A video from the ‘final’ Ottawa People’s Commission’ on the freedom convoy…

Or as they call it, “The occupation”.

For those that have not seen the documentary on the first round of hearings, here it is below. It is worth seeing for context. For those who have seen it, go to the video below where another woman managed to get in front of the Star Chamber judges by claiming a bias against the Truckers and protest, but in fact wanted to let them know how many people, even who lived right in the midst of it actually felt. A view that is anathema to them, and their “lived experience” of ‘witnesses’ who saw the protest only on CBC and knew it must be a violent Klan rally, even before it started.

That was from the first round. And now, from the newest hearings set in Vanier on December 10th, 2022. Danielle sets the record straight.

Left wing activism in Ottawa, and its attempt to smear the Freedom Convoy and its supporters

While the official hearings took place under the auspices of examining Trudeau’s use of the Emergency Measures act, leftist activists held another set of hearings with the intention of demonizing the Freedom Convoy in Ottawa starting in September. Please read a lot of the important story details at US based, RAIR Foundation. There is a lot more to say about this, so perhaps this post will be updated at some point later on, or a new one will be created with additional information.

We have seen a lot of material from this commission showing bias even more clearly at a special hearing they eventually did hold, well after the initial one below for people who supported the Freedom Convoy at a later hearing, subsequent to the one explained in this short documentary. Hopefully that will be presented sometime soon, although you can watch the entire session as presented now at this YouTube link.

Check out how the even handed non-biased panel treated those in favour of the convoy at both hearings. Compare it to how they treated people that opposed it. More to come on this over time.

It should be added that the phrase, “lived experience” is in fact a communist dog-whistle for dialectic replacement of reality with the correct set of feelings about an issue.

Please see the video below:

 

An Open Letter to my Fellow Army General Officers-

30 November 2022

An Open Letter to my Fellow Army General Officers-

We all commissioned into the Army with ideals and a determination to make a difference. We would lead with character, create effective teams to win on future battlefields, and advance our beloved institution, all the while, remaining loyal to our Constitution. During our service, we have faced threats, challenges, and impediments to these ideals ? some in the crucible of combat. Yet, we have never wavered. Today, we face a different challenge ? unique to our time ? that threatens our army like never before. We must not waver now.

Today’s challenge is Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). These innocent sounding words represent a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”, attacking the foundations of our beloved Army. This growing cancer creates distrust, discord, and doubts throughout the institution wherever it metastasizes. Let me briefly explain what you already know in your hearts to be true.

At its core, DEI operationalizes the tenants of Critical Race Theory (CRT) in the organizational setting. Using agreeable sounding concepts like diversity, equity, and inclusion, the underlying goal is to impose race and gender-based outcomes through discrimination. It is a radical ideology that seeks to undermining the “colorblind”, performance-based organization that we helped to create. Unfortunately, we have grown to accept its catchy slogans, like “celebrate diversity” and “diversity is our strength”, while ignoring the damage they cause. But the fact remains, because DEI programs see the world through a lens of skin color, gender, and sexual orientation, they segment our once-unified force into tribes that increasingly look on each other with suspicion. This destroys the unity and trust that we know are the vital ingredients to winning tomorrow’s wars.

Sadly, by supporting DEI principles, we have moved our great Army ? which has led the nation in racial and gender integration ? into reverse. The DEI bureaucrats that we have installed up and down the Army’s echelons, are actively sowing the seeds of discord and distrust in our ranks. By forcing our Soldiers to see the world through a lens of skin color and gender, they are creating suspicion and division ? instead of the unity, trust, and cohesion that we know are required for successful teams to win in battle. The result is wormwood in the Army’s timbers of readiness.

And it’s not just readiness that suffers. DEI is political ideology wrapped in bad social science. Why would we impose this politically controversial experiment on our Soldiers? Army Secretary Christine Wormuth recent said in Army Magazine, “We need to make sure we are keeping the Army out of politics.” Well, here’s your chance. DEI is very political. You can’t look the other way, when you know that the core tenets of DEI violate the Constitution, it’s 14th Amendment, and our civil rights laws. And what of our commanders? Aren’t they responsible for building teams, creating healthy command climates, and ensuring their Soldiers are treated with dignity and respect? Or have we lost faith in them too? Our proven Equal Opportunity channels are no longer good enough? Do we really need a separate bureaucracy to make sure our commanders are valuing diversity?

Don’t misunderstand me. Diversity is a wonderful thing. But DEI is not about diversity of thought. It is about one thing ? diversity of appearance. This should never drive organizational goals ? especially in a profession that requires rigorous excellence and high standards. Rather, diversity in today’s America, is better seen as a precondition for any organization that wants to recruit talent. This is a good thing. But it’s an issue for US Army Recruiting Command, who should be innovating to attract all underrepresented populations into our ranks. But once they wear Army green, it’s all about unity. They are on the Army team, never to be separated into tribes.

Unfortunately, as the DEI bureaucracy grows with every passing year, the unfortunate victims are our Soldiers. Each required training session on antiracism, white privilege, implicit biases, and the like, feels indoctrinating. And some topics are even offensive to their traditional religious values and upbringing. We now force them to “celebrate” things that they often fundamentally disagree with. And of course, every new diversity training requirement, takes valuable time away from training warfighters in their key tasks. Yet, most damaging of all, the training drives wedges into the trust, cohesion, and unity that good leaders strive to create. I hope you bristle at the empty phrase “diversity is our strength” when you know from hard-won experience that our army’s strength has always been the direct opposite: Our strength comes from building unified teams from diverse people. These two concepts are diametrically opposed.

Initially, you may have accepted these toxic ideas because they flowed from presidential executive orders. And at a basic level, diversity sounds good. But make no mistake: This is not diversity of thought; this is diversity of nothing more than physical appearance. This imposition of the superficial over substance damages the good order and discipline of the force. Besides, are they lawful orders in the first place, if they directly oppose the Constitution and our civil rights laws? You may have also fallen for the flawed notion that our army “needs to look like the nation it represents”. Who says? This has never been the case in our history. By comparison, does the NBA look like the nation? Of course not. It’s a meritocracy in very competitive environment. Do you not see our military as a more important meritocracy in the competitive environment of combat?

You can no longer look the other way. The time has come to confront it. Will you choose unity and trust, or grievances and tribes? Will you choose excellence and high standards, or quotas and prescribed racial and gender outcomes? Will you build social-justice warriors or real warriors? You can’t have it both ways.

I was recently assured by a 3-star friend, that work is being done behind the scenes to push back on these destructive ideologies. But he also admitted that if any senior leader speaks out, they will forfeit any future promotion. Duty often comes at a price. If you need support, look to our rich history with a simple question: What would General George Marshall have done? Do you think he would have sat by and watched any administration push politically controversial ideas into the force, when he knew they undermined trust, cohesion, and unity? You know he wouldn’t. He would have pushed back, even if he had to risk it all. We need some George Marshalls today.

If you don’t see the need to act, I fear you may be out of touch with your Soldiers. Unfortunately, they know they are being watched, many by the DEI commissars that you have installed at every echelon. Can they even be honest with you anymore? And it’s not just their rolling eyes in classrooms, they are actively warning people not to join the ranks. Do you see the connection between your embrace of these controversial political theories and the precipitous drop in the public’s trust of the military over the past few years? And if you think the current recruiting challenges are driven solely by a tight labor market and disqualifying conditions in our youth, think again. American youth are attracted to excellence. They want challenges and high standards. But the uncomfortable truth is this: These cohorts have traditionally leaned conservative. That’s the problem. By helping create a progressive political institution of social-justice warriors, you have created an Army that seems hostile to traditional conservative and religious values. This is significant. For the first time in history, you have broken the important link between the family legacy of military service and new qualified candidates. By some estimates, this link, which has normally averaged around 40% is now down to a paltry 13%.

Your oath was to the Constitution, and your duty has always been to build warfighting readiness. DEI programs are at odds with both. Don’t lose this battle. The soul of our army, and our nation’s security, depend on it.

Yours in service,

Chris J. Petty

Brigadier General, USA Retired

Brig. Gen. (R) Chris Petty is a graduate of West Point and a decorated combat commander. He is the author of 12 Battles Every American Should Know, as well as the creator of the Battle Digest military history series. He currently serves on the Board of Directors of STARRS, Inc.

For a PDF of this document, please click here

 

A Nazi under every Tesla

Salty makes some key observations and comparisons which make it worth the time to watch. Yes, every viewer of this site will already know these facts. But its great to see it packaged this way, and might allow us to use it in a pinch should we be discussing the issue of Twitter, Elon or Nazis with anyone, and how the term “Nazi” is used by the left today, as opposed to how it actually was, by the left, back in the early 20th.

Here’s a nice contrast. This guy would seem to be a ‘real’ nazi. He burst forth with Antisemitic slurs at a US airport till he was arrested. He started his own political party called the Christian Socialist Party, so he is half right in terms of a Nazi one; and he started slamming down the Roman Salute in every direction, demanding a race war. How did people at the airport react? A few laughed and the rest watched for entertainment purposes. In other-words, perfectly. When an actual Nazi minded individual does his act no one really cares. It’s often risible.

But when a fair minded individual even begins to take his leg of the scale advantaging a far left, authoritarian narrative, then he becomes a Nazi.

On the 90th anniversary of the Holomodor, we need to carefully examine what led up to the killing of millions

This post contains videos about an historical event on the scale of the Holocaust, more recent, and very possibly of more people in as systematic a manner. Yet if you ask your friends and neighbours about the Holomodor, it is likely they will never have heard of it. Please consider sending the link to this post, or if you prefer, to the videos directly to people who still think the left is about tolerance and fairness.

1. The Soviet Story. A feature length documentary about the Holomodor and the socialist/communist motives for that mass death.

2. What is the Holomodor

3. Jordon Peterson on how things get this far

 

Neil Oliver: This country must awaken to the realisation that we are being taken for fools

Of course, Mr. Oliver may or may not understand that this is not in any way hypocrisy. This is meant to be a humiliating set of lies we learn to repeat to prove our fealty to the most totalitarian and authoritarian group of rulers.

This is the 2+2=5 scene from the movie/book, 1984. And the explanation for that scene, even beyond the one given, that the peasants have to learn to really believe whatever lie the state tells, not just repeat it out of fear, but belt it out like North Koreans weeping at the anniversary of the death of a tyrant who enslaved them for generations This can be understood in that Dalrymple quote, the Baron at Gates of Vienna hipped me to:

“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”

On Western leaders dismantling our polities

First, please pay attention to this excellent video by Neil Oliver

Then consider what Trudeau said, out loud, on at least two occasions. First to the New York Times:

And then what he said on as TV show in Quebec before he was even elected PM in 2006. I still want to know what book he is talking about. I bet it was Klaus Schwabb’s. Still looking for this whole show. All we can tell is the interviewer is named Seamus, and it was in 2006. Here is a reference to what he said, but not when and where he said it or with who. Quite odd.

UPDATE: Reader, PePi found this!

The book was: Citizen of the World: The Life of Pierre Elliott Trudeau which is about Trudeau’s gloabalist crap
The eldest son of former prime minister Pierre Trudeau is belittling nationalism as an “old idea from the 19th century” that is not relevant to today’s Quebec.

“Nationalism is based on a smallness of thought,” Justin Trudeau said in an interview broadcast on CTV’s Canada AM on Thursday.
“(It) builds up barriers between peoples, that has nothing to do with the Canada we should be building.”
He was being interviewed about a new book about his father titled Citizen of the World: The Life of Pierre Elliott Trudeau.
Although for the most part Mr. Trudeau talked about the book written by history professor John English, he digressed into the debate on Quebec’s place in Canada that erupted last weekend when Liberal leadership front runner Michael Ignatieff supported the idea of recognizing Quebec as a nation.
“I’m supposed to be, sort of quiet on this,” an almost sheepish Mr. Trudeau said.
Mr. Trudeau didn’t directly mention the debate in the party his father led for nearly two decades, but he appeared to think the nation issue was not a good one to get tied up in.
“Unfortunately, some people these days are wrapped up in this idea of nation for Quebec, which stands against everything my father ever believed,” Mr. Trudeau said. “We need to start looking forward.”