Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 97 Comments

So I just received my 2016 Canadian Census notice in the mail today, complete with a personalized secure access code, presumably to initiate the self-destruct mechanism attached to the few remaining vestiges of privacy I have in my life, and to potentially out myself – and my family – to both the Canadian and US Governments. In the back of my mind I’m thinking, should I really be this paranoid, just because it’s increasingly likely that everyone is indeed out to get me?

While I have so far managed to elude the FATCA police by sheer luck of having never revealed my birthplace to anyone where I bank, I am now confronted with one of the first true conundrums of my post-OMG moment life – how to respond, if at all, to the following census questions:

2016 Census of Population questions, long form (National Household Survey):

STEP B
1. Including yourself, how many persons usually live at this address on May 10, 2016?
1: Number of Persons

2. Including yourself, list all persons who usually live here on May 10, 2016.
1: Family Name(s); Given Name(s)

STEP C
1. Did you leave anyone out of step B because you were not sure the person should be listed? For example, a student, a child in joint custody, a person temporarily away, a person who lives here temporarily, a resident from another country with a work or study permit, a refugee claimant, etc.

1: No
2: Yes. Specify the name, the relationship and the reason.

STEP E
Copy the names in step B to question 1. Keep the same order.

If more than five persons live here, you will need an extra questionnaire.
1. Name.
In the spaces provided, copy the names in the same order as in step B. Then answer the following questions for each person.
1: Family Name, Given Name

SOCIOCULTURAL INFORMATION

12: Where was this person born?

Specify one response only, according to present boundaries.
Born in Canada
1: Nfld. Lab.
2: P.E.I.
3: N.S.
4: N.B.
5: Quebec
6: Ontario
7: Manitoba
8: Sask.
9: Alberta
10: B.C.
11: Yukon
12: N.W.T.
13: Nunavut

Born outside Canada
14: specify country

13: Of what country is this person a citizen?

Indicate more than one citizenship, if applicable.

“Canada, by naturalization” refers to the process by which an immigrant is granted citizenship of Canada, under the Citizenship Act.

1: Canada, by birth
2: Canada, by naturalization
3: Other country — specify

14: Is this person now, or has this person ever been, a landed immigrant?

A “landed immigrant” (permanent resident) is a person who has been granted the right to live in Canada permanently by immigration authorities.
1: No. Go to question 16.
2: Yes

15: In what year did this person first become a landed immigrant?

Example: Year 1974
1: Year. If exact year is not known, enter best estimate.

PLACE OF BIRTH OF PARENTS

24: Where was each of this person’s parents born?

a) Father

Mark or specify country according to present boundaries.
1: Born in Canada
2: Born outside Canada — specify country
b) Mother

Mark or specify country according to present boundaries.
1: Born in Canada
2: Born outside Canada — specify country

The bottom of the notice reads:

By law, your responses will be kept confidential.
Thank you for your cooperation.

Didn’t the CRA also recently insist that their handing-over of the financial information of hundreds of thousands of Canadians to the US Government is also being kept confidential? How reassuring.

Now, I’m well aware that there are a million other data points out there already broadcasting every detail of my life to whichever three-letter agency might be interested, but it genuinely concerns me that this very explicit package of personal information is being demanded so unequivocally, right now, when so many of us are still figuratively hiding in the attic, not all that far removed from Anne Frank – and the Canadian Government damn well knows it. The threat is right there on the front of the notice:

Complete the census – it’s the law.

So, that perennial philosophical question: what would Jesus do?
If you are a US Person living in Canada in 2016, what will you do?

97 thoughts on “How will YOU respond to the 2016 Canadian Census?”

  1. USXCanada, We’re not stupid. We know there is a risk being truthful on the stats. We don’t trust the Cdn gov’t. But EVERY US related decision that a US slave takes has risks. Once again, US slaves need to make a best attempt at a risk/benefit analysis. It makes no sense to hide ourselves from official stats! There is definite harm to ALL US SLAVES in taking this approach as a group as this will be used against us guaranteed! IMO it is worth the risk that the stats might be used like the FATCA data is being used (i.e. to hunt us and bring us back to the plantation) to get a proper accounting of our numbers. The situation with the census (and thus the decision regarding how to deal with it) is not quite the same as having to decide whether or not to keep your birthplace private from the bank where you KNOW without a doubt what they will do with this information if you give it to them, and nothing good will come of it, only bad.

