Canadian Information: Lockdowns, vaccine passports and general resources

deli
Yes, Canadians live in a constitutional monarchy. Yes, there is a prevalent numbness to the Canadian population - they are in a drugged sleep. We could call it polite, or meek, docile, deferent. But is there any good reason to 'despise' them for it? Or, if not them, then their 'personality'? Every nation has its own particular form of national sleep. Do you despise most of the world, then? And I ask these not as rhetorical questions, but because I wonder about your thinking here, and your internal state...

Throughout Lobaczewski's book Ponerology, he warns against 'moralizing interpretations' of psychopathy, ponerogensis, and pathocracy. He states very clearly, again and again, that moralizing interpretations serve to do one main thing - completely eradicate any objective understanding of evil phenomena.

Why? Moralizing interpretations assume an 'equality of bio-social-psychologial state' - an equality that does not in fact exist. The brains and behaviour of psychopaths is factually different. It is a mistake, then, to look at the whole population of humans on the earth and assume that they may all be judged by the same moral standards. Gurdjieff can help us understand why this is problematic:


So people on this planet can be as different in terms of 'level of Being' as a rock is from a plant. Assuming the equality of bio-social-psychological state between all humans - and then using that as a template for judgment - is like despising a rock for not growing edible fruits, or a grizzly bear for not following the rules at the food court in the mall. We're talking about very different beings with very different cosmic functions. And yes, the sleeping do have a cosmic function.

Another key point from Lobaczewski - psychopaths make deliberate use of this 'we are all equal' atmosphere. The assumption that evil doesn't factually exist allows them to blend invisibly into society. They can find victims in the way they do because most of the population is unsuspecting that there are dangerous beings who are walking around in human skin. Moralizing interpretations function to hide the truth of their predatory natures. This can also lead to improper treatment of the ones who are caught. Only an objective Knowledge can suffice to provide the clear picture of psychopathy, and come up with effective responses.

It's fine to blow off steam once in a while - maybe this is where your post is coming from? The challenge seems to me that it is increasingly important to be careful that we are fully conscious about what exactly it is we're saying. Our words, after all, indicate the state of our thoughts, and our thoughts indicate our levels of Being and of Knowledge.

On that note, following along with Lobaczewski, isn't it just as erroneous to moralize the those who are caught up in evil schemes? To despise them? Take the widespread tendency to call people 'sheep' or 'zombies' or whatever else. What is that? Where does it come from? It can be blowing off steam, it can be a sharp objective discernment, a black-humour kind of sad-laughter... or it can come straight out of self-importance. 'Look at all those dumb sheep, just waiting to be slaughtered! But not me - I am a Seer.' And meanwhile, it's the Predator who has convinced this one that he's a Seer. He's also 'on the menu'.

There is one way of tracking 'Canadogenesis' that shows quite clearly that Canadians have been very deliberately stunted - culturally, technologically, and creatively - for generations. It may be easy to look at Libya, for instance, and see a 'failed state', rife with tribal wars and human slavery, recently destroyed by NATO. It's less easy to look at a supposedly 'developed' nation like Canada and understand that there has been a campaign aimed at the destruction of human potential running here, too. And for a long time. And it's not just the Crown. Some food for thought regarding the national personality that you despise:

 
Misunderstood how the edit times out at 10 minutes.

Replying to iamthis, the quote form that post above '
Yes, Canadians live in a constitutional monarchy. Yes, there is a prevalent numbness to the Canadian population - they are in a drugged sleep. We could call it polite, or meek, docile, deferent. But is there any good reason to 'despise' them for it? Or, if not them, then their 'personality'? Every nation has its own particular form of national sleep. Do you despise most of the world, then? And I ask these not as rhetorical questions, but because I wonder about your thinking here, and your internal state...

Throughout Lobaczewski's book Ponerology, he warns against 'moralizing interpretations' of psychopathy, ponerogensis, and pathocracy. He states very clearly, again and again, that moralizing interpretations serve to do one main thing - completely eradicate any objective understanding of evil phenomena.

Why? Moralizing interpretations assume an 'equality of bio-social-psychologial state' - an equality that does not in fact exist. The brains and behaviour of psychopaths is factually different. It is a mistake, then, to look at the whole population of humans on the earth and assume that they may all be judged by the same moral standards. Gurdjieff can help us understand why this is problematic:


So people on this planet can be as different in terms of 'level of Being' as a rock is from a plant. Assuming the equality of bio-social-psychological state between all humans - and then using that as a template for judgment - is like despising a rock for not growing edible fruits, or a grizzly bear for not following the rules at the food court in the mall. We're talking about very different beings with very different cosmic functions. And yes, the sleeping do have a cosmic function.

Another key point from Lobaczewski - psychopaths make deliberate use of this 'we are all equal' atmosphere. The assumption that evil doesn't factually exist allows them to blend invisibly into society. They can find victims in the way they do because most of the population is unsuspecting that there are dangerous beings who are walking around in human skin. Moralizing interpretations function to hide the truth of their predatory natures. This can also lead to improper treatment of the ones who are caught. Only an objective Knowledge can suffice to provide the clear picture of psychopathy, and come up with effective responses.

It's fine to blow off steam once in a while - maybe this is where your post is coming from? The challenge seems to me that it is increasingly important to be careful that we are fully conscious about what exactly it is we're saying. Our words, after all, indicate the state of our thoughts, and our thoughts indicate our levels of Being and of Knowledge.

On that note, following along with Lobaczewski, isn't it just as erroneous to moralize the those who are caught up in evil schemes? To despise them? Take the widespread tendency to call people 'sheep' or 'zombies' or whatever else. What is that? Where does it come from? It can be blowing off steam, it can be a sharp objective discernment, a black-humour kind of sad-laughter... or it can come straight out of self-importance. 'Look at all those dumb sheep, just waiting to be slaughtered! But not me - I am a Seer.' And meanwhile, it's the Predator who has convinced this one that he's a Seer. He's also 'on the menu'.

There is one way of tracking 'Canadogenesis' that shows quite clearly that Canadians have been very deliberately stunted - culturally, technologically, and creatively - for generations. It may be easy to look at Libya, for instance, and see a 'failed state', rife with tribal wars and human slavery, recently destroyed by NATO. It's less easy to look at a supposedly 'developed' nation like Canada and understand that there has been a campaign aimed at the destruction of human potential running here, too. And for a long time. And it's not just the Crown. Some food for thought regarding the national personality that you despise:

*** My second try to pick up on iamthatis, the edit time ran out on me and all that was left in the first attempted reply was a kind of squawk! So here is the edit of that mistaken squawk entry... sorry!

Deliberately stunted". Here's a couple documents strongly on that topic.

Cognitive Warfare as NATO sees it. I don't think anybody here is unaware of control aspects and aspirations in this with the 3D/4D perspective here. It is just so clearly and scarily presented. Not fully accurate, feels like they have left out a critical 15% of the truth, but even so. You can hear the smart, practiced propoganda approach along with the simple chilling stuff.

This is an article about the NATO pdf first, outlining how they see the new battle ground as the human brain. Cognitive Warfare. A decent introduction from Great Game India before jumping in at the deep end with the NATO pdf itself.

NATO's Cognitive Warfare - How Western Militaries Are Waging A Battle For Your Brain - GreatGameIndia

We have certainly been wrung out, - as people's comments here discuss - and the NATO pdf lays it out, including references to how it worked in the pandemic. Forewarned is forearmed, that's my purpose here. It's like having to get the jab as some people do, and gradually finding things they can do to remediate because we've learned more about what the needlecraft is about and what it does in the body. So here, some intel for protecting the Mind.

https://www.innovationhub-act.org/sites/default/files/2021-01/20210122_CW Final.pdf
 
OPs are just reflecting what is broadcast on them. The technocrat implementation of Plato's Allegory of the Cave (captive audience, no direct observations) is like shooting fish in a barrel for OPs and creating suffering for those who see the illusion for what it is

I knew in March 2020 this was a Hegelian Dialect play, all to program people into wanting the vaccine, asking for it. Submitting to it.
To save them ... from the created problem.
Every play that could have helped was blocked
Every opportunity to fan the flames has been taken
They know they cannot abridge Free Will
They can only make feints that presume they will force it
They cannot
Abridgement carries the gravest of penalties
They can only try and create a framework where your options are perceived to be limited

Ineptness is a nice cover
But the Hidden Hand is playing chess
Even though their pawns are clowns
 
Last edited:

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Great news!
Do you have a link?

There seems to be no news of this that I can find, and there would be news.
As for the state of economic affairs in Canada today, Chrystia Freeland dropped folks a few words regarding the subject of inflation :jawdrop:(the usual jaw drop when she speaks). Her friends at the IMF helped her with the 🔢 and supply chain realities:

 

Gandalf

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
For info, from: Justice Department cautions Trudeau that vaccine mandates are unconstitutional: report - LifeSite

Tue Oct 26, 2021 - 12:52 pm EDT
(LifeSiteNews) — The Justice Department has warned Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government that “zero tolerance vax-mandates” are not acceptable, and that people must be given the option to test instead, according to the Toronto Sun.

Just last week, Trudeau’s government declared that unvaccinated Members of Parliament (MP) would be barred from Canada’s House of Commons. Under the directive, democratically elected MPs and staff who haven’t taken an abortion-tainted jab would not be allowed to enter the federal government headquarters where they work for Canadian citizens.

A statement from the Board of Internal Economy, which is responsible for rules regarding the House of Commons, said: “Effective Monday, November 22, 2021, individuals must be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 to be allowed within the House of Commons Precinct.”

The board also stated that only those with rare medical contraindications that would prohibit them from being jabbed would qualify for exemptions. There were no stipulations given for religious or conscience objections.

“The federal Transportation department quietly announced that the vaccine mandate for air and rail travellers would have to be put off until December,” the Toronto Sun’s article said.

According to a Government of Canada website, “From October 30 to November 29, there will be a short transition period when travellers who don’t yet qualify as fully vaccinated will be able to travel if they can show a valid COVID-19 molecular test taken within 72 hours of travel.”

Just 20 days ago, Trudeau reiterated the prohibition against unvaccinated Canadians from boarding a plane or a train after October 31. No announcement has been made yet by the Prime Minister to acknowledge that the government has pushed its deadline back, and there is not yet an indication that they do not intend to push it back again.

The Toronto Sun article added that given the fact it’s legally dubious that that a Canadian citizen can be barred from traveling domestically on a government sanctioned service — such as federally regulated airlines — that “negative tests will likely have to be accepted in lieu” of proof of vaccination.

The Justice Center for Charter Freedoms (JCCF) has taken a strong stance against mandatory vaccinations that contradict basic Canadian Charter rights, such as the right to travel freely within the country. Recently, the JCCF sued the Ontario government over its draconian vaccine passport that denies unvaccinated tax-paying citizens from public services like ice-rinks that are paid for by the tax-payer.

...
 

Hello H2O

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Saw this regarding the constitutional challenge in BC.

The case came to court Thursday following an application by the government for information about two aspects of the case.

The first concerned an allegation that the government had obstructed doctors from advocating alternative COVID therapies. The second dealt with an allegation that Henry had violated her Hippocratic Oath as a physician.

 

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Saw this regarding the constitutional challenge in BC.
Following submissions from the lawyers in the case, B.C. Supreme Court Justice David Crerar ordered that the plaintiffs provide further details of the alleged obstruction of doctors.
"Alleged" :lol:

Not sure if this is the Rocco Galati filled case, don't think so, and if it is, or if they used his points, that submission had affidavit points numbering > 350.

It is time for judges to be asking the other side to provide 'further details.' However, judges tend to work for the Crown and understand what rocking the boat means. This judge, Mr. Justice David A. Crerar (Vancouver), was recently appointed to Supreme Court June 25, 2019. Hopefully he will listen to the plaintiffs without bias and the weight of backroom fettering.
 

Debra

Dagobah Resident
Ontario seems to have blinked in the staring contest against the hospital staff.
CD33A3C1-E00C-49A2-B7B5-416257BEF3A3.jpeg


26FE801B-5942-4B3B-ABD8-53215086D66A.jpeg

The link to the Quebec article was posted the Covid thread.
CANADA

Quebec drops vaccination mandate for health-care workers

 

Natus Videre

Jedi Master
Et voilà! It was clear they didn't have a contingency plan even with a 97% med-staff vaxx rate.
This is the undeniable proof that fear is the main actor of the Covid show. Stress killed a lot more people than Covid.
If you have time to make a virus-tracking app and book a recurring appointment for the "cure" while the virus is supposedly decimating the whole population, then you are obviously not in a pandemic!
 

Esprit

Jedi Master
FOTCM Member
A white pill here from the RCMP: Mounties For Freedom – Your Freedom is Our Fight
It's a well written letter, very inspiring gives me hope for the backfire the C's have spoken about.
The letter is read by Dan Dicks here: Police Forces Are FIGHTING BACK AGAINST MANDATORY VACCINES Just As Promised! THIS 👏 IS 👏 HUGE!!!
I think Dan has been pretty solid lately with his interviews and general reporting.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY​

As Canadians, our constitutionally-protected freedoms precede the government, and may only be temporarily limited if the majority of evidence justifies such infringements as reasonable, provable, and guided by law. If presented with all available evidence in a court, we firmly believe the government implemented mandates would not hold up under scrutiny.

As experienced investigators, we look past what information is provided and focus on how the information is presented. A proper investigation should be conducted as objectively as possible, and follow the principle that it is better to have questions that cannot be answered than to have answers that cannot be questioned. A complete investigation must include full disclosure of all the facts of the case, even contradictory evidence. Why, then, is there little to no tolerance for free and open debate on this matter? Many credible medical and scientific experts are being censored. Accordingly, we rightly have concerns about “the science” we are being coerced to “follow”.
As representatives of our communities within the RCMP and representatives of the RCMP in our communities, we have never witnessed such division in our country. This sense of “Us versus Them” will be further fueled by having a police force consisting only of “vaccinated” people, while serving communities consisting of “unvaccinated” people, which goes against the community policing model the RCMP has strived to achieve.

As law enforcement officers, we already face higher levels of stress and mental illnesses due to the nature of our work. These have been compounded – considerably – by mandates that we believe are deeply unethical, threatening our livelihood, and dividing society.
As federal employees, what is being done to mitigate this stress? Moreover, what assurances are we given that the injections will not cause short or long-term side effects? What steps will be taken to ensure members are compensated for adverse side effects?

Police officers are expected to preserve the peace, uphold the law, and defend the public interest. We strongly believe that forced and coerced medical treatments undermine all three and, thus, contradict our duties and responsibilities to Canadians. We remain loyal to the Charter and Bill of Rights and ask you to send investigators to collect statements from medical professionals (and other reliable witnesses) who allege they have been silenced – putting lives at risk. Allow us to make this information publicly available to all so the public can scrutinize it and achieve informed consent.

We find it ironic that an organization that preaches the honour and respect of Canadian values, and the sacrifice of their veterans, would support actions that contradict the values our veterans fought to uphold. Enforcement of identification and checkpoints was an early step in what would become the Holocaust. Canadian citizens of various backgrounds are being segregated and punished for choosing not to disclose a personal medical decision. We cannot think of a more ironic and cruel way for our governments to pay homage to the sacrifices Canadians have made worldwide to protect individual freedoms than by participating in a process that takes those freedoms away.


THE SCIENCE

RCMP members are not scientists nor healthcare professionals; our profession is law enforcement. We do not pretend to be experts in medical or scientific fields, but we are experienced and professional investigators: we look for the facts. Proper investigations follow simple practices that remain consistent across most fields. These practices include but are not limited to: asking the right questions, following evidence, being aware of how biases may affect results, and allowing the evidence to point to the conclusion – not allowing the conclusion to point to the evidence. Most importantly, a proper investigation should be conducted as objectively as possible and follow the principle that it is better to have questions that cannot be answered than to have answers that cannot be questioned. A complete investigation must include full disclosure of all the facts of the case, even contradictory evidence.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused several scientists and medical professionals to provide us with information they described as “science”, “scientific”, or “facts”. The problem with many of these statements is that the provided information often contradicted another piece of “scientific fact” that an equally qualified professional had produced. This makes it near impossible for the average person to know what to believe and what not to believe.

As experienced investigators, we look past what information is provided and focus on how the information is presented. This allows us some insight into the credibility of the information. Some professionals make definitive statements such as “It’s safe and effective” or “This is the way”, giving little or no explanation of how they reached their conclusion. When the information provided is challenged or questioned, the response often indicates the answer is something that cannot be questioned. The CDC recently changed its definition of immunity and vaccine10,11, allowing the current COVID-19 treatment injections to fit the definition. This is an example of actions taken when you allow your conclusion to point to your evidence.


CENSORSHIP

We are not against vaccinations, and we are trying to aid our country through this pandemic. We want to participate in a way that is safe for both our physical and mental well-being. We believe it is essential for people to participate with full informed consent by understanding all the risks of what they are being asked (or in this case forced) to participate in.

As experienced police officers, we have become accustomed to the media portraying us negatively or experienced the media misrepresenting the outcome of a police incident. It would be little to no surprise for us to hear that a media agency misreported an incident. However, it was surprising for us to learn that several of these scientists and doctors, who questioned the information fueling the COVID-19 treatment mandates, also spoke of censorship25-27.

As experienced investigators, we know it is our responsibility to present all available facts to the public – by proxy of the courts. It is not our place to decide what the outcome of an investigation should be. Our job is to collect all available facts so that the public (the courts) can make an informed decision. We have learned from past mistakes that presenting evidence that only supports one side, while ignoring or refusing to acknowledge evidence from another side, is wrong and tarnishes an investigation. We cannot provide evidence from witnesses who agree on one story while ignoring or hiding the witnesses who agree on a different account of an incident.


It would be unthinkable that RCMP members would blatantly disregard witnesses in an investigation to mislead the courts. The investigation would lose all integrity and the members would be criticized. Why then are we allowing this same behaviour to occur by other public figures? There are accredited medical professionals from our own country who are desperately trying to have their findings heard. Instead of allowing these professionals to speak freely and discuss their results publicly, they are being silenced by governing bodies25-27.

Our experience in law enforcement and as investigators have allowed us to see how crucial it is that these professionals be allowed to speak openly and publicly. Without the information being included in discussions, we believe the citizens of Canada (including RCMP members) are not receiving the information they need to make an informed decision. This is contrary to our laws and beliefs, and we do not support it.

These medical professionals have tried to stand up and support their country. We are now standing up and supporting them. They must be allowed to share their information publicly to maintain people’s faith in the government. If the people believe the government is continuing to censor experts, the country will fall into instability. This is common around the world in countries whose tyrannical governments sensor information from their people.
 
Last edited:

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
A courageous letter, aimed at the heart of their forces, Brenda Lucki.

Don't know about the cities, yet in rural areas they are not happy, refusing to responds to every Karen and Bob's hysteria.

Hope their letter is a contagion that turns to a pandemic of sanity (wishful thinking I know).

On the 29th of last month, the press was dutiful in playing it all down. Here it was said:

The RCMP says it's ready to turn to reservists if it has to put serving Mounties who refuse to get vaccinated on leave due to the federal government's mandatory vaccination policy.

In a related info-article back in early October, the RCMP's Union pretty much caved - unions, what unions in Canada these days? However, here the RCMP's chief medical cop weighs in; oh you will love this:

RCMP doctor compares shot to body armour​

Peter Clifford, the RCMP's chief medical adviser, sent a video message out this week encouraging members to get vaccinated.

"Think of it this way. As a police officer, you wear body armour because it could save your life if you get shot," Clifford said in the video, which was made public on the RCMP website.


In other Canadian news, this from the Finical Post of all things (and good for them), looks to the headline:

COPOUT26 — Face, farce and fiction, from Greta to Trudeau to Modi​


So, they all jetted off to wine and dine and spread a little friendly C02 between themselves, and of course, Trudeau brought his brand new environment minister with him, the right honourable Environment Minister, Steven Guilbeault - see photo below (yup that is him and yet people change, or do they?):

(National Post article)
steven-guilbeault-3.png


Back to the Finical Post, they put it this way:

After just two days, the world has been drowning in COP26 climate hysteria delivered by politicians, corporate leaders and activists. Staying afloat through the onslaught, hanging on to lifeboats or, alternatively, fleeing killer wildfires and ideological dust storms, requires constant vigilance, awareness and an ability to distinguish fact from fiction and farce.
"ideological dust storms," indeed.:lol:

We begin with the farce, or in this case, f(arse) as staged by media climate star Greta Thunberg who led a group of teenage scientists in a rousing rendition of the latest hymn to a new world order. Under Greta’s musical direction the demonstrators chanted : “You can shove your climate crisis up your arse.”

Here is the C02 Queen Bee:


Recently in Canada, Justin shuffled his cabinet, and gave the honourable Guilbeault a suit and tie and a microphone to help spread the climate 'ideological dust storm' to Scotland:


Justin then jumps into the articles lines from Cop26 himself:

From Greta’s inspiring call to action, we turn now to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s parade of banalities and fact-twisting justifications for his government’s plan to cap carbon emissions, cripple Canada’s fossil fuel industry and continue to ratchet up carbon taxes.

To support his policies, Trudeau played the heat and wildfire cards in his speech before the assembled leaders. Carbon emissions must be reduced down to net zero, he said, to make sure Canada and the world avoid future devastating heat and wildfires that destroyed the British Columbia town of Lytton. “What happened in Lytton can and has and will happen anywhere,” said Trudeau . “How many more signs do we need?

Trudeau continued: “Canada is warming, on average, twice as quickly as the rest of the world. And in our north, it’s three times quicker. The science is clear: We must do more faster.”

Ah, yes, the science. The fact is that it is far from certain that Lytton’s destruction by wildfire is the product of fossil-fuel-caused climate change, that wildfires are increasing or that Canada’s temperature is rising faster than the world average.

The latest data on wildfires point in the opposite direction. According to the National Forestry Database , the number of wildfires across Canada has been in sharp decline for two decades, as has the forest areas burned by wildfires. The year 2020, in fact, produced the lowest number of fires in two decades (3,935 compared with 10,741 in 1998) and the smallest area burned (227,000 acres compared with more than 7.4-million in 1995).

Inconvenient truths.

Trudeau’s reference to Canada warming faster than the world average is based on a misleading Environment Canada report last year. As Andrew Roman highlighted on this page at the time, scores of other countries also recorded higher than “average” temperatures, mainly because the global average includes temperatures across the world’s oceans, which account for 70 per cent of the earth’s surface.

The statistic is essentially meaningless. The objective, said Roman, is to politically manufacture an emergency to pressure “frightened voters (and their even more frightened children) to accept whatever measures the government may propose to reduce CO2 emissions.” {some may conclude that voters are not really important anymore}

There is no room here to get into the rhetorical excesses — the contradictory presentation of fact, fiction and farce — from all the political leaders. UN Secretary General António Guterres managed to cover all three “f”s in his opening comments , including another arse reference, albeit indirect, as he sounded more like Greta than a mature political leader. “It’s time to say: enough. Enough of brutalizing biodiversity. Enough of killing ourselves with carbon. Enough of treating nature like a toilet. Enough of burning and drilling and mining our way deeper. We are digging our own graves.”

Well, suppose we could all do a better job in not treating nature as if it a toilet, so instead of logically talking like adults, they will just built back better and let us all know what that will all look like, that is if we are not all fenced off - see below.

Which comes to the grandfather of the revised enviro movement in Canada, that is he is second after his own Foundations honorary board member and friend of Rio, and the director of the foundation board of the WEF, Maurice Strong (CV here), the once upon a time geneticist who sounded alarms over GMO's (which was forgotten), to then become the carbon deescalation ringmaster:

Speaking of man-vs-nature, Canada’s own David Suzuki appeared on CBC Radio’s Sunday morning show to blast the whole COP26 process as a sham. Instead of fencing off nature, we need to fence off humans. Fencing off nature within parks and other reserves is not the answer. Praising Greta, Suzuki said, “The fences are the wrong way. We’ve got to fence human beings and keep us away” from nature.
David has a lot of followers, followers of his old Nature of Things TV show (there were good epodes at one time through the decades), yet perhaps his own nature is now in question? It seems a little rabid. Here is the thing, though, David and his family, and am sorry for what happened - should never of happened, resided behind fences in a Japanese internment camp in BC during the WWII. So his comment is odd, there might be something psychological there, yet I'm no doctor.

So, that is a few Covid-Canada-Cop26 stories for the week, brought to you by the Canada Climate Change Program.
 
Top Bottom