This is the COVID challenge that should have been heard years ago. It wasn’t. End of February, it finally will be. The evidence is overwhelming. There is no way out for the government. Adam is literally the last man standing who has standing to challenge the tyrannical COVID restrictions in court. The ramifications of this case will be felt across Canada, the United States and the rest of the British common law world. Please give generously, ***especially*** if you don’t reside here. The only alternative is to wait until your own government investigates itself, finds wrongdoing, and then punishes and corrects its own behaviour. Don’t trust. Don’t wait. Become a part of this today. Even if you’ve done nothing to support the cause until now, you’ll be glad you did. Thank you, godspeed and God bless.
Adam Skelly: Canada’s Last Chance to Challenge the Lockdowns
This is an important case, and I want people to really remember why.
In November 2020, when most of us felt powerless being locked down again, Adam Skelly gave us hope. Real hope. I remember being glued to the livestreams, like so many others. Watching him open Adamson BBQ in Toronto. Watching people line up, not just for food, but to support someone who finally said no, and to do a ‘normal’ thing like sit down at a restaurant. It felt like a turning point. Like maybe this madness could be stopped.
Adam Skelly was the first business owner in Canada to openly defy the COVID emergency orders. Long before the Convoy, he stepped forward, alone.
By day three, the state showed its hand. Around 100 police. Some on horses. Locks changed before dawn under orders from Public Health. Adam broke back into his own restaurant, cooked food, and fed people anyway. Then he was arrested and taken away in handcuffs. I will never forget watching that unfold in real time. The hope we felt turned into shock and anger. One man standing alone was crushed.
You can still watch that Day 3 livestream here:
Now, years later, this case is finally going to court. The hearing is set for February 25 to 27.
This matters because Adam’s case is the ONLY case in Canada with standing to challenge the COVID emergency orders. This is our last chance. No other legal case can do this. The limitation period is over and there are no others waiting. If this case dies, that chapter is closed forever. We can still win. We need to win – just remember what those days felt like – do we want that again?
To finish the case, Adam needs about $80,000, with $50,000 already past due. The government does not want this heard. That tells you everything.
If you remember watching those livestreams. If you remember how it felt to see someone finally stand up. This is where it leads.
Please donate if you can and share this. Once this case is gone, there is no second chance.
Dr. Frances Widdowson was arrested and given a ticket at the University of Victoria campus after trying to engage in conversation about ‘the disputed claims of unmarked graves in Kamloops.’
A Canadian academic who spoke out against claims there are mass unmarked graves of kids on former Indigenous residential schools, and who was arrested on a university campus as a result for trespassing, is fighting back with the help of a top constitutional group.
Dr. Frances Widdowson was arrested and given a ticket on December 2, 2025, at the University of Victoria (UVic) campus after trying to engage in conversation about “the disputed claims of unmarked graves in Kamloops,” noted the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) in a recent news release.
According to the JCCF, Widdowson was trying to initiate a “good faith” conversation with people on campus, along with the leader of OneBC provincial party, Dallas Brodi.
“My arrest at the University of Victoria is an indication of an institution that is completely unmoored from its academic purpose,” said Widdowson in a statement made available to LifeSiteNews.
She added that the “institution” has been “perpetuating the falsehood” of the remains of 215 children “being confirmed at Kamloops since 2021, and is intent on censoring any correction of this claim.”
“This should be of concern for everyone who believes that universities should be places of open inquiry and critical thinking, not propaganda and indoctrination,” she added.
UVic had the day before Widdowson’s arrest warned on its website that those in favor of free speech were “not permitted to attend UVic property for the purpose of speaking publicly.”
Despite the warning, Widdowson, when she came to campus, was met with some “100 aggressive protesters assembled where she intended to speak at Petch Fountain,” noted the JCCF.
The protesters consisted of self-identified Communists, along with Antifa-aligned people and Hamas supporters.
When Widdowson was confronted by university security, along with local police, she was served with a trespass notice.
“When she declined to leave, she was arrested, detained for about two hours, and charged under British Columbia’s Trespass Act—an offence punishable by fines up to $2,000 or up to six months’ imprisonment,” said the JCCF.
According to Constitutional lawyer Glenn Blackett, UVic actions are shameful, as it “receives hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars annually while it facilitates the arrest of Canadians attempting to engage in free inquiry on campus.”
Widdowson’s legal team, with the help of the JCCF, will be defending her ticket to protect her “Charter-protected freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly.”
Widdowson served as a tenured professor at Mount Royal University in Calgary, Alberta, before she was fired over criticism of her views on identity politics and Indigenous policy, notes the JCCF. She was vindicated, however, as an arbitrator later found her termination was wrongful.
In 2021 and 2022, the mainstream media ran with inflammatory and dubious claims that hundreds of children were buried and disregarded by Catholic priests and nuns who ran some Canadian residential schools. The reality is, after four years, there have been no mass graves discovered at residential schools.
However, as the claims went unfounded, over 120 churches, most of them Catholic and many of them on Indigenous lands that serve the local population, have been burned to the ground, vandalized, or defiled in Canada since the spring of 2021.
Last year, retired Manitoba judge Brian Giesbrecht said Canadians are being “deliberately deceived by their own government” after blasting the former Trudeau government for “actively pursuing” a policy that blames the Catholic Church for the unfounded “deaths and secret burials” of Indigenous children.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, new private members’ Bill C-254, “An Act To Amend The Criminal Code” introduced by New Democrat MP Leah Gazan, looks to give jail time to people who engage in so-called “Denialism.” The bill would look to jail those who question the media and government narrative surrounding Canada’s “Indian Residential School system” that there are mass graves despite no evidence to support this claim.
A Manitoba Conservative MP is warning that the federal government’s proposed Combating Hate Act could threaten religious freedom, claiming amendments tied to Bill C-9 may allow prosecutors to “criminalize quoting the Bible.”
Brandon Leslie, the Portage–Lisgar MP, posted the warning on Facebook this week, calling the legislation “Orwellian overreach” and urging Canadians to reject it. He also promoted a petition suggesting Liberal-Bloc amendments could be used to prosecute people who share scripture from the Bible, Quran, Torah or other religious texts.
“The state has no place in the religious texts or teachings of any faith community,” the petition says, arguing that freedom of expression and religion must be protected.
Leslie repeated the accusations in Question Period, accusing the Liberals of trying to “police the thoughts of Canadians” by “making amendments to criminalize sections of sacred texts.” He linked Bill C-9 to broader cultural grievances, claiming Liberals “tacitly support tearing down statues” and are waging a war on “values, faith and heritage.”
Bill C-9 would criminalize intimidation or obstruction at religious and cultural sites, introduce tougher penalties for hate-motivated crimes, and ban public displays of Nazi or terrorist symbols except for legitimate purposes. Supplied
“Canadians do not want a government that wages war on their values, their faith, and their heritage,” he told the House.
**New criminal offences target intimidation and hate symbols**
Bill C-9 was tabled in the House of Commons on October 7, and aims to update hate-crime provisions, create new offences against intimidating or blocking access to religious and cultural sites, and ban the public display of Nazi and terrorist hate symbols unless for journalism, education, religion or art.
If passed, Bill C-9 would make it a criminal offence to intimidate someone in order to stop them from entering places of worship, cultural centres, schools, seniors’ homes or cemeteries, with penalties reaching up to 10 years in prison.
The bill would also make it illegal to intentionally obstruct access to those same locations, though it includes an exception for people who are there solely to obtain or communicate information — intended to protect peaceful protest and information sharing.
Another major component of the legislation is the creation of a new hate-crime offence that increases penalties when an underlying Criminal Code offence is motivated by hatred toward an “identifiable group,” such as those defined by race, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, age or disability.
Finally, the bill proposes a new hate-propaganda offence that would prohibit the public display of Nazi swastikas, SS bolts or symbols linked to terrorist entities. The measure includes defences to allow legitimate purposes such as journalism, education, artistic expression or religious context, ensuring those uses would not be captured by the criminal prohibition.