  2. I am quite sure that a lot of us are already on a ‘naughty list’ just from all the anti-FATCA protesting we’ve done. Yet ‘officially’ we may not be on the OFFICIAL FATCA reporting list generated by the FFI’s. What I am getting at here is that imo, in order to be ‘OFFICIALLY’ reportable, you likely need to be on an OFFICIAL list of US slaves. The Cdn stats are not an OFFICIAL list of US slaves because they are supposed to be anonymous. Will that change in future? Will the stats become an OFFICIAL list of US slaves one day? Will the Brock website become an OFFICIAL list of US slaves in future? Who knows for sure? Nothing is certain. And at this point, some of us have nothing left to lose. We can’t get out by the ‘sauve qui peut’ method USX keeps promoting as this worked for HIM/HER; our only hope is to act as a group. A group that doesn’t attempt to pretend it doesn’t exist.

  3. @USX, Are you a government paid troll posing as an ex-US person who is wiser than the rest of us who are still stuck in this US-made, Canada-backed, tax and reporting quagmire? Cause if the CDN or American governments were to hire someone for that job, you’d fit the bill.

    Governments want us to be continually brainwashed into thinking ‘sauve qui peut.’ That is a guaranteed win for them and loss for us and for all our Canadian children’s futures, no matter whether US person tainted or not.

  4. I think he/she’s just someone who likes to fart when walking by the water cooler.

  5. The Canadian and American governments will love it if lots of US persons living in Canada were to deny on the Canadian census forms their American connections. Think of that before you decide how to fill out those forms!

  6. @ Bubblebustin
    LOL — If I had been drinking my morning orange juice it would be all over the keyboard right now.

  7. Five lessons in socio-political logic:

    (1) If the administrative state (Harper-Trudeau) is not your friend, the judicial state (Martineau) will not be your friend either.
    (2) Trite touchstone myths are designed by states to sustain illusions of democracy and freedom (try Rosa Parks). Corollary: rarely will “justice” serve anything except power.
    (3) If the 2006 StatsCan data on Americans in Canada looks like junk, why would anyone except a brain-fried statist expect more from 2016 results?
    (4) The quintessential American believes that s/he can | discover | invent | kill | overthrow | you-name-it | anything. Including Canadian subservience to FATCA and inbred Canadian ressentiment toward everything American.
    (5) What exactly have Canadian Indigenous court decisions brought to the people on the ground? (That’s a pun.) Respect at the Mount Polley mine site?
     

  9. “it’s possible that a US defense contractor (Lockheed Martin), bound by the Patriot Act, will now have the coordinates of the homes of everyone living in Canada. They make drones, don’t they?”

    @embee. Uh. Not to worry you or anything

  11. “This personal information has enjoyed the highest level of security and is only accessible to Statistics Canada employees, and for authorized reasons.”

    Northern Shrike, my maternal uncle used to be head statistician for Stats Can. He wouldn’t hesitate to rat me AND my family out to the USG if he could profit from it. You think I’d trust ANYONE there? You’ve seen the court decisions. No one in the government gives a shit about justice and the general public takes the attitude of “so what, it doesn’t affect me, so I don’t give a shit.”

    The only thing we can do now is passive resistance. And RESIST I SHALL.

  12. Statistician Hideo Mimoto (chief of the social security section at Statistics Canada ). Not there now. But if he is the pinnacle of the quality of people hired at CDN positions, I fear for this country and for the future of those affected by FATCA and those traitorous government bureaucrats.

    Don’t think that STATSCAN will keep any information private; they’ll tell you one thing out one side of their mouth and lie with the other.

    Since they decided to outsource our private information to a company with foreign ties; they broke the promise of privacy and it is up to Canadians to protect themselves.

