text:
How can Blame be Apportioned in "Macbeth"? Essay
The title of the play is "Macbeth". It was written by William Shakespeare around 1606 for King James I. This is a play of many opposites, especially good versus evil. Meaning that through this play there is always good opposing evil. In the period that Shakespere lived and King James reigned, there were people (Jacobeans) who believed in the existence of witches. Witch craft was very important in the days the play was witten because people strongly belived in witches and believed in their "powers". These people hated witches and could accuse anybody of being one just because they were different or had a mark on their body: this mark was seen as the devil's mark.
When Lady Macbeth receives the letter at the beginning of the play her reaction when she reads her husband's letter is powerful and dramatic. As soon as she's finished reading, she has decided she will make sure Macbeth is king
"Glamis thou art, and Cawdor, and shalt be
What thou art promised."
It's as if she and her husband are thinking exactly the same thing. She does not hesitate for a moment. Lady Macbeth does for her husband what he cannot do for himself: she encourages him to take chances, to further his ambitions at any cost, to do things no other man would dare. And he follows, spurred on by her sheer enthusiasm and daring.
In the early scenes we see her in action. She is always in charge. She takes control. She acts in a practical manner when Macbeth expresses doubts about murdering the king, organising and planning the deed with precision. She appears to be absolutely secure in her belief in her husband's claim to the throne and her own position at his side as queen. So she supports him and, when he can do no more, she herself gilds the faces of the grooms with blood. When he is doubtful she comes to the rescue:
"Macbeth: If we should fail?"
Lady Macbeth:We fail?But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail."
In a sense, Lady Macbeth shares the same characteristics as her husband, but in her the reader sees an excess that Macbeth would like to control until convinced by her that success is within their grasp. So, like Macbeth, the reader sees her as ambitious, proud, ruthless, and manipulative. Her belief in their great venture overrides all else. It becomes an obsession with her, as it must with her husband. We watch with admiration as she manipulates Macbeth, using all her feminine wiles to achieve her purpose. How well she understands her husband and his needs. She knows immediately that murdering Duncan is the only way of quickly achieving her goal
"He that's coming,
Must be provided for." (I, v)
When Macbeth brings further news that Duncan is actually coming to spend that night with them, it becomes clear that her role is to seize the moment and facilitate her husband's rise to kingship.
Later in the play she acts out the role of accomplished hostess and wife when, at the banquet, Macbeth gives in to his fears, caught up in doubt and dismay. Earlier in the play she used guile when dealing with Duncan, making him believe she welcomed him as king and kinsman. We cannot but note the irony as she speaks to Duncan with such apparent sincerity and respect:
"All our service
In every point twice done and then done double,
Were poor and single business to contend
Against those honours deep and broad wherewith
Your majesty loads our house."
Her ability for deception also comes to the fore when she faints at the news of Duncan's death a clever move to detract attention at a key and tense moment.
In public she relies on the appearance of normality, of being in control. In private she drops the role, allowing her truly devious ideas full flight. At this time we see her as a vicious and driven woman. We watch in awe as she goes about achieving her aims, using her powers and wiles as a woman to win over her husband: Lady Macbeth uses different methods to persuade Macbeth to change his mind.
She says he has already promised to do it.
"What beast was't then
That made you break your enterprise to me?"
She taunts Macbeth's masculinity by calling him a coward
"Art thou afeared
to be the same in thine own act and valour
as thou art in desire?"
This is an important part of her approach. Macbeth's rank and fame depend on his courage and bravery.
She says he cannot love her. This personal taunt really hits home for Macbeth. It is unexpected because their relationship is so intense.
"From this time
such I account thy love."
Lady Macbeth is really shocking when she says she would have smashed her own baby to the floor rather than go back on a promise. This is good because it shows how dedicated she is to Macbeth
This would be the ultimate sacrifice she makes the point that she knew the joy of being a mother, and would have given that up for Macbeth to be king. She uses terrible, violent imagery as a shock tactic
"I have given suck, and know
Have pluck'd my nipple from his boneless gums,
And dash'd the brains out, had I so sworn as you
Have done to this." (I, vii)
She realises that Macbeth's doubt needs to be overcome quickly and this needs extreme measures. If they delay one night, the chance is gone.
Almost inevitably, once they find themselves so caught up in evil that they cannot escape, the relationship begins to break up. Macbeth no longer relies on his wife. The strength she once showed has been passed on to him. He is now in control. Her support is no longer necessary. In a sense, she has fulfilled her role and is in danger of being left behind, lonely and neglected, while her husband goes about the business of making war and defending his position. Lady Macbeth does not appear in Act IV she is then seen as an isolated, broken and mentally disturbed woman, no longer the "partner in greatness" that was seen earlier in the play.
Lady Macbeth seems totally devoted to evil. She calls upon the forces of evil to unsex her, taking away the very compassion that is usually associated with the female sex – a truly frightening thing for a Jacobean audience whose image of womanhood was one of compassion and meekness. There is a dreadful destructiveness in her words, a fervour and commitment that is truly frightening:
"Come, you Spirits
That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
And fill me, from the crown to the toe, top-full
Of direst cruelty."
There is only one aim in life to achieve the goal of kingship for Macbeth, with her at his side. In the pursuit of this aim it becomes necessary to put aside any semblance of weakness or tenderness. She relies solely on her strength of will, made greater by the forces of evil upon which she calls. She becomes the essence of evil: cruel, heartless, free of the morality of mankind, taking events into her own hands to create her own reality. Yet it is this denial of reality that will finally be her downfall. She is awesome in her commitment, yet pathetic in her belief in herself and the powers of darkness.
From her first appearance we are made aware of the enormity of her desire to succeed at all costs – in spite of her husband's apparent virtuous and compassionate nature
"Come thick night,
And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of Hell,
That my keen knife see not the wound it makes,
Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark
To cry, 'Hold, hold!"
Lady Macbeth seems inherently evil, but we should consider that she is trapped by the very same device that leads to her husband's downfall. Her dark and evil thoughts are prompted by Macbeth's letter. If he had not met the Witches, her ambition might also have lain dormant.
As mentioned, it is necessary for Lady Macbeth to deny reality. She ignores the rules of humanity and organised (Christian) society, pursuing her own ruthless motives. In the process she reject even her own femininity. However, there are flaws in her control. Repeatedly Lady Macbeth gives the appearance of being in control but like so much else in the play this comes at a price. Lady Macbeth cannot simply create her own reality, cut off from society and humanity. What we see in the latter part of the play is a woman who must accept the rules of civilised people, the reality that she too is part of humanity, even though it is too late for change.
Earlier in the play Lady Macbeth was unable to kill the king herself, claiming he looked too much like her. Not much later she advises her husband: "These deeds must not be thought / After these ways: so, it will make us mad." Now this is exactly what we see at the end of the play: a woman driven to madness and eventual self-destruction by her guilt and despair, yet still unwilling to accept reality and her own weakness. There is a marked frailty and vulnerability about her final appearance in the play. We see a woman out of control. Filled with guilt and fear she re-enacts past happenings, her mind wandering from one event to another:
"Out, damed spot! Out, I say! – One; two, why then
'tis time to do't – Hell is murky! – Fie, my Lord, fie!
A soldier and afeard? – What need we fear who know
it, when none can call our power to account? Yet who
would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him?"
At the beginning of the play Macbeth is the "bravest" soldier and the honourable Thane of Glamis. His rank and nobility are of great value, and he seems to be fit for his status. But his encounter with the witches awakens in him a deep impatient ambition. Immediately after the first prophecy of being Thane of Cawdor becomes true the "horrid image" of the murder of King Duncan in order to become king himself crosses his mind. He is not totally cold and solely ambitious as shown by his terror of the murder image, which thoroughly defies his loyalty. There is love in Macbeth as shown by his letter to Lady Macbeth in which he calls her his "dearest partner of greatness." Macbeth is already thinking about being king but he is undecided about whether it is better to succumb to the temptation presented by the witches or to wait for Fate to crown him. Banquo warns him that at times evil forces "tell us truths . . . to betray's in deepest consequence."
Even though he does not state it out loud, Macbeth does care about morality and religion, as demonstrated in his soliloquy where he lists the three reasons why he should not kill Duncan: he is "his kinsman," "his subject" and "his host." Macbeth adds that "Duncan hath born his faculties so meek, hath been so clear in his great office, that his virtues will plead like angels." Lady Macbeth knows her husband and feels that he is "too full o' th' milk of human kindness." To counter this she accuses Macbeth of being a coward if he does not kill Duncan. Macbeth does not want to be a coward, either as soldier or as husband, so he accepts to murder Duncan. His ambition and self-image of bravery win over his virtues. Nevertheless he is remorseful after murdering Duncan, and he masks his fear of being found with rage against the supposed murderers and thus kills the drunken guards.
Already being King Macbeth is troubled by remorse and cannot sleep easily. Also, Macbeth is fearful of Banquo because he knows what the witches prophesied and may suspect Macbeth. Another thing that bothers him is that he has the demeanor of a king and that the witches promised Banquo a lineage of kings while they only promised him to be king. He refuses to accept that he turned evil just for Banquo's lineage to be kings and so decides to challenge Fate by killing Banquo and his descendants. Once he does he is haunted by Banquo's death and troubled because his son Fleance escaped. He is also worried about the loyalty of other lords, like Macduff. Overall, Macbeth exchanged his peace of mind and virtues for a troublesome crown by allowing his impatient passion for desire of power to overcome his senses. This clearly illustrates that "foul is fair and fair is foul."
As time advances Macbeth is more and more unsure about his security as king. To know the best or worst the future holds for him, Macbeth visits the witches. The witches reassure him that he will reign. Through apparitions he is told that he will not be defeated until the Wood of Birnam comes to Dunsinane and that anybody born of woman cannot harm him. Both of these seem impossible events to Macbeth. The images of a line of kings in Banquo's likeness does torment him, though. The magnitude of his relentless and now evil morality shows through his orders to assassinate all of Macduff's family when he finds out that Macduff has fled to England.
The news that Malcolm and his troop come to Dunsinane annoy him, but he rests on the promises of the witches and refuses to be afraid. By this time Macbeth is wary of all the trouble being king has brought him. He laments that even if he prevails he will not have honour, love , and obedience in old age. He fully laments that being king is not worth the peace of mind he and Lady Macbeth enjoyed before. Also the health of Lady Macbeth worries him. Her suicide does not strike him so much with grief but rather unleashes his disenchantment and pessimistic view of life. He bitterly reflects: "[Life] is tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." And when he discovers that Birnam Wood apparently moves toward Dunsinane he realises that the witches cheated him. Nevertheless, he decides to die honourably in battle. On seeing that he will lose the war, he considers but then dismisses suicide. He still clings to the second prophecy of the witches that nobody born of woman can hurt him.
When Macduff encounters Macbeth the small but still present moral consciousness of Macbeth is shown through his refusal to fight Macduff because his is already too guilty with the blood of Macduff's family. Macbeth is sure he will kill Macduff too because he is born of a woman. But when Macduff declares that he was "untimely ripped" from his mother's womb Macbeth is afraid and still refuses to fight. Only when Macduff threatens to tie him to a pole and make of him a public spectacle does Macbeth fight Macduff. Macbeth still has dignity at the end and proves not to be a coward by perishing in battle.
Macbeth was tempted and cheated by the witches. His own ambitions and passions deceived him into changing his virtues for unrest and immorality. At the end he is wary of life and fully aware of his deception. He pays all the consequences of his betrayal but still dies like a brave soldier.
The witches or "weird sisters" as agents rather than characters. They serve a very definite purpose and play an important role in the play. It is on their instigation that Macbeth is tempted to kill the king in order to gain the throne. The limits to their power are clearly expressed in the opening of the play when the First Witch determines to revenge herself upon the sailor and, by association, his wife. He will waste away, unable to sleep. However, "Though his bark cannot be lost, / Yet shall it be tempest-tossed" Their power is limited. They cannot alter fate. The association with Macbeth is important. Macbeth is lost not because he cannot resist their temptations but because he gives in to his own unrestricted ambition. What they do is make statements about the future. It is Macbeth who chooses to follow up on what they have to say, making the decision to act upon their suggestions once he is proclaimed Thane of Cawdor, an indication that there might be truth in their prophecies.
The witches represent all that is uncreative in the play, an inversion of the natural order. Macbeth, very much under their spell, speaks of his life having "fallen into the sere, the yellow leaf" a reference to the degeneration that has taken place in the character. Their weirdness is reinforced by their appearance: as woman with beards they appear loathsome and repellent.
The witches challenge the forces of virtue and order in the universe. By having sold their souls to the devil they are able to challenge moral order. They use apparitions in order to perform the devil's work: "Say, if thou'dst hear it from our mouths, / Or from our masters"
The purpose of the witches is to kindle the evil ambition they know Macbeth will find hard to resist. Thus they betray the Thane by deceiving him into believing the truth of their prophecies, drawing him into their world of evil. By gaining the trust and confidence of Macbeth they are able to bring about political and social disorder. The very state of Scotland and its people are at risk as Macbeth moves deeper into evil. They provide the false courage and perverted values that will betray the better half of Macbeth by appealing to the worst in the man. What they do in the play is tempt the Thane with ambiguous words. It is still Macbeth who makes the choices. They are linked to the major imagery and themes of the play, not least the examination of appearance and reality.
The play is entitled The Tragedy of Macbeth. This suggests that the main character is a tragic hero. This implies the downfall of a man of great standing, intelligence and personal power someone respected for his courageous deeds. Because of a fatal flaw in his character, we watch his decline and inevitable death. During the course of the play we are encouraged to feel terror and pity as we watch the tragic consequences of his behaviour.
The point has been made repeatedly that Macbeth is first portrayed as a great man. We also watch his decline into evil as a result of his ambition, encouraged all the way by his wife. We are fearful as we watch his evil deeds and the way in which he copes with important decisions. We are even impressed at the end of the play that he chooses to fight instead of just giving in. However, it is too late. The evil deeds committed by Macbeth far outweigh any true feelings if sympathy we might have for the man. So at the end of the play Malcolm speaks of Macbeth as a "dead butcher"..
The way in which the playwright presents the character, allowing us to share in his most intimate thoughts, certainly encourages pity. Also, Shakespeare gives Macbeth some of the most stirring poetry to speak so that his words and the skilful images he uses move us. But then Macbeth is a tyrant, a vicious and thoughtless killer who allows nothing to stand in his way. Perhaps the tragedy is that we see the decline of a man who had so much in his favour: he has all the potential for success. It is not his death that moves us then but rather the realisation that here we see a man who has given in to his inherent weakness. As traitor, tyrant and murderer he deserves to be punished by death. Yet we cannot help but feel a sense of loss that comes with the destruction of a great man.
Before judging too harshly, look again at how the man struggles with life and the choice he has to make in the great soliloquies Shakespeare gives this character to speak:
This play is a tragedy because of all the pointless killings that take place in the story of Macbeth. Duncan was an innocent man who was killed because of Macbeth's greediness to become king. Banquo was another innocent man who was murdered because of Macbeth's fear of what might happen to him if Banquo told everyone who really killed Duncan. Lady Macduff and her son were two very insignificant characters in the play and did not deserve to die because they were not at fault. The killings that take place in the play, with a doubt, were entirely unnecessary. Therefore making Macbeth a tragedy. Nevertheless, if this play was not to have these, redundant killings take place; Macbeth would have been a very boring play that the people in Shakespeare's time would have not enjoyed. So Shakespeare included these killings into the play for a reason, and that was to make this one of the greatest tragic plays ever written.
Lady Macbeth fulfils her role among the nobility and is well respected like Macbeth. King Duncan calls her "our honoured hostess." She is loving to her husband but at the same time very ambitious, as shown by her immediate determination for Macbeth to be king. This outcome will benefit her and her husband equally. She immediately concludes that "the fastest way" for Macbeth to become king is by murdering King Duncan.
Lady Macbeth's immediate thoughts may make her appear as thoroughly irreligiously cold and ambitious, but this is not so. To prepare for what she feels must be done she calls on evil spirits to "stop up th' access and passage to remorse" in order to be relentless. Otherwise her conscience would not allow her to act. Lady Macbeth knows her husband well. She thinks he may be too kind in order to murder King Duncan. This is why she represses her conscience so she can later usher Macbeth into committing the deed. At first Macbeth agrees. But later Macbeth wavers in his decision. But Lady Macbeth is sure that being king is what Macbeth really wants and that this is the best for both of them. So, in response to Macbeth's uncertainty, Lady Macbeth manipulates him by questioning his manhood and his love for her. She is successful because regardless of his own conscience Macbeth carries out their plan of murder.
The almost superhuman strength Lady Macbeth rallies for the occasion and her artful and sly ability are shown through her meticulous attention to detail regarding the murder. When Macbeth returns to their chamber she goes back to the murder scene and cleverly smears the grooms with Duncan's blood. However, her morals had prevailed just a while before as revealed through her comment that she would have killed Duncan herself had he not "resembled [her] father as he slept."
Perhaps Lady Macbeth felt that suppressing her conscience for the deed was enough and that later the thought of the deed would just dissipate. The outcome is not this way, though, because Macbeth and Lady Macbeth often cannot go to sleep, and if they do, they experience terrifying dreams. But still, Lady Macbeth is able to maintain her sanity and composure during the day, even more than her husband is. She urges him to be light hearted and merry. Once she practically rescues Macbeth from the frailty of his own conscience. When Macbeth sees Banquo's ghost she creates an excuse to explain his odd behaviour. She attempts to chasten Macbeth by again questioning his manhood. When the situation grows worse though, she takes charge once more and promptly dismisses the lords from the feast.
Later, though, the burden of Lady Macbeth's conscience becomes too great for her and her mental and physical condition deteriorates. A gentlewoman observes her sleepwalking and consults a doctor. The doctor and the lady observe Lady Macbeth sleepwalking, madly trying to cleanse her hands of the blood of Duncan and Macduff's family. Still in her sleep, Lady Macbeth asks, "what, will these hands ne're be clean?" foreseeing that she will never have peace of mind. She also retells events of the day Duncan was murdered. The doctor tells the gentlewoman that what Lady Macbeth needs is spiritual and not physical help.
The three witches in the tragedy Macbeth are introduced right at the beginning of the play. They recount to Macbeth three prophecies. That Macbeth will be Thane of Cawdor, Thane of Glamis and King. These prophecies introduce Macbeth to ideas of greatness. Macbeth will eventually follow through on killing king Duncan, a destruction of the natural order it was sometimes thought that the witches had the ability to reverse the natural order of things.
This brings into the play idea of fate and the role with which it has in the play. One can wonder if Macbeth ever had a chance of doing what was right after he met with the witches. It is however more realistic to believe that Macbeth was responsible for his own actions throughout the play as in the end it was he who made the final decisions. Banquo says, "The instruments of darkness tell us truths, / Win us with honest trifles, to betray 's / In deepest consequence." He thinks and says bad things of the witches. He calls them instruments of darkness and the devil. He might believe that these prophecies will only bring harm even before anything begins to happen. So his best friend warns Macbeth before he makes any decisions that the witches are evil, and what they suggest is evil. The witches could foretell the future, they can add temptation, and influence Macbeth, because they had told Macbeth that he would be King he became impatient and tried to hurry it as quickly as he could. But they can not control his destiny.
Macbeth creates his own misery when he is driven by his own sense of guilt. This causes him to become insecure as to the reasons for his actions which in turn causes him to commit more murders. The witches offer great enticement, but it is in the end, each individual decision to fall for the temptation or to be strong enough to resist their captivation. The three Witches are only responsible for the introduction of these ideas and for further forming ideas in Macbeth head, but they are not responsible for his actions throughout the play. Lady Macbeth is shown early in the play as an ambitious woman with a single purpose. She can manipulate Macbeth easily. This is shown in the line "That I may pour my spirits in thine ear". She is selfless, and wants what is best for her husband. It is Lady Macbeth who states "Thou wouldst be great/ Art not without ambition." Macbeth states that it is "his besetting sin: I have no spur/ To prick the sides of my intent, but only/ Vaulting ambition." Macbeth's continued ambition is present in his wanting to have a succession of kings after him. Macbeth's ambition is deep within him and because of this, both the witches and Lady Macbeth are able to sway him to evil.
FIRST WITCH: All hail Macbeth, hail to thee Thane of Glamis
SECOND WITCH: All hail Macbeth, hail to thee Thane of Cawdor.
THIRD WITCH: All hail Macbeth, that shalt be King hereafter.
Macbeth is startled when he hears this prophecy. He believes that his title is still Thane of Glamis; yet here he has just been told that he shall be King. He does not know Macdonwald who has been sentenced to death for betraying his country. The witches' plant the idea of being King into Macbeth's mind, which has encourages Macbeth to consider his future.
In his soliloquy, the audience learns about Macbeth's initial plan to murder Duncan so that he shall have power and position earlier, thus destroying the natural order.
'My thought, whose murther is yet but fantastical.'
Macbeth sent a letter to Lady Macbeth outlining the witches' prophecy. He also consults her concerning his plans. This is how Macbeth reduces some of the responsibility of the incident of the murder by accepting her guidance and advice.
Macbeth always had free will from his first encounter with the witches. He independently decides to believe the supernatural powers of the witches will help him; and it is him and Lady Macbeth that make the witches prophecy come true. There is no evidence to suggest that the witches made the future even though Macbeth could have waited for natural order to proceed; but he couldn't wait.
The witches and evil can play a small part in the final conclusion. Their prophecies encouraged Macbeth's ambition to be king. The witches told him he had nothing to fear because he could not be killed by a man born from a woman.
'The power of man: for none of woman born
Shall harm Macbeth.'
There is plenty of evidence in the early scenes of the play that Macbeth is a valiant soldier and a noble Thane. He is well respected by the other Thanes, who speak highly of his performance in battle. He is a soldier of note, a worthy opponent in battle. He kills Macdonwald and helps defeats the Norwegian forces. He is, in fact, crucial to the army, his king and country – "Bellona's bridegroom", as Ross describes him. Macbeth is a loyal friend to the king and his fellow Thanes, and a worthy kinsman. His courage is admired, his loyalty beyond question. In all, he appears to be a man very much in control of himself and his emotions. However, it is in this early section of the play that Macbeth and Banquo meet the witches. Immediately a new element is introduced, as Macbeth appears very disturbed by their words. Banquo says: "Good Sir, why do you start, and seem to fear / Things that do sound so fair?".
The idea of kingship suddenly seems within his grasp, especially once he is declared Thane of Cawdor. From this time onwards we share in the slow decline of a great hero in his own right, until finally we see only the sad and lonely man who anticipates the meaninglessness of his future. Although it is very necessary for Shakespeare to show the heroic Thane in action, it also adds to our sense of loss as we watch Macbeth's descent into evil, prompted by personal ambition and the prophecy of the forces of darkness. Only at the end of the play, as he puts on his armour to fight, is there a glimmer of the old fearless warrior Macbeth.Or could it be fear that prompts Macbeth to face Macduff? Or is he still so sure of the witches' prophecies that he is prepared to fight the very man against whom he has been warned? Does Macbeth regain something of our respect or does he die a coward? This is an issue about which you must think very carefully. The text suggests he would rather face death than suffer the humiliation and degradation that would follow his capture.
" I will not yield
To kiss the ground before young Malcolm's feet,
And be baited with the rabble's curse."
The greater part of the play is devoted to this aspect. We see Macbeth in action, we hear of his actions, others comment on his reign of terror.There can be no doubt that Macbeth is a wicked and corrupt monarch. In part this is necessary, for Shakespeare wants to show what happens when there is a disturbance in the legal succession of the monarchy. So Macbeth is the very opposite of Duncan and, later in the play, Edward the Confessor of England. Both stand out for their kindness and compassion, their care for their subjects and the honest manner in which they deal with life.
In comparison, from the moment he is crowned king at Scone, Macbeth executes a reign of terror that had already started with the killing of Duncan. Together with Lady Macbeth he is ruthless in pursuing his own selfish aims. He organises the death of those whom he sees as rivals and thus a threat to his safety. He is merciless in wiping out the Macduff family, an act of mindless horror. In every sense of the word, Macbeth may be termed a 'tyrant'. We are reminded that this is the epitaph pronounced by Malcolm at the end of the play.
However, there is another side to Macbeth the king. Although we see him desperately trying to keep up appearances when in public in the banquet scene, we are also aware of the difficulty he has staying in control. We share in his indecision and anguish when he is faced with killing the king his much admired kinsman, monarch and guest. Later, once the deed is completed, Macbeth is obsessed with guilt. He cannot sleep, he has difficulty making decisions and he mistrusts all those around him. His conscience constantly reminds him of the enormity of the deed he has committed. Yet, in spite of all the guilt and remorse, Macbeth is unable to confess and give up his position. Instead he isolates himself from his fellow man, living instead in a twilight world of his own. Fearful, his last days are spent as a worn out and tired man who realises the uselessness of his ambition and bloody deeds. There is a world weariness about his speech after he has received the news of his wife's death and the inevitability of an attack on his castle.
"Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death …
Life's but a walking shadow …
… it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."
There is an aspect of Macbeth that we tend to forget in all the horror and fear with which we are faced. The above lines show another side of Macbeth: that of a man with a great deal of sensitivity and imagination. Shakespeare gives Macbeth some of the most moving and insightful lines to speak, particularly in the soliloquies creating an almost poetic side to the otherwise repulsive character. This in no way justifies his cruel and savage actions. Instead, it heightens our awareness of the unbearable situation in which the man finds himself. In a sense, we share in his guilt and fear, the great burden of weariness with which the play ends. We are also aware of the great loss that begins when Macbeth succumbs to the witches' appeal to his darker side and his wife's insistence that he carry through their decision to murder the king.In the end Macbeth the king is defeated and order is restored. He does not die a hero's death but is rather slain in an act of revenge against the individual and the usurper king.
At the beginning of the play Macbeth and his wife appear to have a good relationship. They depend on one another, planning and plotting the death of Duncan. However, at this stage it is Lady Macbeth who emerges as the stronger and more determined. She uses all her powers to convince her husband to kill the king. This includes her attempt to shame Macbeth into action and prompt him to assassinate Duncan:
" I dare do all that may become a man;
Who dares do more, is none."
Lady Macbeth:
That made you break this enterprise to me?
When you durst do it, then you were a man;
And to be more than what you were, you would
Be much more the man."
We also learn much about the character of Macbeth from what his wife has to say in these early scenes. Perhaps she, better than anyone else – being closest to him – is able to understand the conflict he suffers in making decisions that involve death and destruction. Her words in Act 1 are important, showing her understanding of her husband and his shortcomings:
Thou wouldst be great,
Art not without ambition, but without
The illness that should attend it.
(Act 1, scene 5, line 17-19)
At first Macbeth resists, but after his wife's forceful attack on his manhood he gives in. It is noticeable that Macbeth and Lady Macbeth are equal partners in the killing of Duncan, but that after Macbeth becomes king he excludes her from his plans. When she asks about his plans for Banquo he replies:
Be innocent of the knowledge, dearest chuck,
Till thou applaud the deed.
Yet Macbeth is always bothered by his conscience. This reaches a climax in the banquet scene when he sees the ghost of Banquo. Again it is Lady Macbeth who steps in to save the situation, keeping up appearances and encouraging the Thanes to leave. However, there are decided signs of strain in the relationship:
Macbeth: Why, so, being gone,
I am a man again. – Pray you sit still.
You have displaced the mirth, broke the
good meeting
With most admired disorder.
The relationship between husband and wife is clearly becoming strained. Both move into their own worlds. They become distant and removed from one another. When the news finally comes that Lady Macbeth has died, Macbeth replies very strangely: "She should have died hereafter" . This response invites discussion. Is Macbeth genuinely moved to grief at the news, expressing the desire to have had time to mourn? Is he suggesting this is not the right time for such news and that had she lived she would have shared with him the success he anticipates in battle? Or is he just being dismissive, passing over her death as simply another in a series of disasters? Is he suggesting she would have died at some time or other in any case? Perhaps this is his way of dealing with the anguish of the death of his "dearest love" (Act 1, scene 5, line 58). Before you make a decision you will have to read the soliloquy that follows his initial remark about his wife's death, one of the great speeches in the play: "Tomorrow, and tomorrow …" During the course of the play Shakespeare shows us the breakdown of what might have been a sound and fulfilled marriage – yet another price Macbeth has to pay for his "vaulting ambition".
There seems to be strong evidence of the latter option, in terms of the themes of the play and Shakespeare's 'message': that there is a price to pay for evil. We do see that once Macbeth is on his way, there is no 'cure'. He goes on with a determination and resolve that knows no bounds. Although he frequently questions his own behaviour, he does nothing about changing. Instead, he goes back to the witches – and this time there is no doubt he makes the choice to consult them.
Macbeth puts his belief in what he hears from the witches and in this he has the backing of his wife. The witches, who speak in the passive voice, do not give instructions or tell Macbeth what to do. Instead, they tell him what he will be. Although he hesitates initially, he is quick to take action, making plans for the future so that the witches' words can become reality. The audience is aware that, in the end, the equivocal nature of the witches' predictions must lead to his downfall. It is suggested that Lady Macbeth takes her own life and is thus beyond the bounds of Christian redemption and salvation.
Shakespeare seems to imply that once we are committed to following a path of evil, it is very difficult to break away – even though there is always the chance of redemption. Macbeth chooses never to consider the alternative. Once he has made the decision to put into action the witches' predictions he follows the path he has chosen with a bloody determination. In Act 3 he claims, "I am in blood / Stepp'd so far, that, should I wade no more / Returning were as tedious as go o'er."
It was a true Halloween night Essay
Macbeth – Lady Macbeth's Arguments of Persuasion Essay
What Influence do the Witches and Lady Macbeth have over Macbeth? Essay
Macbeth – Evil Tyrant or Man of Conscience? Essay
How Does Shakespeare Make the Presentation of Lady Macbeth Dramatically Effective? Essay
Close Analysis: Macbeth Scene 3:4 Essay
Lady Macbeth – A Fiend Like Queen or Lady of Remorse? Essay
Shakespeare's Macbeth Act 2 Scene 2 Essay
Two Different Film Versions, of Shakespeare's Macbeth Essay
← Consumerism is a concept that has been increasing throughout society Essay
air newzealand →


TICKETS NOW ON SALE FOR JUST £5!
At this months Event & practice session we will demonstrate the powerful NLP technique "Belief Change Cycle" which will enable you to overcome any limiting beliefs and help you to live the life of your dreams.
There will be a chance to speak to the NLP Centre of Excellence team & trainers at the end of the session with any questions that you may have.
How to smash limiting beliefs and build a brighter future:Our beliefs are at the core of who we are. Beliefs guide our decisions and behavior in all areas of life. They determine what we think is or is not possible. More often than not they prove to be self-fulfilling prophecies.
Some of our beliefs are not fully our own, but rather blindly taken on from others. Once a belief is formed, we work overtime to prove it right, even if the belief is something negative like "Nobody likes me" or "I am a failure." Do we have to let our beliefs govern us, even if they are harmful to others and ourselves? Can we consciously make changes to what we believe?
In the first half of the 20th century the world believed that it was impossible to run a mile under four minutes. When, on May 6th 1954, Roger Bannister ran a mile in 3.59 minutes, everyone was in awe. Then, a curious development took place. Within the following year many other runners ran the mile under four minutes. It was as if a spell had been broken. To understand this phenomenon better, we have to take a closer look at our beliefs, and how they affect us.
In this workshop you are going to be inspired to achieve World class results in your life by learning from some of the World's greatest performers in both sports and business and how they did it.Success leaves clues and Jimmy Petruzzi has broken down some of the most powerful lessons that you could learn into simple and easy to understand steps so you can start applying them immediately.
Benjamin Franklin, one of the greatest leaders of all time said that you can either buy a man's wisdom or borrow it. Buy buying it you pay full price in personal time and treasure. But by borrowing it you can capitalize on the lessons learned from the failure of others.In this workshop you will do just that. You will be inspired, energised and walk away with some clear action steps to be the best possible version of yourself that you could be.
Jimmy Petruzzi is a world-renowned performance coach and NLP, CBT and Hypnotherapy Expert. For over 15 years he has worked and continues to work with many top professional soccer teams and individuals at national and international level in the English premiership and worldwide. He also works with international and Olympic athletes, top professional sports people, and consultant to sports organisations, associations, helping them achieve peak performance in all aspects of their lives.
"Jimmy was pivotal part of all the football programmes broadcast on Sky Sports Radio between 2006-2011. His insightful understanding and detailed analysis were integral to the success of the Football at Five show which was broadcast five times a week as well as the Live and Exclusive coverage of the 2009/10 English Premier League. Jim also played a key role in the daily World Cup show in 2010. I look forward to future collaboration with Jim in any football show I present or produce." ANDREW PASCHALIDIS FOOTBALL PRESENTER, SKY SPORTS RADIO & RACING"Jimmy is first and foremost a really nice guy, who loves to help and empower people to reach their full potential.
His knowledge base is vast and covers a broad spectrum of disciplines in the arena of personal development, notably with regards to NLP and Hypnotherapy, where Jimmy has proven time and time again to be a Master Trainer in both modalities.


text:
Home » CARE HULK » Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck exchanged 'beautiful' vows
Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck exchanged 'beautiful' vows
"You can definitely see the love that they have for each other."
It's probably not news to you that Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck got married a few days ago.
Thankfully, J. Lo gave us loads of details via her newsletter: she told us they had a small wedding in a Las Vegas chapel, that Ben got changed in a toilet, that they were both so happy to have finally made it to the altar 20 years after they first started dating.
But one aspect of the ceremony we weren't clued into until now was what the newlyweds promised to each other. Now, though, we have new and juicy details from Grace Christian Center of Las Vegas's lead pastor, Ryan Wolfe, who told People about the "emotional" moment when Bennifer shared their vows — which they had written themselves.
Ryan said: "They had their own words and they were beautiful words to each other."
He added: "It was an emotional moment they shared with one another. You can definitely see the love that they have for each other."
Videos you may like:
Like Jennifer had revealed in her retelling of the wedding, she and Ben just about made it before the chapel closed — and Ryan explains that they had to stay open specially for the celeb couple.
"We were locking up everything, and they get out and we were like, 'Okay, well I guess we can do one more,'" he said. "So they walked in, and I know Jennifer Lopez, of course. But you don't expect to see Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez walking through the door every day."
Ryan also admitted: "I didn't recognise them [at first]. I think it was just because I didn't expect to see them."
He finally realised who they were while he was walking Ben to where he could change into his wedding gear.
Ryan said: "I walked him out there, and then all of a sudden it just hit me. I'm like, 'That's Ben Affleck! That's Ben Affleck!' You don't want to make them feel uncomfortable so you don't want to get so nervous and so starstruck, but it was hard not to do."
The pastor didn't go into detail about what the couple actually said in their vows, but he did say this: "She walked down the aisle to the regular 'Here Comes the Bride' processional, and she had flowers and he had a boutonnière on."
He explained that he "was able to bless them and pray over them very quick, literally like an eight-second prayer."
Then came the exchange of rings. "It was a beautiful wedding," Ryan concluded.
Well, it certainly sounds like it!
Here's why Prince George's birthday portraits differ from his siblings'

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Hollywood Icon Clint Eastwood to Produce Film in Georgia As Others Boycott State's Pro-Life Law
Photo by Alberto E. Rodriguez/Getty Images
By Tré Goins-Phillips
Despite intense calls to boycott Georgia over the state's recently approved pro-life law, Hollywood icon Clint Eastwood is set to begin production on a new movie in the Peach State this summer.
The so-called "heartbeat bill," which was signed into law by Gov. Brian Kemp (R) last month, prohibits abortion after a heartbeat has been detected, usually around six weeks into pregnancy.
Horror Film Director Gary Dauberman: Faith Helps My Creative Process
At the behest of actor and activist Alyssa Milano, Hollywood elites began pledging to stop filming in the southern state unless the courts overturn the law. In a letter to Kemp, Milano described the legislation as "dangerous and deeply flawed."
Regardless, the right-leaning Eastwood is moving forward with production of his upcoming movie, "The Ballad of Richard Jewell," chronicling the real-life story of the security guard who, during the 1996 Olympics, discovered a pipe bomb in a knapsack at a park near the Olympic grounds.
The movie features stars Olivia Wilde, Jon Hamm, Kathy Bates, Sam Rockwell, and Ian Gomez. None of the film's actors have spoken out yet on Eastwood's decision.
In an interview last month with Faithwire, Pure Flix CEO Greg Gudorf described Georgia as "a great place to film" and said the faith-based company plans to continue producing content in the state, known as the "Hollywood of the South."
Baby Born Smaller Than a Soda Can Celebrates First Birthday
"Our Pure Flix vision is, quite frankly, to influence culture for Christ through media," he explained. "We state that, we share that with our investors, our employees. It's in our marketing material. For us to not be [in Georgia] — or to withdraw from being there — certainly is not in line with our company vision."
Gudorf also rebuked Hollywood celebrities for boycotting the state, arguing those who are protesting the state's pro-life law and refusing to work in Georgia are saying the conversation over the morality of abortion is "not worth having."
Mother of Five Kids Shows How 'Blessed' She Is to Have Her 'Hands Full'
New York Hosts 'Abortion is Normal' Exhibit to Benefit Planned Parenthood


text:
Where it's made is where it's at
Technology / IIoT
Cleantech Canada
Fire continues to burn at site of New Brunswick train derailment
CN president Claude Mongeau described fire as controlled burn; normal procedure after such incidents
by Kevin Bissett, The Canadian Press
PLASTER ROCK, N.B.—Investigators were interested in the brake system and a broken axle on a Canadian National (CN) freight train carrying crude oil that derailed in northwestern New Brunswick as the railway company said a fire that's been burning for more than 18 hours was under control.
CN president Claude Mongeau described the fire as a controlled burn that is normal after a derailment involving cars carrying petroleum products.
He said 17 cars derailed near Wapske and five of them were carrying crude oil from Western Canada that was destined for an Irving Oil refinery in Saint John, N.B.
Four other cars were carrying liquefied propane gas.
"We don't have a lot of information, we are assessing as we speak," he told a news conference in nearby Plaster Rock. "The impact on the environment, air quality, spill seems to be very contained and hopefully will be manageable.
"The fire is our first priority at the moment. We have the equipment, we have the people and we have all the procedures in place to deal with it in a safe manner."
Mongeau said the train consisted of about 122 cars.
New Brunswick's Emergency Measures Organization said there have been no injuries and the number of people affected by an evacuation has climbed from about 60 to 150 people.
The Health Department said as a precaution, people in the area with private wells should not consume their water.
The regularly scheduled freight train ran into trouble about 150 kilometres northwest of Fredericton at about 7 p.m. Jan. 7.
CN spokesperson Jim Feeny said the only people on board the train—the conductor and engineer—have provided statements, but he wouldn't reveal what that they said.
He added that no one was injured.
The province initially ordered the evacuation of an area within a two-kilometre radius of the fire, but officials said no one was using an evacuation centre set up by the Red Cross as people forced from their homes found places to stay with family and friends.
Rail safety has become a major issue across the country since the deadly derailment in Lac-Megantic, Que., last summer and as a growing amount of fuel oils and crude petroleum is carried by train across the country.
The federal Transportation Safety Board has sent investigators to the scene of the derailment and based on preliminary information from the company and the RCMP, it said the train's brakes came on unexpectedly.
"The preliminary details that we received indicate that while the train was proceeding it had experienced an undesired brake application," Daniel Holbrook, manager of head office and western regional operations for the safety board, said from Gatineau, Que. "The train then came to a stop."
He said the crew went to inspect the train and found that the 13th car behind the locomotives had derailed and noticed the axle had failed, but investigators don't know what role that might have played in the derailment.
Holbrook said investigators don't yet know the sequence of events and what car derailed first, which they will be looking at.
On the train is a continuous pipe that supplies air to the brake systems on all of the cars and locomotives, Holbrook said, and if that pipe breaks it applies the emergency brake.
"So as this train was proceeding there was presumably a break in the brake pipe and the brakes came on and the train came to a stop," he added.
Andrew Simpson, 30, lives on a road right next to the derailment and was playing cards with his uncle when the train went off the tracks.
"The table just kind of rumbled and out the window went a real bright orange," he said. "We looked out and the whole train yard was on fire. We panicked and called 911."
He said he and his uncle quickly left the house and tried to alert people to get them out of their homes.
He could see lumber and one tanker burning, adding that he was about 100 metres from the site of the derailment.
Simpson said he couldn't smell anything and that there was no warning of trouble prior to the table rumbling.
Asked if he ever had concerns about the rail line, he replied: "No, everything has run smooth until yesterday."
Steve Legace, a resident of Plaster Rock, said tensions had calmed considerably since the day of the derailment when many didn't know the extent of the risk.
"It's kind of unnerving, I guess, knowing that we have things that close going through our village and not knowing what's being carried on these vessels," he said. "Things seem to have calmed down and people are not as upset as they were and a little more at rest now."
New Brunswick's Emergency Measures Organization said it was notified of the derailment around 8 p.m. Jan. 7.
Hazardous materials crews were dispatched and the site has been secured by the RCMP.
Related Posts from the network
Cracked wheel, broken rail found at site of N.B. train derailment
Federal safety agency to carry out full probe of N.B. train derailment
Safety board wraps up ground investigation of N.B. train derailment
CN says wheel or axle failure likely caused N.B. train derailment
EU makes pollution more expensive under carbon trading system
Couche-Tard potential buyer for Hess's retail operations in U.S.
Canadianmanufacturing.com is the top source of daily industry-focused news in Canada. We cover the world for stories that impact your business each day with news, in-depth articles and expert commentary.
Cleantech Canada delivers the latest news and insight on the global green economy. Our award-winning editors and expert contributors connect businesses and entrepreneurs with information on cleantech financing, market development and growth strategies.
Find it on Frasers, your home for sourcing industrial suppliers of manufactured products, MRO equipment and components, and so much more.


text:
Tag Archives: Inadmissibility
How does the Sergei Magnitsky Law Tie Into Inadmissibility Under the Immigration and Refugee Protections Act?
December 2, 2018 Will	Leave a comment
Recently Canada's Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland made an announcement that 17 Saudi Nationals linked to the death of journalist Jamal Khashoggi had been sanctioned under the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) .
Within her announcement, she mentioned that these 17 individuals (which notably do not include the Crown Prince MBS) are now inadmissible to Canada.
Given the Sergei Magnitsky Law is relatively new, I thought it would be worth looking at how these two legal provisions tie into each other.
They tie in to each other via the related amendments made to section 35 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) noted in the preamble and the Related Amendments in Section 18 of the Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act.
As stated in the Regulatory Impact Analysis – "The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act renders inadmissible to Canada persons, other than permanent residents, subject to orders and regulations made under the new Act. Therefore, the individuals listed in the Regulations are inadmissible to Canada."
We need to look at the IRPA to better understand the application of an s.35(1) IRPA inadmissibility.
IRPA and the Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act
Human or international rights violations
35 (1) A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible on grounds of violating human or international rights for
(e) being a person, other than a permanent resident, who is currently the subject of an order or regulation made under section 4 of the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) .
(2) For greater certainty, despite section 33, a person who ceases being the subject of an order or regulation referred to in paragraph (1)(d) or (e) is no longer inadmissible under that paragraph.
2001, c. 27, s. 35;
2017, c. 21, s. 18.
In order to get one's name off the list, one needs to make an application under section 8 of the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law).
Rights of Foreign Nationals Who are the Subject of an Order or Regulation
8 (1) A foreign national who is the subject of an order or regulation made under section 4 may apply in writing to the Minister to cease being the subject of the order or regulation.
(2) On receipt of the application, the Minister must decide whether there are reasonable grounds to recommend to the Governor in Council that the order or regulation be amended or repealed, as the case may be, so that the applicant ceases to be the subject of it.
(3) The Minister must make a decision on the application within 90 days after the day on which the application is received.
Notice if application rejected
(4) The Minister must give notice without delay to the applicant of any decision to reject the application.
(5) If there has been a material change in the applicant's circumstances since their last application under subsection (1) was submitted, he or she may submit another application.
Currently, there are no cited cases to this law.
What If the Individual is in Canada
In the off chance that they are in Canada already when the order is made, the application removal order per R. 229(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations is
229 (1) For the purposes of paragraph 45(d) of the Act, the applicable removal order to be made by the Immigration Division against a person is
(b) a deportation order, if they are inadmissible under subsection 35(1) of the Act on grounds of violating human or international rights;
Update: On 22 December 2018, Canada Gazette, Part 1, Volume 152 Number 51: Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations was released, which proposes to turn the applicable removal order (with Immigration Division designated responsibility) into a specified removal order (with the Minister's Delegate designated responsibility. See more, here.
So far there is not a single case citing to s. 35(1)(e) IRPA – it is no doubt still in it's legislative infancy. More is certainly yet to come on this interesting piece of law!
Human or International Rights ViolationsInadmissibilityJustice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials ActSergei Magnitsky Law
Want to Try My Immigration Quiz on Entry to Canada/Inadmissibility?
December 20, 2017 Will	Leave a comment
I thought it would be fun to share the quiz I had my brilliant Ashton students write. Part creative writing part immigration. Enjoy! I will try and post an answer key soon 😉
Mr. Chow and His Friends Have a Tough Day at the Border
Mr. Orlando Chow ("Mr. Chow") is a 35-year old foreign national and citizen of Hong Kong. He is travelling to Canada with his two friends, Juan Jose ("Mr. Jose") a permanent resident of Canada and citizen of Mexico and Pierre Lacroix ("Mr. Lacroix"), another foreign national of France.
They are returning by plane from a month-long trip to Vegas where they had a good time, some would say too much of a good time. Upon entry into Canada, their glazed looks and alcohol in the breath led to a referral to secondary for all three.
Officer Bruce Boulder ("Officer Boulder") is a two-year vet of the Canada Border Services Agency ("CBSA") working secondary examination at Vancouver Airport ("YVR").
Officer Boulder greets the three of them at the border. Greet may not be the best descriptor. He is not having a good day. His boss told him that he had been making one too many mistakes. Recently, a Bulgarian individual he had let into Canada had ended up robbing a local convenience store and making headlines. Apparently, he had a criminal history that Officer Boulder missed in his review. Officer Boulder, being the consummate professional that he is, was not going to screw up one more time.
Orlando Chow, twirls his gold chain as he comes up to the border. "Dogg, you can't being do this to me Officer." You have to prove that I am not allowed into Canada." Your primary guy, this Rookie, said something about me proving I am not inadmissible. Get him some training or something. He is making no sense.
Question 1: Is Officer Boulder's colleague right that the burden of proof is on Mr. Chow and his cronies to show that they are not inadmissible to Canada.
TRUE or FALSE (1 mark)
Officer Boulder checks his computer and to his surprise something pops up. Mr. Jose, during a binge drinking session apparently had received a misdemeanor Driving Under the Influence ("DUI") charge while on the trip to Vegas. Global Case Management System ("GCMS") never lies. Officer Boulder asks to see Mr. Jose's bags. A bag of soiled underwear revealed a white powder of the non-flour variety. The drug test machine showed it was a 100% match for cocaine. Caught red-handed.
Officer Boulder places handcuffs on Mr. Jose and orders him against the wall. He calls his supervisor on the intercom to come as it looked like a serious issue. "Boss, I think I got one – he's got a charge on him from Las Vegas. I'm thinking s.36(2) – it doesn't matter what the punishment is – I know this is a hybrid offense and he's indictable. I have a reasonable ground to believe he committed an offense outside of Canada– this is a home run." "But I am a permanent resident!" Mr. Jose yells from the wall trying to get Officer Boulder's attention to no avail.
Question 2: Officer Boulder is right about the standard of proof and section of IRPA that Mr. Jose is inadmissible under.
Officer Boulder then turns his attention to Mr. Lacroix. Officer Boulder notices on his GCMS check that Mr. Lacroix had recently obtained an eTA to fly to Canada from France. He had indicated no previous history of detention, arrests, or refusals. Before Officer Boulder could even begin to ask, Mr. Lacroix smirks, his Parisian accent starting to flow through: "You have nothing on me monsieur!" Listen mon ami, this is not my first rodeo. I remember in zee Australia. They had me in zee handcuffs and I called my lawyer and he comes in with paperwork storming in and zey let me go on the spot. We actually end (sic) up suing them and I got enough money to allow me to stay in Australia for two years and not work a single day (before, you know I had to do that under the table thing). Anyways, I am done talking to you guys. You aren't asking me another questions – I need my lawyer here now"
Question 3: Mr. Lacroix has the right to counsel at this stage of secondary questioning even though he has not been detained.
Officer Boulder tells Mr. Lacroix that on the balance of probabilities he has reason to believe that Mr. Lacroix has misrepresented himself. Officer Boulder's boss, Superintendent Jenny Jones (Superintendent Jones) shows up on the scene. "What is wrong" asks Superintendent Jones. "Zee Officer thinks I misrepresented myself because I wrote that I had never been arrested before on my application for an eTA" answered Mr. Lacroix, noticeable sweat pores started emerging on his forehead. "That was done by my travel agent. Not my fault at all. I cannot be found responsible for misrepresentation as I never intended to answer that."
Question 4: Misrepresentation under A40 IRPA requires intent therefore Mr. Lacroix is right.
Superintendent Jones tells Officer Boulder that he will interview both Mr. Jose and Mr. Lacroix (given the severity of their situations) and that Officer Boulder should talk to Mr. Chow to make sure he had met his conditions for entry (you know, the one from Question 1). IRCC had flagged Mr. Chow for CBSA to ask a few questions. It was easier to question him this way.
Mr. Chow tells Officer Boulder that he did indeed have an application in for permanent residence as a sponsored spouse and that everything will be okay once he is a permanent resident of Canada and says that given he had done nothing wrong. Mr. Chow told the Officer that an American friend of his, Lily Chow, had done the same thing in sponsoring her spouse (or was it common-law partner?). The Officer asks if he was aware that his Canadian wife had received a procedural fairness letter from IRCC about three issues. First, there were concerns that his relationship was not genuine. Second, there was a concern that there was a financial inadmissibility concern due to his wife's disability (she was a paraplegic and currently receiving disability payments as the source of her living expenses). Finally, there was issues with his daughter (remember not her daughter)'s autism being an excessive demand on Canadian society. His daughter was seven and also born in Hong Kong to his ex-partner. He had met his Canadian wife online before they arranged to see each other in Taiwan. A week later and they were engaged to be married.
Officer Boulder remembers his recent training session and thinks to himself. If Mr. Chow's relationship is not genuine, the financial inadmissibility issue does not even matter to the appeal division as he will found not to be a family member.
Question 5: Does Officer Boulder remember correctly that if the relationship is not genuine, there is no need for an appeal division to consider financial inadmissibility?
Officer Boulder grabs his laptop out and searches "Orlando Chow" just to see who he was dealing with. He sees a relatively sketchy website with information suggesting Mr. Chow was a member of the Triads – Canadian chapter. "This is enough. I need to only prove this only on a reasonable grounds to believe. S.37 – Organized Crime. I got this. Or was it balance of probabilities? What does section 33 say again?
Question 6: Is balance of probabilities the standard of proof for a finding of organized criminality?
Officer Boulder decides to make a note to send this issue to inland enforcement but not to action it now. As he writes, Mr. Chow, who continues to read the letter setting out how his wife's inability to prove care and support was being challenged. "This letter is BS – listen my wife can sponsor me." Mr. Chow shouts. "I know, my lawyer told me that a Canadian sponsor can receive disability payments – there's an exemption for this." My wife's disability has nothing to do with me. I can make $0 dollars for all that matters. Plus, I have a job lined up in a motorbike shop. I even have a contract to start once my open work permit arrives. Look" Mr. Chow provides a one page letter with two lines. A faint electronic signature can be found on the page. "Juan Jose."
Question 7: Given his wife is eligible as a sponsor, there is no requirement for Mr. Chow to have anything to demonstrate that he is financially admissible other than an employment letter.
Mr. Chow then reads the section about his daughter's condition. This is ridiculous – absolutely ridiculous… how can there be an excess demand on social services. I have an uncle in Hong Kong who is a millionaire. He can just give me some money and we can pay for it. No problem. This "mitigation plan" will be easy to prepare.
Officer Boulder responds: "Clearly you haven't read the case law in this area, money does not matter. Your plan does not matter! The Officer does not even have to look at it in the context of social services"
Question 8: Officer Boulder is right that any individualized mitigation plan that Mr. Chow comes up with in respect to social services will not matter and cannot be considered given the nature of the medical inadmissibility.
Officer Boulder asks Mr. Chow if he intends to leave Canada and that he could not intend to be a permanent resident without holding a permanent resident visa. Mr. Chow flips open his bag showing that he still owned property in Hong Kong, had an adult daughter that he still visited often and in fact was planning to visit in another 6 months. Officer Boulder realized Mr. Chow was low key about social media – his #hashtag game was not strong. Officer Boulder states: None of this is relevant. You are only allowed one intention and you made that clear with your permanent residence application.
Question 9: Is Officer Boulder right that only one intention is allowed once a permanent residence application is submitted?
"I know my little daughter won't affect my application at all anyways. What is the worst that can happen. She can just stay in Hong Kong. There is no rule that her being inadmissible makes me inadmissible as well. I am sponsored by my wife. My daughter is not even hers. I remember there's an exemption for this"
Question 10: Mr. Chow's statement that his dependent daughter's inadmissibility cannot render him inadmissible and there is an exemption for this is correct.
"Clearly, there are way too many questions right now." Officer Boulder continues. I am going to ask you for you to give me your passport for now. I will leave the decision up to my colleague on whether or not to give you a visitor record when you meet him in two weeks.
Bonus: The Officer's decision to ask Mr. Chow to return in two weeks to attend another interview can also be called a D_____________ E___________. (1 extra mark)
Immigration QuizInadmissibility
Why Canada's Punishment for Inadmissibility for Misrepresentation Needs to Be Both Tougher and Softer
April 17, 2017 Will	2 Comments
Within the realm of Canadian criminal law there is a fundamental principle that the punishment should be proportional to the crime an individual convicted of. Under Section 718.1 of the Canadian Criminal Code it is written as follows:
Fundamental principle
718.1 A sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender.
There are are also various sentencing principles meant to guide the discretion of decision-makers to ensure that the sentences are properly set down. These include factors such as potential rehabilitation and whether the punitive and societal aims of the proposed sentence are met.
During the previous government's tough on crime focus, this led to the introduction of the Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act (FRFCA) which clearly was introduced with deterrence in mind when it came to punishing foreign nationals and permanent residents for misrepresentation. In my assessment, I believe that not enough attention was paid to the overall requirement of proportionality.
The Regulatory Impact Assessment Statement issued in support of regulatory changes states (my emphasis added):
1. Misrepresentation
An examination of the effectiveness of the IRPA's current misrepresentation provision — that is, the two-year period of inadmissibility that bans a foreign national from entering or remaining in Canada because of directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts that cause an error in the administration of the IRPA — determined that it is not sufficient to deter fraudulent applications, particularly for permanent resident applicants, as processing times in this stream can be in excess of two years. In those cases, permanent resident applicants who have been found to have provided false information can simply reapply almost immediately and wait in the processing queue for the two-year inadmissibility period to be completed. In practice, there is little or no consequence for these applicants.
Increase consequences for misrepresentation
Amendments to existing regulatory provisions related to misrepresentation would support legislative changes that provide a stronger disincentive for applicants to provide fraudulent information on their immigration applications. The changes would also help ensure that the processing of legitimate applications is not delayed by fraudulent permanent resident applicants who reapply and wait out their period of inadmissibility in the processing queue.
In addition, the increased consequences for misrepresentation would make Canada less vulnerable to immigration fraud by bringing consequences in line with Canada's like-minded international partners. A stronger deterrent for misrepresentation would benefit Canadians by ensuring travellers and immigrants admitted to Canada meet the criteria established to support Canadian immigration objectives, and would increase public confidence in and support for Canada's immigration program.
The two-year penalty is shorter than those imposed by Canada's like-minded international partners, which makes the Canadian immigration system more vulnerable to abuse. Other countries appear to have more severe penalties, for example:
Australia: three-year ban on visas where false or misleading information is provided;
United Kingdom: 1-, 5-, or 10-year ban on re-entry (length of ban depends on severity of false representation); and
United States: lifetime inadmissibility (i.e. ban on entry) for visa fraud or misrepresentation.
See: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2014/2014-06-07/html/reg1-eng.php
I think one of the challenges is equating all of those caught under s.40 IRPA misrepresentation with fraudulent permanent resident applicants. There may be (and I have seen many) individuals who made genuine mistakes in misrepresenting themselves (or hiring the wrong person who misrepresented for them), when in fact they often had recourse to other routes such as their bona fide permanent resident applications.
Essentially, what you have amounts to a very broad provision under the immigration inadmissibility for misrepresentation (s.40 of IRPA) [separate from the immigration offense of misrepresentation under s.127 IRPA] which can cover several non men reus incidents such as unknowingly withholding material evidence or having a third party indirectly misrepresent on behalf of an unknowing applicant who has paid for the services.
In an overseas foreign national applicant's situation, they can be issued a five-year ban in writing. This takes places, a majority of the time, after a procedural fairness letter is issued giving them the opportunity to make representations and supplements the refusal letter
In an inland situation, a foreign national applicant is written up for misrepresentation and referred to the Immigration Division who are usually bound to enforce the order. The first stage of this reporting process takes place at the Port of Entry or with the help of Inland Enforcement as coordinated by Canada Border Services Agency ("CBSA").
Generally speaking CBSA is bound to pursue the misrepresentation allegation, but I have been successful in a few occasions to have them "commuted" (so to speak) to lesser non-compliance findings that can carry a one-year exclusion order. I strongly agree with this practice, but again I think without anything written down on paper to support it, it becomes a remedy that is difficult to ultimately rely on or seek – Good in effect, but not effective in law.
The Consequences of Misrepresentation are Heavy
As per A40(2) and (3) of IRPA, the inadmissibility period is five years. The FRFCA announcement added a five-year bar to applying for permanent residency.
Currently, there is a lack of clarity on whether IRCC has the discretion to ARC back a misrepresentation client as a permanent resident or only as a temporary resident. I have heard from various individuals in private practice that this is done but ultimately with some inconsistency.
I am currently in the process (by ATIP and coordination with various Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada ("IRCC") Offices/Officers to seek some clarity). I believe there is some incongruity to allowing the ARC back of a temporary resident (a visitor or worker with a bona fide purpose), but not a permanent resident who may have been part of a genuine relationship unrelated to the misrepresentation.
I will not get to it in this piece, but there are also quasi-criminal, regulatory, and criminal punishments for misrepresentation that could render an individual inadmissible to Canada for criminality in addition to misrepresentation.
Why I like the U.K.- style Approach Better to Misrepresentation
I think applying a five-year inadmissibility and five-year bar on PR for misrepresentation is both too light and too heavy, all at the same time.
I am in favour of strict punishment of mens reus perpetrators of misrepresentation. Those that purposely committed or instructed the commission of fraud in order to seek entry or status in Canada. Individuals who are part of larger efforts to defraud fellow immigrants (in addition to being punished regulatory wise) should face the highest form of punishment.
However, there are simply too many cases where it really is the unfortunate promise of a purported "trusted immigration representative" or even cases of ignorance, albeit willful blindness, of Canadian law. I believe CBSA should have some legal recourse, written in legislation, to provide these individuals with a two-year bars or even a five-year inadmissibility period, but a waiver of the five-year PR bar.
I think the way to handle the issue of "discretion" is to make is clear that the Immigration Division/Visa Officer/Immigration Appeal Division's decision is not subject to appeal in the case of a foreign national and that they have a broad ability to determine the reasonableness of the ban.
How would I re-write A.40(2) and (3)
Disclaimer: this is not the law and merely my legislative rewriting for the purposes of this piece. Changes in italics.
(2) The following provisions govern subsection (1):
(a) the permanent resident or the foreign national continues to be inadmissible for misrepresentation for a period of between two and ten years following, in the case of a determination outside Canada, a final determination of inadmissibility under subsection (1) or, in the case of a determination in Canada, the date the removal order is enforced. The sole discretion in determining the length of misrepresentation will fall to the Immigration Division or an overseas visa officer, in the case of a foreign national, or the Immigration Appeal Division, in the case of a permanent resident, and is not subject to the right of appeal.
(b) paragraph (1)(b) does not apply unless the Minister is satisfied that the facts of the case justify the inadmissibility.
Marginal note:Inadmissible
(3) A foreign national who is inadmissible under this section may not apply for permanent resident status during the period referred to in paragraph (2)(a), subject to the discretion of the Immigration Division, in the case of a foreign national, or the Immigration Appeal Division, in the case of a permanent resident, to waive the requirement due to the Applicant's mitigating factors.
(a) Mitigating factors can include, but are limited to:
(i) demonstrable evidence of the Applicant's remorse;
(ii) demonstralve evidence of the Applicant's efforts to come forward proactively with their misrepresentation;
(iv) demonstrable evidence that the Applicant has rehabilited themselves of the factors that have caused the misrepresentation and will not commit future misrepresentations; and
(v) demonstrable evidence that the Applicant's misrepresentation is not related to the grounds by which they end to
(b) The decision of whether to add section (3) as a term of the period of inadmissibility under section 3(a) will fall to the Immigration Division or an overseas visa officer,in the case of a foreign national, or the Immigration Appeal Division, in the case of a permanent resident, and is not subject to the right of appeal.
I think such a system would create a much more rehabilitative process for those who have made mistakes and are willing to correct them, yet at the same time can be used to punish those who have committed egregious misrepresentations.
What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree or do you like the one-size fits all, easy come easy go approach, that is currently written in law?
Canadian immigration inadmissibilityfive year barInadmissibilityMisrepresentation
Canada's New Electronic Travel Authorization Regime: 5 Things You May Not Have Known
August 6, 2015 Will	1 Comment
Because the actual requirement to hold an Electronic Travel Authorization (eTA) does not kick in until March 2016, the regime has been understudied and largely unreported outside of the immigration legal community.
On the surface, the new eTA requirement conceptually seems quite simple. Up to now, those exempt from the temporary resident visa requirement process did not undergo any prior screening or vetting. Decisions were made solely at the port of entry and concurrently Canada's border/immigration system was susceptible to allowing in visitors, who had not made prior applications to Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) and who are ultimately inadmissible, into Canada.
Importantly, Canada made some commitments in the Canada–U.S. Beyond the Border Action Plan several years ago where they pledged to introduce an eTA regime. They were bound by those commitments to introduce the regime.
I want to highlight in this piece, five things you might not know about the eTA regime.
By the way, I will not go through a comprehensive review of the regime. For those who want to read more about the policy changes in general, check out CIC's Program Delivery Update for August 1, 2015 and the text of new Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR) via the Part 2 – Gazette in April of this year. Check out also my colleague Steve Meurren's post for a summary of the new regime.
#1 – The eTA now allows for visa-exempt visitors to Canada to be issued removal orders from outside Canada. Until that removal order is enforced, the visitor will not get an eTA and not be allowed to come to Canada.
This authority is created by by subsection 240(2) of IRPR which states (emphasis added):
240. (1) A removal order against a foreign national, whether it is enforced by voluntary compliance or by the Minister, is enforced when the foreign national
When removal order is enforced by officer outside Canada
(2) If a foreign national against whom a removal order has not been enforced is applying outside Canada for a visa, an authorization to return to Canada or an electronic travel authorization, an officer shall enforce the order if, following an examination, the foreign national establishes that
(a) they are the person described in the order;
(b) they have been lawfully admitted to the country in which they are physically present at the time that the application is made; and
(c) they are not inadmissible on grounds of security, violating human or international rights, serious criminality or organized criminality.
And until that removal order is enforced (i.e. they meet the above requirements), s.25.2 of IRPR applies:
Electronic travel authorization not to be issued
25.2 An electronic travel authorization shall not be issued to a foreign national who is subject to an unenforced removal order.
#2 Cancelling an eTA (at least from a legal perspective) is not as easy as CIC makes it seem (from a policy perspective).
The intersection between policy and law always play an interesting role in Canadian immigration law. As the Federal Courts have made clear on several occasions, online instruction guides, processing manuals, operational bulletins (which now can be extended to include program delivery updates) do not constitute law.
Often times CIC will provide instructions that summarize the law without providing its full details or make recommendations that aren't legal policy (e.g. when they tell applicants they should apply for extensions 30 days before expiry for several programs, when often times doing may hurt their implied status).
CIC writes on their webpage regarding eTAs:
For how long is an eTA valid?
Section 12.05 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations indicates that an eTA is valid for five years or until the applicant's passport expires, whichever occurs sooner.
Section 12.06 of the Regulations indicates that an eTA can be cancelled by a designated officer. Once cancelled, an eTA is no longer valid.
While this statement is not incorrect per-se- it omits a few important details.
12.06 An officer may cancel an electronic travel authorization that was issued to a foreign national if
(a) the officer determines that the foreign national is inadmissible; or
(b) the foreign national is the subject of a declaration made under subsection 22.1(1) of the Act.
Subsection 22,.1(1) of the Act (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act) is an interesting one.
This section allows the Minister, on his or her own initiative, to declare that a foreign national cannot be come a temporary resident for a period of three years, justified by "public policy considerations." The underlying provisions has been in force since August 2013 but it appears no Federal Court jurisprudence (at least none that I could find) talk about this provision. To me it is a very discretionary provisions.
Could we see an increase of cancellations of eTAs on s.22.1(1) IRPA grounds where inadmissibility has not yet been made out but there is some concern about the individual's background? I certainly think so.
#3 – Adverse Information on your immigration file may mean your eTAs might take a while.
CIC has made available by way its most recent program delivery update, updated instructions for how to assess adverse information on file for an eTA applicant.
CIC writes (emphasis in original and added):
If the applicant previously applied for entry to Canada (either through a CIC program or through the CBSA at the port of entry), or if they are already known to CIC (through intelligence, for example), and if there is adverse information on file for the applicant, it will be uncovered through the automated eTA screening process, which will cause the application to be referred for manual review.
Officers should consider:
Did the adverse information result in a previous refusal?
If so:
What is the full story behind the refusal? Look at the case notes to fully understand the reason for the previous refusal. It is not sufficient to only look at the refusal ground(s).
Was the applicant previously refused because they did not meet the specific needs of the category to which they were applying? For example, if they were refused a work permit because they did not provide a labour market impact assessment, would this impact their eligibility to come to Canada as a visitor?
Have their circumstances changed since the refusal? Is this still a concern?
Has the applicant received an approval between the time of their eTA application and the adverse information on file? Note that the automated eTA screening process will not take this into account when determining if a case should be referred for manual review.
If not:
What type of adverse information is on file?
How long ago was it entered?
An officer must be satisfied that an applicant is not inadmissible to Canada under A34 to 40 prior to issuing an eTA. Officers initiate and conduct admissibility activities as needed. This may include screening requests to partners, criminal record checks, info sharing, medical exams and misrepresentation activities.
I find CIC's example of applying for a work permit without an LMIA kind of curious, as not meeting program requirements does not directly lead to an inadmissibility. However, it appears to suggest that for these type of cases, a procedural fairness letter may be sent to eTA applicants asking them to "explain the circumstances", with the ultimate fear being that an applicant is attempting to enter Canada to work without authorization.
What this all means, is an Applicant needs to be very careful with misrepresentation (a topic I have written about quite extensively, so see previous posts!).
#4 Permanent Resident Problems are Coming
Strategically for a permanent resident, there may have been reasons in the past to enter Canada on a separate passport or travel document (particularly if their permanent resident card had expired or was lost and/or they no longer met the residency requirement).
eTAs effectively end that practice and create an added barrier – the e-relinquishment process.
CIC writes in their website section titled "Manual processing Electronic Travel Authorization (eTA) applications") (emphasis added):
Based on case history, is the applicant indeed a permanent resident?
Based on case history, has the applicant renounced their permanent resident status? Often, even though a person has renounced their status, their GCMS profile still shows them as a permanent resident.
Level 1 decision-makers at the OSC will query for these applications by performing a search in "IMM activities, Auto Searches." The "Activity" will be "Derogatory information," the "Sub-activity" will be "Client Derogatory Information," and the "Status" will be "Review Required."
If the applicant is a permanent resident and has not already gone through the formal process of relinquishing their status, they should be contacted to determine whether they would like to voluntarily relinquish their status
If the applicant does not wish to relinquish:
The officer must withdraw the application
Advise the applicant that they will need to get an appropriate travel document that demonstrates that they are a permanent resident, which may necessitate a determination of their status (PDF, 665.91 KB)
If the applicant would like to relinquish:
They may do so electronically
Once they have done so, and assuming they are otherwise admissible, the officer may issue the eTA
Again, expect this new eTA to increase the number of residency determinations and will likely trickle through to more appeals at the Immigration Appeal Division.
#5 Interactive Advance Passenger Information (IAPI) and Carrier Messenger Requirements (CMR) make Airline Staff the Front-Line Messengers for the new eTA program
An Applicant holds a valid eTA and is now booking a plane ticket. Now what?
There is a whole process that runs in the backdrop between commercial Airline Carriers and Canada Border Services Agency to inform them of who is on the plane that will be arriving in Canada. A lot of the front end information sharing will essentially begin with you entering your name into a flight reservation system to buy tickets all the way until you arrive in Canada. This includes any questions or document requirements asked of you by Airline staff.
I have written a bit about this in a previous post. I have signed up for the webinars offered by CBSA to try and understand this process better (from the Airlines side). Hope to update everybody soon.
Overall Takeaway
I think a perfect conclusion is to quote Canadian immigration lawyer, Liz Wozniak on the new eTA regime – it's like "Visas for the visa-exempt":
Ultimately, there is no reason to wait to file your eTA application. As the requirement deadline comes in. If you expect to come to Canada as a potentially, visa-exempt visitor by March 2015, it would be a very good idea to start applying for an eTA now.
It may also be a good idea to get notes on your file first, so you at least have a good idea of what might come down the pipeline for an eTA application.
Hope this post was somewhat enlightening.
Electronic Travel AuthorizationeTAInadmissibilityMisrepresentation


