"Objects in history may be closer than they appear" – Eeyore for Vlad
Once again, Vets 4 Freedom took a shot at riding around the war memorial, originally to reconsecrate it after how it was disgraced by the Ottawa government during the Freedom Convoy. Please read the story details at RAIR
A short time later, a micro convoy on Wellington St.
About three years ago, we posted a video many times advising people to ignore covid regs and not pay the fines based on it’s reasoning. In fact, we checked with UK, Canadian AND US lawyers who all agreed with every point of this video, and that the laws being enacted were in fact, Ultra vires. Yes. You heard it here first.
A lawyer on the Alberta ruling and reasoning. (The most important part of it in our opinion is the bit where the lawyer says: “The charter of rights is the supreme law of Canada… supposed to be, getting highly skeptical of that” because of course rule of law has been supplanted by dialectics in many or even most cases.)
The video we posted 3 years ago as often as we could get away with it:
It ends on YT and picks up here
Kelly Hale still has a way to go to get even a fraction of what the neo-fascist governments of Canada did to him and his business using Covid as an excuse. But at least he got his first win in the courts.
Please read the details at RAIR Foundation. Video below:
The following post was written by an Alberta resident and political pundit, familiar with the candidates and issues of that province and this race. Thank you sir for sending this in!
On May 18, 2023, the Alberta debate between Premier Danielle Smith and Opposition Leader Rachel Notley took place.
The debate was moderated by CTV News and Global News. The moderation was done reasonably fairly, and even the panel that had been assembled to pose the questions was presented quite well as attended by Post Media, City News and CBC Alberta.
The participant’s apparel was interesting in that Premier Smith wore her party’s colours – blue, while Leader Notley wore Smith’s colours … blue! Hmmm! During the debate, Notley addressed her remarks directly at Smith, seemingly scolding Smith, all the while Smith directly connected to her audience through the cameral lens, presenting genuine smiles as she talked about Alberta and the prospects for a bright future.
It was clear from the outset that Rachel Notley was on the defence. On several occasions, questions were asking for specific answers. Smith gave those, while Notley stumbled around saying, “That was a good question” and paraphrased, “We need to look at ways to improve on the problem posed.” In other words, no real answer.
At times, the exchange got into mudslinging, with accusations of law breaking coming from Notley, and levelled at Smith. It should be noted that there is no evidence of breaking the law, or any charges even being contemplated. What is clear is that CBC and others propagated misleading information, something they seem to have a penchant for doing.
There was the normal promulgation and denial of numbers, as comparisons were made regarding job losses and revenue losses during Notley’s reign, and the job returns upon the UCP regaining leadership. What is clear, is that financial conditions deteriorated considerably across many industries including the oil and gas industry as well as support sectors while Notley was in power.
Both candidates made their fair share of projections into the future including both individuals making strong statements about NOT having medical patients being charged for doctor’s visits. This has been a major campaign issue to-date. Varied methods of revenue allocation have been discussion topics, and speculative thoughts have somehow been converted into promises going forward. Reality seems to be on another planet, especially whenever Notley presents her personal and party views.
But Smith, perhaps came up with the best line of the night when she said about Notley, “She doesn’t want to run on her record. And the reason she doesn’t want to run on her record is, it was an absolute disaster!” Record debts had been realized, and the major downturn in economy ultimately cost Notley her position as Premier.
It is questionable whether the hardliners on either side might be convinced otherwise, but a significant part of the fence-sitters might be swayed one way or another.
In the end, it will be a debate worth the record, to evaluate whether promises come true.
Recently I had the pleasure of attending a casual dinner with some members of the Freedom Community, which included some Canadian veterans. It is alway satisfying to discover people with whom you have no connection but have put the pieces together in nearly identical ways to yourself, to form an understanding which is not based on information people get from the usual channels. People from the medical, military, religious and farming communities who all through their own expertise and experience have discovered what regular readers to this site have a pretty good understanding.
One of the subjects that came up in conversation was the relationship between veterans, and the organization meant to serve them, The Canadian Legion.
Many years ago, at a local watering hole, I had the opportunity to speak with people at the Legion’s head office. Even 15 years ago or more, the suspicion that the Legion didn’t really serve the cause of veterans was at least an inkling, but nothing like it became during Covid when the Legion Halls blocked all veterans and their families if they had not taken the experimental clot shots. The often deadly mRNA injections. At that point I swore off support of them forever. But back in the day just the approach to selling poppies was curious. That you could not get a better one with a bulldog to hold it to your coat which meant you or your kids or your dog might step on the pins as they fell out of your jacket a couple of times a day, all to make you go buy more of them. But that is a minor irritation compared to how they acted during Covid.
More recently it has become common to speak about “agency capture”. How clearly the various Colleges of Surgeons and Physicians have become something very very different in purpose and effect than they were. Once, the Colleges, like the Law Societies and other regulatory bodies, were meant to keep a profession honest and serve the public. Now they are captured by what we may as well call Marxists as the effect is indistinguishable from a communist state. In other words, the regulatory bodies now serve the state at the expense of the public and the profession.
And so it goes with the Legion. And so at this recent meeting at a wonderful out of the way location, some veterans announced a new initiative. To retake the Poppy from the Legion and ask the public to show direct support to the Veterans by getting and wearing a newly designed poppy. As it turns out, the Legion has taken total control of the symbol, making it more about the agency than about the veterans. Sound familiar? Yeah a little. Like everything else since what we may as well admit was a communist revolution across much of the West and certainly North America.
Below is the actual release with an image of the new poppy from the Veteran’s Group:
One can get this poppy and other materials to support the actual veterans without going through what increasingly looks like captured middlemen at this Web address: https://blackbirdindustries.ca/ and The Veterans 4 Freedom page: https://veterans4freedom-merch.myshopify.com/
The clip below is from the City of Ottawa meeting of April 18th, 2023 where the city took questions on the radical plans to transform the energy grid, and life in Ottawa overall.
The first question asked to Angela Keller-Herzog was about the seeming reluctance of the city to consider what Hydro Ottawa had to say in response to the plan to make Ottawa run on solar and wind.
Herzog’s answer was straight out of one of the early anecdotes from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s. famous book on the workings of the Soviet Union, The Gulag Archipelago.
The example he gives, illustrating the reversal of reality dictating policy, a central axiom of communism, was when the Soviet told the rail engineers that they had to double the amount each train carried on each trip. It was explained to the political officers that the tracks could only handle so much weight and to double the load would lead to catastrophes. The Soviets rounded up those engineers who refused to double the load and shot them. Then doubled the weight of the trains. Catastrophe followed resulting in hundreds of deaths and massive damage. The people who orchestrated that were given the Order of Lenin. (It may have been another honour, it has been a few years since I read book 1)
Listen to Keller-Herzog’s answer about the city not listening to Ottawa Hydro and see if there is a comparison there. The master plan must be supported. The reality of how much you can make by wind and solar is not to be discussed.
The next speaker is using reason to defeat the plan overall, but at the top layer of deception of the plan itself. This means that his objection, while scientifically accurate and verifiable and therefore, ‘true’ still operates on the base assumption that man made CO2 is causing climate change, or more precisely, Global Warming. I would go out on a limb and suggest that he knows the CO2-Global warming connection is utter nonsense, but realizes that our civilization is too far gone into the abyss of scientism to attack the base lie. It has been accepted as axiomatic, both by repetition and by extensive use of Discourse Theory. Still, worth watching as he attacks the plan on the basis of ‘even if true then…’.
The next presenter explains why we have to eat crap we don’t want. The excuse is the Carbon Footprint of food. Which again, is a branch of the base lie, that CO2 causes the world to heat up in a way that is somehow a bad thing. There is no science or reason to the presentation. Just a plan on how to make life less pleasant in order to reduce carbon in agriculture. Something one might suspect is related to this National Post article on Trudeau’s advisor, Mark Carney. Especially the part where he says his plan is to make our lives worse, not better. The presentation on making more plant based options, really means taking away your choice of what you want to eat. Note that prisons are on her list of where food will change.
How Ottawa plans to change your life slide 1
Next is Nigel Ellis. His volume was very low on the video. I had to raise it to the level of the other speakers to be heard. He also played into the CO2 = Global Warming myth, but at least used science to show why the plans to reduce it are nonsense even if we accept the hypothesis as it is.
Karen Bourdeau asks some proper questions, like “When do you plan to ask the residents of Ottawa about your plan to “prohibit automotive oriented land use”. It should not be a rhetorical question because it is a policy that will destroy many generations of labour and development, and end much freedom and liberty. But we all know it is rhetorical. The Politburo doesn’t ask the public what it wants. It appoints experts to speak for the people, that give the answers the politburo wants. She also asks questions that appear to be related to a covert plan to implement 15 minute city type restrictions in Ottawa.
Next is an Ottawa U prof. His volume was very good. Loud even. So I bet you can guess what his politics are. He launches into full scale and undisguised Habermas Discourse Theory attacks against people who merely asked rational questions about the plan to radically transform Ottawa due to alleged CO2 effects on global climate. He expresses outward dismay that they were even allowed to speak and called them “essentially climate deniers”. This is a Frankfurt School dialectic where you destroy the people who disagree with your consensus view you are trying to impose on the majority. Call them names that effectively makes them thought criminals. For a refresher on the formal method of how this works, click through to this video on Marcuse and Habermas and making truth, hate speech.
It is also famously Saul Alinsky Rules for Radical rule XIII if memory serves.
This Prof. also wants a shift from voluntary to mandatory measures. Somehow, indigenous leadership and rights factor in to changing the climate.
Next is Danielle, who tries to steer the ship back towards safe shores by mentioning that even far left wing extremist, Michael Moore made a film exposing the green scam of wind and solar. She is followed by another climate scare advocate who demands more action to lower CO2.
After the delegations is questions to staff. Here’s one that doesn’t get asked. Why is Canada, which seems to be the most vocal nation in terms of pushing the Global Warming scare, actively working on their Century Initiative plan to increase Canada’s population to 100,000,000 people via immigration from hot countries, where their per-capita carbon footprint goes up by FOUR TIMES!
This ‘debate’ was not about competing visions for a better Ottawa or world. This was a confrontation of individual rights Vs. collective authoritarianism. Authoritarianism using any excuse it can make up to justify its actions. If Covid measures didn’t convince anyone that this is the plan, then don’t be surprised with what these people do to us in the name of ‘climate change’.
For a really comprehensive and science based, fact based analysis on the Climate Scare of Global Warming, please watch this video below and maybe take some notes in case you run into a believer.
Yesterday in Ottawa, a protest was held against a drag show for children, that is explicitly against the law when we had such a thing. The leader is a 17 year old Catholic school student that was suspended for stating that there are two sexes. Please read the story at RAIR Foundation.
Only fact checked one aspect of this so far, but so far it checks out.
@nikisfunnyfarm #greenscreen ? original sound – Niki’s Funny Farm
Introduced in the ‘Five Big Moves’, the principles of 15-minute neighbourhoods are integral to the strategic directions contained in Ottawa’s Draft New Official Plan. The concept of 15-minute neighbourhoods supports a variety of objectives relating to intensification, economic development, energy and climate change, gender equity, and culture. Additionally, planning for 15-minute neighbourhoods represents a critical means of embedding health resiliency in planning in order to achieve healthier, more inclusive communities.
15-minute neighbourhoods are compact, well-connected places with a clustering of a diverse mix of land-uses; this includes a range of housing types, shops, services, local access to food, schools and day care facilities, employment, greenspaces, parks and pathways. They are complete communities that support active transportation and transit, reduce car dependency, and enable people to live car-light or car free.
The 15-minute neighbourhood study is the first step at understanding the components of a 15-minute neighbourhood as they evolve across Ottawa’s urban, suburban, and rural transects. This study of 15-minute neighbourhoods is composed primarily of two different mapping exercises. One looking at access to available services and amenities; and the other focusing on the safety and enjoyability of the pedestrian environment with respect to walking to these services and amenities.
(Could be worse. Imagine if we weren’t vaccinated didn’t ‘win’ the last municipal election in Ottawa)
Here is a link to the local council with references to Green Space Alliance without saying much about what it is. Also lots of climate change bollux in it.
The following is from here:
It’s all still ruddy mysterious though. Can’t figure out what the “Green Space Alliance” changes to the land use laws will be yet.
A few months ago, some readers of this web site might remember that we posted a live broadcast of a lawyer representing three doctors against the now fully captured, “College of Surgeons and Physicians of Ontario”.
The college made a link to the Zoom available but got so overwhelmed with requests for it that they put it on YouTube with strict instructions that no one should record or republish it yada yada wuzza wuzza.
Hopefully someone outside Ontario has it and will post it for the world to see how the three doctors had a slam-dunk case against the college, yet now today, this judgement came in from them.
In part:
THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE PHYSICIANS
[7] Broadly speaking, the three physicians take issue with some of the public health measures relating to COVID-19 such as vaccination and treatment.
[9] The College alleges that Dr. Trozzi committed professional misconduct by making misleading, incorrect or inflammatory statements about vaccinations, treatments and public health measures concerning COVID-19 through his email and online communications about the pandemic.
[10] In Dr. Phillips’ case, the allegations of professional misconduct include making misleading, incorrect or inflammatory statements about vaccinations, treatments and public health measures for COVID-19; disclosing information from a College investigation, including posting such information online and failing to remove it when requested; and failing to cooperate with College investigations. The College alleges that he failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession and engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional conduct in different aspects of his treatment of patients and public health reporting, that he engaged in unprofessional conduct and communications at his hospital workplace and also breached terms, conditions and limitations on his certificate of registration.
[11] The College alleges that Dr. Luchkiw committed professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with College investigations relating to her infection control practices, communications about COVID-19 and issuance of vaccine exemptions.
Then skipping forward a lot:
[36] Justice Morgan stated:
[1] The three Respondents in this set of Applications are physicians who believe that vaccinations are a misguided and ineffective way to address the ongoing health issues caused by COVID-19. Although the specifics of each of their cases differ somewhat, they are each under investigation by the Applicant for their conduct and practices in acting on this belief.
[2] None of the Respondents [is] prepared to cooperate in the usual way with the Applicant’s investigation. They are each of the view that the investigation and the disclosure and production requirements that accompany an investigation amount to an abuse of the regulator’s power….
[5] In the words of the formal Appointment of Investigator documentation, the inquiries were to examine each of the Respondents’ practices “including in relation to COVID-19 and [his or her] completion of medical exemptions for COVID-19 vaccinations and diagnostic testing”. For the Respondent, Patrick Brian Phillips, the Applicant had an additional concern regarding his use of online websites and social media to disseminate what the Applicant characterized as misleading health information about COVID-19, as well as his posting on social media, copies of what were supposed to be confidential communications from the Applicant. The Appointment of Investigator in respect of Dr. Phillips mandated the investigator to investigate his medical practice “including in relation to communications and conduct relating to the COVID-19 pandemic”.
…
[23] The record demonstrates through correspondence and other statements that the Respondents have no intent to provide the requested documents or to otherwise cooperate with the investigator. Their communications to the Applicant indicate that they are not prepared to respond to the matters that the investigator is investigating.
[29] The Respondents are all in continual breach of their obligations under the Code. They have put forward no reason for their refusal to comply with their obligations in this regard, except to reiterate their objection to vaccines. As indicated, what the investigator seeks is production of records; the investigation does not seek to compel vaccinations or any other specific medical treatment. Accordingly, the Respondents’ position is unresponsive to the investigator’s request and their argument about the efficacy or inefficacy of COVID vaccines is a non-sequitur.
Not being a lawyer or a doctor, or even having read this whole judgement, it sure looks on the surface that the deal is:
Doctors, who acted on their best medical judgement and attempted to dissuade people from taking an experimental and mostly untested new technology (possibly made by DoD as a military countermeasure and not actually developed by a drug company at all) are guilty of not doing what government and its agents, like the CPSO, tell them to do.
This means the official transformation of medicine from a science into a corporate practice where all practices are diktats from the top. Remember that old saying that we should all always get a second opinion? Doctors aren’t allowed to have opinions now. They have to follow instructions from government. And these doctors did not. And so they are guilty of something or other. Their patients who did not take the vaxx, are likely fine. We know now that they are less likely to catch Covid and certainly less likely to have a serious case and less likely to die of it than those who took lots of shots and certainly, infinitely less likely to suffer side effects and adverse reactions than those who took any number of shots.
So win-win for everyone who avoided the accursed Witches’ brew.
Meanwhile, back at the college:
The analysis and the analysis of the analysis:
What Premiere Daniele Smith actually said: