Freedom Dove

Inspired by a Facebook clip of Ivor Cummins, this article brings awareness and workable remedies for our towns and cities—grounded in informed consent and accountability for living men and women. It bridges these insights with the We Shall Be Free Movement, inspired by civil-rights advocates Tanawah Downing and Jessica Saxton.

Smart-city language promises convenience and “green” progress. Yet when decisions are made by contract instead of open by-law, “smart” can slide into always-on surveillance. This piece offers a clear, source-checked overview of the issues raised in Ivor Cummins’ talk—and, more importantly, a peaceful, practical path forward in alignment with the We Shall Be Free Movement. Inside you’ll find a records-first checklist, oath-anchored questions for council, and model safeguards that protect freedom of movement, cash options, privacy, and due process. Use this to open respectful dialogue, bring sunlight to vendor deals, and shape technology to serve living men and women—not the other way around. We choose proximity without the panopticon, local services without local spying, and governance by consent.

May the light of the divine surround you, peace flow, and truth stand eternal — ◇═◎═◇  Team Freedom Forever ◇═◎═◇

✧ ✦ △ ◇ Aeterna Reconcilio ◇ △ ✦ ✧

Here is the link to Ivor Cummins video transcribed below followed by an analysis and action steps: https://www.facebook.com/reel/346111401103243]

Good evening. Restructuring of Canadian mayors and municipalities under the auspices of the United Nations began in 1992. PM Mulrooney signed Canada onto UN Agenda 21.

Canada thus became a UN member nation state. 178 countries signed on, lured by the promise of big money to go green. By 2000, countries, including Canada, were being governed by directions of the UN G7 G20 World Economic Forum and World Health Organization, to name some.

Every organization named is a foreign-based NGO, non-governmental organization, and every member of all these organizations is unelected. Parliamentary procedures for law changes weren’t followed. In 1994, a municipal primer was issued to all local towns, outlining how they were to restructure their governments.

Though the municipal primer was a non-binding agreement, all towns adopted it. Our public officials, the mayor and councillors of that day, were partnered with a private corporation, the Corporation of the Town of Aurora, who appointed a chief administrative officer who helped implement the global agenda instead of a local one. The International Council on Local and Environmental Issues, ICLEI, became the main source of consultation to push and fund the global agenda.

We remind you that the World Economic Forum and the United Nations signed a strategic partnership framework in 2019 to jointly accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This is the same World Economic Forum whose chairman, Klaus Schwab, famously declared, you will own nothing and be happy. This is the same Klaus Schwab who, referring to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, boasted, we have penetrated more than half of his cabinet.

We would ask Mayor Maracas and the councillors, why should the citizens of Aurora bow down to the intrusive dictates of an unelected foreign entity? The fact is, we should not, and we will not. What, you ask, does any of this have to do with 15-minute smart cities? Absolutely everything. Smart, S for surveillance, M for monitoring, A for analysis, R for reporting, and T for technology.

Technology news editor Patrick Wood, 50 years of experience and expertise on technocracy, wrote, the 15-minute city is a cover for data collection bonanza for technocrats who design and operate them. Cities designed for maximum efficiency always reveal technocrat thinking that efficiency itself is the goal. Maximum surveillance allows for maximum control to achieve even more efficiency.

At its very root, this mechanistic thinking is anti-human. The 15-minute city narrative seeks to fool you in the guise of saving the planet, keeping you safe, and delivering convenience. It’s actually the gateway to digital IDs and CBDCs, central bank digital currencies.

CBDCs allow bankers and or governments to freeze your bank account because you happen to peacefully and lawfully protest and express your disagreement with government policy. Anyone remember the trucker’s convoy in Ottawa, February 22, when the government of Canada invoked the Emergencies Act and froze the private bank accounts of law-abiding citizens? 15-minute cities are wolves in sheep’s clothing. Don’t believe the countless stories spewing forth from the 24-7 bases from the elitist-captured mainstream media, all claiming to have your best interests at heart.

We have been burned too many times. In reality, 24-7 surveillance through the Internet of Things inside your home, 5G and LED streetlights outside, monitoring and tracking and recording everything. Implementation of exclusion zones and geofencing to restrict movement and travel.

Ability to control behaviors through military-directed energy technologies. Property and car ownership to be outlawed. Evictions from farms and rural areas to gather people into cities.

Digital passports being promulgated by the UN World Economic Forum and the World Health Organization are in the final stages of planning and implementation. They are tied to social credit score, which is determined by compliance to government directives. These passports control all access and all aspects of life.

Digital currency is being implemented to end cash and monitor all your spending. Your digital currency will be turned off or on depending on your compliance score. UBI Universal Basic Income is a state-controlled allowance forcing compliance by restricting access to food, money, services, and education.

All of the above will enable climate lockdowns to be implemented easily, arbitrarily, and indefinitely. The real agenda of 15-minute smart cities is to monitor and control everyone and everything. In summary, in the coming days, Council will receive an electronic info packet which will contain the text of this delegation and other items.

We, the citizens of Aurora, wish to enter into a meaningful, respectful dialogue with our elected members of Council on this complex, important issue. A key framework of that dialogue is a list of questions posed to Council. Can Council explicitly guarantee that citizens will remain free to travel as is their right under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Can Council guarantee not to restrict access to essential services, medical care, bank accounts, government pensions, utilities? Most importantly, we, the citizens of Aurora, need to have the conversation with Council about exiting their non-binding agreement with a private, for-profit entity known as the Corporation of the Town of Aurora.

We need to turn back the page to a simpler time when open, transparent municipal government serving its citizens and working in their best interests rule the day. We are your equal partners on this journey. Thank you.

_____________________________________

Quick fact-check of the claims

What’s accurate (with nuance):

• Agenda 21 (1992) — Canada participated at the Rio Earth Summit under PM Brian Mulroney (spelled without the second “o”) and supported the UN sustainable-development program. Agenda 21 itself is non-binding (an action plan, not a law). Every CRS Report+3Government of Canada Publications+3Sustainable Dev Platform+3
• UN–WEF partnership (2019) — The UN and World Economic Forum signed a Strategic Partnership Framework to “accelerate” the 2030 Agenda. It’s a cooperation MOU, not legislation. World Economic Forum+2United Nations Media+2
• “We penetrate the cabinets” quote — Klaus Schwab said this at a 2017 Harvard event (frequently cited in Canadian contexts). YouTube+1
• Frozen bank accounts (Feb 2022) — During the Emergencies Act period, banks froze protest-linked accounts (e.g., a parliamentary report notes ~180 accounts at major banks). House of Commons of Canada
• WHO digital certificates — WHO launched a Global Digital Health Certification Network in 2023 based on the EU COVID certificate infrastructure. Not a “social credit” system, but it is an identity-linked credentialing framework for health proofs. World Health Organization+1
• “Smart city” frictions are real — Examples: San Diego’s smart streetlight cameras were shut off pending a surveillance ordinance after public pushback; Oakland passed one of the strongest surveillance tech ordinances with a Privacy Advisory Commission. Oakland City+4Smart Cities Dive+4GovTech+4

What’s misstated or needs correcting:

• “You will own nothing and be happy” is not a Schwab quote; it traces to a 2016 WEF site essay by Ida Auken imagining a sharing-economy scenario (later republished with context). It’s widely used by critics as shorthand, but attribute it correctly if you mention it. Wikipedia
• Municipal ‘corporations’ — In Ontario, towns are public municipal corporations by law (e.g., “The Corporation of the Town of Aurora”), not private for-profit companies. That’s normal legal form under the Municipal Act, 2001. CanLII+1
• 15-minute cities ≠ movement restrictions — The planning concept (Carlos Moreno) is about proximity/walkability. Some UK places used traffic filters/ANPR for congestion, which got conflated with “lockdowns”; councils issued clarifications. If you critique, focus on data/surveillance risks and governance, not a blanket claim that travel is banned. AP News+2Oxfordshire News+2
• CBDC in Canada — The Bank of Canada is researching a digital dollar and doing consultations; there’s no launch, and Parliament would have a role. Avoid stating it’s implemented already. Bank of Canada+1

What this means tactically (We Shall Be Free-aligned)

Your movement excels at record-backed, oath-anchored dialogue with councils. Aim your energy where it bites: contracts, policies, data flows, ordinances, and funding. Here’s a focused playbook you can drop straight into your process.

Phase 1 — Illuminate (Records first)

File targeted records requests to surface who decided what, under which authority, and where the data goes. Ask for:

1. All “smart” infrastructure contracts since 2018 (streetlights, kiosks, cameras, ALPR, sensors, Wi-Fi, 5G small cells on municipal assets), including SOWs, amendments, NDAs, and data-ownership clauses.
2. Data governance artifacts: Privacy/AI/Data Protection Impact Assessments, DPIAs/PIAs, algorithmic specs, retention schedules, vendor sharing diagrams, and revenue-sharing terms.
3. Surveillance tech inventory: current + proposed tools (ALPR, video analytics, facial recognition, geofencing, predictive systems) and any use by police or third parties (insurance, advertisers).
4. Memberships & MOUs: ICLEI memberships/dues, WEF/WHO/NGO MOUs, grants (federal/provincial) tied to “smart” deliverables, and all reporting obligations tied to those funds.
5. Governance: policies enabling police access to city sensors; audits; all instances when footage/sensor data aided an investigation; vendor “kill switch” or remote update powers.
6. Payments & ID: policies on cash acceptance at all municipal counters; any pilots for digital ID or wallet credentials; any CBDC working groups with the Bank of Canada or Payments Canada.

(Why these? San Diego and Oakland prove the leverage points are contracts, NDAs, and surveillance policies. Once they’re public, you can restructure them.) Smart Cities Dive+2GovTech+2

Phase 2 — Notify (Respectful notice & questions)

Serve a Private Notice + Question Set to the Mayor/Council (by name, no titles if you prefer), anchored to their oath and Charter/constitutional duties. Use precise, answerable questions:

• Authority: Identify the enabling by-law(s) that authorized each “smart” project and any delegation of authority to staff/vendor. Provide by-law numbers and vote dates.
• Data ownership: Who owns raw data/metadata? Can vendors sell or share it? Where is it stored (jurisdiction)?
• Surveillance limits: Does the city use or permit facial recognition or predictive analytics? If not, codify the prohibition.
• Police access: Under what policy can law enforcement access feeds (real-time or historical)? Is a warrant required?
• Public veto: Will Council commit to no NDAs that restrict public oversight and to public votes before deploying new surveillance tech? (Oakland-style.) Oakland City
• Mobility & geofencing: Any present or planned geofencing/ANPR traffic filters? If so, require published justification, public hearing, and opt-out/appeal paths. Oxfordshire News
• Payments & ID: Will the city guarantee cash acceptance at counters and no ID-or-CBDC-only service mandates without explicit by-law?
• Memberships: If in ICLEI or similar, confirm the arrangement is advisory only and non-binding, with fees, deliverables, and exit terms disclosed. ICLEI+1

Phase 3 — Safeguard (Model ordinances/resolutions to demand)

Ask Council to introduce and adopt:

1. Surveillance Technology Ordinance (STO) — Prior approval + annual reports for any surveillance tech, whistleblower protections, explicit ban on NDAs, and a community Privacy Commission (Oakland model). Oakland City+1
2. Biometric Guardrails — Prohibit real-time facial recognition and remote biometric ID in public spaces; mandate human review and narrow warrants for any post-hoc biometric search.
3. Smart-Infrastructure Procurement Rules — Require data-minimization, on-prem or Canada-hosted storage, public data dictionaries, open audit APIs, and a no-sell/no-share clause for vendors.
4. Cash-Friendly City Policy — Guarantee cash acceptance for municipal services and forbid cashless-only pilots without a public vote (prevents exclusion and preserves freedom).
5. Public Membership Review — If the city is in ICLEI/other networks, pass a resolution affirming non-binding status and requiring an annual public review of costs, benefits, and any policy influence. ICLEI

Phase 4 — Course-correct (When projects go too far)

Use precedent: Sidewalk Toronto was cancelled after public scrutiny over data governance and economics. Demand pause/terminate/renegotiate where privacy, due process, or community consent are lacking. WIRED+1

Phase 5 — Build parallel, freedom-preserving options

• Money: Favor cash acceptance locally; use credit unions; avoid dependence on single rails. (BoC is researching CBDC; there’s no mandate—keep optionality.) Bank of Canada
• Comms: Neighborhood mesh networks + offline backups for key docs; minimize reliance on vendor clouds.
• Mobility: Community ride-shares, tool libraries, and co-ops that don’t harvest data.
• Digital hygiene: Hardware switches/covers, disable ad IDs, prefer open-source messengers with end-to-end encryption.

Talking points you can lift into remarks/notices

1. “Local law by open vote, not vendor contract.” Smart infrastructure that surveils must be authorized in daylight, with strict limits and public reports. (Cite Oakland as model.) Oakland City
2. “Non-binding isn’t a blank check.” UN/WEF/ICLEI frameworks do not override municipal law. If used, they must be filtered through our Charter, statutes, and by-laws, with public consent. World Economic Forum+1
3. “Proximity without panopticon.” Walkable amenities are fine; mass data collection is not. Keep “15-minute” benefits; reject surveillance creep and geofencing without due process. AP News
4. “Keep cash, keep choice.” Maintain cash options and no ID-or-CBDC-only access to essential city services. (BoC: research only.) Bank of Canada
5. “No NDAs over public rights.” If a contract requires secrecy that blocks council or public oversight, don’t sign it. (Oakland forbids NDAs in this context.) Oakland City

Micro-templates (copy/paste ready)

A. Records request opener (Canada / municipal):

I request, under applicable access to information laws, copies of all contracts, MOUs, PIAs/DPIAs, policies, and data-sharing agreements for smart infrastructure (streetlights, cameras, ALPR, sensors, kiosks, public Wi-Fi, 5G attachments) from 2018 to present, including amendments, NDAs, retention schedules, data ownership clauses, and any law-enforcement access policies. Please include membership agreements and invoices for ICLEI or similar networks, and all grant agreements tied to “smart city” deliverables.

B. Council question set for the record:

Please identify the by-law number, vote date, and scope for each “smart” deployment; the data controller; all third-party recipients; the lawful basis for any police access; and whether the City prohibits facial recognition, predictive analytics, and geofencing. Confirm that cash will remain accepted at municipal counters and that no service will become CBDC-only or digital-ID-only without a by-law and public hearing.

C. Resolution snippet (Surveillance Tech Ordinance intro):

No surveillance technology or smart-infrastructure capable of collecting personally identifiable information may be acquired or used by the City or its departments without: (1) public posting of a use policy and DPIA; (2) approval by Council after a public hearing; (3) annual public reporting; (4) whistleblower protections; and (5) a prohibition on NDAs that restrict Council’s or the public’s oversight.