Roussin’s Victims

Throne, Altar, Liberty

The Canadian Red Ensign

The Canadian Red Ensign

Thursday, November 26, 2020

Roussin’s Victims

The province of Manitoba in the Dominion of Canada, one of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II’s Commonwealth Realms, is my home.   We have seen two types of protests directed against the provincial government in recent months, both objecting to the province’s response to the spread of the Wuhan bat flu.   One type of protest, such as that which took place in Steinbach on the 14th of November, expresses opposition to the public health orders as trampling all over our basic freedoms of association, assembly and religion and our prescriptive and constitutional civil rights.   The other type of protest expressed the views of the socialist opposition party, its leader Wab Kinew and his health critic, and their far left echo chamber in the media which features such automatons as the CBC’s Bartley Kives and the Winnipeg Free Press’s Dan Lett and Ryan Thorpe.   Those involved in this type of protest take the position that the government’s public health orders have been too few, too light, and too slowly enacted, and that the government by not imposing a harsh lockdown the moment the case numbers started to rise in the fall, is responsible for all the deaths we have seen since September.

My sympathies are entirely with the first group of protesters, as anyone who has read a word I have previously written on the subject already knows.   I should say that my sympathies are with the protesters’ basic position.   I don’t much care for the rhetoric of civil disobedience, rebellion, and populism in which that position is often expressed at those protests.

While the second group of protesters are certainly entitled to their opinion and the free expression of the same, a freedom that I note many if not most of them would prefer to deny to me and others who take my side of the issue, their position is easily debunked from an ethical point of view.

When a virus is spreading, government is not required to do everything in its power to slow or stop the spread.   Indeed, it has a moral obligation NOT to do everything in its power to slow or stop the spread of the virus.   This is because the government has the power to do tremendous evil as well as good.

Let us agree that saving lives that are at risk from the virus is in itself a good and worthy goal.   Stopping and slowing the spread of the virus may be a means to that end, but whether it is a good means to a good end or a bad means to a good end is debatable.  Slowing the spread of the virus increases the total length of the pandemic, stretching out the time we have to deal with this plague over a much longer period than would otherwise be the case.   That can hardly be regarded as desirable in itself.   Quite the contrary in fact.   Whether this is an acceptable evil, worth tolerating in order to achieve the end of lives saved, depends upon a couple of considerations.

First it depends upon the effectiveness of the method of slowing the spread of the virus in saving lives.   If the method is not effective, then the evil of artificially lengthening the period of the pandemic is much less tolerable.

Second it depends upon the means whereby the stopping or slowing of the virus, considered as an end itself, is to be accomplished.   If those means are themselves bad, this compounds the evil of stretching out the pandemic.

Neither of these considerations provides much in the way of support for concluding that a longer pandemic is an evil made tolerable by a good end, such as saving lives.

With regards to the first consideration, it is by no means clear that any lives have been saved in this way at all.  Indeed, at the beginning of the first lockdown, back when everyone was repeating the phrase “flatten the curve” ad naseum, the experts advising this strategy told us that it would not decrease the total lives lost  but merely spread them out so that the hospitals would not be overwhelmed at once.   This, in my opinion at least, was not nearly as desirable an end as saving lives and not one sufficient to make the lockdown measures acceptable.

This brings us to our second criteria.   The means by which our government health officials have tried to slow or stop the spread of the virus are neither morally neutral nor positively good.   On the contrary, they are positively evil.  They inflict all sorts of unnecessary misery upon people.  Advocates of the lockdown method sometimes maintain that the damage inflicted is merely economic and therefore “worth it” to save lives.   This would be a dubious conclusion even if the premise were valid.   The premise is not valid, however, and it is highly unlikely that those who state it seriously believe what they are saying.  

Telling people to stay home and avoid all contact with other people does not just hurt people financially, although it certainly does that if their business is forced to close or their job is deemed by some bureaucrat to be “non-essential”.  It forces people to act against their nature as social beings, deprives them of social contact which is essential to their psychological and spiritual wellbeing, which are in turn essential to their physical wellbeing.   Mens sana in corpore sano.   The longer people are deprived of social contact, the more loneliness and a sense of isolation will erode away at their mental health.   Phone, e-mail, and even video chat, are not adequate substitutes for in-person social contact.

All of this was true of the first lockdown in the spring but it is that much more true with regards to the second lockdowns that are now being imposed.   The first lockdown was bad enough, but the second lockdown, imposed for at least a month, coming right before Christmas in the same year as the first, will be certain to pile a sense of hopelessness and despair on top of the inevitable loneliness and isolation.  The government has kept liquor stores and marijuana vendors open, even though the combination of alcohol and pot with hopelessness, loneliness, and despair is a recipe for self-destructive behaviour, while ordering all the churches, which offer, among other things, hope, to close.    This is evil of truly monstrous proportions.    It can only lead to death – whether by suicide, addictive self-destruction, or just plain heart brokenness.   

The protesters who accuse Brian Pallister and the government he leads of murder for having re-opened our economy from the first lockdown and not having imposed a second one right away when the cases began to rise are wrong-headed about the matter as they, generally being leftists, are wrong-headed about everything.   The government does not become morally culpable for deaths because it refrains from taking actions which are extremely morally wrong in themselves in order to achieve the goal of saving lives.   Not imposing a draconian lockdown does not translate into the murder of those for whom the respiratory disease caused by the coronavirus becomes one health complication too many.

Where Pallister does bear moral culpability for deaths is with regards to all the people who will kill themselves, or perhaps snap and kill others, drink themselves to death or accomplish the same with drugs, or simply give up on life in hopeless gloom and despair because he has allowed Brent Roussin, once again, to impose these totalitarian public health orders.

Roussin has been going on television as of late, showing pictures of people who have died, and lecturing Manitobans on how these are not just numbers but people.   This is a kind of sleight-of-hand, by which he hopes to distract the public from all the harm he is actively causing, and he knows full well that lockdowns are themselves destructive and lethal for he admitted as much a couple of months ago thus compounding his guilt now, by manipulating their emotions.

Does Roussin realize that this street runs both ways?

What about the young man, Roussin, who would otherwise have had decades of life ahead of him, much more than those whose deaths you have been exploiting to justify your bad decisions, but who killed himself because you cancelled his job as “non-essential”, took away  his social life, and left him with the prospect of long-term isolation?   Do you not realize that he is a person as well?

In the end, those who die from the lockdown may very well turn out to outnumber by far those who succumb to the bat flu.   In which case all that Roussin will have accomplished will have been to exchange a smaller number of deaths for which he would not have been morally responsible for a larger number of deaths that leave his hands permanently stained with blood. Posted by Gerry T. Neal at 1:30 AM

Labels: addiction, Bartley Kives, Brent Roussin, Brian Pallister, CBC, COVID-19, Dan Lett, despair, hope, lockdowns, Manitoba, Ryan Thorpe, suicide, Wab Kinew, Winnipeg Free Press


  1. Bruce CharltonNovember 26, 2020 at 4:41 AM“In the end, those who die from the lockdown may very well turn out to outnumber by far those who succumb to the bat flu. “

    From what I can tell from the numbers William Briggs provides, this point has already, several months since, been surpassed in the UK; and the toll continues to mount.

    Plus the severity of intense and chronic human misery – perhaps especially nasty among children, teens and young adults – is clearly appalling but the extent is only known to the immediate circle of neighbours and family.

    …As would be expected from an illness with such a modest mortality rate – even accepting all the inflated and false counting – such as including all influenza deaths, and many other dishonest methods to numerous to list the inflated-rate seems to be considerably less than 1 in a 1000 and very concentrated among the old and already ill who would have a short life expectancy anyway.

    (The non-Christian’s terror of his own death, and the desire to delay it a short while at any price, has a lot to do with this.)

    Here in the UK many of the most basic aspects of medical care, such as actually meeting a doctor, diagnosing and treating lethal cancers etc, have been almost abandoned.

    However, nonetheless, there is a widespread passive acceptance and even embrace of the response – and there is no doubt that poeple-as-a-whole deserve what they are getting – since they keep asking for more of the same; and most of those who don’t like it have ne better justification for their objection than hedonism – which does not sustain courage, and offers no motivating alternative.

    This has been long coming, long building (pervasive and worsening sub-fertility among the most intelligent, wealthy and high status people being an index) – but we are now seeing an accelerating process of civilizational suicide – caused, obviously, by the denial of God (denial of any God – not only the true God).

    Even without our extraordinarily evil and psychopathic global leadership our civilization would be doomed (as I wrote in Thought Prison, 2011) – just more slowly than is happening now

    Men cannot live without God/s – even at the basic biological level; since all human societies evolved with religions, and depend upon religion for much that is basic to survival. ReplyReplies
    1. Gerry T. NealNovember 27, 2020 at 6:37 AMBruce, that we have long ago passed the point where the numbers dead from the lockdowns exceeds those dead from the virus is my understanding as well. I worded it more cautiously here because I was focusing on the local situation in Manitoba where the statistics about deaths from causes such as suicide for this year are suspiciously difficult to obtain.

      We have the same situation with regards to basic medical care here. My father has had to come into Winnipeg annually to see specialists for several years now, but both visits were cancelled this year. One of the specialists was able to do a kind of online videochat examination through the small rural hospital closest to him, but the other just postponed the visit since it has to do with an eye condition that requires an in-person examination. Someone I know who had been waiting for important surgery for years which had finally been scheduled had it postponed due to the virus. I could mention several other specific examples of this sort.

Report from Pyongyang on the Prairies — Hotels Don’t Honour Bookings; Hotels Discriminate Against Whites; Cops Engineer Banning of Service

Report from Pyongyang on the Prairies — Hotels Don’t Honour Bookings; Hotels Discriminate Against Whites; Cops Engineer Banning of Service

SOMEWHERE IN MANITOBA, November 15, 2017. It’s been a wild day here in Winnipeg. Except for there not being the smell of kimchee in the air, this city is about as free as Pyongyang. It is a story of utterly cowardly hotels, blatant discrimination and, in the background, interference by the political police.

I was supposed to speak to local supporters at the Airport Hilton, My topic was

 Charlottesville Changed Everything

* An elite running scared

* New repression — Motion-103 (Islamophobia) now in committee

* Little rebellions across Canada

You can see the version of this speech I gave in Vancouver a few weeks ago:

Before I arrived in Winnipeg, there had been two days of lies and denunciation in large articles in the Winnipeg Free Press, written by a reedy writer in a wool cap, one Ryan Thorpe. I comment on one of his smears at the end of this article. You’ll note the article reveals almost nothing about what I believe but unleashes a torrent of weaponized words — “neo-Nazi”, “White supremacist” etc.

VICTORIA, B.C.: AUGUST 14, 2010 – Paul Fromm, Canada First Immigration Reform Committee director, talks to the media during a protest against the rescue of Tamils, at CFB Esquimalt in Victoria, B.C. August 14, 2010. (ADRIAN LAM, TIMES COLONIST). For City story by Stand Alone

When I arrived in Winnipeg early this afternoon, I hopped the shuttle to the Airport Hilton. I was met at the door by Wade Barkman. He was accompanied by a massively overweight East Indian who wouldn’t identify himself to me. I assume he was some sort of a bodyguard. The two barred the doors; “We are not able to honour your reservation.” [That’s a contract guaranteed by a credit card.]

Why, I asked. I had patronized this hotel on and off for more than 20 years. He agreed I’d been a good guest. Well, why?

“Circumstances,” he said. I told him that was insulting and was no answer As late as Tuesday, the Hilton was hanging tough. Jewish groups — the usual instigators of censorship, were denouncing the hotel for profiting from my presence. Joel Lazer of the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg and the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs said: “It is shameful that a local hotel is reportedly providing a platform (and therefore profiting) from Paul Fromm, a notorious white nationalist, to peddle his bigoted agenda.” (Winnipeg Free Press, November 15, 2017) Actually, I had rented a large bedroom suite for a small gathering.

An e-mail from Barkman even references the number of the contract that he was breaking:


Inbox x

Wade Barkman <>

to me

Mr. Paul Fromm,


Due to circumstances surrounding your scheduled visit to the Hilton Winnipeg airport Suites, we will be unable accept your request for accommodations tonight.  We will begin searching for alternate accommodations and will inform you if we are successful in finding you a hotel room elsewhere.

Local anti racists also promised protests. So, by this morning, the hotel had changed its mind. They were a little more forthcoming with long-time anti-free speech campaigner Helmut Harry Loewen: “We appreciate and acknowledge your concerns regarding Mr. Fromm’s proposed event… Due to safety and security concerns, the reservation has been cancelled and Mr. Fromm will no longer be staying at the hotel,” a spokesman for the hotel company wrote in an email to Helmut-Harry Loewen, a retired University of Winnipeg professor with a specialization in neo-fascism.


Canadian white nationalist Frederick Paul Fromm arrives in Winnipeg Wednesday night vowing to speak to supporters despite a local hotel cancelling his reservation.

 “Our goal is to provide quality accommodations for our guests, employees and members of our community visiting our hotel. Racism in any form is not tolerated,” the statement read.

  1. Who might pose a threat to safety or security? Presumably, the antifa. One wonders: Are there no police? Or is the mere threat of a protest enough to tear up a contract? Or worse are the Winnipeg cops actually a political police in cahoots with the antifa and more interested in suppressing politically incorrect thought than maintaining law and order?

Barkman claimed he’d tried to find me another hotel but could not — in hotel alley? He provided a cab and I set off to find another venue.

Not far away, I stopped in at the Main Stay Suites. I booked a suite. I contacted those invitees I could. I never cancel a meeting. I was receiving calls from interested people, some phoneys, some young and sincere. Indeed, I met three excellent new recruits this hectic. day.

I was treated to a fine supper by some good supporters. On the way back, I gave a short interview in person to scribbler, hatchetman — he’s not  reporter — Ryan Thorpe. I got a sneaky satisfaction from forcing him to buy me a double-double before I gave him a few quotations and let his frenetic cameraman wear out his camera snapping  pics. Then, back into my cab and on to the MainStay Suites (250-594-0500).

Then, about 7:45 just as people were beginning to arrive, I received a call from the hotel manager, who, like many cowards in this business, refused to give his full name. I challenged this slimy behaviour. I said: “You know my name. I want to know yours.” He suggested that I might not be using my proper name. I said: “I showed your staff my photo ID.”

Anyway, Jason — that’s the name he gave me — his story was that he was throwing me out because he had been contacted by the police. By this time there were about a dozen antifa protesters in the hotel parking lot. I suggested that he had no right to throw a person who had paid out of a hotel room. I cited the Innkeepers Act. [Can you imagine a sober Indian in a business suit being tossed out of a hotel room because of his politics? But then this is Pyongyang lite, not the True North of sturdy independent thinkers that is quickly fading into the past in this cultural Marxist vomitorium of diversity.]

I insisted that, if I was to be put out into the night, they would have to haul all my luggage, Eventually, a cab was found. Several supporters followed me as I headed to the Canad Hotel. The Filipina on the desk told me she had several types of rooms available. As soon as I showed my ID, she grew pale and asked me what the “P” in my name stood for. I told her, She became flustered. She made a phone call and then told me that having refreshed her screen, she found the hotel was overbooked. I expressed my serious skepticism.

She then broke down and confessed: “We had a call from corporate headquarters and were given a strict order not to let you stay.” I said: “This is blatant discrimination! Is it because I am a Christian? Is it because I am a White male?” She was clearly distressed.

I said:  “You were not born here. How would you feel if someone turned you out because, as you’ve just told me, you were from the Philippines?” She clearly sympathized. “I am only a worker,” she said softly. And of course, it was true. This was not her decision but the  decision of dark forces responding to pressure far greater than could be exerted by the motley crew of anti-racists.

My supporters and I headed out to a decidedly downscale hotel that was not part of a chain and was known to one of my guys. We pulled up to the Assiniboine, an old watering hole. As soon as the desk clerk saw my ID, he summoned the night manager, a bald burly man with earings who looked as if he’d done some bouncing decades ago. “I can’t let you stay. I have a bad gut feeling,” the bouncer said. Here I am a 68-year old man in a suit. Perhaps, given the dingy beer joint appearance of the place, a guy in a suit may have given him “a bad gut feeling.”

I asked his name.   He said it was “Brian.” What’s your last name? I asked, “I don’t have to tell you,” the cowardly bouncer said. The parking lot outside the quiet Assiniboine was almost  empty — few boozers or guests tonight.Odd that such a down-at-heels place would turn down a paying customer.

Clearly, the fix was in and likely from people with the power to make serious threats and that’s not the freakish antifa.

My supporters saw the pattern and found me other accommodations.

Hectic as the day was, I picked up three new supporters because of the publicity, two of whom saw first hand antifa goons and the shameless cowardice of the hospitality industry, which, ironically still e-mailed me several times for my reaction to my stay at the Hilton!


This lying report captures only part of the drama.

White nationalist mulls legal action after Winnipeg hotel cancels room reservation

By: Ryan Thorpe
Posted: 11/15/2017 4:36 PM | Last Modified: 11/15/2017 9:49 PM UpdatesComments: 23

Frederick Paul Fromm said his presentation would go on as planned in an undisclosed location.

Facing backlash over news Frederick Paul Fromm would be holding a Wednesday night conference at the Hilton Winnipeg Airport Suites, the hotel issued a statement saying it has cancelled the notorious Canadian white nationalist’s room. [Actually, that’s a bedroom and, a lawyer advises me, utterly illegal discrimination.]

“We appreciate and acknowledge your concerns regarding Mr. Fromm’s proposed event… Due to safety and security concerns, the reservation has been cancelled and Mr. Fromm will no longer be staying at the hotel,” a spokesman for the hotel company wrote in an email to Helmut-Harry Loewen, a retired University of Winnipeg professor with a specialization in neo-fascism.


Canadian white nationalist Frederick Paul Fromm arrives in Winnipeg Wednesday night vowing to speak to supporters despite a local hotel cancelling his reservation.

 “Our goal is to provide quality accommodations for our guests, employees and members of our community visiting our hotel. Racism in any form is not tolerated,” the statement read.

Anti-facists soon called off a protest planned for outside the hotel, which was to counter-demonstrate Fromm’s far-right gathering and his presentation of a speech entitled Charlottesville Changes Everything.

“We’re very happy and feel very positive that Hilton made the right decision. Morally and ethically, it was the right call,” said Omar Kinnarath, a local organizer with Fascist Free Treaty 1.

“It’s great and shows that community organizing and community pressure works. We did something together today, the hotel, anti-fascists and all the groups that have been involved in this whole thing.”

Kinnarath went on to thank hotel staff for their patience when fielding calls from concerned community members during the past two days. [In other words, an organized campaign to interfere with the free exchange of ideas.]

Following his arrival in the city Wednesday, Fromm characterized the Hilton’s decision to cancel his booking as a breach of contract. He added he’s “disappointed, but not surprised.”

Fromm said he’s been in contact with a lawyer and is considering legal action against the company.

Citing help from local supporters, Fromm said the presentation would go on as planned and some 20 people were expected to attend. He did not make clear if the meeting would take place at another hotel in the city.

During a press conference Wednesday, Winnipeg Mayor Brian Bowman denounced Fromm’s visit.

“Winnipeg and Winnipeggers are voicing their repulsion with the prospect of Mr. Fromm espousing his hate in the city of Winnipeg. I want to let those Winnipeggers that are expressing their repulsion know that I’m with them and I’d encourage them to continue to express their condemnation… in a lawful manner,” Bowman said.

“Certainly, I find the hate he is promoting in cities across Canada, and now purportedly in Winnipeg, unwelcome and repulsive, and the vast majority of Winnipeggers will share those views as well.” [What an ignoramus this mayor is, denouncing a speech that has not yet been delivered and which he obviously has not heard.]

Fromm is a former educator who was dismissed by the Ontario College of Teachers in the late 1990s for his association with neo-Nazi organizations, although he denounces the term “neo-Nazi” as a misnomer.

He identifies as a white nationalist activist, though he is generally viewed as a white supremacist, and used to host a radio show on the neo-Nazi and white supremacist website Stormfront. [I told the reporter Stormfront is not “neo-Nazi” and that the word is a smear. Note that he offers no evidence that I am “generally viewed as a White supremacist”. I emphatically told him I am NOT a supremacist and do not seek to dominate anyone. I want to preserve the place of the European founder/settler people of North America.]

and has long standing ties with some of North America’s most well-known Ku Klux Klan members, white supremacists and neo-Nazis, including David Duke, Don Andrews, Don Black and the late Ernst Zundel, among others.[An orgy of name calling. I told him that NONE of these men call themselves Nazis, noe- or otherwise. None considers himself a White supremacist and none is a member of the KKK.]

[Thorpe claims to have seen the video of this talk and, yet, you read the column and learn nothing about my views. You do read the weaponized words “neo-Nazi” and “White supremacist” which are vague but signal “bad guy”]