The law would also allow police to seek wiretap warrants and DNA orders for intimidation crimes, and judges would be able to impose bail conditions like no-contact orders or geographic restrictions, subject to judicial discretion and review.
The Charter review explicitly states that “hatred” is defined as extreme vilification, not dislike or discomfort, and that the bill would not criminalize expression that merely “discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends.”
It also clarifies that legitimate religious expression, including quoting sacred texts, does not meet the legal threshold for hate promotion unless it is used with wilful intent to encourage violence or extreme vilification.
Every day, Canadian students from kindergarten onward are exposed to a “gender ideology” that encourages changing genders, undergoing harmful and often irreversible gender-transition treatments – all while keeping parents in the dark.Increasingly, parents and teachers face serious consequences for challenging this unscientific ideology and for advocating for the safety, privacy, and dignity of women and girls. Right now, Canadians Bryony Dixon and Amy McKay are facing exclusion and professional sanctions for standing up for women and girls. Defend safe spaces for women and girls
Bryony Dixon (Courtesy of Bryony Dixon)
On the west coast, mother-of-two Bryony Dixon opened her home to an international student during the 2023-2024 school year through her school district’s “Homestay” program, which connects international students with caring host families like Bryony’s. When another student asked to stay with her, Bryony submitted the same application to be a host family. This time, however, the school district ignored her application. After months of unanswered emails, she filed a Freedom of Information request to find out what had happened. What she learned was startling: school district officials had intentionally ignored her application because she had spoken publicly about the right of women and girls to access female-only spaces where biological males may not enter. Like thousands of parents across the country, Bryony cares about the privacy and safety of girls.Bryony had also raised concerns shared by many British Columbia parents about the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) school curriculum, which teaches that students are expected to use peers’ preferred pronouns and that teachers may support a student’s chosen gender identity, including new names or pronouns, without notifying parents.Behind closed doors, and without any opportunity for Bryony to respond, administrators decided that her views made her unfit to participate. A mother trusted to provide a stable home for a young student was rejected solely for advocating for female rights.Bryony said, “Evidently, this district denies girls their voice, and endeavours to bar anyone brave enough to advocate for them. The district’s ongoing discrimination against me has denied female students contact with one of the few adults willing to stick their neck out for their rights to safety, dignity, and fairness.”Our lawyers have filed a complaint with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal on behalf of Bryony, arguing that her school district discriminated against her by barring her from its Homestay program because of her political views.
Meanwhile, in Ottawa, Ontario, former teacher and mother-of-two Amy McKay is facing the same problem. Amy has been an active member of her community for years: teaching with the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board, volunteering to run student clubs and activities, and hosting a neighborhood knitting and crochet group. In 2022, she decided to enhance her professional skills by studying counselling. During that time, she expressed her personal views online about the harms of gender ideology and gender-transition surgeries for minors. The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board responded by banning her from teaching in any of its schools. Amy’s own School Board even filed a complaint against her with the Ontario College of Teachers. Nearly two years later, in 2025, she received an ultimatum from her College: permanently surrender your teaching licence or face a formal investigation. Both Amy and Bryony (and many other Canadians) are being forced to self-censor, just to participate in society. With help from the Justice Centre, Amy has rejected the College’s demand, asserting her Charter-protected freedom of expression, which the College must balance in its decision-making.Reflecting on the ordeal, she said, “In a diverse and multicultural country, everyone’s rights must be considered and all are important. Attempting to silence, intimidate, or punish anyone for speaking about their experiences and their rights is wrong.” She now awaits the College’s decision on whether it will proceed with a full investigation.
