Category Archives: irrational leftism

The Mac public house in New York, and Ottawa City Council, and the totalitarian fraud that is public health regulations

Posted on by

Yesterday we posted a couple of videos on the state thuggery that this pub was subjected to in the past few days.

Here is more updates. Below, that, our hypothesis as to how this comes to be.

This next move is genius. They declared the pub an autonomous zone. Obviously they do not expect this to work. Much like pointing out the massive election fraud. But the American people now get a look at how things actually work. Some autonomous zones are more respected than others.

Just about a month before the attacks of 911, In fact on August the 1st, 2001, the city council of Ottawa pulled a fast one on Ottawa businesses, and used illegal means to do so.

Using the now familiar trick of playing with the meanings of words, City Hall banned smoking in all “public places” which meant private businesses and bars and restaurants.

In a move that was similar to banning coal miners from working in coal mines due to the heavy presence of coal, they decided that bar workers, many of whom smoked, needed to be protected from second hand smoke and barred smoking inside for the good of their health. Of course.

And as to public, if as person tripped and fell within the premises, the business owner was liable for it, and if a customer drank too much and got in an accident, or even was arrested for DWI on a random stop, the bartender was criminally liable. So, not so much. public at all really.

It is also important to understand that Ottawa City Council, which was staffed as memory serves, by a lot of far leftists at the time, was invited to speak to New York City Council to explain how they managed to implement this ban.

The bylaw was worded in such a way that there wouldn’t be too much resistance to it, as it offered an out that they, the city, never intended to honour. It said this was for public places but private clubs were exempt. One major entertainment venue on Bank St. Barrymore’s Pub, decided to become a private club and sell memberships and all the other related requirements to be exempt from the bylaw.

But bylaw enforcement came every day and levied ENORMOUS fines, 4 figures in fact, against Barrymore’s knowing that they were operating within the law, but the cost of fighting the tickets would be too much for them.

Keep in mind that only a few years earlier, bars and restaurants had been forced to invest many thousands of dollars into special air filters and circulation devices to comply with previous anti-smoking bylaws.

But a curious thing happened during this period.

A consortium of bars and restaurants who lost on average 30% of their total sales or more, got together and hired a law firm in Ottawa. Not to fight the bylaw, they didn’t think they had a chance. Probably based on some of the illegal tactics the city had already used against them. One example being that in direct contravention of law, the city spent a great deal of public funds advertising one side of a bill before it became law. On the sides of busses and on signs all over Ottawa, there were signs that read something very much like:

“Ottawa is going smoke free soon! Please call this number to support the new proposed law!”

This wasn’t just illegal, this was pernicious. The kind of warp we now see on all issues from immigration policy to free speech now. You MUST go with the state opinion. No other views on an issue can be aired and more and more will become illegal. Just ask Geert Wilders, Marine Le Pen, Matteo Salvini, and these are just leaders of national parties! For the rest of us, well we saw what happened to a mathematician who dared speak election truth yesterday.

But what this group of restaurants did, was to sue the city and all restaurants or bars that became private clubs in order to force them to comply with these regulations.

That’s right.

They did not fight for their own rights. They fought to remove what they saw was an unfair advantage that those who fought the bylaw had, and close them down, or take away their right to be a private club.

And it worked. Most of those places are closed. Interestingly, all the places that had existed before the ban, but were no-smoking establishments also closed. Becuase the city forced the niche market they had on the whole city. So people who didn’t like cigarette smoke before now could go anywhere. A few great restaurants and bars in an area we were familiar with, all closed within months. And the remainder all complained that business was down on average 30%.

Entertainment was gutted. People who go out to see bands, go to enjoy themselves. That typically doesn’t include going outside in -20 C weather every half hour for a rushed cigarette and back in.

Google searching leads one to suspect that the WHO is also behind this global push to ban smoking everywhere. And at this point, by design or evolution, it looks like that was a template for all we see around us now, from Toronto BBQs to Staten Island public houses.

Additional:

After conversations with Johnny U. it feels like this is worth adding.

The post above is to offer insight as to a strategic operation against the free peoples of the world. But Johnny U. pointed out the equally important tactical method of implementing the strategy. And that is to use regulation to bypass law, debate and all democratic process. Clearly this is what is taking place, and is a conscious and conceived, deliberate process.

 

 

A solid explanation of what is a “Colour Revolution” and how it played out in the USA

Posted on by

(This is really good. It also seems like the time to add that during most of the ANTIFA/BLM riots, i often noticed a much higher than chance, occurrence of specific clothes. For example, for some weeks during various riots in Portland and other cities, I noticed that a lot of people who might be directing the violence, wore Rolling Stones T shirts with the tongue on it. It seemed to me that they were too young and there was too many of them to accidentally be wearing that symbol. Even at the time it looked like that was a secret uniform maybe showing rank of some kind. This would fit with the “colour” part of the Colour revolution in the following explanation.)

There are several other segments to the show of which part 1 is above. We will add them here as soon as they are found.

Below, is a video from October 29, where Rich Higgens discusses what might happen on November 4th. Now that we are at November 20th, its interesting to test their models against their predictions.

Potentially GAME changing victory in Denmark!

Posted on by

The article is in Danish for the moment. Have a look using Google translate in Chrome till we get it properly done to English but for now…

And here is the English video explaining what they did and how they did it!

A segment of the article:

The government has proposed a new epidemic law that can enter into force if Denmark is affected by a coronavirus version 2.0 or a completely different epidemic . In the proposed law, the word coercion is included 92 times and power 84 times in different contexts.

Among other things, the law stipulates that those infected with a dangerous disease – or persons who are presumed to be infected – may be required to be examined, hospitalized, treated and isolated so that the infection does not spread.

 

 

Studies on mask use and Covid suppressed while some areas double down on forced masking OUTDOORS

Posted on by

1. Danish study shows that masks do not do what we are forced to believe they do

Delingpole: Why Won’t Top Medical Journals Publish Landmark Danish Mask Study?

Do masks protect against Chinese coronavirus and reduce its spread — or are they, as their critics maintain, mere empty gesture politics?

A major study which might finally have answered this question has been postponed indefinitely after three of the world’s top three medical journals mysteriously declined to publish it.

The researchers behind a large and unique Danish study on the effect of wearing a mask are having great difficulty in getting their research results published. One of the participating professors in the study admits that the still secret research result could be perceived as ‘controversial’.

For weeks, the media and researchers around the world have been waiting with increasing impatience for the publication of a large Danish study on the effect – or lack thereof – of wearing a mask in a public space during the corona pandemic.

Now one of the researchers who has been involved in the study has said that the finished research result has been rejected by at least three of the world’s leading medical journals.

These include the Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine and the American Medical Association’s journal JAMA.

“They all said no,” says the Chief Physician in the Research Department at North Zealand Hospital, Professor Christian Torp-Pedersen.

However, the Professor does not wish to disclose the journals’ reasoning.

Let us all remember that the New England Journal of Medicine AND The Lancet knowingly published fake ‘studies’ on the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine for the purpose of discrediting that treatment, not to inform the public. The studies were so badly faked that enough scientists screamed loudly forcing retractions. But no policy changes came making the treatment available. The fact that these journals did not accept these studies at this stage makes it reasonable to think that the Danish study is well done, but contradicts the narrative, or more accurately, the “consensus” (political position taken by a small group to be imposed on a large group which usually imposes a pseudo reality at the expense of actual reality) and therefore must not be stamped with the rapidly diminishing credibility of these once great publications. Hopefully like their fellow Danish scientists who discovered through rigorous application of the scientific method that the Earth’s climate is driven by the sun, and that CO2 levels FOLLOW temperature changes and not the other way around, these Danes will also go straight to the public with a film.

To prove a point, the German Government in a fully Orwellian way, is now sending the police forth in the streets of Frankfurt to announce that masks are mandatory for all OUTSIDE now. Which adds a lot of weight to the theory directly above:

Translation below:

“To all pedestrians on Schweizer Strasse,
Due to the increasing corona numbers, the city of Frankfurt has decided in a general decree that in every shopping street as well as (every?) Schweizer street, mouth and nose covers are to be worn on the street to protect everyone at all times. Put on a mouth and nose cover, otherwise you may be fined.”

So there you have it. Germany is making mask wearing mandatory OUTSIDE on the basis of ‘cases’ almost certainly from increased testing and not serious illness, even as evidence mounts that masks may not do what we are told they do.

Meanwhile, as Christmas Markets in Germany likely fold, some effort is being made to make masks more festive at the expense of, well an actual festival. What we need are masks that say, “This is s token of communist control”

 

Simple, short, brilliant and accurate explanation for Covid measures.

Posted on by

On first read, I cannot find a word I disagree with.

From the Epoch Times:

Held Captive by Pandemic Lies

Back in the spring, when the official mantra was “two weeks to flatten the curve,” and “fifteen days to slow the spread,” Americans and others were game to give the fight against the CCP virus a try. After all, we were being asked to briefly surrender our freedom of movement, association, speech, and the exercise of religion in exchange for protecting a medical system about to confront the Chinese Communist Party virus.

But it was all a lie—every word of it.

The hospitals were not overwhelmed. The death toll was many degrees of magnitude smaller than so direly predicted. The lockdowns continue in one form or another to this day.

In fact, since that time the death toll from the novel coronavirus has steadily dropped, even as “infections” have increased—entirely understandably, given the nature of viruses. The first lockdowns were never meant to control or eradicate the virus by denying it hosts. That’s impossible. Instead, all they did was delay the number of people who would eventually get this variation of SARS and the flu, in order for the herd to be culled and immunity to kick on.

And, indeed, those who died were mainly the low-hanging fruit: the extremely elderly, the residents of nursing homes whose remaining life spans were short in the first place, those with compromised immune systems, the grossly obese or suffering from severe comorbidities, such as cancer and advanced heart disease.

Please read the rest at Epoch:

https://www.aier.org/article/woodstock-occurred-in-the-middle-of-a-pandemic/