The New Kulaks

The New Kulaks

by

Gerry T. Neal

(Expurgated for Legal Reasons by the Editor) 

The “experts” that our governments and the media have been insisting that we blindly trust for almost two years are now telling us that due to the Delta and other variants herd immunity to the bat flu is either unattainable or requires a much higher percentage of the population to have been immunized than was the case with the original strain of the virus. They are also telling us that the fourth wave of the bat flu, the one we are said to be experiencing at the present, is driven by the Delta variant and that those who, for one reason or another, have exercised their right to reject the vaccine either in full or in part – for those who have had one shot but opted out of a second, or in some jurisdictions have had two but have opted out of a third, for whatever the reason, including having had a bad reaction to the first shot or two, are categorized under the broad “unvaccinated” umbrella by those who think that it is our ethical duty to take as many shots as the government’s health mandarins say we should take – are responsible for this wave, which they have dubbed a “pandemic of the unvaccinated”.

This, however, is a case of the guilty pointing the finger at the innocent.

Think about what they are now claiming. If herd immunity was attainable with the original virus if 70-80% of the population were immunized but with the Greek letter variants it requires 90% or higher if it is attainable at all, then the blame for the current situation, however dire it actually is – and it is probably not even remotely close to being as dire as is being claimed because the media, the medical establishment, and the governments have grossly exaggerated the threat of this disease from the moment the World Health Organization declared a pandemic – belongs entirely to those who insisted upon the “flatten the curve” strategy. Flattening the curve, which required massive government overreach and the dangerous suspension of everyone’s most basic human, civil, and constitutional rights and freedoms, prolonged the life of the original virus, giving it the opportunity to produce these new, reportedly more contagious, mutations. It was the public health orders themselves – not people resisting the orders and standing up for their and others’ rights and freedoms – that gave us the variants. It would have been far better to have taken measures to protect only the portion of the population that was most at risk, while letting the virus freely circulate through the rest of the population to whom it posed minimal risk, so that herd immunity could have been achieved the natural way and at the lower threshold while it was still available. Natural immunity, as even the “experts” now acknowledge, is superior to what the vaccines offer if this can be called immunity at all seeing as it conspicuously lacks the prophylactic aspect that traditionally defined the immunity granted by vaccines for other diseases. When you took the smallpox or the polio vaccine, you did so in order that you would not get smallpox or polio.  When you take the bat flu vaccine, purportedly, it reduces the severity of the bat flu so that you are far less likely to be hospitalized or to die from it.   When we consider that for those outside of the most-at-risk categories, the likelihood of being hospitalized due to the bat flu is already quite low and the likelihood of dying from it is lower yet, being a fraction of a percentage point, the so-called “immunity” the vaccines impart is not very impressive, making the heavy-handed insistence that everyone must take the jab all the more irrational.

For all the hype about the supposed “novelty” of the bat flu virus, it is now quite apparent that its waves come and go in a very familiar pattern.  The first wave, which started in China late in 2019, hit the rest of the world early in 2020 during the winter of 2019-2020 and ebbed as we went into spring.  With the onset of fall in 2020 the second wave began and the third wave took place in the winter of 2020-2021.  It once again waned as we entered spring of 2021, and the current fourth wave is taking place as summer of 2021 moves into fall of 2021.  Each wave of the bat flu, in other words, has occurred in the times of the year when the common cold and the seasonal flu ordinarily circulate, just as the lulls correspond with those of the cold and flu, the big one being in the summer.  How many more waves do we have to have in which this pattern repeats itself before we acknowledge that this is the nature of the bat flu, that it comes and goes in the same way and the same times as the cold and flu, compared to which it may very well be worse in the sense that the symptoms, if you get hit by a hard case of it, are much nastier, but to which it is far closer than to Ebola, the Black Death, or the apocalyptic superflu from Stephen King’s The Stand?

The politicians, the public health mandarins and their army of “experts”, and the mass media fear pornographers do not want us to acknowledge this because the moment we do the twin lies they have been bombarding us with will lose all their hold upon us and become completely and totally unbelievable.   The first of these lies is when they take credit for the natural waning of each wave of the virus by attributing it to their harsh, unjust, and unconstitutional public health orders involving the suspension of all of our most basic freedoms and rights.    The second of these lies is when they blame the onset of the next wave of the virus at the time of year colds and flus always spread on the actions of the public or some segment of the public.

It is the second of these lies with which we are concerned here.

Last fall, as the second wave was beginning, our governments blamed the wave on those who were disobeying public health orders by getting together socially with people from outside their households, not wearing masks, and/or especially exercising their constitutional right to protest against government actions that negatively impact them, in this case, obviously, the public health measures.   There was an alternative form of finger-pointing on the part of some progressives in the media, who put the blame on the governments themselves for “re-opening too early”. This form of “dissent” was tolerated respectfully by the governments, a marked contrast with how they responded to those who protested that they could not possibly have re-opened too early because they should never have locked down to begin with since lockdowns are an unacceptable way of dealing with a pandemic being incredibly destructive and inherently tyrannical. Although there was much more truth to what the latter dissenters were saying it was these, rather than the former group, that the governments demonized and blamed for the rising numbers of infections.  The governments and other lockdown supporters attempted to justify this finger-pointing by saying that the lockdown protestors, whom they insisted upon calling “anti-mask protestors” so as to make their grievances seem petty by focusing on what was widely considered to be the least burdensome of the pandemic measures, were endangering the public by gathering to protest outdoors.  That their arguments were worthless is demonstrated by how they had made no such objections to the much larger racist hate rallies held by anti-white hate groups masquerading under banal euphemisms earlier in the year and, indeed, openly encouraged and supported these even though they had a tendency to degenerate into lawless, anarchical, rioting and looting that was absent from the genuinely peaceful protests of the lockdown opponents.

With the deployment of the rapidly developed vaccines that are still a couple of years away from the completion of their clinical trials under emergency authorization government public health policy has shifted towards getting as many people vaccinated as possible, with a goal of universal vaccination. At the same time, the finger-pointing has shifted towards the unvaccinated or, to be more precise, those who have not received however many shots the public health experts in their jurisdiction deem to be necessary at any given moment. This blaming of the unvaccinated is both a deflection from the grossly unethical means being taken to coerce people to surrender their freedom of choice and right to informed consent with regards to receiving these vaccines and is itself part of those means.

Perhaps “shifted” is not the best word to describe this change in the finger-pointing.   While the less-than-fully-vaccinated are being blamed as a whole for the Delta wave the blaming is particularly acrimonious for those who both have not been sufficiently vaccinated to satisfy the government and who have been protesting the public health abuses of our constitutional rights and freedoms the latest of which is the establishment of a system of segregation based upon vaccine choice in which society and the economy are fully or almost fully re-opened to those who comply with the order to “show your papers” while everyone else is put back in lockdown.  The CBC and the privately owned media, both progressive and mainstream “conservative” have gone out of their way to vilify such people, as have the provincial premiers and their public health mandarins whose vaccine passport system is obviously punitive in nature. The biggest vilifier of all has been the Prime Minister. In his campaign leading up to the recent Dominion election he was unable to speak about the “anti-vaxxers” – a term, which until quite recently, indeed, until the very eve of this pandemic, designated supporters of holistic medicine who object to all vaccination on principle and who were usually to be found among the kind of tree-hugging, hippy-dippy, types who support the Green Party, NDP, or the Prime Minister’s own party – without sounding like he was speaking about the [Censored. Ed.] to an audience at Nuremberg in the late 1930s.

What we are seeing here is not a new phenomenon. When the ancient Greek city-states were faced with a crisis beyond human ability to control – such as a plague – they would choose someone, generally of the lowest possible social standing such as a criminal, slave or a cripple, and, after ritually elevating him to the highest social standing, would either execute him, if he was a criminal, or beat him and drive him out of their society, in either case as a symbolic sacrifice to avert disaster and save the community. This person was called the φαρμακός, a word that also meant “sorcerer”, “poisoner” or “magician”, although there is no obvious connection between this meaning and the usage we have been discussing and lexicographers often treat them as being homonyms.  In some city-states this came to be practices as a ritual on a set day every year whether there was a looming disaster or not.   In Athens, for example, the two ugliest men in the city were chosen for this treatment on the first day of Thargelia, the annual festival of Apollo and Artemis.   Parallels to this can be found in almost every ancient culture as can the related practice of offering animal sacrifices.   Indeed, the practice is generally called scapegoating, from the word used in the English Bible to refer to the literal goat over which the High Priest would confess the sins of the people on the Day of Atonement each year, symbolically transferring the guilt to the goat, which would then be taken out into the wilderness and sent to Azazel, a word of disputed meaning generally taken to refer either to a place in the desert, an evil spirit who dwelled there, or both.   

Anthropologists have, of course, long discussed the origins and significance of this phenomenon. While going into this at great length is far beyond the scope of this essay, a well-known summation of the discussion can be found in Violence and the Sacred (1977) by French-American scholar René Girard as can the author’s own theory on the subject. Later in his Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World (1987), Girard, a practicing Roman Catholic, returned to his theory and discussed how it related to Christian theology and to contemporary expressions of violence. He put forward an interpretation of the Atonement that could in one aspect be understood as the opposite of the traditional orthodox interpretation. While there have been numerous competing theories as to how the Atonement works, in traditional Christian orthodoxy the relationship between the Atonement and the Old Testament sacrificial system was understood to be this:  the former was the final Sacrifice to end all sacrifices, and the latter were God ordained types of Christ’s final Sacrifice. By contrast, Girard argued that sacrifices were not something instituted by God but arose out of man’s violent nature. When division arose in primitive communities, peace was restored through the scapegoat mechanism, whereby both sides joined in placing the blame on a designated victim who was then executed or banished, and built their renewed unity upon the myth of the victim’s guilt and punishment. The sacrificial system was the ritual institutionalization of this practice. As societies became more civilized the institution was made more humane by substituting animals for people. The Atonement, Girard, argued, was not the ultimate sacrifice but rather a sort of anti-sacrifice. It was not designed, he said, to satisfy the demands of God Who has no need for sacrificial victims, but to save mankind from his own violent nature as manifested in the scapegoat mechanism and sacrificial system.  In the Atonement God provided bloodthirsty man with One Final Victim. That Victim offered to His immediate persecutors and by extension all of sinful mankind forgiveness and peace based not upon a myth about His guilt but upon the acknowledgement of the truth of His Innocence and the confession of man’s own guilt.

What is most relevant to this discussion, however, is not how Girard’s understanding of the Atonement contrasts with the more traditional orthodox view, but where both agree – that it brought an end to the efficacy of all other scapegoats and sacrifices.  This does not mean that the practice ceased but that it no longer works. One implication of this pertains to the choice that the Gospel offers mankind. If man rejects the peace and forgiveness based upon the truth of the Innocent Victim offered in the Gospel, “there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins” [Censored. Ed.], and so his violence, which the scapegoat mechanism/sacrificial system can no longer satisfy, increases.  This means that in a post-Christian society the sacrificial and scapegoating aspect of human violence would reassert itself with a vengeance.  

Interestingly, Girard interpreted the New Testament Apocalyptic passages, both those of the actual book of Revelation and those found in the words of Jesus in the Gospels, that speak of disasters, calamities and destruction to fall upon mankind in the Last Days, as describing precisely this, the self-inflicted wounds of a mankind that has turned its back on the peace of the Gospel rather than the wrath of God (see the extended discussion of this in the second chapter entitled “A Non-Sacrificial Reading of the Gospel Text” of Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World).   Certainly the twentieth century, in which the transformation of Christendom into secular, post-Christian, “Western Civilization” that was the main project of the liberalism of the Modern Age came to its completion, saw a particularly ugly resurgence of scapegoating on the part of secular, totalitarian regimes.

I alluded earlier to one such example.  Another example can be found in the early history of the Soviet Union and this is for many reasons a closer analogy to what we are seeing today.    When the Bolsheviks, a terrorist organization of mostly non-(ethnic)-Russians who hated the Russian Orthodox Church, the Russian Tsar, and the Russian people, most likely in that order, exploited the vacuum created earlier in 1917 when republicans forced the abdication of Russia’s legitimate monarch in order to seize power for themselves and form the totalitarian terror state known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, they created their own scapegoat. 

Kulak, which is the Russian word for “fist”, was a derogatory term applied with the sense of “tight-fisted”, i.e., miserly, grasping, and mean to peasant farmers who had become slightly better off than other members of their own class, owning more than eight acres of land and being able to hire other peasants as workers.   Clearly this was a loosely defined, largely artificial, category, enabling the Bolsheviks to hurl it as a term of abuse against pretty much any peasant they wanted. The scapegoating of the kulaks began early in the Bolshevik Revolution when the Bolsheviks sought to unify the other peasants in support of their regime by demonizing and vilifying those of whom they were already envious and confiscating their land.    After Stalin became the Soviet dictator in 1924 he devised a series of five-year plans aimed at the rapid industrialization and centralization of what had up to then been a largely feudal-agrarian economy.   In the first of these, from 1928 to 1932, Stalin announced his intention to liquidate the kulaks and while this worded in such a way as to suggest that it was their identity as a class rather than the actual people who made up the class that was to be eliminated, that class identity, as we have seen, was already largely a fiction imposed upon them by the Bolsheviks and the actions taken by Stalin – the completion of the confiscation of kulak property, the outright murder of many of them and the placing of the rest in labour camps either in their own home districts or in desolate places like Siberia, clearly targeted the kulaks as people rather than as a class.    The history of Stalin’s liquidation of the kulaks as well as that of the Holodomor, the man-made famine he engineered against the Ukrainians, is well told and documented by Robert Conquest in his The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror Famine (1986).

“Anti-vaxxer”, like “kulak” is mostly a derogatory term used to demonize people.   The term itself ought to be less arbitrary than kulak.    Assigning someone to a class of greedy, parasitical, oppressors simply because he is fortunate enough to own a few more acres of land than his neighbour is quite arbitrary and obviously unjust.   Identifying someone as being opposed to vaccines on the basis of his own stated opposition to such is not arbitrary at all, although dehumanizing someone on this basis is just as unjust.   In practice, however, the “anti-vaxxer” label is used just as arbitrarily.   Look at all who have been turned into third-class citizens, denied access to all public spaces and businesses except those arbitrarily deemed “essential” by the public health officials, and whose livelihoods have been placed in jeopardy by the new vaccine mandates and passports.    While those who have not taken the bat flu shots because they reject all vaccines on principle are obviously included so are those who have had every vaccine from the mumps to smallpox to hepatitis that their physician recommended but have balked at taking these new vaccines, the first of their kind, before the clinical trials are completed.   So are people who took the first shot, had a very bad reaction to it, and decided that the risk of an even worse reaction to the second shot was too great in their instance.   So are people who came down with the disease, whose bodies’ natural immune system fought it off, who thereby gained an immunity that recent studies as well as common sense tell us is superior to that imparted by a vaccine that artificially produces a protein that is distinctive to the virus, and who for that reason decided that they didn’t need the vaccine.   There are countless legitimate reasons why people might not want to receive these inoculations and it is morally wrong – indeed, evil, would be a better word than wrong here – to bully such people into surrendering their bodily autonomy and their right to informed consent and to punish them for making what, however much people caught in the grip of the public health panic may wish to deny it, is a valid choice.    It is even more evil to demonize, vilify, and scapegoat them for standing up for their rights.   Ironically, those currently being demonized as “anti-vaxxers” by the Prime Minister and the provincial premiers include all who have been protesting against the vaccine passports and mandates, a number which presumably includes many who have had both of their shots and therefore are not even “unvaccinated” much less “anti-vaxxers” in any meaningful sense of the word, but who take a principled moral stand against governments mistreating people the way they have with these lockdowns, mask mandates, and now vaccine passports and mandates.

The Bolshevik scapegoating of the kulaks, and the as-we-speak scapegoating of the “anti-vaxxers” by all involved in the new world-wide medical-pharmaceutical tyranny, all demonstrate the truth of the implication discussed above of the Atonement’s abolition of the efficacy of sacrifices and the scapegoat mechanism, whether this is understood in the traditional orthodox way, as this writer is inclined to understand it, or in accordance with Girard’s interpretation. If people reject the peace and forgiveness offered in the Gospel and can no longer find it in the old sacrificial/scapegoat system the violence multiplies. In the ancient pre-Christian practices, the victims were singular or few in number (there were only two victims, for example, in the annual Thargelia in Athens). These modern examples of the scapegoating phenomenon involve huge numbers of victims.  The sought objective – societal peace and unity – is still the same as in ancient times, but it is unattainable by this method since scapegoating millions of people at a time can only produce division and not peace and unity.

The peace, forgiveness, and unity offered in the Gospel is still available, of course, although the enactors of the new medical tyranny seem determined to keep as many people as possible from hearing that offer. They have universally declared the churches where the Gospel is preached in Word and Sacrament to be “non-essential” ordering them to close at the first sniffle of the bat flu and leaving them closed longer after everything else re-opened, although the number of churches that willingly went along with this and even took to enthusiastically enforcing the medical tyranny themselves raises the question of whether anyone would have heard the Gospel in them had they remained open.  Which brings us back to what was briefly observed earlier about Girard’s interpretation of Apocalyptic passages as depicting the devastating destruction of human violence which the scapegoat mechanism can no longer contain when man has rejected the Gospel.   Perhaps it ought not to surprise us that throughout this public health panic the medical tyrants have behaved as if the Book of Revelation’s depiction of the beast who demands that all the world worship him rather than God and requires that they show their allegiance to him by taking his mark on their right hand or forehead and prevents them from buying and selling without such a display of allegiance had been written as a script for them to act out at this time. 

~Ω~

Canada orders 293 million Covid vaccine doses – nearly eight shots per person over 3 years

Never mind the myocarditis and unrecorded adverse events, or the waning protection, third doses are coming … and fourth and fifth and sixth …

Mon Aug 23, 2021

(LifeSiteNews) – Not eight months after Covid-19 vaccines made their debut, hailed as a “miracle of science” and the “end of the pandemic,” it now looks like there will no end to the vaccines.  

Remember when it was so important for people to get their second dose? Well now, just months later, it’s a third dose. Soon it will be so important for people to roll up their sleeve for their booster shot – for the sake of everyone’s health, of course. But no one really believes it ends with a single booster, do they? 

Vaccine-maker Moderna sure doesn’t; it announced this week that it has inked a contract with the government of Canada to supply 20 million doses of its experimental mRNA shot (with an extra 15 million doses thrown in if required) for each of 2022, 2023 and 2024. Not a bad deal for your first product ever to market — and a drug that’s still in clinical trials to boot.  

Especially since Moderna has some problems with the safety of its novel platform mRNA vaccine. Former New York Times writer Alex Berenson reported recently that over just three months after the launch of its novel Covid vaccine, Moderna received 300,000 reports of vaccination side effects, according to an internal report from a company that helps Moderna manage the reports. This is much higher than the numbers reported on the official government vaccine adverse event reporting system that Moderna is required by law to report side effects to. 

This week, it was reported that U.S. health officials are reviewing reports that Moderna’s vaccine may be linked to a higher risk of myocarditis – an inflammatory heart condition — in younger adults than previously thought. 

Heart inflammation was detected in one data set at a rate of 12.6 per million in 12-to 39-year-olds who got Moderna shots. That’s 12 times higher than the “one in a million” people are told to expect for vaccine adverse events – and it’s just one unexpected life-threatening side effects that has emerged in recent months.  

Never mind. There’s 105 million doses of Moderna vaccine coming for an entire population of 37 million men, women, and children, including babies. Roll up your sleeves, Canada! 

But that’s just the start. Remember way back four weeks ago when the mainstream media echo chamber was asking (as if they didn’t know the answer), if we would need an extra vaccine dose? That’s when the FDA pushed Pfizer back on its booster like a coquettish teenager and said its third dose wasn’t necessary — just yet anyway. Then it rushed headlong into the affair just weeks later. Just weeks after that, the FDA had an Emergency Use Authorization contract in hand and Pfizer had the go-ahead to start doling out its boosters in the United States in September. 

Everyone knew the FDA’s pushback was a false show of refusal, didn’t they? Someone in the government of Canada sure did. Way back in April, even before Anthony Fauci began warming Americans up to the idea of booster shots, long before the whole Pfizer-FDA tango, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced at a press conference that his government had secured 35 million Pfizer booster shots for 2022 and another 33 million doses for 2023.  

The deal had options to add 30 million doses in both ‘22 and ‘23, and an option for 60 million doses in ‘24, he told reporters.  

That’s 188 million Pfizer shots. Added to Moderna’s supply that’s 293 million vaccine doses — enough injections to shoot every Canadian nearly eight times over in just three years. Do you think they might have a few booster shots a year in mind? Or are the extras for Canadian cats, perhaps? 

In late July, Theresa Tam, the chief public health officer was flirting with the idea like the FDA, telling Canadians that there was “not enough data to suggest that in Canada we would go into boosting as of yet.” Two weeks later, however, shots are going into arms of “vulnerable” people in Ontario where one minister told the CBC he thinks “booster shots are going to be an important part of continuing to protect our long-term care residents. I’ve spoken to our chief medical officer about that a number of times.” 

Most of Canada’s vaccine program has progressed without data though. When Canada delayed its second dose of vaccine months beyond the manufacturers’ directions, even the country’s chief scientific adviser, Mona Nemer, confessed to the CBC it was a “population level experiment.” 

Then, after public health agencies worldwide suspended AstraZeneca’s vaccine when they learned it carries a risk of fatal blood clots and some people who’d already had a first dose of it didn’t want a second, Tam announced they could mix and match different kinds of vaccines like cocktails. A shot of AstraZeneca, followed by a dose of Moderna or Pfizer. This is the new freedom of choice.  

Canadians soon learned that Canada’s public health progressivism was frowned upon by other countries, like the United Kingdom and cruise lines who wouldn’t accept their cocktails or let them cross their borders as if vaccinated. The World Health Organization warned that there is “limited data on the immunogenicity or efficacy of a ‘mix and match’ regimen.” 

“We don’t really know the exact impacts of adding another dose to the existing schedule,” Tam admitted at a news conference.  She also suggested it could be some time before the mixed shots dilemma gets resolved for the Canadians who took her advice. 

“It is going to be a bit confusing and complicated in the next months ahead.” 

That remark suggests it hasn’t been confusing and complicated – not to mention illogical and hypocritical – for months getting to this place. 

No one seems to be asking why the miracle vaccine needs a booster dose or why, since every vaccination bar ever presented and then raised again — has been passed in Canada – and 99% of long-term care residents are vaccinated, why are heavily vaccinated Canadians – and Brits and others –locked down in a “4th wave” of COVID cases? Why is the wonder vaccine failing? 

“There has been a marked decline in vaccine immunity,” one doctor wrote this week in the British Medical Journal. Pfizer claimed its vaccine was 95% effective against infection after initial clinical trials, for example, but the Mayo Clinic found that figure had dropped to 42% by July. Of course, “95% and 42% effective” refer only to the “relative vaccine effectiveness in populations,” retired pediatrician Allan S. Cunningham of Cooperstown, New York explained. The real benefit to individuals is only a tiny fraction of 1% for the prevention of serious illness caused by Covid-19.  

You may want to read that again just to ensure you have understood the enormous discrepancy between what is claimed and what is real. 

He also noted that the big benefits of natural and durable immunity that the United States was on the cusp of grasping was abruptly “interrupted by massive vaccine rollouts and replaced by the limited immunity from vaccines.” 

“This fact is reinforced by the discovery that some of the first U.S. patients to recover from Covid-19 infections have potent antibodies against a diverse range of variants, including the Delta variant.”  

He also pointed to the terrifying prospect of the immune system phenomenon called antibody-dependent enhancement of infection (ADE) from vaccines that has been seen before with dengue and respiratory syncytial virus.  It occurs when vaccine antibodies actually facilitate attachment of wild viruses to cells, thereby producing more severe illness in vaccinated individuals than in unvaccinated individuals and it’s a documented risk for Covid-19 vaccines.  

It’s not too late to “step back from a relentless policy of universal vaccination in the U.S. and the UK and concentrate on individuals at truly high risk,” wrote Cunningham. “This would allow the large majority of young and healthy individuals to safely acquire broad and lasting immunity from natural infections, without the risks of adverse vaccine effects, known and unknown.” 

Somehow it seems that, like every reasonable and scientifically supported suggestion from thousands of doctors, scientists and other professionals such as Cunningham, this advice won’t make it to Trudeau and Tam’s booster agenda.  

The pandemic will continue so long as they and the pharmaceutical giants want it to continue. Canadians and many others around the globe, including children, will be subjected to scares of variant after scary variant, long after Delta is history. When the letters of the Greek alphabet have run out, we’re told, they will start naming the new variants of Covid after the constellations of stars – Aries and Orion and Gemini Covids are to come. And experimental booster shots for each one of them. 

~Ω~

Trudeau’s Internet Censorship Another Step Toward Communism In Canada

“Granting a government agency authority over legal user generated content — doesn’t just infringe on free expression, it constitutes a full-blown assault upon, through it, the foundations of democracy.” 

~ Brad Salzberg

So stated Peter Menzies, former commissioner of the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission. As Prime Minister Justin Trudeau so boldly articulated, “people tend to see things from different perspectives.”

Here is the perspective of Cultural Action Party: Bill C-10 exists for the purpose of controlling what Canadians read and publish on the internet. If it passes, which it will, internet publishing will fall under the Canadian Broadcasting Act. At the base level, the result is a transfer of control of internet content to our ruling Liberal government.

Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault is positioning the move as an act of altruism. “This is for the benefit of Canadians–citizens want this,” and other such platitudes. Make no mistake– the benefit resides squarely in the hands of the few.

Meaning the Liberal Party of Canada, and their omnipresent quest to rule our nation in perpetuity. Leaders of our nation’s most powerful “multicultural” lobbies are also at the driving wheel.

As with all aspects of our nation’s transition away from a free and democratic society, internet censorship comes down to an issue of control. As in, control the media, and you control what citizens speak, write- and potentially believe.

You know the situation is serious when mainstream media pipe in:

“Unfortunately, the democratic world can no longer look down on dictatorships like China, because our governments are increasingly taking pages from the authoritarian playbook.”

Parliament  has now voted to expand the bill to apply to user-generated content, potentially subjecting YouTube videos, Facebook posts and tweets of Canadians to government regulation. Such is the incremental nature of the loss of Canadian values at the hands of the Trudeau government.

Speaking of control, what would Canadians call the ramifications of the Covid pandemic, if not control of society? “Walk here, don’t walk there, wear a mask in public.”  Become, if you like, zombie-type citizens who exist for two purposes– to follow government orders, and to pay taxes.

Such is the reality of life in Canada in the year 2021. Amazing how five years of the second coming of a Trudeau-family prime minister has served up what can best be described as a pseudo-communist Canada.

Let us take a look at some of the fundamentals of the Pierre Trudeau-created Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the impact of the pandemic upon them:

— the right to live and seek employment anywhere in CanadaCancelled.

— freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication. Pending cancellation.

— freedom of peaceful assembly. Illegal.

— every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, and leave Canada. Suspended.

Shall we continue? Let’s not– because dollars-to-Tim Horton’s donuts readers are getting the picture–a picture which not a single media outlet has presented to the public. To be certain, they never will.

READ MORE: Do Lockdowns Exist To Prevent Public Protest As Canada Moves Toward Communism?

Nor will the truth of Justin Trudeau’s emulation of China’s censorship policies be properly articulated by media. Based on the information contained herein, anyone should be able to understand why this is the case.

Government and media working in collusion. The people of our nation censored from an expression of ideas government decree inappropriate.

Getting the picture, fellow patriots? If any readers are having difficulty, we offer a hint: think of the favourite form of governance of Pierre and Justin Trudeau–and go from there.

Communism has come to Canada. The wise will expect more and more of the same until the final Great Reset goal is accomplished. As CAP stated from day one of the Trudeau regime, the days of democracy in our nation are surely numbered.

— Brad Salzberg, Cap Founder (Est. 2016)

SOURCE