These nurses are ‘leveling up’ their moves to Ciara’s hit dance challenge
COVID 19 is a rather unimpressive “pandemic.” The government is lying to you. Masks, lock-downs, social distancing – think about what they’re really doing to you. They don’t want to protect you; they want to control you. They use the standard formula for brainwashing: despair, deprivation, and dread. That’s what we have with our so-called pandemic. Not protection. Control. There have been various “pandemics” over the last few thousand years. The 14th-century Black Death may have killed 200 million people, and that was when the world population itself was much smaller. The Spanish Flu of 1918-1920 killed perhaps 40 or 50 million people. In 1957 the Asian Flu killed about a million people, and in 1968 the Hong Kong Flu also killed a million. Neither of those events in 1957 and 1968 was a major news item. The big news of 1957 was that Elvis Presley was starring in two movies.
The main difference between 1957 and 1968 and now? Then: no masks, no lock-down, no social distancing, no global economy crushed down to Great Depression level, and no government by martial law. (By the way, one million is only one percent of one percent of 8 billion, the world population. No, that’s not a misprint.)
There are about 77,000 radio and TV stations around the world. Starting in early 2020, it seemed that all of them were talking almost all day about COVID 19. At the same time, political leaders started chanting expressions such as “the New Normal” and “the Great Reset.” It was hard to imagine what sort of organization would be big enough to jump-start such an operation as “COVID 19” and keep it rolling for such a long time.
The expressions being intoned were in fact the words of Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, disguised as a great new opportunity for humanity, but really a massive attempt at global dictatorship. Imagine a “lock-down” that goes on for the centuries.
Don’t let your own fear be used as a weapon against you.
Right now in the Conservative Party, we are seeing a clear case of dirty politics.
On January 20th, MP Derek Sloan was kicked out of the Conservative caucus. He will no longer be allowed to run as a Conservative Party member in future elections and will now sit as an Independent MP.
This happened after Erin O’Toole initiated a caucus vote which resulted in a majority of Conservative MPs voting to remove him from the caucus. This vote was initiated because Derek Sloan had apparently accepted a $131 donation to his 2020 leadership campaign from a white nationalist named Paul Fromm.
As many quickly pointed out, there are factors around these allegations that don’t hold up. For example, the Conservative Party took a cut from this donation and they weren’t even able to flag his name.
Additionally, the donation was apparently made under the name ‘Frederick P. Fromm’, so even if Sloan was expected to recognize the name of this obscure white nationalist, the donation was made under a name most would not recognize as his.
Derek Sloan is likely being thrown under the bus for being an extremely vocal social conservative.
Derek Sloan has spoken out unequivocally against abortion, euthanasia, attacks on religious freedom and many other vital issues to conservatives and faithful Christians, many of whom see him as their voice on Parliament Hill.
Erin O’Toole has always claimed to want a big tent party in the Conservative movement, but clearly Derek Sloan has been too successful at mobilizing people who agree with him on these issues for O’Toole’s liking.
To make matters worse, the Conservative caucus vote that resulted in Derek Sloan being ejected was confidential. No one knows who voted to suppress Derek Sloan’s freedom to represent his constituents, and who voted in support of his freedom.
If you’re represented by a Conservative MP, don’t you think you deserve to know if they voted to suppress one of Canada’s most outspoken social conservative politicians? Don’t you feel that how a Conservative MP voted on this reflects on whether they’re capable of truly representing religious and social conservative constituents, such as yourself?
There may be good reasons why the Conservative Party would need to hold confidential votes at private meetings. But on issues like deciding what beliefs can be represented in the party, there needs to be transparency.
O’Toole was quick to say after kicking out Sloan that this is not meant to be a condemnation of social conservatives in general. I’m sure O’Toole is internally justifying that he is only kicking out Sloan because he’s divisive and is causing a lot of negative media attention.
But the fact is that the mainstream media in Canada will always ensure that the beliefs of social conservatives will be divisive. These organizations have close ties to Canada’s left-wing parties, and so a socially conservative politician can either hide their views or cause negative media attention through their honesty.
You also cannot kick one of the most outspoken pro-life, pro-family, and pro-liberty candidates out of caucus and not expect a severe backlash from people who hold these values.
When CitizenGO sent out surveys to candidates of the Conservative leadership race last year, Derek Sloan was the only candidate to respond with a full endorsement of the values we surveyed him on.
O’Toole may not be as left-wing as our Prime Minister, but when he says that people like Derek Sloan are not welcome in the Conservative Party, I cannot help but feel he’s attacking the values of CitizenGO and our supporters.
P.S. Remember, if it weren’t for social conservatives, Erin O’Toole would’ve lost to Peter MacKay. Social conservatives are necessary for the success of the Conservative Party and its leader. We must demand to be respected.
Kathryn Marshall: The cancel culture mob could come looking for you, too
Due process goes out the window when it comes to cancel culture. By the time all the facts come to light, it is too lateAuthor of the article:Kathryn MarshallPublishing date:Jan 26, 2021 • 5 days ago • 3 minute read
Cancel culture is a toxic practice that we should cancel, writes Kathryn Marshall. PHOTO BY SEAN GALLUP/GETTY IMAGES
Article content
You know it is getting bad when even Mr. Bean is calling you out. In an interview earlier this month, Rowan Atkinson equated cancel culture with a “medieval mob, roaming the streets looking for someone to burn.”
It is an apt comparison.
Kathryn Marshall: The cancel culture mob could come looking for you, too
In 2015, British journalist Jon Ronson wrote a great book called “So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed,” where he explored public shaming on the internet and interviewed people who had been on the receiving end of the online mob. No one could have predicted how online public shaming would mutate into the ubiquitous and toxic cancel culture that has become so powerful today.
A medieval mob, roaming the streets looking for someone to burnROWAN ATKINSON
Cancel culture doesn’t just come for celebrities and politicians. It pursues regular everyday folk, too. As an employment lawyer, I have seen my fair share of unjust terminations. One aspect of cancel culture I find particularly troubling is how the mob goes after people’s jobs. This is no trite matter. It is one thing to call someone out and shame them on online. But to attack a person’s ability to put food on the table is a line that shouldn’t be crossed. It doesn’t take much pressure from the cancel culture mob to cancel someone’s employment contract. Employers, especially large companies, are terrified of bad press and the thought of trending on Twitter for the wrong reasons is the stuff of nightmares
A few angry emails and an unsightly mention in a BuzzFeed article may be all it takes to get you cancelled at work. Forget about an investigation or proper human resources protocols — there isn’t time for that. One of cancel culture’s greatest strengths is its speed. With social media and the 24/7 news cycle, the process of cancelling a human can take mere hours.
In any other scenario where a complaint is made against an employee, there would usually be a proper investigation process undertaken by the employer that could take weeks, maybe months. The employee would be permitted to present a defence and the full context would be examined. Termination for cause, which is the capital offence of employment law, would be a last-resort option.
A statue of justice is seen outside Vancouver’s law courts. Due process goes out the window in cases of cancel culture, writes Kathryn Marshall. PHOTO BY MARK VAN MANEN/POSTMEDIA NEWS
Due process goes out the window when it comes to cancel culture. By the time all the facts come to light, it is too late. The damage has been done and the mob is onto its next victim.
If companies would just keep their nerve instead of panicking and hitting the fire button, they could avoid potential liability from unjustly fired employees. The cancel culture mob usually loses interest after a few days, but the lawsuits from terminated employees linger.
A friend once asked me, isn’t cancel culture just the product of a free market, like consumer activism? The answer is no. Cancel culture is about power and control. It is a highly effective tool that gives a self-appointed and often small mob the power to control who has and doesn’t have a platform or voice. What it takes to be cancelled is completely fluid and changes almost daily. Cancel culture is the antithesis of free speech and the enemy of due process and fairness.
Cancel culture is the antithesis of free speech and the enemy of due process and fairness
The goal isn’t just to humiliate or to shame. And it certainly isn’t to elicit an apology. The objective is to literally remove a person from every semblance of their life — personal and professional. To destroy that person’s career, influence, respect and render them so radioactive that no company, person or employer will ever want to touch them with a 10-foot pole. In other words, cancelled.
There are always stories of a cancel culture victim months later, where some reporter has dredged up all the facts and evidence and tells the full story in the proper context. You read it and think — that was really unfair. And then you go about your day, while that person has to live the rest of their life with this humiliation plastered all over the internet.
Are there some people and groups out there who deserve to be deplatformed? Of course — this has always been the case.
But do the vast majority of people who have made a mistake or said or done the wrong thing at some point in their life deserve due process and a second chance?
Yes.
Cancel culture is a toxic practice that we should cancel.
Mask-exempt Parksville customer goes on HUNGER STRIKE after Pharmasave denies prescription
Remember when discriminating against people based on their medical, physical, and cognitive conditions was a bad thing? I miss those days. Back before mask mandates, lockdowns, and snitch lines were a thing. It’s all but a distant memory now. These days, it seems like it’s the “new normal” to discriminate against people if their health condition makes them mask-exempt.
That’s precisely what happened to Ela Tanase, a Parksville, B.C., resident who was refused service at a Pharmasave when she went in without a mask to pick up her pain medication. Ela is mask exempt because of an underlying health issue, and as per B.C.’s human rights laws, she’s not required to divulge what that issue is to justify her mask exemption. But that didn’t matter to Pharmasave. They refused to listen and kicked her out of the store!
If that wasn’t humiliating enough, the police were called, and when they arrived, they issued Ela a $230 ticket. It wasn’t until Ela embarked on a 6-day hunger strike that her pharmacy finally relented and allowed her to pick up her medication!\ Isn’t it ironic that a place that is supposed to help citizens with their medical needs is the same place ignoring their medical mask exemption? Why bother outlining mask exemptions in the law if it can just be ignored?
Lucky for Ela, she doesn’t have to worry about paying that ticket. We set her up with one of our top-notch lawyers to challenge her citation.Hiring lawyers to defend a $230 ticket may sound strange, considering it will cost way more to fight the ticket than to simply pay it off. But this isn’t about the money — it’s about standing up for what’s right and sending a message that Canadian civil liberties are worth defending.
