft analysis) and were uncontrollably addicted to power, wealth and schadenfreude, wants to ride Beijing’s imperialistic coattails to satisfy those insatiable cravings.
In the final analysis it was determined that in identifying and then exploiting weaknesses and vulnerabilities in the modern world China was seeking to buy, bribe, seduce and lend its way domino-style to a global presence that put the gains made by democracy in the 20th century in serious peril. With the vast, vast majority of nations second and third world the stage was set for the establishment of more joint governance as had been achieved in Canada; the belief being that if it can be done in a country such as that, which appears to its citizens and the entire planet as a mature democracy, it can happen in societies where there are no or less bulwarks to the infiltration of unlawful foreign interests.
Beijing’s extortionistic capitalism foreign policy trajectory has to be viewed as most troublesome: Beijing Leadership Flexes its Global Imperialism Muscle by Forcing a Dozen and a Half Governments to Boycott Human Rights Motivated Nobel Prize Award Ceremony. From strong-arming one country, South Africa, in early 2009 to many in late 2010 is an achievement that when viewed predictively cannot but strike trepidation in the collective mind of the international community. It would be ironic and most devastating to the nature and health of civilization if China and its Canadian partner succeeded where the Soviets failed.
