Magness maintained that he was left with no choice but to go along with the rate increase, racking up huge profits for energy companies in the process, after Abbott allegedly told former Public Utility Commission (PUC) Chair DeAnn Walker to do anything it took to prevent more blackouts. The PUC ordered the maximum price on February 15 as part of the anti-blackout effort, with prices remaining at the cap until February 19.

"[Walker] told me the governor had conveyed to her if we emerged from rotating outages it was imperative they not resume," Magness reportedly said during his testimony. "We needed to do what we needed to do to make it happen." (read more)

(Update: One day after the publication of this article, Abby Broyles conducted a video interview with KFOR and admitted that she attended the party in question. The article below remains in its original form.)

A Valentine’s Day weekend sleepover party for tween girls that included watching the film Titanic turned bizarre and tearful after parents say Oklahoma 5th Congressional District candidate Abby Broyles allegedly became drunk and berated some of the children in attendance.

The party, held at the home of a Deer Creek Public Schools parent on Feb. 11, included eight girls between the ages of 12 and 13. Broyles was allegedly at the home the night of the party at the invitation of the homeowner, who is the mother of one of the children.

According to multiple accounts of the evening, Broyles became intoxicated and spoke derogatorily to some of the girls. She allegedly called one girl an “acne fucker,” which prompted the girl to leave the room in tears. Broyles allegedly called another girl a “Hispanic fucker” and another a “judgy fucker.”

At one point, Broyles allegedly vomited into a laundry basket and onto one girl’s shoes.

Sarah Matthews, whose daughter attended the party, outlined some of Broyles’ alleged behavior in a Twitter thread Wednesday that tagged Broyles’ account. Matthews was not present but was told of the alleged events by her daughter and the mother who hosted the party.

Both Matthews and her 12-year-old daughter discussed the situation thoroughly with NonDoc. Another parent, who asked not to be named, corroborated the story based on details provided by her daughter after the party. Text messages from the homeowner outlining and apologizing for Broyles’ actions were also provided to NonDoc by multiple people. In a phone conversation, the homeowner also confirmed to NonDoc that Broyles had caused an incident “of magnitude” at her home.

NonDoc also obtained two photographs of Broyles: A picture of her drinking wine in a kitchen next to two girls, and a screenshot of her in a TikTok video posing with four girls, three of whom are wearing matching pink pajama outfits adorned with hearts.

Matthews said she is still shocked by her daughter’s account of what happened. (read more)

Vaccine passports will no longer be required in New York City starting March 7, Mayor Eric Adams said Sunday — and he plans on lifting school mask mandates then, too, barring “unforeseen spikes” in COVID cases.

Adams said he plans on following Gov. Kathy Hochul’s lead in nixing masks in schools but would make the final determination this Friday.

“At the end of this week, we will evaluate the numbers and make a final announcement on Friday. If we see no unforeseen spikes and our numbers continue to show a low level of risk, New York City will remove the indoor mask mandate for public school children,” Hizzoner said in a statement.

But he said starting March 7, patrons at Big Apple restaurants, gyms and indoor venues will no longer be required to show proof of vaccination. (read more)

She announced a conservative run for U.S. Congress, representing Massachusetts's 4^th district, a long-shot attempt in a staunchly Democratic area. Her primary issue was pushing back against COVID policies, particularly those that impacted school children. Her message resonated and Burns collected more than $100,000 in donations for her campaign in just one quarter. She was an outspoken advocate for children and families and called out the Massachusetts politicians who continue to double-down on coronavirus mandates even as elected officials elsewhere eliminate them. 

Burns was recently featured in a popular article, “Revenge of the Covid Moms” on Bari Weiss’s Substack, that spotlighted mothers who are fed up with endless virus restrictions and are taking action to end them.

Ultimately, Burns had enough of fighting. This week, she terminated her political campaign and explained that she and her family are fleeing to Texas where her husband has an opportunity to open a new company office. 

“My leaving is entirely predicated on what is best for my family,” Burns wrote. “My trust in the political and cultural leadership of this state is totally broken. The past two years have shown me that I cannot protect my children from the ill effects of that leadership. Given the chance to escape those malign forces, I had to take it.”

Fight or flight is a choice that more Americans are facing, especially those who live in parts of the country with continued coronavirus restrictions and the constant threat that, even if ended, those restrictions could re-emerge at any time by political decree.

A National Trend

This is a national trend, as U.S. Census Bureau data released in December showed that restrictive states such as California, Illinois, New York, and Massachusetts lost population between July 2020 and July 2021, while states with less-restrictive virus policies like Texas, Arizona, and Florida gained population during that time. Writing about these population trends for FEE, economist Peter Jacobsen explained: “Lockdowns, documentation mandates, school closings, and other COVID regulations are likely just too cumbersome for some to tolerate.”

Fight or flight is a tough choice for families, but at least it’s a choice that Americans can enjoy thanks to federalism and the ability to vote with our feet. We can choose to live in a different city or state, and select different state and local governance, due to the decentralization of power envisioned by our Founding Fathers.

As more people move to states they see as offering greater freedom and opportunity, there is some concern about political change in their new states. Could newcomers bring with them policies and perspectives that could threaten the very freedom they are seeking? FEE's Fresh Start States project helps to prevent this through outreach and information promoting the principles of personal and economic freedom to those settling in new areas.

What If You Can't Move?

Still, for a whole host of reasons, many families can’t or don’t want to move somewhere else. In that case, they can keep fighting. Burns has some advice for families staying put.

“Start talking about your concerns publicly—and don't pull punches,” she told me in an interview this week. “Don't vacillate and say things work when you think they don't. That's how we got stuck here. You will find more people agree with you than you think. Then, if you can, run for something, and run on these issues—lean into them. These issues shouldn't be Republican or Democrat, so run however you feel comfortable. Talk about the things that concern you—not whatever the party line is supposed to be. Being public about it will help you find the people in your area who are sympathetic, and who will form the base of your support,” she said.

It’s a dynamic moment in the U.S., and many individuals and families who never before considered uprooting their life for a new one elsewhere are giving it serious thought. Perhaps you are one of them. (read more)

The other day, Harvard senior Julie Hartman wrote a brief tale in the Wall Street Journal about what has been happening on that revered campus since COVID landed its microscopic self on American shores. She and her classmates have been denied the norms of campus life, treated instead to mask-wearing, social distancing, and endless COVID tests. But that’s no big deal, because students across the country have been subjected to similar protocols, right?

That’s wrong, according to Hartman. She points out that students at Harvard are often viewed as the leaders of the next generation, for that institution has been producing great men for centuries. “We may be the future decision makers,” she writes, “but most of us aren’t leaders. Our principal concern is becoming members of the American elite, with whatever compromises, concessions and conformity that requires.” In essence, Harvard students are simply the same cookie-cutter automatons that so many institutions produce today. Hartman concludes by saying that such a lack of opposition to “these irrational bureaucratic excesses bodes ill for our ability to meet future challenges.”

If today’s institutions aren’t producing great men and women, how can we average folks pick up the slack and do their work for them? And if we’re going to do that, just what exactly is it that makes a great man or woman? One of Harvard’s former professors, philosopher George Santayana, had some thoughts on the matter in his work, Winds of Doctrine.

Santayana first diagnosed the reason why we don’t have great men: moral chaos. “When chaos has penetrated so far into the moral being of nations,” he wrote, “they can hardly be expected to produce great men.” This observation, made in 1926, certainly checks out with our present-day society. From rioting in the streets to election irregularities, to gender confusion, to irrational and flip-flopping COVID mandates, we’ve experienced a full range of chaos penetrating our moral being in the last few years.

In the midst of such confusion, we often seek people to run for office or fill leadership positions who have never said or done anything that today’s cancel culture deems “offensive.” As a result, these hapless leaders have little ability to speak the hard truth, behaving instead like jello when anyone tries to pin them down on their beliefs.

By contrast, “A great man need not be virtuous, nor his opinions right,” Santayana wrote, “but he must have a firm mind, a distinctive, luminous character; if he is to dominate things, something must be dominant in him.” In other words, a great man will have strong convictions and the courage to stick to them.

These convictions will likely be ones that are secretly shared by many of the public. Unlike the masses, however, the great man will be willing to swim upstream against the conforming crowd. “We feel him to be great in that he clarifies and brings to expression something which was potential in the rest of us,” Santayana wrote, “but which with our burden of flesh and circumstance we were too torpid to utter.”

“Greatness is spontaneous,” Santayana concludes, and “simplicity, trust in some one clear instinct, are essential to it….”

So how do we encourage the next generation toward greatness rather than simply promoting compromise, concession, and conformity as Harvard is doing? The answer is to train them in a solid set of convictions, strong enough to be worth dying for and poignant enough to be worth defending when no one else will.

Examples of such convictions include faith in God, admiration of virtue, respect for the institutions of marriage and family, and love for learning and discerning truth. These were once commonplace convictions in Western civilization; now they are rarer than a white tiger. Nevertheless, our need for them has never been greater, and the men and women who are taught to cling to these as children will one day stand in greatness, even if they never set foot on Harvard’s campus. (read more)

• Genetic match discovered in Covid's unique furin cleavage site on spike protein
• Matched genetic sequence patented by Moderna for cancer research purposes
• Researchers say one in 3trillion chance Covid developed the code naturally
  

The federal agency now says nearly three-quarters of Americans don’t need to wear masks because they live in areas with low or medium community risk from COVID-19.

The dramatic switch comes because the CDC switched from only using COVID-19 cases as a factor and are taking into account other metrics, including hospitalizations.

“This updated approach focuses on directing our prevention efforts toward protecting people at high risk for severe ailments and preventing hospitals and healthcare systems from being overwhelmed,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC’s director, told reporters on a call.

Walensky said the CDC “came up with these indicators, including new hospital admissions and hospital beds utilized, and complimented them with case incidents to really create a package of metrics to be able to understand what’s happening at the local level.”

The CDC will count all hospitalizations, regardless of whether the patients were admitted because of COVID-19 or tested positive for COVID-19 after being admitted for another reason.

The previous measures for transmission, unchanged since 2020 before Friday, counted a county as having substantial risk of COVID-19 transmission if there were as few as 50 new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people in the past 7 days, or the percentage of positive tests was at least 8 percent in the same timeframe.

High transmission risk meant a county had 100 or more new cases per 100,000 people or 10 percent or higher positive tests in the past 7 days.

Under the scheme, over 95 percent of the country on Feb. 25 was labeled substantial or high risk, even though COVID-19 cases have plunged in recent weeks and just 77,458 cases were recorded nationwide on Feb. 23.

After the update, the substantial risk column was removed. Now, just 37 percent of U.S. counties are deemed at high risk.

People who live in those counties, representing 28.2 percent of the U.S. population, are advised to wear a mask in public indoor settings such as schools.

In the rest of the counties, people are not advised to wear masks unless they test positive for COVID-19 or have been exposed to somebody with COVID-19.

People can still wear masks if they feel more comfortable, Walensky said.

The CDC had resisted calls to alter its community risk metric for months, even after many of the governors who had kept masking requirements in place announced in early February those requirements would be eased or withdrawn.

Walensky signaled a [politically-motivated] change might be coming in a recent briefing, acknowledging the sharp drop in cases and hospitalizations. But she’s also indicated that people would be urged to mask up in the future if the CDC thinks it’s necessary.

“We want to give people a break from things like mask-wearing, when these metrics are better, and then have the ability to reach for them again should things worsen,” she said.

Jeffrey Zients, a White House official, did not deny the White House had been in touch with the CDC on revising its masking recommendations but said the CDC was “in the lead here on both the substance and the timing of masking guidance.”

Federal health officials say masks are effective at preventing COVID-19 transmission, pointing primarily to studies the CDC has published in its quasi-journal. One such paper, published Feb. 4, relied on self-reporting and found no statistically significant benefit for wearing cloth masks. Critics say the studies don’t support mask-wearing, especially wearing cloth masks. (read more)

The introduction to author and mathematician James Lindsay’s new book, “Race Marxism: The Truth About Critical Race Theory and Praxis” is a perfect summation of its contents:

If you already know what Critical Race Theory is, the purpose of this book is to cement, refine, and deepen what you already know about it and to place what you know about it beyond any doubt. If you’re newer to Critical Race Theory and are just beginning to find out what it is, buckle your safety belts and try to hold on.

Many Legal Insurrection readers follow closely the work of our CriticalRace.org team. But no matter how many posts read or news stories followed, everyone striving to end the toxic policies based on the race-based doctrine should add Lindsay’s new book to their library.

In Race Marxism, Lindsay carefully and with robust scholarship shows how Critical Race Theory is nothing more than repackaged Marxism. As practitioners of Marxism have failed to divide this country against each other by class, they have turned to racial division to enact their agenda as well as to gain power and influence.

With precision that highlights his math background, Lindsay deftly demonstrates that Critical Race Theory = Race Marxism.

Though the six chapters of Race Marxism, Lindsay explains what Critical Race Theory is, where it comes from, how it is implemented, and what can be done about it once it is understood to be repackaged Marxism. Lindsay offers a broad spectrum of quotes and background information supplied from proponents and Critical Race Theory activists.

Race Marxism explains simply what Critical Race Theory does and the goals of its promoters. For example, the opening to Chapter 1 offers a clear, concise definition that is both accurate and eye-popping.

(1) Calling everything one wants to control “racist” until it is fully under your control.
(2) A Marxian conflict theory of race; i.e., Race Marxism
(3) A belief that racism created by white people for their own benefit is the fundamental organizing principle of society

Lindsay expands upon the philosophy and the philosophers behind Critical Race Theory in engaging and informative detail. As an example, here is a passage explaining the influence of French political activist Michel Foucault (“whose relevance to the structure of Leftist social thought today can hardly be overstated”) and the mother of intersectionality, civil rights activist Kimberlé Crenshaw.

The real story, then, is that activists today in the Critical Social Justice movement have selectively incorporated useful elements of Foucault’s thought into virtually everything they do. They have also done so in ways that suit their activist agendas, even including writing Foucault out of his own Theories. What matters to these activists posing as scholars more than anything is operational success, so they pick up the various pieces of Foucault or Marx or Hegel that suit their purposes, modify them as needed, and discard the rest. This doesn’t happen arbitrarily, however. There’s a method, and that’s the dialectic.

In fact, modifying Theories by keeping useful elements of earlier Theories and combining them strategically with other useful but contradictory Theories is how the dialectic “progresses.” Take Crenshaw’s fusion of neo-Marxism and postmodern Theory in “Mapping the Margins,” for example. Her whole premise is that the social constructivist thesis at the heart of postmodernism needs to be modified to neo-Marxist purposes while neo-Marxism itself has to relax its grip on the idea of truth if a “meaningful politics of identity” might come about.

Race Marxism is very powerful and superbly written. I must admit, I am no political scientist, so sections were challenging to wade through.  I feel like I attended a Master Class in the subject after having finished this book. It appears I am not the only one who is arming themselves with knowledge, either.

Race Marxism is now #14 in all books on Amazon. Y'all are amazing! We're going to change the world!https://t.co/L2HyQRusN1 pic.twitter.com/OZruGOK9Vb

— James Lindsay, phantom honk (@ConceptualJames) February 17, 2022

In conclusion: I give the book 5 out of 5 stars and highly recommend it to anyone who wants a full understanding of Critical Race Theory in order to defeat it.

As we outlined since January 6, 2021, the nomination of Judge Brown-Jackson to the Supreme Court was a foregone conclusion, the only issue was the timing {GO DEEP}.  The 10th Anniversary of Trayvon Martin provides the opportunity.  Additionally, in order for Obama/Clyburn to get to KBJ, they had to shift Merrick Garland out of his judicial chair. That’s the largest part of the reason why we have Attorney General Merrick Garland.

All of the political moves follow a pattern and script, you just need a solid mental reference library to see them.  The game is rigged folks, and the most accurate definition of the ‘business of DC politics‘ is the strategic presentation of an illusion of choice.

KBJ was put into the planning book back in February 2020, yes, 2020!

It was February 25th, 2020, to be precise, just four days before the South Carolina Democrat primary.  South Carolina Representative James Clyburn went backstage at the presidential debate and told Biden, “You’ve had a couple of opportunities to mention naming a Black woman to the Supreme Court,” Clyburn lectured his friend of nearly half a century, like a schoolteacher scolding a child. “I’m telling you, don’t you leave the stage tonight without making it known that you will do that.” {link}

Unbeknownst to Biden at the time, just two days earlier Barack Obama and James Clyburn came to an agreement and created the most consequential alliance of the 2020 Democrat campaign.  Barack Obama the figurative and ideological leader of the movement known as “Black Lives Matter”, and James Clyburn the figurative and ideological leader of the political construct within the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) church, had struck a deal.

A Bernie Sanders -vs- Donald Trump general election would have been a disaster; and it would be almost impossible for the racial operatives in the key precincts [Atlanta (GA), Philly (PA), Clark County (NV), Wayne County (Mich), Madison (WI)] to feel inspired enough to risk themselves and commit fraud to help Bernie win.

To get rid of Sanders, BLM and AME aligned.  This was the actual moment when Hillary Clinton was cast into the pit of irrelevance in Democrat politics.

Within the agreement, Obama and Clyburn selected Biden as the tool they could easily control to deliver on their larger, progressive, leftist intentions.

A few days later, James Clyburn then endorsed Biden while Barack Obama began making phone calls telling each of the other candidates to drop out in sequence and support Biden or else the club would destroy them.  The only one told not to drop out yet was Elizabeth Warren, as she would be needed as the insurance policy, the splitter against Bernie Sanders.

Each of the candidates was promised the traditional indulgences for toeing the party line, and the rest is history.  Joe Biden wandered around doing what everyone told him to do, which was mostly stay in his basement and let the club work on his behalf, until the club delivered the nomination.

Inside that process, the strategic map was modified to ensure Ketanji Brown-Jackson would advance to the Supreme Court.

With Biden installed, he would select Merrick Garland as his Attorney General.  Judge Garland was an important judge on the important DC Circuit Court.  Garland’s replacement would need to be a Senate confirmed seat for that court.  Brown-Jackson would be put into Garland’s open spot. {Go Deep}

As a standalone Supreme Court nominee, Brown-Jackson would have been a radical pick.  Justice Brown-Jackson is a known activist in the DC District Court; however, with this maneuver she could get through nomination easier and then sit on the highest court for thirty years.

Once Brown-Jackson was Senate confirmed for the DC Circuit Court, the countdown began until she was elevated as a Supreme Court nomination to replace Justice Stephen Bryer, now 83-years-old.  The Senate has no political ammunition to block or not confirm the radical SCOTUS pick, because she was confirmed a few months before with support from Republicans.

[White House Announcement]

The three Republicans who voted to confirm Brown Jackson for appeals court https://t.co/h1bHRTQBEg pic.twitter.com/V3THUKOMQo

— The Hill (@thehill) February 25, 2022

I sought a nominee with the strongest credentials, record, character, and dedication to the rule of law. That’s why I’m excited to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to serve on the United States Supreme Court. pic.twitter.com/iGHLqqRAD0

— President Biden (@POTUS) February 25, 2022

Earlier today the installed current occupant of the White House delivered remarks and held a brief press conference to discuss the latest Russian entrance into Ukraine.  Simultaneously, the White House also released their latest sanctions on Russia [SEE HERE]

For well over a month Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, the White House and State Department have promoted the assembly of “harsh sanctions” as the deterrent that would keep Russia out of Ukraine.  However, when Biden was questioned by the media about the ineffectiveness of sanctions he declared, “no one expected the sanctions to prevent anything from happening.”  WATCH (prompted)

[Transcript Available Here]

Russia knows from watching Biden execute his domestic energy and regulatory policy, that Joe Biden has no intention to do anything that would support U.S. energy development.  As a consequence, Putin knows the U.S. will remain dependent on OPEC where Russia is a member.

Additionally, Europe writ large, and Germany specifically, are dependent on Russia’s oil and natural gas.  Underneath all of the saber rattling from the U.S. and NATO allies this truth remains Putin’s biggest weapon.  In essence, Putin is leveraging the western ‘global climate change’ and energy initiatives as a weapon to do whatever he wants to do, while knowing his adversaries have no options.

As the proverbial ‘west’ chases the Build Back Better climate change agenda, it becomes a structural weakness that Vladimir Putin knows he can exploit. (read more)

With the situation in eastern Ukraine deteriorating each day, the West keeps on promoting its “Russian threat” rhetoric and pledges “never-before-seen” sanctions on Russia should it invade Ukraine. Meanwhile, Kiev keeps violating the Minsk accord and continues to shell Donbass, forcing thousands of people to flee to Russia.

Nick Griffin, political analyst and former Member of the European Parliament, reflects on the geopolitical, economical and historical reasons for the West trying to force Russia into war with Ukraine, why the collective West turns a blind eye on systemic violations of the Minsk agreement by Kiev, and why no one in the West cares about the humanitarian disaster in the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk republics in Donbass.

Sputnik: Why is the West not only ignoring but also encouraging Kiev’s provocations in Donbass?

Nick Griffin: The Washington and Westminster cabal are desperate to force Vladimir Putin to abandon his policy of self-restraint and negotiation. They intend to leave him no option but to use military force in defence of the Russian population of Donbass. So the NATO leaders are now engaged in the most blatant and irresponsible destabilisation and hybrid war operation since they used Islamic terrorists to destroy Libya and attempted to use them to break up Syria.

Their operation against Russia is in fact even more desperate than the campaign of lies and aggression against Syria, because the stakes are even higher. The West promoted conflict in the Middle East in the hope of gaining a geopolitical advantage. The attempt to force Russia into war in Ukraine, by contrast, is not really about promoting the geopolitical interest of the Dollar Empire – it is about its very survival.

The US is no longer the self-confident colossus that bestrode the world a few decades ago. America in 2022 is a financial, political, economic, military and social basket case, and its UK ally is in the same very leaky boat. The liberal Anglo world is further disturbed by the situation in Canada, which is now in the critical phase of a historic struggle between the Trudeau regime and a large and well-organised section of the working population.

On top of that, one shouldn’t overlook the influence of ideology and personal sexual obsessions in Western decision-making circles. There is in all this an element of a woke, liberal ‘crusade’ for ‘our liberal values’ against the ‘archaic Christian traditionalism’ which they see and detest in Russia.

More practically, the Washington policy-makers, who direct the semi-senile ‘President’, know that Nord Stream 2 is about far more than a mutually beneficial energy trading relationship between Germany and Russia. In the shorter term, it also spells further financial disaster for the already failed client state of Ukraine. Longer term, Nord Stream 2 heralds a steadily closer relationship between Germany and Russia, which would in turn be a huge step towards the creation of a giant Eurasian free-trade block.

The fundamental targets of the NATO warmongers in this crisis are not Donbass, nor even Russia, but Germany, and China’s One Belt, One Road initiative. They are trying to keep Germany down, and China out; failure to do both means that the US will become an isolated rust-belt island thousands of miles away from the core economic block of the world.

The same development also spells the forthcoming end of the dollar as the world’s financial reserve currency, while America’s time as a sole military superpower has already clearly ended. This is a classic example of the Thucydides’ Trap, the moment when an emerging power threatens to displace an existing great power as the hegemon of the age, a transition which all too often is accompanied by a war of desperation.

NATO’s aggression towards Russia is not born of confidence but of fear. In just three decades, we’ve gone from the ‘End of History’ to the looming end of the Dollar Empire. The push for war in Ukraine is an attempt to recover from the defeat of the Anglo-Zionist Jihadi adventure in Syria, and the debacle in Afghanistan. Perhaps, when it ends just as badly, they will finally learn a bit of humility, but I guess none of us will hold our breath.

Sputnik: The OSCE is registering ceasefire violations, with Kiev repeatedly using 120mm mortars banned by the Minsk accord; why is the West ignoring these facts? Why are the US and its allies turning a blind eye towards Kiev blatantly violating the Minsk accord?

Nick Griffin: Implementation of the Minsk Accord would end the crisis. That is the very last thing the US/UK want. It is very hard for nations with a vivid folk memory of the horrors of total war in their own land (such as Russia, Germany and China) to comprehend the very different attitude that prevails in the US.

To Americans, the elite and the general population alike, wars are things that are fought in other peoples’ countries. Despite the fact that the US hasn’t won a war since the campaign against Japan in 1945, the general view in Washington, in particular, is that there is nothing to fear and plenty to gain from war.

Sputnik: President Biden in his address held the self-proclaimed Donbass republics responsible for ceasefire violations and insisted there was no sign of Ukraine preparing a full-scale attack. Why is he downplaying the threat?

Nick Griffin: The US is bankrupt, and threatened with this being drastically exposed by a new subprime debt disaster with the collapse of the shale gas debt bubble, and by the steady erosion of the reserve currency of the dollar. The very dubious legitimacy of the President is questioned by half the population and the Democrats are months away from potentially disastrous midterm elections. Key ally Boris Johnson likewise faces political and personal disaster at home.

Ukraine’s provocations are therefore ignored and indeed rewarded with political backing and massive arms shipments because both Western leaders believe they have a great deal to gain from war or the threat of war.

Given the perceived benefits to the US of war in Ukraine, why on earth would anyone expect the US and its allies to be concerned over the brutal aggression which we now see from their puppet regime in Kiev?

If Russia is forced to act, then Nord Stream 2 will be stopped, inflicting massive economic damage on Germany and forcing Berlin to get back in line completely under Anglo-domination. If, on the other hand, Russia manages to keep out of the West’s proxy war, then Biden and Johnson will crow that it was their ‘resolve’ that ‘deterred Putin and saved Ukraine and freedom’. Thus, in their dangerously deluded calculations, it doesn’t really matter if the crisis ends in war or in peace. For them, it’s a win-win either way. That is why the Yanks and the Brits are only too happy to fight Russia down to the last Ukrainian.

Sputnik: Instead of ensuring that Kiev doesn’t use banned weapons, the West is stoking “Russia invasion” fears around the world. Where are the guarantors of the Minsk agreement? Are they so desperate for a new war?

Nick Griffin: They are indeed desperate for war! Geopolitics, financial crisis, bribes from arms manufacturers, political advantage and personal vanity – they’ve been key drivers for disastrous wars in the past, and human nature doesn’t change. So here we are, back in July 1914.

Sputnik: Thousands of people have fled their homes and are being evacuated to Russia due to constant shelling by Ukrainian forces. Why is this humanitarian disaster in Donbass being neglected by the West?

Nick Griffin: Political elites always have a regrettable tendency to view the sufferings of the ‘little people’ as a price well worth paying for their own advantage.

The Washington imperialists have always been among the very worst at this. Their Empire was founded on genocide and on the ruins of the Confederacy and grew through a series of false-flag initiated wars, and the deliberate and ruthless incitement of tensions in Europe to destroy a string of rivals, including Tsarist Russia and the British Empire.

Why would anyone expect the heirs of those who obliterated Wounded Knee, Dresden and Hiroshima to give a flying fig for the well-being of a few hundred thousand impoverished Slavs? If ever there was a group who deserved to go on trial for the crime of plotting aggressive war, they are right now in the corridors of power in Washington DC and Westminster. (read more)

After its formation in 1949 with twelve founding members, NATO grew by including Greece and Turkey in 1952 and West Germany in 1955, and then later Spain in 1982. After the Cold War ended, and Germany reunited in 1990, there was a debate in NATO about continued expansion eastward. In 1999, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined NATO, amid much debate within the organization and Russian opposition. Another expansion came with the accession of seven Central and Eastern European countries: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. These nations were first invited to start talks of membership during the 2002 Prague summit, and joined NATO shortly before the 2004 Istanbul summit. Albania and Croatia joined on 1 April 2009, prior to the 2009 Strasbourg–Kehl summit. The most recent member states to be added to NATO are Montenegro on 5 June 2017 and North Macedonia on 27 March 2020.

As of 2021, NATO officially recognizes three aspiring members: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Ukraine.^[1] Future expansion is currently a topic of debate in several countries outside the alliance, and countries like Sweden, Finland, and Serbia have open political debate on the topic of membership, while in countries like Ukraine, support and opposition to membership is tied to ethnic and nationalist ideologies. The incorporation of countries formerly part of the Eastern Bloc and the Soviet Union has been a cause of increased tension between NATO countries and Russia.

The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan.

As a result, between 1994 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons. Until then, Ukraine had the world's third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile,^[2][3] of which Ukraine had physical, but not operational, control. Russia alone controlled the codes needed to operate the nuclear weapons^[4][5] via Russian-controlled electronic Permissive Action Links and the Russian command and control system.^[4][5]

In 2009, Russia and the United States released a joint statement that the memorandum's security assurances would still be respected after the expiration of the START Treaty.^[6]

After the annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014, Canada,^[7] France, Germany, Italy, Japan,^[8] the UK^[9] and US^[10][11] stated that Russian involvement was a breach of its Budapest Memorandum obligations to Ukraine which had been transmitted to the United Nations under the signature of Sergey Lavrov and others,^[12] and in violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity. On 4 March 2014, the Russian president Vladimir Putin replied to a question on the violation of the Budapest Memorandum, describing the current Ukrainian situation as a revolution: "a new state arises, but with this state and in respect to this state, we have not signed any obligatory documents."^[13] Russia stated that it had never been under obligation to "force any part of Ukraine's civilian population to stay in Ukraine against its will." Russia tried to suggest that the US was in violation of the Budapest Memorandum and described the Euromaidan as a US-instigated coup.^[14]

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.  A promotional video from the Canadian Bankers Association (CBA) helps to neatly connect all the dots about why the Canadian government made such a quick reversal in their bank asset seizures in the last 24 hours {Go Deep}.  And yes, as we suspected, it was almost certainly contact from the World Economic Forum to Canadian Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland that triggered the change in position.

When Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland announced they would use the Emergency Act declaration to target the financial support systems, banks and accounts of the people who were protesting against COVID mandates, they not only undermined the integrity of the Canadian banking system – but they also inadvertently stuck a wrench into the plans of the World Economic Forum and the collaborative use of the Canadian Bankers Association to create a digital id.

Against the backdrop of the Canadian government action, WATCH THIS VIDEO.

If the Canadian government can arbitrarily block citizen access to their banking institution without any due process, what does that say about the system the Canadian Banking Association (CBA) was putting into place as part of their Digital ID network?

If the CBA digital identity were in place, the same people targeted by Trudeau’s use of the Emergency Act would have their entire identity blocked by the same government measures.  The realization of the issue, reflected by a severe undermining of faith in the banking system, is a dramatic problem for those working to create and promote the Digital ID.

It is not coincidental the financial targeting mechanism deployed by Trudeau/Freeland, the Canadian banking system, is the same system being used to create the digital identity.  As a result of the government targeting bank accounts, Finance Minister Freeland just created a reference point for those who would argue against allowing the creation of a comprehensive digital identity.

The motive for the World Economic Forum and Canadian Bankers Association to immediately reach out to Trudeau and Freeland and tell them to back off their plan is crystal clear.  THAT is almost certainly why Freeland appeared so admonished, shocked and incapable of getting her footing yesterday {Go Deep}, and why the Canadian government simultaneously informed Parliament they were unfreezing the bank accounts.

However, this undermined confidence and faith in the banking system cannot be restored quickly.  The toothpaste cannot be put back into the tube. The horse has left the barn.  This is now a moment for damage control by the Canadian government. That is why Justin Trudeau just dropped the declaration of the Emergency Act.

It all makes sense now.  All of it.

Indeed, the government leaders who take their instructions from the multinational corporations in charge of the World Economic Forum, which is to say almost all of them, are so entrenched in their need to use COVID-19 as the pry bar for the Build Back Better agenda, they simply cannot let it go.

Without COVID-19, they can’t keep the vaccination push.  Without the vaccination push, they can’t keep the vaccine passport process in place.  Without the vaccination passport registration process to track and monitor human behavior, the governing authorities cannot fulfill the mission of a comprehensive digital identity and social credit tracking system.  Indeed, everything they seek is contingent upon keeping the premise of COVID-19 alive.

It is not accidental the World Economic Forum is at the epicenter of this

As we previously noted, the architects of the Build Back Better society (WEF) are guiding various governments on ways to create efficient registration and compliance systems, i.e. ways that permit citizens to prove their vaccinated and compliant status.  As these discussions are taking place, it is prudent to pause and think very carefully, wisely.

We all know, as we are reading this, under the guise of enhancing our safety, the U.S. Federal Government is in discussions with the medical community, multinational corporations and employers of citizens to create a more efficient process for you to register your vaccine compliance.

We know their conversation under the terminology of a COVID Passport.  The current goal is to make a system for us to show and prove our authorized work status, which, as you know, is based on your obedience to a mandated vaccine.

For the western, or for lack of a better word ‘democratic‘ outlook, Australia, New Zealand, France and Europe are leading the way with their technological system of vaccination check points and registered state/national vaccination status tied to your registration identification.

New York City joined the vaccine checkpoint process, as their city now requires the vaccine to enter all private businesses.  Los Angeles soon followed.

The Australian electronic checkpoints are essentially gateways where QR codes are being scanned from the cell phones of the compliant vaccinated citizen. Yes comrades, there’s an app for that.

Currently, the vaccine status scans are registered by happy compliance workers, greeters at the entry to the business or venue. Indeed, the Walmart greeter has a new gadget to scan your phone prior to allowing you custody of a shopping cart.

In restaurants, the host or hostess has a similar compliance scanner to check you in prior to seating or a reservation confirmation.

It’s simple and fun. You pull up your QR code on your cell phone (aka portable transponder and registration device), using the registration app, and your phone is scanned delivering a green check response to confirm your correct vaccination status and authorized entry.

The Australian government, at both a federal and state level, is working closely with Big Tech companies (thirsting for the national contract) to evaluate the best universal process that can be deployed nationwide.

As noted by all six Premiers in the states down under, hardware (scanners) and software (registration) systems are all being tested to find the most comprehensive/convenient portable units to settle upon. Meanwhile in the U.S., cities like Los Angeles and New York await the beta test conclusion before deploying their own version of the same process.

In Europe, they are also testing their vaccine checkpoint and registration processes known as the EU “Green Pass.”

The “Green Pass” is a similar technological system that gives a vaccinated and registered citizen access to all the venues and locations previously locked down while the COVID-19 virus was being mitigated. What would have been called a “vast right-wing conspiracy theory” 24 months ago, is now a COVID passport process well underway.

As with all things in our rapid technological era, you do not have to squint to see the horizon and accept that eventually this process will automate, and there will be a gadget or scanning gateway automatically granting you access without a person needing to stand there and scan each cell phone QR code individually.

The automated process just makes sense. You are well aware your cell phone already transmits an electronic beacon enabling your Uber or Lyft driver access to your location at the push of a touchscreen button, another convenient app on your phone. So, why wouldn’t the gateways just accept this same recognizable transmission as registration of your vaccine compliant arrival at the coffee shop?

The automated version is far easier and way cooler than having to reach into your pocket or purse and pulling up that pesky QR code on the screen. Smiles everyone, the partnership between Big Tech and Big Government is always there to make your transit more streamline and seamless. Heck, you won’t even notice the electronic receiver mounted at the entry. Give it a few weeks and you won’t remember the reason you were laughing at Alex Jones any more than you remember why you are taking off your shoes at the airport.

However, as this process is created, it is worth considering that you are being quietly changed from an individual person to a product. Some are starting to worry in the beta test:

[…] “you must become an object with attributes sitting in a database. Instead of roaming around anonymously making all sorts of transactions without the government’s knowledge, Australians find themselves passing through ‘gates’. …

All product-based systems have these gates to control the flow of stock and weed out errors. It is how computers see things. The more gates, the more clarity.

You are updating the government like a parcel pings Australia Post on its way to a customer. If a fault is found, automatic alerts are issued, and you are stopped from proceeding. In New South Wales, this comes in the form of a big red ‘X’ on the myGov vaccine passport app (if you managed to link your Medicare account without smashing the phone to bits).

Gate-keeping systems have been adapted from retail and transformed into human-based crowd solutions to micromanage millions of lives with the same ruthless efficiency as barcodes tracking stock. There is no nuance or humanity in this soulless digital age. Barcodes are binary. Good – bad. Citizen or dissident.

Even if you have all the required government attributes to pass through the gates – two vaccines, six boosters, and a lifelong subscription to Microsoft – something could go wrong. If your data fails the scan, you’ll slip into digital purgatory and become an error message. (read more)

It could be problematic if your status fails to register correctly, or if the system identifies some form of alternate lifestyle non-compliance that will block you from entry. Then again, that’s what beta tests are for, working out all these techno bugs and stuff. Not to worry…. move along….

Then again… “For those in the privileged class allowed to shop, take note of Covid signs which encourage cashless transactions under the guise of ‘health’. Messaging around cards being ‘safer’ will increase until the Treasury tries to remove cash entirely, almost certainly with public approval.”

Wait, now we are squinting at that familiar image on the horizon because we know those who control things have been talking about a cashless society for quite a while.

We also know that data is considered a major commodity all by itself. Why do you think every system you encounter in the modern era requires your phone number even when you are not registering for anything. It, meaning you, us, are all getting linked into this modern registration system that is defining our status. We also know that system operators buy and sell our registered status amid various retail and technology systems.

Yeah, that opaque shadow is getting a little clearer now.

Perhaps you attempt to purchase dog food and get denied entry into Pet Smart because you didn’t renew the car registration.  Or perhaps you are blocked from entry because you forgot to change the oil on the leased vehicle you drive, and Toyota has this weird agreement with some retail consortium.   You head to the oil change place that conveniently pops up in the citizen compliance App –it’s only two blocks away– they clear the alert after they do the oil change, and you are gateway compliant again.

Missed your booster shot? We’re sorry citizen, your bank account is frozen until your compliance is restored… please proceed to the nearest vaccination office as displayed conveniently on your cell phone screen to open access to all further gates (checkpoints)…. tap to continue!

Vote for the wrong candidate?  Attend, or donate to, a trucker protest?

Yes, it seemed transparently obvious where this was heading, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau just awakened the masses. (read more)

In the bigger picture, the Canadian banking and financial system was hit hard by the deployment of the Emergency Act which highlighted the ability of the government to arbitrarily freeze and seize money, assets and financial investment capital without any due process.

There are also strong rumors in the financial sector, that in addition to Canadians removing money from the banking system, previous investment funds from Hong Kong had been moved – and, making matters even worse, digital currency exchanges were no longer offering secure services in Canada.

Simultaneous to the mounting domestic and international backlash against the financial system, the Canadian Senate was likely to rebuke the government of Justin Trudeau and not support the invocation of the Emergency War Measures Act against Canadian citizens.

As a result of multiple issues of backlash with severe consequence, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his cabinet are trying to save face, and yet walk away from the Emergency War Measures Act by revoking it before they faced the humiliation of a public defeat in the Canadian Senate. WATCH

After his prepared remarks about his reversal in position, Trudeau was softly questioned about internal documents discovered by the Canadian Senate that point toward Trudeau’s cabinet discussing the political benefits they would gain by invoking the Emergency Act.  The prime minister dodged the question twice, instead saying a parliamentary investigation will review why the Emergency Act was needed.

Keep an eye on the story of this Senate discovery.  From all indications, even the liberal allies of Trudeau in the Senate were unable to support the Emergency Act after they reviewed the non-public documents.  There’s something very damaging in those documents, likely internal emails between Trudeau and his various ministers.

FULL ANNOUNCEMENT VIDEO AND PRESSER HERE.

Watch that video from the perspective that someone in the international financial world, IMF, World Bank or other affiliate in the world of collective finance has just had a very serious talk with Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland.

♦ Shortly after that very awkward performance, Finance Minister Freeland’s assistant deputy, Isabelle Jacques, informed a parliamentary committee that all bank accounts frozen by the federal government’s use of the Emergency Act, were immediately being unfrozen.

( VIA CBC ) – […] More than 200 bank accounts worth nearly $8 million were frozen when the federal government used emergency powers to end a massive protest occupation of downtown Ottawa.  Federal officials report most of the accounts are now in the process of being released, a parliamentary committee heard Tuesday.

Isabelle Jacques, assistant deputy minister of finance, told a committee of MPs that up to 210 bank accounts holding about $7.8 million were frozen under the financial measures contained in the Emergencies Act. (read more)

Obviously, many people realized from the outset what the Canadian government had done was tenuously legal at best, provided no legal due process or right of challenge, and likely would not pass any serious legal scrutiny.  Unfortunately, in the echo chamber that is far-left liberalism, such matters are not as important as the ideological political motives; but there are people who realize the consequences of power-lust in this application.

Without a doubt, just as you were likely stunned, amazed and then angered by the financial punishment declared by Trudeau, there are people aligned with Trudeau –outside his government– who could see a bigger picture of consequence than those inside the echo chamber.

Central banking finance ministers around the world obviously would pay close attention to what Trudeau just announced, and there are certainly people in the World Economic Forum (WEF) group, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and central bankers who would not be happy about the Canadian government showing just how easy it is to snatch money out of the hands of citizens.

These tools of citizen control are things well known to the central bankers and control agents of finance, but they are never spoken about in polite company – let alone publicized, promoted and openly bragged about.

Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland essentially broke the financial code of Omerta, by highlighting how easy it is for government to seize your bank accounts, credit cards, retirement accounts, insurance, mortgages, loan access and cut you off from money.

Worse yet, the short-sighted Canadian government via Minister Freeland announced their ability to control cryptocurrency exchanges in their country and block access within a financial mechanism that exists almost entirely as an insurance policy and hedge against the exact actions the government was taking.

♦ A very nervous Finance Minister, Chrystia Freeland, appears with Trudeau to talk about Ukraine.

♦ Freeland’s underling, Deputy Minister Jacques, is simultaneously telling parliament the bank accounts are being unfrozen.

♦ The CBC then reports that RCMP officials are taking a 180° reversal in position, about asset seizures.

Then there’s this supportive data-point from Jordan Peterson (see this Direct Rumble Link),

Apply Occam’s Razor here and the result is akin to: ‘How couldn’t they“.

Once that tool is deployed, there’s no putting the toothpaste back into the tube. (read more)

We recently reported that many of Canada’s major banks were offline or suffering mysterious outages.

As reports of increased civil unrest continue to come out of Canada we are beginning to see the classic signs of national and government collapse…

According to the latest reports, Canadian citizens appear to be pulling out their funds from the custodial control of banks in record numbers.

Sources claim that this is in direct response to Trudeau’s emergency measures and it isn’t very difficult to see why.

Any government freezing assets and funds without a court order is a massive blow to individual liberty and property rights—with this being the norm now in Canada can we continue to call them a free and democratic country?

People the world over took to Twitter to denounce the actions of Trudeau and his regime, but will this be enough to stem the tide and avoid a potential financial collapse in Canada?

According to Bein Crypto:

People withdrawing huge amounts of money said they were avoiding a possible government measure announced in recent days by Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada.

ProCoin News featured more infringement of property rights by the Canadian regime:

Authorities in Canada have officially ordered several financial firms to stop any transactions involving 34 crypto wallets that have been connected to funding the freedom convoy.

The Ontario Police Department along with the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada has been investigating all transactions towards the Freedom Convoy.

The world has watched, in pain, as images of police violence from Ottawa, and of a bid for Canadian tyranny (that I would ever write those words!) are flashed around the world.

As usual, I hate to be Cassandra; but the chessboard ahead is all too clear. On Feb 12, 2022, I warned, during an appearance on Steve Bannon’s WarRoom, that we all must all now brace for a period during which the powers that now clearly seek to enslave our planet, and subdue our human species, will be broadcasting scenes of civil society mayhem, and of shocking violence against protesters.

I also predicted that there would be food shortages and other economic harms that would be blamed on the protesting truckers, and I warned too that people should print out their bank and any liquid asset records, as there would be cyberattacks on financial institutions and the freezing of accounts. All of that, of course, took place in the week that followed.

I recently received a kind note on social media thanking me for my bulletins about the near future as it helped people, the writer explained, to stave off shock and disorientation. I have often spoken about how tyrants rely on just these effects of shock and disorientation to “tenderize” a targeted population, so I will keep alerting you all to the near future, as unpleasant as that task can be.

So in this essay I wish to explain, especially to Canadians, what martial law really is, and how very dangerous it is, since many leaders there, especially Parliamentarians, appear to be in the treacherous “hangover” state of thinking that they still inhabit the old world that died when Justin Trudeau declared emergency law. I also wish to warn what happens historically at this moment in the decline of a formerly democratic nation, and what the murder of Canadian democracy — at least for now — means to the rest of the world.

Parliamentarians in Canada do not seem to understand that now their former colleague, Justin Trudeau, can arrest not just truckers, whose lawful protest has been declared illegal, but also the Parliamentarians themselves. This is, sadly, the next step in this kind of drama, historically. It is an extraordinarily dangerous sign that Parliament is not seated. When the Australian Parliament was suspended, by the time they reconvened, their powers had been dramatically curtailed. Tyrants seek to normalize the convening of Parliaments as “optional” or to suspend normal Parliamentary processes long enough to hollow out a legislative body’s deliberative powers, and to ensure that when and if a Parliament (or a Congress, for that matter) meets again, it will be merely a ceremonial assembly.

Parliamentarians in Canada also do not seem to understand that “dictator” is no longer rhetorical. A member of Parliament was shushed when he cried out this epithet, but the fact is that this is not a slur at this point. Justin Trudeau is by definition now in fact a dictator.

At this stage in history, you do not go back to a previous state of civil society order without arrests, though hopefully you can do so without civil war. Historically, when a would-be dictator has reached this point in the suspension of democratic processes and has sought this level of a power grab, his arrests of the opposition’s leaders, on trumped-up charges, come next. Also arrested at this point are labor leaders, outspoken members of the clergy, and independent journalists and editors.

Beware the word “incitement”; the next stage is an edict that casts criticism of what Trudeau is doing, as a crime, or an act of violence.

At this stage in history, too, the identity of the security forces are at issue. Who are these frighteningly gas-masked, uniformed, extremely violent men represented as police in the streets of Ottawa? For that matter, who are the masked, black-uniformed, extremely violent men represented as police beating the protesters in Paris, a week ago?

It is not easy to get police and military to enforce violence upon their own people, their own neighbors and community members. A real danger at this point in the overthrow of a democracy (for that is what happened in Canada in this past week) is the deployment of militias accountable not to the people but to the newly minted dictator. This happened in Italy when Mussolini sought control, in Germany when the National Socialists sought power, and so on. Remember that there are mercenary armies around the world, such as those run by Xe, formerly Blackwater, for hire [https://www.xecompany.us/]; remember that the Southern border of the United States is wide open and many observers have reported a massive influx of young adults of military age traveling alone [https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/us-agents-encounter-single-adults-crossing-border-77661358]. With an open border in North America, a mercenary army can flow not just into Canada, if permitted by border guards directed by a would-be dictator; they can also flow into strategic points in the United States.

But Parliamentarians and heads of provinces in Canada should be aware that those violent entities in the streets of Ottawa may be loosed against them, as well as against other hapless citizens trying to make use of their Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, of course, guarantees freedom of speech and expression, peaceful protest, and assembly. [https://lop.parl.ca/about/parliament/education/ourcountryourparliament/html_booklet/canadian-charter-rights-and-freedoms-e.html] The Charter of Rights and Freedoms also guarantees Canadians the right to a democracy itself, so what Justin Trudeau has done is unlawful on its face. Canadians, any Canadians, according to the Charter, can take him to court for having suspended their democracy unlawfully.

There is also the criminal charge at stake. Justin Trudeau may well be guilty of an act of treason, which is defined in Canadian law as preparing to levy war against Canada, which is what I personally see in the Ottawa livestreams; and treason in Canadian law is also defined in other broad ways, including this: “(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province”; [https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-46.html#:~:text=46%20(1)%20Every%20one%20commits,any%20act%20preparatory%20thereto%3B%20or]

“High treason

• 46 (1) Every one commits high treason who, in Canada,

  • (a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;

  • (b) levies war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto; or

  • (c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.

• Marginal note:Treason

  (2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,

  • (a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;

  • (b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;

  • (c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);

  • (d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or

  • (e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.”

What I must share with sincere regret is that at this point in history, it is a situation of either “arrest or be arrested.” I am not advocating; simply describing a consistent pattern in history.

At this point in a power grab, either Parliamentarians and patriotic heads of the military peacefully arrest an out-of-control leader who has sought to overthrow a democracy, or else they must be aware that history shows that their own arrests may be nigh.

I also note that we down South of the Canadian border are far from safe. It is alarming that our own President has not spoken out against Justin Trudeau’s militaristic power grab, or against his violence against peaceful protesters using their lawfully protected freedoms of speech and assembly. It is even more alarming that the Biden administration is seeking to extend our own state of emergency. [https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/biden-extends-state-of-emergency-in-us-amid-ongoing-covid-19-pandemic-122021900344_1.html]

The COVID-19 State of Emergency in the US was declared almost two years ago, at the start of the pandemic; now that the virus is “endemic”, against all science and reason the State of Emergency has been extended.

This situation - that the United States is operating under emergency powers - is the biggest underreported story of the century to date. Emergency law means that President Biden has powers he does not have under non-emergency law; specifically, the COVID-19 emergency powers acts, extended eight times already, give HHS powers that it did not have before. President Biden declared a year ago the:

“Continuation of the National Emergency Declared by Proc. No. 9994

Notice of President of the United States, dated Feb. 24, 2021, 86 F.R. 11599, provided:

[…] For this reason, the national emergency declared on March 13, 2020, and beginning March 1, 2020, must continue in effect beyond March 1, 2021. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing the national emergency declared in Proclamation 9994 concerning the COVID–19 pandemic.

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.”

And the current declaration by President Biden, as of this past week, that the Emergency Act must be extended, is about an Act that is open-ended in duration.

What this declaration does, going around Congress, is to continue to allocate billions of dollars to HHS, which billions in effect flow to constituencies to create a massive economic incentive for stakeholders to keep the drama of the pandemic, including forcible masking, pressure for vaccine passports, the possibility of closing businesses again, and all the misery of the past two years, ongoing forever. [https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/biden-administration-extends-public-health-emergency-covid-19-rcna12291]. A state of emergency also allows the President to update the next Emergency Powers act in the future, with the kinds of suspension of democratic processes that we saw further North.

We are in a highly precarious situation in the US, when it comes to the restoration of the rule of law.

Sorry for this bleak bulletin, but this is where we are in the world. What is happening in Ottawa and in Paris is two to three weeks ahead of what will be attempted against us in the United States.

Washington State’s Board of Health tried to pass a regulation to create a detention camp for those exposed to a contagious disease; fierce citizen pressure, including from readers of my site DailyClout.io, stopped that action.

Then New York State under emergency law tried to pass the same kind of regulation. They will not stop coming at us.

Boards of Health are exactly what are empowered to do whatever is deemed necessary by — Boards of Health, under the COVID-19 Emergency Powers Act. They are our Trojan horse. If we are to be brought to our knees here in the US currently, it will be via these bland-sounding agencies and the master agency, HHS.

Beware of the focus now moving to “mental health”, as empowering Boards of Health with detention powers, with a focus of policing mental health, means that your and my dissident commentary can lead to our being entangled by these hyper-empowered and now-lawless entities in the near future.

In every direction, the WEF has staked its alumni and speakers in national leadership roles, or, as in Boston, at the helm of local leadership; in every direction, they are cracking the totalitarian whip via “health” or in Canada, via the “emergency” of lawful peaceful protest.

The people’s mass noncompliance, the leadership of the opposition in taking on tyrants, and hopefully too the people’s quickly-mastered knowledge of their own Constitution, their own Charter of Rights, and their own legislative processes, alone can save us all.

The image of the great conflict of the 60s was of a young woman placing a daisy in a rifle barrel. The image of our great conflict, is that of scores of truckers on their knees, in the snow, praying, surrounded by unidentifiable standing thugs.

We have been here before. God have mercy on us; and as for us men and women, may we only remember in time that we are free people. (read more)

Sheriff Michael Chapman of Loudoun County, Va. got an unpleasant surprise recently from Old Joe Biden’s handlers. On Thursday, the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) published a press release that reveals the truly astonishing extent of the administration’s high-handedness, dishonesty, carelessness, and recklessness in its resettlement of Afghan refugees in cities and towns all over the United States. Without any prior warning, Loudoun County officials were told that 2,000 Afghan refugees would be arriving in the county in just over two weeks and that 2,000 more would be arriving every month after that through September. In what will come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention for the last thirteen months, Chapman and other Loudoun County officials found the Biden team to be disingenuous, uncooperative, poorly prepared, and worse.

“On February 4, 2022,” says the Sheriff’s Office press release, “the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) received an unannounced visit by the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Federal Protective Service (FPS) in which it learned that approximately 2000 Afghan refugees, per month, were slated to arrive at the Washington Dulles International Airport during a window beginning as early as February 19, 2022, and extending to September 2022.” This gave them just two weeks to prepare for the influx. “DHS/FPS regional personnel advised the refugees would be transported by bus to the National Conference Center (NCC) where they would stay until their ultimate relocation elsewhere in the United States. DHS/FPS estimated that no more than 1000 refugees per month would remain at the NCC at any given time until September 2022. The refugees, for the most part, would enter the US from Qatar.”

Let’s remember that in Oct. 2021, a Congressional delegation in Qatar led by Rep. Darell Issa (R-Calif.) was told that fully 12,000 of the Afghans who had come to Camp As Sayliyah and then went on to the U.S. had no identification at all. Issa stated: “They came with nothing. No Afghan I.D., no I.D. of any sorts. Those people were all forwarded on to the U.S., and that’s quite an admission. So many people had no I.D. whatsoever and yet find themselves in the United States today based on what they said.”

Are any of these people we know absolutely nothing about going to Loudoun County? There’s no way to tell, but once they get there, they’ll have it made: “DHS/FPS advised that the refugees will be provided cash and cell phones from non-government organizations and be required to remain on the NCC grounds.” Whether voting for Democrats was a requirement for keeping the dough rolling in was not mentioned; maybe it’s just understood.

Chapman found the information he had been given to be “vague,” and “raised concerns about DHS’ lack of communication, lack of planning, language barriers,” as well as about the fact that the  National Conference Center was not fenced and was near “a residential neighborhood and two public schools.” In response, DHS officials told him that the Federal Protective Service would send over 15 officers to provide security. However, the Sheriff’s Office press release pointed out that “the FPS has no law enforcement jurisdiction in Loudoun County and cannot enforce nor investigate any criminal activity on the campus.”

It got even worse. Chapman also asked: “What level of vetting has been conducted to ensure refugees entering Loudoun County had aided the United States and were not a threat to the US or our local community?” The Sheriff’s Office characterized the DHS response this way: “Refugees had been carefully vetted and many served as translators. However, when asked how if in fact they served as translators when only 30% of the refugees spoke English, DHS responded that many of the incoming refugees were family members of the translators.”

The shifting answer there gives the strong impression that the DHS is making all this up on the fly. That impression is reinforced by the fact that while they told Chapman that “refugees had been carefully vetted,” a Senate Republican report noted back in Oct. 2021, according to the Washington Examiner, that “senior officials across the departments of Homeland Security, Defense, State, and Justice described a disastrous screening and vetting process.” This process relied completely on databases of criminals and terrorists, which were incomplete in the best of times and even less useful in the chaotic situation of the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Biden administration officials accepted at face value what these Afghan evacuees told them about themselves without making any effort at all to check whether or not the evacuees’ claims were true. The report noted that “refugees are to be screened and vetted before being admitted to the U.S. through an extensive process that includes multiple interrogations. Rather than follow the protocol, the Biden administration instructed federal law enforcement and military officials handling the evacuations and processing to adhere to less stringent standards.”

Chapman also asked the DHS: “What communications had been done to prepare area residents who may be impacted by this?” The answer was as succinct as it was chilling: “None.” The DHS “stated that no coordination had occurred and that no notifications had been made to the community surrounding the NCC (as of February 15). Additionally, no coordination had been performed either with the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Director of Public Safety.”

So many of its actions make abundantly clear that the Biden administration simply doesn’t care about the well-being of American citizens. What is happening in Loudoun County is happening all over the country, with no regard for the possibility that there could be criminals and terrorists among the Afghan refugees, despite the fact that some have already been arrested. This will play out the way Leftist utopianism always does: the elites will feel good about themselves while ordinary people will have to pay the price. (read more)

Yet after indisputable scientific evidence continued to pile up in favor of natural immunity, the CDC finally capitulated on January 19, 2022, recognizing the superiority of natural immunity over vaccination alone: “Between May and November 2021, people who were unvaccinated and did not have a prior COVID-19 infection remained at the highest risk of infection and hospitalization, while those who were previously infected, both with or without prior vaccination, had the greatest protection.”

The CDC’s reversal came after its previous discounting of natural immunity caused mass layoffs, nursing home resident isolation, and hospital staffing shortages. It must not be forgotten or overlooked, and the CDC must be held accountable.

Last summer, guided by the CDC, President Biden claimed, “If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in the IC unit, and you’re not going to die.” Biden also spread misinformation about vaccinations preventing the spread of Covid-19 by stating, “You’re not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations.” 

Who is harmed the most by health misinformation produced by our president and his agencies? Those with low health literacy. Our rich-poor gap is growing in this country, and lying about health issues only exacerbates it.

A Positive Test Doesn’t Always Mean Infectiousness

A deeper dive into the August natural immunity study reveals methodology that can be recognized as illogical, even to those without medical experience. The CDC researchers created two groups. The case group included people who tested positive in 2020 and then tested positive again during a two-month window in 2021. The control group included people who had a positive test in 2020 without another positive test during this artificial two-month window.

The study observed that non-vaccinated group registered a positive test 34.4 percent of the time, compared to 20.3 percent of fully vaccinated individuals. The CDC falsely defined the case group’s second positive test as a “reinfection.” This is the central lie of the study. This data conveniently omitted data on people actually becoming symptomatic or what a common person would call “reinfected.”

To illustrate this point, consider if a Covid-recovered person comes into contact with Sars-Cov-2 in their community. They might test positive on a PCR test. Their body can remember the virus, fight it off, and the person never becomes ill.

However, shortly after the exposure, a PCR swab can detect bits of genetic material (even if it’s unviable virus). Therefore, this study could be more of a reflection of people’s likelihood of re-exposure to Sars-Cov-2, not reinfection, as the CDC claimed.

By conflating exposure and reinfection, the CDC misled the public. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky stated, “This study shows you were twice as likely to get infected again if you are unvaccinated. Getting the vaccine is the best way to protect yourself and others around you, especially as the more contagious Delta variant spreads around the country.”

This guidance came when mounting evidence indicated Covid vaccines quickly lose their effectiveness against infection and transmission, which the CDC loathed to admit. Unfortunately, Walensky’s guidance undermined the credibility of the CDC for generations to come.

As a physician, it’s frightening that a public health official made a policy recommendation based on such a flawed study. We should encourage critical thinking and scientific skepticism, but such a blatantly flawed study design should not be tolerated in our leading health institutions.

Not an Isolated Incident for the CDC

This isn’t the only time the CDC has been caught misleading the public. Drawing ire from the medical community, the was an uncontrolled study of students in Arizona that Walensky referred to in discussing the CDC’s mask guidance for schools. This study defined a “covid outbreak” as “two or more” positive lab tests among students or staff. So if your school had two asymptomatic third graders, you’ve got a “covid outbreak” on your hands.

Even worse, the study weighted such an “outbreak” equally to a school with dozens of symptomatic teachers or students. According to the CDC, two equals 50—at least for “covid outbreaks.”

In a Georgia study that actually had a sufficient control arm, the CDC minimized the fact that there was no statistically significant difference between masked and unmasked student groups. They’ve also minimized the importance of diet and exercise during the pandemic. They failed to effectively communicate evidence-based, life-saving outpatient treatment protocols. The list goes on.

Why This Matters So Much

How does minimizing natural immunity cause harm in the real world? There are at least three deadly repercussions.

First, many hospitals following the CDC’s guidance mandated that only vaccinated health-care workers be allowed to work at their facilities. This means naturally immune health-care workers were wrongly excluded from the workforce. Based on a toxic lie fabricated by the CDC, hospitals continue to experience staffing shortages, contributing to the hospitalization overcapacity narrative they’ve used to demonize the unvaccinated.

Second, the same problem arose for nursing homes, where seniors were denied visitation rights from unvaccinated, naturally immune family and friends, even though less protected vaccinated people were allowed in. Lack of care workers also prevents patients from being discharged from hospitals to care facilities.

Third, the natural immunity lie also stripped countless Americans of their health coverage and livelihoods. During the delta wave, for example, a worker at Los Alamos National Laboratories was fired from his job for religiously objecting to vaccination, despite working entirely from home and having recovered from a previous Covid infection.

The CDC now admits this worker’s immunity provides protection superior to that of his co-workers who had merely vaccine-induced immunity at that time. He lost his job while the less protected did not. By denying natural immunity’s superiority to vaccine-induced immunity, how many others have been fired and lost health-care access the moment we need our population to be at its healthiest?

Punishing People We Should Have Praised

Naturally immune people should have been identified early in the pandemic as the most protected, ushered into hospitals and nursing homes to serve our vulnerable, and certainly should have been allowed to keep their jobs.

By refusing to acknowledge the harms of lockdowns, mask mandates, and vaccination, the CDC has brought everlasting shame to itself. There is clear evidence these types of interventions carry measurable risk.

A better approach would have been to honestly discuss the risks and benefits with the public, much like I discuss surgical risks and benefits with my patients. This is the very tenet of informed consent, and better communication always results in a better relationship.

Americans need an unbiased, incorruptible, and credible CDC that provides reliable and scientifically sound public health guidance. These lies have de-legitimized and undermined public confidence in the institution of the CDC itself.

The consequences of lying about Covid-19 will spill into other areas of health care. Millions of Americans have lost trust in our hospitals and institutions and are now resorting to “under the table” health care. In health care, loss of trust equals lack of access. The CDC must return to the basics of evidence-based medicine to overcome its crisis of legitimacy. (read more)

On a serious note, it would be interesting to see what the difference is between people who took the vaccine and the percentage of people who then took the booster shot(s) after adverse vaccine events began getting recorded.  Are there a lot of people who took the original vaccine, but later wouldn’t continue taking the booster shots? (read more)

(New York Times) […] Kristen Nordlund, a spokeswoman for the C.D.C., said the agency has been slow to release the different streams of data “because basically, at the end of the day, it’s not yet ready for prime time.” She said the agency’s “priority when gathering any data is to ensure that it’s accurate and actionable.”  Another reason is fear that the information might be misinterpreted, Ms. Nordlund said.

[…] The performance of vaccines and boosters, particularly in younger adults, is among the most glaring omissions in data the C.D.C. has made public.

[…] the C.D.C. has been routinely collecting information since the Covid vaccines were first rolled out last year, according to a federal official familiar with the effort. The agency has been reluctant to make those figures public, the official said, because they might be misinterpreted as the vaccines being ineffective.

Ms. Nordlund confirmed that as one of the reasons. Another reason, she said, is that the data represents only 10 percent of the population of the United States. But the C.D.C. has relied on the same level of sampling to track influenza for years. (read more)

If the vaccines are effective, they cannot be misinterpreted as being ineffective.  However, if the data shows the vaccines are ineffective, which at this point almost everyone admits they are, then the question becomes what were all of the mandates about?

The CDC has become yet another institution, amid a network of institutions, that has collapsed itself under the weight of pushing political ideology as the primary mission.   Entrenched ideological political bureaucrats being exposed in the system is the brilliant legacy of Donald J Trump.

The CDC joins the FDA, DHS, HHS, FBI, DOJ, DoS, Pentagon and the larger intelligence apparatus as collapsing under their institutional ideology.

We were always rightly skeptical of these institutions of government. However, now a much larger audience sees them naked and exposed. (read more)