  13. Hmm, Animal, I guess your uncle was the right age to be incarcerated in a Canadian concentration camp due to his ancestry. Did he rat himself out?

  14. Norman Diamond; the ethics that my uncle displays in life and the circumstances of his incarceration are two different subjects. You may be married to a Japanese citizen but do not presume to know the dynamics of a Japanese-Canadian family of which you have NO CONNECTION to.

  15. Animal wrote: “my maternal uncle used to be head statistician for Stats Can. He wouldn’t hesitate to rat me AND my family out to the USG if he could profit from it”

    so I asked: ‘ Did he rat himself out?’

    Animal retorted: “do not presume to know the dynamics of a Japanese-Canadian family of which you have NO CONNECTION to.”

    I didn’t presume anything; my question followed logically from what you wrote.

    P.S. If my wife were a Japanese citizen, she wouldn’t have needed to apply for, let alone be rejected for, tourist visas to Japan, Canada, and the US. So Animal, perhaps you should not presume to know the dynamics etc.

  16. The decisions Stats Canada (and by extension the government of Canada) has made by hiring Lockheed Martin indicates either evil intent or incompetence, debating which it is is pointless, because either way it deserves our distrust.

    All I know is that if Stats Can really cared about our privacy, they would at the very least be very careful with maintaining a perception of privacy. It just does not make sense to poke the privacy monster in the eye by hiring the likes of Lockheed Martin when almost any other company would have been able to do the same job without the US Patriot Act and military baggage that came with it.

  17. My uncle is a Canadian citizen. He has no US CONNECTIONS. But he would potentially gain a snitch profit from the IRS from “ratting us out”.

    and exactly WHAT is the point of your asking about whether he ratted himself out to the CDN government prior to the internment? The RCMP already had their eyes on Japanese Canadians after Pearl Harbor. So your question is moot.

    And if you’re talking about “blood is thicker than…” You haven’t seen my maternal family’s social dynamics. So again, I ask “what’s your fucking point?!”

  18. “All I know is that if Stats Can really cared about our privacy, they would at the very least be very careful with maintaining a perception of privacy. It just does not make sense to poke the privacy monster in the eye by hiring the likes of Lockheed Martin when almost any other company would have been able to do the same job without the US Patriot Act and military baggage that came with it.” ~ Middle Finger.

    Exactly.

  19. ‘my maternal uncle used to be head statistician for Stats Can. He wouldn’t hesitate to rat me AND my family out to the USG if he could profit from it’

    From which the question logically follows, would he rat himself out to the Canadian government if he could make a profit from it.

    Perhaps his sense of ethics was that he would only rat Canadians out to foreign governments, not to his own? Hey wait, isn’t that what Canada does with its privacy legislation?

    ‘And if you’re talking about “blood is thicker than…”’

    I wasn’t, but I understand now. He would rat you out because you have blood in your veins, but he wouldn’t rat himself out because he doesn’t have any.

    Anyway Animal, if you don’t want people reading and making logical inferences from what YOU WROTE, maybe you need to post somewhere where logic is lacking?

  20. “would he rat himself out to the Canadian government if he could make a profit from it.”

    Ratting oneself out usually implies a detrimental position for the “person being ratted out on”… There is NO logic in your inference. Diamond.

    Let me state to you my position on Stats Can and my uncle.

    1. I do not trust my mother’s side of the family at all. And he has proven himself to be opportunistic. He would not hesitate to rat anyone else other than himself, out to any government (including Canada’s) if he could foresee himself profiting from it.

    2. My wife is a US citizen living in Canada. And as such my children (born in Canada) have US taint. Should he gain knowledge of my wife’s country of birth; he would no doubt sleep comfortably and secure in the reward money that he would get “ratting her and my kids out to the IRS”.

    3. I have no doubt that Lockheed Martin (Canada) has a back door deal to provide any information on US persons living in Canada they collect through their census for STATSCAN to the IRS. And I consider STATSCAN’s use of a foreign corporation to collect Canadians’ private data to be an act akin to treason.

    Is that fucking simple enough for you?!!!

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: