The engineered failure of Europe will be accelerated by the engineered failure of its energy supplies. EU climate management rules (aka Lysenko-like scientism) will continue to decarbonize (and deindustrialize) that continent into ultimate submission to the Comintern. Meanwhile, Mark Carney annexes Canada to Europe so to be the arbiter of valued Canadian natural resources, and subprime human capital, between continents. Brookfield Asset management, Carney’s company, will broker carbon credits to profit from the interstitial ideological lunacy these credits represent. Brookfield has also moved into the heat pump space promoted by Carney for all Canadian households. Heat pumps also occupy the interstitial space between modest effectiveness and freezing solid in the Canadian cold, the former being a lousy gamble even in air-conditioning mode.
Meanwhile, Red China very cleverly creates a conversion mechanism for its non-fungible currency, the Yuan, by creating a clearing house in Hong Kong through which it will launder Yuan for gold. This is mafia-style economics while wearing sovereign suits.
HIs comment contains links to two video. The salient bit of one of them is this Western Standard article about a leaked deal Carney made with the EU which at least on the surface may be some kind of deal to benefit Brookfield. But given that Carney states in his book that his role models are Marx, Engles and Lenin, and that he considers the problems of the West to be derived from ‘Capitalism’, an analysis that fits better would look more like anything that moves power away from the people of the region being ruled, and ideally to unknown, faceless all powerful bureaucrats as far away as possible so that the public actually have no chance of changing how things work in their day to day lives. Central planning don’t ya know. Canadian mineral and other natural resources will be planned and managed by the Communist EU and the CCP. And Canada will make scarcity very well. Which after all, is the only product that socialism always delivers on time.
Canadians are being sold “associate membership” in the European Union without being told what it means or what Ottawa has already offered Brussels in the backrooms. A recent Nanos poll found significant support for the idea among Canadians. Were respondents shown the leaked document Ottawa drafted for discussions with Brussels, given a clear definition of associate membership, or reminded that Canada already has comprehensive trade and defence agreements with the EU? No.
While Mark Carney tells Canadians and Albertans that Confederation rests on sovereignty, consultation, and strong provincial partners, the document his government sent to Brussels in September tells a different story: Ottawa is prepared to bargain away pieces of that sovereignty without consulting the people and provinces that hold it. Albertans who still believe the federation will protect their resources, their industries, and their constitutional powers may not have much time left to decide whether staying is worth the risk of closer EU alignment.
While Mark Carney tells Canadians and Albertans that Confederation rests on sovereignty, consultation, and strong provincial partners, the document his government sent to Brussels in September tells a different story: Ottawa is prepared to bargain away pieces of that sovereignty without consulting the people and provinces that hold it. Albertans who still believe the federation will protect their resources, their industries, and their constitutional powers may not have much time left to decide whether staying is worth the risk of closer EU alignment.
Lastly, while it is true that Alberta’s cities, Calgary and Edmonton, like all big cities now are far to the left of reality, (a luxury people who live far from the farms and factories that make all the stuff they consume can enjoy temporarily) one may still question how well Monday’s referendum was conducted. And the fact that they allowed mail in ballots, I believe half a million of them, may suggest a planned outcome by the provincial apparatus, since mail ins tend to always favour the collectivist options on any vote.
Asking BRAVE’s AI on the numbers: “519,082 special mail-in ballots were received and counted in Alberta’s October 19, 2026 referendum. This figure represented a tenfold increase compared to the 2023 provincial election and accounted for approximately 43% of the province’s eligible voters, who had already cast their votes before the main election day.”
I asked a follow up: ‘Is it known which way the mail ins were counted? For me at least, the answer raises an eyebrow. Actually high enough to catch in your hat.
There’s no official breakdown by voting method — Elections Alberta reports results by riding and by question, but not separately for mail-in vs. in-person ballots. The special ballots are counted at the same facility and reported alongside in-person ballots.
What is known is a striking participation pattern: mail-in voters were heavily concentrated on Question 10 (the separation question). As one analysis noted, “almost all the mail-in ballots appear to have only answered question 10.” The numbers back this up — Q10 drew roughly 1.9 million votes, while the other nine questions each had participation ranging from only 1 to 1.5 million. Since each question is on a separate ballot and voters can choose to answer any subset, many mail-in voters apparently marked only the separation ballot.
This disparity fueled online speculation of fraud (e.g., claims that Q10 had “38% more votes than actual eligible voters”), which Elections Alberta and analysts have dismissed. The explanation is that the special ballot option was newly unrestricted for the first time, and many of the 519,000+ mail-in voters were specifically motivated by the separation question rather than all ten issues.
As for the direction of mail-in votes on Q10 (remain vs. separate), that’s not publicly broken out. The overall result was ~75% remain / ~24% separate, but you can’t tell from the public data how that split looked among mail-in voters specifically.
We already know the Fed Guv has no ethics, morals or concerns about the law or constitution. Anyone who does not already know that, please go back to listening to CBC. You will find it much more comforting than this site. We know that The Rebel already busted some interference with the referendum for the remain side:
Search Rebel News for more on Thomas Lukaszuk if you want.
So the patters reads:
Federal Government does the opposite of enforce border control and immigration laws.
Federal Government does the opposite of protect individual rights and has now passed a LOT of legislation which de jure actually makes the state the controller of the most fundamental of basic rights. Like bill C4, criminalizing parents if they try and talk their own children out of being spayed or neutered at the suggestion of a teacher or whatever other state agent.
Federal Government invoked the Emergency Measures Act, technically the renamed, War Measures Act (in retrospect one wonders if they did not rename it because they expected serious conflict to come from Canadians against the nascent communist state rather than external threats?) in order to quell the Freedom Convoy. An event which at least one brave federal Judge actually ruled was unconstitutional.
So its not much of a stretch to believe the same state government would interfere with a Provincial election where the main issue was the sovereignty of the people in Alberta, the most wealthy province in Canada since Newfoundland farmed out all the lobsters.
Weird about those mail ins only having time to mark question 10 isn’t it? It’s almost like there were far fewer voters than ballots or something.
