UGLY SMEAR OF ALBERTA INQUIRY PAPERS.

Before we get to the grotty green smear campaign underway, let me start with the target of the smears, two brilliant research documents now on file at the Public inquiry into anti-Alberta energy campaigns. The inquiry itself has been dogged by criticism, but there is no justification for the greasy attacks on the impressive papers commissioned by the inquiry from historian Tammy L. Nemeth.

Through 220 pages of deeply researched and referenced analysis, Nemeth delivers a comprehensive exposé on the inner workings of what she describes as the radical transnational progressive movement to reshape the world economy and impose a Great Transformation. The objective, concludes Nemeth, is to impose “a new energy economy that will halt fossil fuel use and development, initially in the Western world, in order to create a new global low-carbon, net-zero civilization. The first major petroleum industry target being used to accelerate this global transition is the Alberta oilsands.”

In meticulous detail, Nemeth exposes the historical progress of what is clearly a concerted international campaign, hatched in the bowels of UN agencies and such cabals as the World Economic Forum and other activist organizations, to use climate change and now COVID-19 as springboards to a new economic order, a Great Reset where everything will be Built Back Better under government control.

Readers are free make their own assessment of Nemeth's two papers, which are as up-to-date as today's headlines, including the ongoing machinations at this week's virtual Davos summit under the guidance of the Great Resetter himself, Klaus Schwab.

The purpose of this column, however, is not to give Nemeth well-deserved support but to draw attention to the ugly and pathetic smears that have been directed at her — in the leftwing media, on CBC and CTV and in a stunningly ignorant editorial in The Globe and Mail.

“Jason Kenney's war of words verges on farce,” said the Globe's headline over an editorial that itself stumbled pathetically through thickets of misinformation.

The main source for the Globe editorial and the other media attacks on Nemeth is a short paper filed with the inquiry by Martin Olszynski, associate law professor at the University of Calgary.

Olszynski called Nemeth's paper “textbook climate denialism.” He dismissed her views because she is not “a trained climate scientist,” ridiculed the idea that the foreign funding of Canadian ENGOs had helped undermine oilsands development, and suggested the Alberta government should ignore evidence that the global fossil fuel war is a pretext for a global remake of the world economy. It is a little rich, off the top, for Olszynski, a lawyer by training who is associated with the ultra-green Smart Prosperity Institute, to put down a qualified historian because she is not a climate scientist. The CBC commentary also included a typical smear-job putdown by describing Nemeth as a “home-school teacher in England.”

Nemeth's climate science research looks a lot more solid than Olszynski's surface scratchings. In his effort to label Nemeth a “denier,” Olszynski cites among his sources a couple of Canadian court decisions by judges who were assessing the legality of carbon taxes but who did not actively review the science. Olszynski also urges the inquiry to consult a 1999 paper by climate scientists, including Michael Mann, a Pennsylvania State climatologist, which claimed to show a massive run-up in 20th-century temperatures. Known as the “hockey stick graph,” it has been the subject of endless conflict and debate.

Olszynski, by the way, is the recent recipient of a $25,000 government grant to investigate “Agile Regulation for PostCOVID-19 Clean Innovation, Recovery and Growth in Canada.” So it is OK to receive $25,000 in government money to research agile regulation but a scandal to receive $28,000 to research global energy campaigns.

The Globe editorial board also delivered a sweep-of-thehand dismissal of the idea that foreign-funded ENGOs have been part of an international campaign to land-lock Alberta energy. How could tiny marginal groups such as Vancouver's Ecojustice, with a puny $5-million annual budget, shut down Alberta's oilsands exports? What a joke, implied the Globe.

That's essentially Olszynski's view, too. He dismisses Nemeth's conclusions that scores of Canadian environmental groups received millions of dollars from U.S. activists and foundations as part of the 2008 North American Tar Sands Coalition Strategy — even though the coalition's objectives were clear. The plan, as quoted by Nemeth, is “to stop the production of this fuel … It is also an excellent vehicle for realizing the ultimate goal of a new energy paradigm … this campaign has much larger strategic implications for the entire global warming effort … We are forcing investors and oil companies to embrace a new energy paradigm.”

Olszynski and the Globe apparently dismiss the work of Vancouver researcher Vivian Krause who has documented that 10 U.S. foundations have paid $750 million over 20 years to fund environmental activism in Canada, much of the money going to Canadian ENGOs fighting fossil fuels and Alberta's oilsands, including $750,000 to Ecojustice.

Alberta, concluded the Globe, has also not been singled out by global plotters. “The world is changing,” it said, and by killing Keystone XL, President Joe Biden is merely accelerating that change.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney apparently isn't buying the left-wing media smear storm. In his response to Biden's decision last week, Kenney took direct aim at the “foreign funding campaign to land-lock Alberta energy.” The premier should stick to his guns. The Nemeth reports and the detailed funding data assembled by Vivian Krause demonstrate that Canada's energy future remains under attack on all sides.