text:
namespace content {

FakePepperPluginInstance::~FakePepperPluginInstance() {}

content::RenderFrame* FakePepperPluginInstance::GetRenderFrame() {
  return nullptr;
}

blink::WebPluginContainer* FakePepperPluginInstance::GetContainer() {
  return nullptr;
}

v8::Isolate* FakePepperPluginInstance::GetIsolate() {
  return nullptr;
}

ppapi::VarTracker* FakePepperPluginInstance::GetVarTracker() {
  return nullptr;
}

const GURL& FakePepperPluginInstance::GetPluginURL() {
  return gurl_;
}

base::FilePath FakePepperPluginInstance::GetModulePath() {
  return base::FilePath();
}

PP_Resource FakePepperPluginInstance::CreateImage(gfx::ImageSkia* source_image,
                                                  float scale) {
  return 0;
}

PP_ExternalPluginResult FakePepperPluginInstance::SwitchToOutOfProcessProxy(
    const base::FilePath& file_path,
    ppapi::PpapiPermissions permissions,
    const IPC::ChannelHandle& channel_handle,
    base::ProcessId plugin_pid,
    int plugin_child_id) {
  return PP_EXTERNAL_PLUGIN_FAILED;
}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::SetAlwaysOnTop(bool on_top) {}

bool FakePepperPluginInstance::IsFullPagePlugin() {
  return false;
}

bool FakePepperPluginInstance::IsRectTopmost(const gfx::Rect& rect) {
  return false;
}

int FakePepperPluginInstance::MakePendingFileRefRendererHost(
    const base::FilePath& path) {
  return 0;
}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::SetEmbedProperty(PP_Var key, PP_Var value) {}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::SetSelectedText(
    const std::u16string& selected_text) {}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::SetLinkUnderCursor(const std::string& url) {}
void FakePepperPluginInstance::SetTextInputType(ui::TextInputType type) {}
void FakePepperPluginInstance::PostMessageToJavaScript(PP_Var message) {}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::SetCaretPosition(const gfx::PointF& position) {}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::MoveRangeSelectionExtent(
    const gfx::PointF& extent) {}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::SetSelectionBounds(const gfx::PointF& base,
                                                  const gfx::PointF& extent) {}

bool FakePepperPluginInstance::CanEditText() {
  return false;
}

bool FakePepperPluginInstance::HasEditableText() {
  return false;
}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::ReplaceSelection(const std::string& text) {}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::SelectAll() {}

bool FakePepperPluginInstance::CanUndo() {
  return false;
}

bool FakePepperPluginInstance::CanRedo() {
  return false;
}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::Undo() {}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::Redo() {}

void FakePepperPluginInstance::HandleAccessibilityAction(
    const PP_PdfAccessibilityActionData& action_data) {}

}  // namespace content

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub