1. Steve Hurley gives the practical on Alberta separation and then likely the rest of Canada fragmenting in the wake of a successful Alberta independance referendum. Turkey doesn’t mention how many Canadians would move to Alberta from Ontario if they manage to pull this off, which would be a large number of productive people as well as the parasites.
Quebec separation sentiments are typically very left wing though. The FLQ was a Marxist movement. Quebec may find if Alberta and Saskatchewan leaves, that for a while, they may have milk and eggs. But no refrigeration. Especially if Newfoundland cuts the power. That is the subject of another essay though. The main point is that Canada is a fragmentation grenade at this point and Alberta is likely to pull the pin, and most of us who are paying attention or have any love of individual rights are happy about it.
2. The following video was taken hours after the Oct. 7th attack on Israel. It appears to be in Toronto but was in a Canadian city.
This was not in response to an Israeli counter-strike, as one had not happened yet.
This was in celebration of the initial attack and the beginning of what the actual purpose of the attack was.
The tents had already been bought and the signs printed, well before Israel responded to the Hamas attack.
The Hamas attack did not weaken the Israeli military in any meaningful way, It may have killed or kidnapped a few reservists, but clearly the purpose of the attack was to provoke a strong Israeli ,military response, and then weaponize the response with a major global propaganda effort to make Israel into an unacceptable aggressor, delegitimize the state altogether and bring it down with international pressure, or at least obliterate public support and foment a new wave of antisemitism with common purpose with islam.
3. Communism will use one identity to destroy another. Feminism was a line of operation against the family, and the trans movement, a large and effective dialectic, was used to destroy feminism, even while calling itself 4th wave feminism.
Promoting homosexuality in a DEI, previously known as, “Affirmative Action” above and beyond equality was a line of action against heteronormativity and other components of Western Civilization. Not to say that gay people should be persecuted etc. But the use of homosexuality as a weapon was not about ending persecution. There are no rights gay people do not have that the majority of the population also do not have. Marriage was debatable as a right, since they already had the right to marry an opposite sex person, but they won that fight and everyone was fine with it.
The Trans-movement and various offshoots of the original gay pride movement is now in full effect, out to destroy the gay pride movement. It has become the normal. And the communist movement is about a constant attack on whatever the social order is, even when they created it in the first place.
One can debate the final purpose of this mission, if indeed there is one. But whatever it thinks it is doing, it will not end until the rest of us end it, or it achieves a total crushing destruction of all identity, wealth, means of creating wealth, individual rights and anything it an identify as being a component of Western Civilization. There will at some point be an anti-plumbing movement. And if that sounds ludicrous, explain to me how it is any more insane than the global warming effort to end Western productivity.
Sunday in Ottawa:
For those who are still confused, this explainer video on what “Queer” means is really good.
And to drive the point home, and yes, we’ve posted this before but its importance cannot be overstated. This video reveals that the Trans-movement, like so many others, which may have a mustard seed’s worth of truth in it or not, is in fact a dialectic to destroy Western identity, sexual and others.
Chris Dacey has more footage of Ottawa
Edmonton: A ‘Trans-person’ claims “Palestine is the moral compass of the world.”
This is about as true as it is true that this man is a woman in any way.
Back to Ottawa
Chris can be followed here
Thank you all for checking out this site.
I would like to leave this post with the following reminder about the United Nation’s Moral authority:
United Nations Security Council Resolution 138
United NationsSecurity Council Resolution 138 was adopted on June 23, 1960, after a complaint that the transfer of Adolf Eichmann to Israel from Argentina constituted a violation of the latter’s sovereignty. The Council declared that such acts, if repeated, could endanger international peace and security and requested that Israel make the appropriate reparation in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the rules of international law.
Argentina itself, repeatedly challenged to interpret its demand for “appropriate reparation,” declined to take up the challenge. Dr. Mario Amadeo, Argentina’s delegation chairman, was asked sharply for a “yes or no” answer by Soviet delegation chairman Arkady A. Sobolev in regard to the demand he voiced in the Council the previous day for Eichmann’s return and punishment of those guilty of abducting the Nazi from Argentina. Dr. Amadeo refused flatly to give such an answer, declaring that each delegation is entitled to make its own interpretation of what “appropriate reparation” might mean.[1]
During the debate, Israel told the Security Council that Eichmann had been captured by private individuals acting on their own behalf, that Eichmann had volunteered to come to Israel, and that the Israeli government only heard about it later without learning that he had come from Argentina.[2]
Israel held the view that the matter was beyond the Council’s competence and should instead be settled via direct bilateral negotiations.[3] Israel and Argentina did conduct further negotiations, and on August 3 issued a joint declaration admitting that Argentine sovereignty had been violated, but that the dispute had been resolved.[4]
Resolution 138 was approved by eight votes to none; the People’s Republic of Poland and the Soviet Union abstained. Argentina was present but did not participate in voting, making this resolution one of the last recorded instances of a state abstaining from voting under the nemo iudex in causa sua principle of Article 27(3) of the UN Charter.[5][6][7]
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Eeyore
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://vladtepesblog.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
