Grant Abraham, Founder of Canada’s Reforge Party joined Rich Does Politics to give his excellent insights into what’s happening in Canada, now emerging as an important front in the Globalists’ anti-human war that will be playing out in the October 19th non-binding Alberta Referendum.
People tell Grant, “We don’t know what it’s going to look like if Alberta leaves,” and he replies, “You don’t know what it looks like to stay in Canada, because Canada is being deconstructed right in front of you, and Alberta needs to get out before it shipwrecks.”
From Grant’s perspective, the Referendum isn’t really about Alberta leaving, it’s about preserving what Canada truly is, that’s being stolen by the Globalists through what he calls the “Post-National Agenda”.
Grant explains:
“Canadians were told back in 2015 by Justin Trudeau that we would be the first ‘post-nation state’. And that is when I really started watching and tuning in.
“And then, I saw that Justin Trudeau…was actually turning Canada into a post-nation state and rewiring the operating system of how the country works.
“And Canadians took a long time to begin to wake up that their country was being pulled out from underneath them. And it was really COVID that landed the hard punch for people to say, “Where the Hell has our country gone? What is going on?”
“So I say to them, ‘Look, Post-Nationalism means what the country is going to look like after the death of the country and are you prepared for that?’”
Grant says many Albertans see independence as an essential step towards preserving what Canadians love about their country and he believes their movement could eventually reforge Canada back together after the inevitable clash.
He says:
“I believe that our country is supposed to be together, but right now, we have maggots and parasites that are against the Canadian people. They’re undermining the Canadian sovereignty.”
Speaking of which, during EC President Ursula von der Leyen’s September 16th State of the Union Address in Strasbourg, she invited Canada to become the first “Associate Member” of the European Union and she proposed upgrading the existing Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) to an “Alliance for the Future” that would create “a common prosperity and economic security space.” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney ran to Strasbourg to help accelerate the process.
Conservative Canadian YouTubers are grumbling that an associate membership in the EU could make them part of the Schengen Area, essentially putting Canada on the Turkish border and allowing visa-free entry into Canada for Europe’s millions of illegal migrants.
Grant continues:
“This is part of the Great Game. This isn’t just boring Canadian politics. The Americans are not prepared to have an outlying picket of the Globalist agenda sitting right across their northern border, creating geopolitical insecurity.
“This isn’t just some trifling thing. Canada will not be allowed to be the host that destabilizes continental security. More and more people in Canada are starting to recognize that.
“That’s why I believe that there’s a polarizing perspective happening within Canadians that are tuning in to how significant the stakes are, in relation to identifying the threat, which is the Carney Globalist New World Order agenda that’s being played out, as a gasping desire to see the New World Order agenda resuscitated through Canada and the resolve of the Americans to not see it happen in North America and free people in Canada saying, ‘Look, we never signed up to join the EU. We never gave a mandate for our sovereignty to be traded. We never agreed for a post-nation state. We never agreed for our legal rights to be undermined. We never agreed for legislation to be coming in that would undermine our property, or surrender our privacy, or give up our free speech.’ There’s a value clash that’s going on that’s much more potent and, let’s say, simmering than just a referendum on independence.”
Grant reminds us that in early 2025, the White House announced tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China, due to a national emergency invoked under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), as a result of the extraordinary threat posed by illegal aliens and deadly drugs.
Grant notes that whereas, Mexico and China signalled their cooperation, Canada chose to start a trade war with the United States.
Among Mark Carney’s first acts as the new Prime Minister, he rolled out retaliatory tariffs against the US and launched the “Elbows Up” campaign. Pierre Poilievre and the federal Conservatives joined in lockstep, demonstrating that Canada has a Uniparty.
Grant continues:
“Trump wasn’t asking us to change the bacterial count of our chicken breasts, or add more fat to our homogenized milk that we sell or whatever. He was saying, ‘Clean up human trafficking, stop producing fentanyl, and shipping it into the US.’
“And we were not just shipping 40 kilos, we’re talking, you know, sea cans out of Vancouver. And if you look closely, November of ‘24, you’ll see that there’s a Toronto-Dominion Bank, which is a Canadian bank in the US had just under a $4 billion fine for money-laundering in the US…
“It’s human trafficking. That’s human misery and death. That’s where Trump started the conversation with the Canadians on trade. But our response was to start a trade war. That’s what we did…
“The bottom line is that our leadership in Canada shows the values of protecting the apparatus of organized crime, and allowing tariffs to be perpetuated upon the Canadian people, rather than actually dealing with human trafficking and fentanyl production. It’s shocking…
“Canada has existed and profited and been favored immeasurably economically because we sail off of the wind of the economic engine of the Americans. We have the longest undisputed border in the world – undefended, essentially. Most of us are interrelated with Americans. We’re not just cousins, we’re really brothers, at the North American level. And for anybody to think that Canada can do a pivot and suddenly have a trade war with an integrated economy that Canada does with the US is just incredibly naïve…
“The American economy is 13 times the size of Canada’s, and our trade framework, like in Alberta, for example, 82% of provincial trade is North-South with the American states, it’s not with the rest of Canada. So, we are so integrated culturally and economically, relationally with the Americans, to try and pretend that they’re suddenly our enemy.
“This is what Canadians need to wake up to, this reality. They’re a bit myopic, and there is a very big geopolitical reality being played out in Canada with regard to foreign interference, with regard to the presence of Chinese, let’s say CCP military infrastructure in the country that was actually opened up and paved the way by Stephen Harper with a treaty that he did with China called the Foreign Investment Protection Act, which allowed for China, in particular to use its own security forces to protect national investment.
“But, right now, with what Canada is hosting, we could probably develop that concept of foreign interference. And this isn’t “conspiracy theory conversations”. I mean, I’ve articulated this in the book that I wrote, called ‘The Battle for the Soul of Canada, Firing the Forge’.
“I actually talk about what we call in Canada, the NSICOP report, which is the National Security Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. They did a report, it’s a federal report that they produced in 2019. And it clearly outlines – and that was under the Justin Trudeau leadership – it truly outlines the foreign interference that was prevalent in the country. And it’s a warning to Canadians. And that was essentially undermined.
“So this notion, this isn’t a fanciful reality about foreign interference in the country. The reality is very clear, in relation to the presence of foreign force in the country. It’s, very much camouflaged, the Canadian people wouldn’t see it. But we understand that it’s there and I think that there’s a real risk.
“I think, if you talk to anybody in the American intelligence community that’s prepared to talk, they would say that they have acute concerns about terror cells, Islamic terror cells being activated in the US and in Canada.
“And so there’s kind of a multiplicity of, of, let’s say, latent threats that exist continentally, that, let’s say, the security apparatus across the two countries are aware of.”
Grant believes that Canada is moving into a revolutionary phase and the people are waking up to the fact that their own government is opposed to their grandchildren’s future and prosperity and that a strong “Yes” vote to separate in the upcoming October 19th Alberta Referendum would be a very good thing. Although non-binding, it would be a benchmark in terms of a moral authority of a future secession vote.
Grant adds:
“But let me say this: There’s no way that we want to be the 51st State. Alberta will become its own nation and ultimately, Alberta will become the seedbed to reforge Canada, I believe…
“Alberta is trying to leave, because it’s fed up with the overreach and the unreasonableness of Central Canada. What I will say to Canadians is, ‘We’re no longer dealing with – in Ontario and Québec, if you will – an elder brother that is just greedy and ambivalent. We’re now dealing with a diabolical ideology that actually is here to destroy us’…We have a malevolent force that has co-opted our governmental system that is contrary to the culture, values, and traditions of the Canadian people, itself…
“Our Supreme Court’s become an activist court. We have a two-tier justice system with regard to our policing. And interestingly, the parallel and I think one of the best commentators on the, let’s say, the evolving DNA that leads to the confrontation that I think is coming is Professor David Betz in the UK who breaks down these ingredients of, let’s say, fragmentation that set the ecosystem up for the kind of polarizing confrontation, whether it’s political or kinetic, that may happen. That’s what’s going on.”
Rich: Hey Grant, thank you for being here. Good to see you.
Grant: Great to be with you this morning, Rich.
Rich: Thank you. You’re Grant Abraham, Alberta Sovereigntist, so you say. I’ll have the links in the description below where people can find you. You are the leader for the reforgeparty.ca, which is a Sovereigntist party in Alberta.
I just want to say that, because there’s the referendum in October the 18th for Albertan independence, I think that’s a really, really bad idea, because what you’re going to do is you’re going to split Canada up into smaller entities, which will make it easier for the Globalists to control. So are you working on behalf of the Globalists?
Grant: (Laughs) Well, first of all, when you say I’m an Alberta Sovereigntist, that would be true.
Secondly, the reforge party is a Canadian federal party, which is a party that can and has run candidates right across the country in our general elections federally, like a national election.
And the Alberta referendum that is coming up October 19th is a provincial vote, which is really the people of Alberta sending the first formal message, let’s say official message. They’ve sent the message for many decades that they’re unhappy with how Ottawa is running the country.
But things are heating up in Alberta. And ultimately, I’m definitely not a Globalist! (Laughs).
Rich: That’s my clue. Every Globalist says they’re not a Globalist.
Grant: So yeah. And how many globalists do you have on your show? That’s really the question, right?
Ultimately, the issue is Globalism. And Canadians have been told – they’ve been sleeping – you know, Canadians were told back in 2015 by Justin Trudeau that we would be the first “post-nation state”. And that is when I really started watching and tuning in.
And then I saw that actually, Justin Trudeau – with probably help from behind a velvet curtain somewhere – was actually turning Canada into a post-nation state and rewiring the operating system of how the country works.
And Canadians took a long time to begin to wake up that their country was being pulled out from underneath them. And it was really COVID that landed the hard punch for people to say, “Where the hell has our country gone? What is going on?”
By that time, there were many, many changes going on to what was the established understanding of how the nation worked. For anybody that was born in the ‘60s or ‘70s or ‘80s, everyone was going, “What is going on?”
And so, Justin Trudeau ran out of gas, essentially. And then…we had him replaced by something much worse, kind of a High Priest of Globalism, in the form of Mark Carney.
And we’re really now still having the country waking up to the fact that we have a Uniparty and this Globalist Post-National Agenda is advancing.
And I tell Canadians, when I speak to them all the time, “Post-Nationalism” means – I know no one knows what that means. That’s something that the British understood much earlier, because of Brexit and what was felt in the UK, because of the loss of culture and borders and that control that was exerted from Brussels. Everybody felt it in the UK, but Canadians didn’t know what Post-Nationalism was.
So I say to them, “Look, Post-Nationalism means what the country is going to look like after the death of the country and are you prepared for that?”
And so all of this stuff is all landing now in the next month in Alberta, as kind of the first serious volleys of the – I’m going to call it a “revolution”, because it’s the coming, it’s the head-to-head, coming head to head of the Globalist agenda that is still playing the deception game in Canada, but what’s really going on with the people in Alberta who are still homogenous and are the kind of, you know, let’s say the ones that broke the ground and pioneered parts of the country and aren’t fools and are knowing that something is wrong, deeply wrong in the ethos of government.
And so we’re moving to this referendum, which is going to be this first kind of contention. And that’s going to be the first spark in a, I believe, a series of confrontations that are really going to redefine what Canada is.
And from my perspective, when I’m talking to Canadians, I will say, “Look, this isn’t about Alberta leaving. This is about Alberta preserving what Canada is truly,” because what’s actually happening is the real Canada is being muffled and stolen by the Globalists through the Post-National Agenda that’s operating federally via Justin Trudeau first, and then Mark Carney, who is blatantly telling Canadians that we’re going to be a part of the New World Order. And it’s just this last week talking about joining the EU, which is an unbelievable departure from what we understand our sovereignty to be in Canada.
So this is the, I think this is the forefront battleground in this discussion that the world is talking about. If anybody’s listening to Susan Kokinda or Promethean Action, she’s talking about ultimately the Globalist machine bumping into Trump’s foreign policy, which is basically saying, “We want to work with sovereign nations that actually care about their people, value human flourishing, and want to see wealth built generationally for families, not Globalist agendas that are going to basically harvest and scrape money together that are suctioned-up by the investment bankers and central banks.”
So this is the battlefront, and this is what’s going on in Canada right now.
Rich: OK, thank you for that. Now you said this Post-Nationalism, so I’m trying to say after nation state, so then it would be, what comes to mind straight away is the destruction of the state as a national entity, as a nation-state, and then getting subsumed into a global order, the New World Order, or Canada becoming an “Associate Member” of the European Union – albeit there’s no such thing as an Associate Member of the European Union, there’s no structure for it, there’s no agreement for it, right? There’s no regulations or policies or procedures or protocols, it’s not in the constitution.
Grant: Well, this is the discussion, right? Because when you have a power base like the Globalists believe that they have, they make stuff up as they go along, right? And this is the reality of the Brexit vote. The British people thought they were leaving, but it took us three years to 2019 to see the fact that we actually were able to see the change that brought a kind of a Brexit, but we never were able to see the departure from the European Court of Human Rights.
And if anyone’s looking at what the Labour government is doing now, it’s pulling the UK back into the machine of the European Union, right? And I think, in my view, that that Globalist agenda, as played out in the European Union is gasping for air and dying, and so it’s not surprising to me at all that Mark Carney, who is not cooperating with Trump with Canadian trade, is desperately wanting to create a new and parallel system that can kind of replace the US.
And for anybody in your show that’s watching, I mean, Canada has existed and profited and been favoured immeasurably economically because we sail off of the wind of the economic engine of the Americans. We have the longest undisputed border in the world – undefended, essentially. Most of us are interrelated with Americans. We’re not just cousins, we’re really brothers, at the North American level. And for anybody to think that Canada can do a pivot and suddenly have a trade war with an integrated economy that Canada does with the US is just incredibly naïve.
And so, if you go back a year and you look at the general election that Canada had in 2025, the whole position that was offered to Canadians, both by Mark Carney and by Pierre Poilievre was retaliatory tariffs. The American economy is 13 times the size of Canada’s, and our trade framework, like in Alberta, for example, 82% of provincial trade is North-South with the American states, it’s not with the rest of Canada. So, we are so integrated culturally and economically, relationally with the Americans, to try and pretend that they’re suddenly our enemy.
It’s not about “Orange Man”, but it’s about a Globalist agenda that’s bumping in to foreign policy that is being precisely articulated by Marco Rubio.
This is what Canadians need to wake up to, this reality. They’re a bit myopic, and there is a very big geopolitical reality being played out in Canada with regard to foreign interference, with regard to the presence of Chinese, let’s say CCP military infrastructure in the country that was actually opened up and paved the way by Stephen Harper with a treaty that he did with China called the Foreign Investment Protection Act, which allowed for China, in particular to use its own security forces to protect national investment.
It wasn’t many months ago from right now that there were what we call “hotshot deliveries”. They’re kind of like couriers in Canada called “hotshot drivers” that delivered some stuff to an oil refinery compound up in northern Alberta. They drove into the compound, and there was security there. They were all Asian, and they were all carrying serious assault rifles, which the guy was able to recognize.
In Canada, those are restricted weapons and totally illegal, so the citizenry doesn’t have those or you wouldn’t see those out on the streets. This became something that hit our media and then suddenly disappeared.
There are very much two realities in the country, in terms of understanding. A lot of people are still living in a paradigm where they don’t understand that we have a Uniparty. They think that the Conservatives can rescue us, the nation, from what Mark Carney is doing. They think that Trump is the enemy, he’s the problem with why there’s now a trade war going on.
The country’s upended and Albertans are actually seeing things very clearly. All of these forces are coming to a head right now and being played out in this referendum that’s coming up here in literally a month. It’s probably the leading battle line in this confrontation with the Globalist agenda in the world.
(Promo)
Rich: Let me add some color to what you said. Thank you for that. October the 18th is the day of the Alberta Referendum, and we will get to that.
For people who are new to this conversation, and perhaps others, just to refresh them, if we consider the world in terms of blocks, and you actually have a power struggle between the blocks of America, Russia, China and the European Union.
The weakest of those blocks, militarily and in terms of economics, is the European Union. I believe America, Russia, and China are working together, in order to upend the City of London’s control over the world.
There’s no clearer example of the power that the City of London has when the governor of the Bank of England, his next job is the Prime Minister of Canada, of which 81% belongs to the Crown Corporation, which is headquartered in the City of London.
How to say “The City of London runs Canada without saying that the City of London runs Canada”? Just to add to that, Australia, I think 70% of Australia, no, 40% of Australia is Crown Corporation territory, and I think about 70% of New Zealand is Crown Corporation territory. Might be the other way around, in terms of the percentages.
My understanding from conversation with Susan Kokinda and Tom Luongo, who are regular guests on my channel, is that Canada was sort of set up by the British as a bulwark against those ornery Americans who won’t be told what to do.
My experience and sense of Canadians – lovely, lovely people – is they’re more sort of European-minded in many respects than say Americans, although the Albertans and the Okanagans, which is in, which province is that in?
Grant: British Columbia.
Rich: British Columbia, OK. They’re a slightly different breed. They’re more American, right, I think, in attitude. That’s just my impression...
So now what’s happened, Canada is also incredibly resource-rich, along with Russia, United States and all of Africa and the European Union and Britain borrowed a lot of money from the bondholders in order to empower and arm the Ukrainians to defeat Russia. They’ve failed in that enterprise, and they’ve failed, and they are failing to get the resources from Russia to pay back the bondholders.
So now, they’ve created links with Canada, with the City of London Puppet State, Canada, because Canada has a lot of resources, and I recorded a video with Jim Torma, aka .@shimjelly, it’s not been published yet, at the time we’re recording, where he goes into how Canada is gearing its manufacturing in order to build armaments and weaponry to supply the European Union, versus building things like cars and investing in more maple syrup (which is lovely, by the way).
So, I just wanted to add that to it. Now, with regards to the October 18th referendum, you said things are heating up. Is that within the Province of Alberta or nationally, as well?
Grant: I think it’s heating up nationally, because the Canadian infrastructure, as it was – and I’ve started to really refer to the Globalist infrastructure in Canada as “Canada 1.0” and Alberta as kind of the rock, if you will, of real Canadians that the New World Order agenda is going to break against.
And many Albertans see Alberta independence as an essential step, now to preserve what it is that Canadians love about Canada, and it can actually be something that can rebirth Canada.
In some ways, that’s why, here’s a clue, we called the party the Reforge Party, because we believe that these forces that are driving Alberta independence and conversely, the forces that are threatening the free and good people of Canada, the Globalist forces, are going to clash and it’s going to fragment the country and it needs to be reforged.
That’s where I’m going. I believe that our country is supposed to be together, but right now, we have maggots and parasites that are against the Canadian people. They’re undermining the Canadian sovereignty.
To your point that you made there in the preamble, I think our understanding, I think you’re right, the understanding that everybody has in terms of the post-World War II, let’s say post-Cold War reality of who our enemies are has to be rethought, because if you want to analyze things in relation to what’s going on with the war with Russia and the Ukraine, that’s not as obvious as it would have appeared.
I think if you go back to the Minsk Agreement, Russia’s position is very strong, in relation to why it’s in that war and that Ukraine war is really a Globalist proxy war that these nations that are kind of Globalist-minded, if you will, are dumping money into because they need to win it.
I think, as that confrontation unravels, I would tend to agree with your analysis. To say that Russia and China and the US are “allies”, I think is probably too strong, but there may well be an alignment that is quite contented to see the City of London Globalist New World Order agenda broken.
One of the most interesting breaking actions that we’ve watched in recent months is the repositioning of the Lloyd’s insurance policies, whenever Lloyd’s pulled the insurance on the tankers going around the Strait of Hormuz and President Trump was able to say, “You know what, we’ll underwrite that to keep the oil moving.” That’s part of the breaking of the City of London stranglehold that was set up, through its Middle Eastern policy. We can get into all that if you wish to.
This discussion in Canada about what is really going on here, this is part of the Great Game. This isn’t just boring Canadian politics. The Americans are not prepared to have an outlying picket of the Globalist agenda sitting right across their northern border, creating geopolitical insecurity.
This isn’t just some trifling thing. Canada will not be allowed to be the host that destabilizes continental security. More and more people in Canada are starting to recognize that.
That’s why I believe that there’s a polarizing perspective happening within Canadians that are tuning in to how significant the stakes are, in relation to identifying the threat, which is the Carney Globalist New World Order agenda that’s being played out, as a gasping desire to see the New World Order agenda resuscitated through Canada and the resolve of the Americans to not see it happen in North America and free people in Canada saying, “Look, we never signed up to join the EU. We never gave a mandate for our sovereignty to be traded. We never agreed for a post-nation state. We never agreed for our legal rights to be undermined. We never agreed for legislation to be coming in that would undermine our property, or surrender our privacy, or give up our free speech.
There’s a value clash that’s going on that’s much more potent and, let’s say, simmering than just a referendum on independence.
Rich: Just on Russia, China and America, it’s not a formal treaty or anything, right? But they both have a common enemy in the City of London, because the City of London wants control over the United States. It’s long held animosity to Russia. And then, of course, there’s how they killed, I don’t know, millions of people in China through the Opium Wars and stole China’s silver that way.
Now, you said earlier about the Canadian-American border being the longest undefended border. Is it really the case? If, for example, someone was in Saskatchewan or Manitoba – great names, by the way, right? They could just walk across, they could find a bit where there’s no road and just walk across?
Grant: Well, I mean, technically, that’s illegal to do that. But I mean, we don’t have hard point, firing points, right across 4,000 miles of border that means you couldn’t do that.
I would say, my understanding of security at the border is that some kind of thermal satellite or something might pick you up. But I would say that there’s been people that have jumped across one side of a ditch to the other. Like, for example, near Vancouver, there’s a road called Zero Avenue.
And it basically runs east-west and right beside it is a ditch. And then on the other side of the ditch is another road that’s running east-west, 20 feet away. And that’s the American road.
And the only thing that divides the two roads, and they’re running alongside each other like this, they both have, both bi-directional traffic, but one’s in the US and one’s in Canada. I mean, so if the grid went down, and, you know, there was an EMP or something, and you decided to run out and, you know, jump across the ditch, I’m quite sure, it’s that simple. There’s no fence, there’s, you know, and it’s the same way right across the country.
Rich: Right now, one level that’s very, very cute and nice, right? At another level, with the Chinese, Chinese security forces coming in, into Canada, as you described, that’s a possible threat towards the United States. And I recorded a video with Clif High, who created a predictive large language model back in the ‘90s. And what kept coming up is how Canada and the United States were going to go to war.
Actually, it kept coming up in his, in his, his large language model called a “web bot” in 1999, which was the same year the South Park movie came out, which I saw the night before I got married. And the idea of Canada and the United States going to war seemed absurd at the time. And,
Grant: Well, if the United States and Canada go to war, it’ll be the United States and the Globalist ethos within Canada won’t be the Canadian people, because we love Americans.
But, right now, with what Canada is hosting, we could probably develop that concept of foreign interference. And this isn’t “conspiracy theory conversations”. I mean, I’ve articulated this in the book that I wrote, called ‘The Battle for the Soul of Canada, Firing the Forge’.
I actually talk about what we call in Canada, the NSICOP report, which is the National Security Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. They did a report, it’s a federal report that they produced in 2019. And it clearly outlines – and that was under the Justin Trudeau leadership – it truly outlines the foreign interference that was prevalent in the country. And it’s a warning to Canadians. And that was essentially undermined.
So this, this notion, this isn’t a fanciful reality about foreign interference in the country. The reality is very clear, in relation to the presence of foreign force in the country. It’s, very much camouflaged, the Canadian people wouldn’t see it. But we understand that it’s there and I think that there’s a real risk.
I think, if you talk to anybody in the American intelligence community that’s prepared to talk, they would say that they have, they have acute concerns about terror cells, Islamic terror cells being activated in the US and in Canada.
And so there’s kind of a multiplicity of, of, let’s say, latent threats that exist continentally, that, let’s say, the security apparatus across the two countries are aware of.
Rich: Right. There’s the Islamist threat that you mentioned, there’s the Chinese security forces. And then I did a video with Jim Torma .@shimjelly, where he talked about the large number of Sikhs that are coming in through Canada’s open borders policy, which we have in the United Kingdom and in the European Union and Australia and New Zealand.
And how Jim was saying that the Sikhs have not a monopoly, but they have a really powerful presence within the trucking industry and also within the drug trade, which would mean moving fentanyl across from Canada into the United States.
And Sikhs are from India, which was a former colony of the British Empire, which fostered proxies in order for this small island nation to control such a large, powerful, populous nation as India. And the City of London has used drugs as a weapon against people that it considers to be hostile. So there’s also that in the mix, as well.
Grant: Yeah. So that is something that is, is being opened up and explored and exposed to the Canadian people. There’s a, there’s an independent journalist in Canada called Sam Cooper, who is doing some really good work with that.
I think, if you were to interview him, he would make the distinction between kind of Sikh people and the recent immigration with the Khalistani immigrants that are part of that underbelly that you’re talking about.
Rich: Grant, thank you so much for saying that. ‘Cause you know, I’m an immigrant in Britain. I make a distinction between settled immigrants like myself, who’ve integrated and contributed, versus new arrivals coming in and getting hotels and mobile phones and three meals a day, right? Many of them from Albania, which, as far as I know, isn’t facing war or famine or pestilence or anything like that. Right. So there can’t be asylum-seekers from Albania.
So, so thank you for saying that, because this is not in any way meant to be a slur on Sikh people in the Sikh community. But one of the things that happens with crime is you do have a concentration within a community because of the background relatedness. And then when you say about Khalistanis, I haven’t looked into this, but I suspect they may be the hidden hand of the City of London causing mischief, as it is wont to do, in pretty much every single place where it operates, in order to divide and rule. So I don’t know.
And then, with regards to Sam Cooper, please do connect me to him. I’d love to have him on.
Grant: Yeah, because he’s done a lot of, in fact, I, he’s done a lot of research on this area, particularly in Canada. And so like, for example, when I grew up in Canada, you know, the one visible minority, if you will, that were immigrants in my area, I mean, Canada was essentially English and French, but the other immigrant community that was quite early in Canada’s formation was actually the Sikh community, post-World War I. And many of them came and settled, particularly in British Columbia. And so when I went to school, we had, you know, many of my colleagues, students, friends were from that community, the Sikh community. And at that time, there was not a criminal element within Canada that was being driven by the Sikh community.
But in the last 20, let’s say 25 years with immigration, that has evolved. And it has it has evolved with the understanding of what the Khalistani component of that community is. And so that’s as far as I can go with that I’m comfortable going with in terms of articulating what the nature of the problem is without, you know, doing further research.
But there’s some profound and significant research that Sam Cooper has done, and that I’ve been listening to, that actually connects the dots that you’re talking about, with regard to trucking drugs, continental security, you know, and, and, and let’s say what you reference as the City of London, and its desire to see destabilization within sovereign nations, right?
And that goes right back to what happened with the Opium Wars, right? I mean, that’s how Hong Kong was formed and all that. So I’m with you there on that and I think that that particular piece of it requires further discussion. But there was a lot of destabilizing forces that are anti-national.
And you know what, here’s the most shocking thing for me, and I think for your listeners, in relation to Canada: If you go back and do the research, if one chooses to go back to say [February] of 2025, and listen to what President Trump says to Canada, he says to the Canadian people, he said, “Look, I’m going to tariff you, I’m going to begin to implement tariffs, unless you deal with fentanyl production, distribution and human trafficking.”
And when you look at the federal election that happened in April of 2025, Mark Carney rolled out retaliatory tariffs, and the whole “Elbows Up” thing, “We’re going to resist the US!” and it was a stupid image of resistance. But so did Pierre Poilievre and the federal Conservatives.
Now, I say, what’s really happening in Canada is we have a value issue, because Trump wasn’t asking us to change the bacterial count of our chicken breasts, or add more fat to our homogenized milk that we sell or whatever.
He was saying, “Clean up human trafficking, stop producing fentanyl, and shipping it into the US.” And you know, we were not just shipping 40 kilos, we’re talking, you know, sea cans out of Vancouver. And if you look closely, November of ‘24, you’ll see that there’s a Toronto-Dominion Bank, which is a Canadian bank in the US had just under a $4 billion fine for money-laundering in the US.
So what is being money-laundered? You know, what that money being money-laundered for?
Rich: Homogenized milk? It’s the fentanyl.
Grant: It’s human trafficking. It’s, you know, that’s human misery and death. That’s where Trump started the conversation with the Canadians on trade. But our response was to start a trade war. That’s what we did.
Rich: And so which betrays Canada as a hostile actor. And so just on that, Grant, I didn’t know that! I didn’t know that’s what he said. If I didn’t know that, many, many more people wouldn’t know that, because of the way it was portrayed in the mainstream media.
Grant: Well, and it’s true. So if you when you bring this home to Canadian people, you say, “Look, you’re paying more now, you and your businesses are paying more for everything now, because of tariffs. And you have to see that there was a value decision, because the leadership of the of the country decided to protect organized crime – not engage organized crime – and pay tariffs, rather than actually deal with what the Americans were asking us to deal with.”
When I was in my formative years, let’s say growing up in Canada, if we’d have had a Conservative Prime Minister in Canada who had been presented with that issue, say by Ronald Reagan, the answer would have been, “Look, OK, you’re right, let’s deal with that. There’s a problem. Let’s set up a task force. Let’s identify who the organized crime is, name these organized gangs. Let’s call them terrorist organizations. And let’s establish the appropriate use of force, including lethal force to dismantle the apparatus for their operations in Canada.”
That’s what a conservative Prime Minister would have said 25 or 35 years ago. Now, we have Pierre Poilievre, who clearly said, “Let’s have retaliatory tariffs,” too. So these are departures from what Canadians even understand they’re voting for, in relation to their leadership.
And the bottom line is that our leadership in Canada shows the values of protecting the apparatus of organized crime, and allowing tariffs to be perpetuated upon the Canadian people, rather than actually deal with human trafficking and fentanyl production. It’s shocking.
Rich: OK. Grant, can you hold on one second, please? I had too much green tea to drink.
Grant: Pause, sure.
Rich: I’m a little bit nauseous. I need to go and eat some ginger. I’ll be back in a moment.
Grant: OK.
Rich: Note to editor, cut this bit out. Sorry about that. I don’t like green tea. I like the effect it has on me, except when I take too much and then on an empty stomach.
Grant: No problem.
Rich: I’ve had some ginger and I just drank some kefir. And I was thinking it says you’re an organic farmer.
Grant: I do keep a few organic sheep. Yes.
Rich: Is raw milk available in Canada?
Grant: Illegally. It’s like buying drugs. Honestly, it is.
Rich: I believe you. That’s insane.
Grant: Raw Jersey milk. That’s right. Yeah.
Rich: But I can get fentanyl easily, right?
Grant: Correct.
Rich: Just ask around the street.
Grant: Yeah, that’s how you know you have a messed-up nation.
Rich: Yeah, you can get fentanyl, but not raw milk.
Grant: Right. And the police are more interested in prosecuting the lactose.
Rich: The lactose lovers, the raw milk lovers, they’re dangerous people, because they probably didn’t have the injections.
Grant: Clandestine, unvaxxed. It’s crazy.
Rich: So does this underscore the desire for the referendum for Alberta to become an independent state?
Grant: Well, I think that, again, that’s a great question, Rich, because there’s two sides to this conversation.
What we’re talking about is the articulation and realization of the real threat that is happening within Canada, which I would argue is what we’re not talking about in Canada right now, which we should be, which is a lot of people will say, “Well, we don’t know what it’s going to look like if Alberta leaves.”
And conversely, I will say to them, “Actually, with the Post-National threat, you don’t know what it looks like to stay in Canada, because Canada is being deconstructed in front of you, and Alberta needs to get out before it shipwrecks.”
So, there’s that discussion. The kind of mainstream discussion that’s going on, in addition to what you and I have been talking about, is that Alberta, Canada has a system that is, first of all, electorally-imbalanced, so that if you’re a Western Canadian, you will have spent your life watching the leadership of the country be decided while British Columbia and Alberta is still voting.
It doesn’t matter electorally what the vote is from British Columbia or Alberta or Saskatchewan. It’s already decided by the time the votes are counted at the Ontario-Québec borders. So there’s a real sense of powerlessness to change, on the electoral.
And this is the real kicker, is that since 1960, Alberta has, we have a system called “Equalization”, which basically, the idea is to have “Have” provinces subsidizing “Have Not” provinces in the country.
So since 1960, Alberta, itself has paid in excess of $650 billion into Central Canada, most of which goes to Québec.
Now, so this is a really big issue, because $650 billion, a lot of people would say since 1960, we’re probably really pushing a trillion dollars into the central government mechanism.
And Alberta is finally saying, “We’re fed up with it, because you’re encroaching, you’re using that money, first of all, to change the nation in ways we don’t like and to undermine the value infrastructure that we want to see in our province, in our nation. And you’re actually in violation of the provincial powers that are set out within our constitution in Section 92.
So there’s this imbalance of resources, where we’re now paying for the dysfunction that is undermining the nation.
Rich: Yes, well, that’s definitely going on in the UK, that, you know, our taxes are going to pay for digital IDs and the war in Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East. Hence, notaxforwar.com for Britons here. Go check it out.
Now, is it that the eastern Canada, the states of Ontario and Québec have much larger populations and thus they get more of a say nationally than the western provinces?
Grant: Yeah, well, it’s not just as simple as that. There’s an imbalance even in the proportionality of kind of the population to the number of seats. So it’s a skewed representation that isn’t just predicated upon a bigger proportion of population.
Rich: OK, so so what you’re saying is that some Albertans, they get one member of parliament per, I want to make something up, 10,000 people. But in the east, they might get one member of parliament per 5,000 people.
Grant: Correct.
Rich: OK, that’s very fair, isn’t it? How can you complain about that?
Grant: It’s a problem. And it’s also it’s also true, with regard to what we call the Senate, which is the upper house. And over the last 50 years, the West has tried various different political strategies that have been, let’s say, inclusive in the sense that we we have endeavored to stay inclusive and keep Canada together within the existing infrastructure.
And this is before there was a Post-National Agenda. We’ve never really been able to reform the infrastructure to make the country work more fairly. And, you know, Western Canadians feel like they’re Canadians and have been paying the money, in many ways because they love the country and and we’re a fair minded people.
So it’s not about, you know, selfishly saying, “Well, we don’t want to submit this money anymore because we don’t care.” It’s it’s that there’s a there’s a gross dissonance with the value direction being now taken, with regard to the undermining of faith, family, community and how that money is being spent and how we’re seeing our laws changed so that our civil civil liberties are are being undermined.
And so, you know, we could talk about this in relation to privacy and providing the government access to our, you know, private mail, whether it’s physical or electronic. We could talk about it in relation to parental authority. And, you know, in Canada, we’ve had legislation passed now that, if parents try and intervene or stop their child transitioning and or bring their child to a counselor or to a pastor, to help the child process through that transitioning psychology, that has become a criminal offense in Canada and the parents can be incarcerated for five years.
And many of the Canadians don’t realize that that piece of legislation was actually advanced unanimously by the Conservative Party in Canada. That wasn’t the Liberal or the Left that did that. It was the Right that facilitated that.
And so these kinds of things like parental authority, privacy, now, freedom of speech, we’ve just gone through a batch of legislation where we’ve lost the defense for clergy to be able to read portions of the Bible. If someone feels that that passage that a clergy member has read or preaches on is interpreted as being “hateful”, then suddenly now there’s a criminal offense; that pastors can be prosecuted for doing this.
This has been our Bill C-8. The technology stuff is similar to what we’re we’ve seen in the UK in terms of just the vulnerability and having police show up at the door because of Facebook posts. So the freedom of speech is lost and so people are now seeing this these kinds of things happen.
The other big thing in Canada is the advancement of the UN Direct Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People and how that’s being interpreted in the courts to provide new forms of legal mandate or “equitable” interests over property, land titles, in particular.
So the suddenly people who thought that they owned their property and that the title was king, if you will, in terms of defining what was ownership, suddenly there’s there’s new property interests that are being created by the courts that are giving Indigenous people the rights to property, over and above the people that are named on the titles.
Ten years ago, people wouldn’t have believed that this ever could have happened, because Canada had a very strong land title system that had very clear rules about certainty of title and many of these things are just being upended now.
Rich: So on that last point, what I hear in what you’re saying is how this is being used to set one group of people against another group of people, because it’s creating conflict, plus also moving you and many other Canadians towards owning nothing. But just be confident that they’re doing it for your own good, so you’ll be happy!
Grant: Exactly. Well, that’s the kind of assuaging that Canadians need to hear, but we’re not buying it. And I think that there’s a lot of Canadians realizing that, while we we may have that stereotype of being incredibly polite, at our root, we’re actually fighters and it’s just taking some time to wake up to the fact that we’re being abused and betrayed.
I believe that we’re moving into a revolutionary phase where these kinds of issues are going to be confronted between the people and the kind of ethos – there’s an ideological war going on in North America and the people are waking up to the fact that their own government is opposed to their future and their grandchildren’s future and prosperity.
Rich: The government is the enemy of the people.
Grant: It is. This is what is happening.
Rich: Now, in Alberta, what’s the general mood? Are Albertans waking up, en masse?
Grant: I think that there’s a there is an awakening. There’s many people. I mean, I’m surprised that people don’t see and understand these tensions much more clearly and move faster. But I think right now, what’s happening is there’s a referendum that is going to happen on October 19. It’s a non-binding referendum. And the reason I make that point is…there’s a complete discussion about why the referendum is not binding versus binding, which is maybe for another conversation. It’s not technically relevant right now.
But because it’s non-binding, what is happening is there are many people in the country that are are in Alberta, in particular that are still waking up to what’s going on in the country. And they’re seeing that there’s a problem, but maybe haven’t diagnosed the root system of how malevolent it is.
And they’re saying, “We’re going to vote ‘Yes’ for Alberta independence, because it’s a non-binding referendum. And what we believe we will do by providing our ‘Yes’ vote is to provide the leadership of the Provincial Government of Alberta with a greater mandate to negotiate.”
It’s going to provide leverage for negotiating to create a better scenario within what I would call “Canada 1.0”.
And from my perspective, I would say establishing a strong “Yes” vote on Question 10 of the referendum that is coming in October 19th, which is the separation question, is a very good thing, because it’s going to lay down a marker, a benchmark in terms of a moral authority of a vote.
Now, without getting boring and getting into international law, I would say, my view is that whether it’s a binding referendum or not, that vote, whatever it is, will be a strong determiner and may well be used as an indicator and support for self-determination at a future date by another leader.
Rich: OK, OK. Now, is this on the path to Alberta becoming a state of the United States or an independent nation in its own right?
Grant: Yeah, there’s been a lot – I mean, President Trump has said about Canada becoming a “51st State” and he’s provocative and all of that. We’re not talking about that. I don’t think that Albertans want to become Americans. Canadians don’t want to become Americans, but we sure do want to be free and independent and, you know, have lower taxes and have an understanding that if we give our grandchildren something, that they’re going to get it and the government’s not going to take it because, they’ve decided to send it to the Ukraine, for example. So, I hope you edit this bit out.
But let me say this: There’s no way that we want to be the 51st State. Alberta will become its own nation and ultimately, Alberta will become the seedbed to reforge Canada, I believe.
So, I look at it in two stages. The first round is Alberta becoming independent and leaving the lunacy of the Post-National Agenda and the ethos of the New World Order that is undermining the Canadian people.
Rich: OK? But the problem with that and the problem you’re going to have is Alberta’s wealth and riches. It’s oil. I don’t know what other resources does Alberta have that it’s rich in?
Grant: Natural gas. There’s all kinds of other minerals too.
Rich: Gold?
Grant: Probably.
Rich: Right. OK. Canada, Ontario and Québec, they’re not going to give that up. Why are you going to give up oil? Are you kidding? So, how will you deal with that?
Grant: Well, it’s never really been about not sharing…and I think that’s why the point is so important. It hasn’t been about the money. That’s not why we’re trying to leave.
Alberta is trying to leave, because it’s fed up with the overreach and the unreasonableness of Central Canada. This is what I will say to Canadians is, “We’re no longer dealing with – in Ontario and Québec, if you will – an elder brother that is just greedy and ambivalent. We’re now dealing with a diabolical ideology that actually is here to destroy us.”
It’s not about sharing, anymore. So, when you rephrase and reframe this discussion, this isn’t about a normal “Ontario and Québec and how do we get along together, because we all love each other, as Canadians?”
No. We have an ideological aberration called “Post-Nationalism” that its whole agenda is the destruction of Canadian sovereignty and the wealth of Canadian people; the wealth and wellness. When you put this discussion into those terms, it’s not about the reasonableness of an argument of “They’re never going to let you leave”.
No, we’re not going to allow that intellectual framework to exist to rule our lives, because it’s tyranny and slavery.
Rich: Yeah, absolutely it is. OK. Well, that kind of makes it clearer and I draw a parallel or a fractal argument that you have, if Canada were a house and each of the provinces were family members, then with the parliament, with the government, what you’ve got is an abuser in the household.
Grant: Yeah, we have a constitutional crisis, legally and ultimately, and we have exactly that. We have a malevolent force that has co-opted our governmental system that is contrary to the culture, values, and traditions of the Canadian people, itself.
Rich: Yeah, and contrary to your charter as well, your Charter of Rights.
Grant: Well, we thought that our charter meant something. COVID showed us that it didn’t. So, from a legal perspective, we’re looking and trying and any lawyers or people looking at our legal system, it’s like trying to navigate something that we thought we used to be able to understand but it’s being interpreted in a way that is contrary to even how we’ve understood our constitution or how our statutes have worked, because they’ve politicized our courts.
Our Supreme Court’s become an activist court. We have a two-tier justice system with regard to our policing. And interestingly, the parallel and I think one of the best commentators on the, let’s say, the evolving DNA that leads to the confrontation that I think is coming is Professor David Betz in the UK who breaks down these ingredients of, let’s say, fragmentation that set the ecosystem up for the kind of polarizing confrontation, whether it’s political or kinetic, that may happen. That’s what’s going on.
Rich: Yeah, I think Grant, what you’re pointing to is something that I say to my friends and family is we need an upgrade. You know, those incredibly safe and effective medical concoctions weren’t like regular vaccines. My kids didn’t have those, the regular vaccines, right? But people just related to them as the same.
No, it’s not the same. And then, how governments are isn’t how they used to be, where it looked like most of the time they were acting in service of their electorate. That’s not the same.
The move, the immigration that’s coming in now through the open borders, unvetted, getting benefits at the expense of indigenous people. That’s not like the immigration, certainly in Britain of the post-Second World War, when the economy was expanding and people were needed for jobs and they were interviewed and appointed, right? And then they settled and contributed, came with their families. That’s not what’s happening, now.
So and then the even the courts, because when you said about the Supreme Court being an activist court, one of the things that Tony Blair did is he got rid of the law lords and created a Supreme Court, which essentially allowed for political appointees and undermined the English constitution.
So we need an upgrade and then we have to reassert our independence and our sovereignty and that we get to say how our life goes and that we’re the ones who are going to build a world where human beings honor human beings.
Grant, really, really appreciate you having this conversation with me.
Reforgeparty.ca, plus I’ll have your X account. Look forward to having you back on again, so we can keep abreast of what’s going on, because I think Canada is going to be quite important, geopolitically over the next few years.
Grant: It’s been great to chat, Rich. Thank you.
Rich: This is Rich and Grant signing out. All the best. 'Bye 'bye.