These two mothers—living thousands of kilometres apart—share a troubling connection. Both were deeply involved in their school communities. Both spoke sincerely about issues affecting children. And both were punished for it. Parents who raise concerns about their children’s wellbeing are now being removed, excluded, pressured, or professionally sanctioned. School districts are taking political positions. Regulatory bodies are policing lawful opinions. The message to parents across the country is unmistakable: your views are unwelcome unless they comply with politically correct narratives. Stay silent.This is not how a free country treats its citizens, and it is not how a healthy society treats its parents. When parents are silenced, children lose their strongest advocates. Your support can ensure that these mothers—and many others—are not forced to fight alone. Your generosity makes it possible for the Justice Centre to fund important cases like these. Please stand with Bryony, with Amy, and with every parent willing to defend the rights of women and girls. Yours sincerely,
John Carpay, B.A., LL.B.President and FounderJustice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
Close to 2000 people wearing orange shirts joined a walk in Sydney this past Canada Day to show support for residential school survivors and victims. FILE Photo by Ardelle Reynolds /Ardelle Reynolds
Woke Watch Canada is a reader-supported publication. Please consider becoming a paying subscriber or making a one-time or recurring donation to show your support.
The villainous leader of the British Columbia conservatives, John Rustad, has struck again. Readers of this newsletter will remember last March when he ousted then conservative critic to the attorney general, Dallas Brodie, after she stood up for lawyer Jim Heller and mocked the alternate truths of social justice activists (i.e. your truth, my truth). Rustad, not wanting to defend free speech or broadly held conservative views, claimed disingenuously that Brodie’s words and tone were offensive to “survivors” of Indian residential schools, and removed her from the conservative caucus. Brodie has since launched a new provincial party called OneBC.
This time around, Rustad the Regrettable has fired Lindsay Shepherd from her communications staffer role following a post she published to X regarding Orange Shirt Day, from her personal profile on her personal time:
The orange shirt and the orange flag perpetuate untruths about Canadian history, such as the grandest lie of all that 215 children’s graves were unearthed in Kamloops.
It is a disgrace that this fake flag flies in front of the provincial parliament buildings, and it is a disgrace to see the shirt of lies framed prominently and permanently beside the coat of arms so that locals and tourists cannot view our insignia without having their eye drawn and redirected to the orange shirt.
I could not agree more with this sentiment! And I commend Lindsay Shepherd for having the principles, courage, and intelligence to express it publicly!
Although, in Canada, speaking ones conservative or Christian principles can be extremely costly. Shepherd is 32 weeks pregnant and was expecting to go on maternity leave in a few weeks. The callousness and apparent tone deaf quality of Rustad’s actions has made many conservatives furious across the country. Aren’t conservatives supposed to be the ones who support families?
But even if Shepherd wasn’t expecting a child and reliant on mat-leave benefits now denied her, Rustad so rapidly folding under political pressure, and throwing another strong intelligent conservative woman under the bus, is outrageous and unforgivable. Conservatives must have strength and principles and clearlyRustad has neither.
I included Shepherd’s story from 2017 involving Wilfrid Laurier University in my book-in-progress, What Happened To Canada?(section not yet published). A source I drew from was Shepherd’s own book written about what ended up being a national controversy. Diversity and Exclusion: Confronting the Campus Free Speech Crisis is an excellent examination of the excesses of woke authoritarianism happening at Canadian universities. In a nutshell, Shepherd, who at the time was a teaching assistant, showed a brief video clip of a Steve Paikin interview of controversial public figure Jordan Peterson. They were discussing the gender identity issue of pronouns, which was at the time a fairly new, and for most people, perplexing issue. The Diversity department at the university manufactured a complaint in order to censure Shepherd and enforce social justice orthodoxy — which doesn’t like outspoken figures like Jordan Peterson, or allow for debate on pronouns or any other social justice tenets.
In Canada, one area where the excesses of the social justice paradigm are obvious on the surface, and substantiated by evidence underneath, is all things First Nations. The country is going crazy over Truth and Reconciliation. The entire thing has been tainted by the Kamloops mass grave hoax. If what is called “reconciliation” is ever going to have a chance at achieving anything positive, the 215 so-called unmarked graves, or more recently “soil anomalies,” in the Kamloops apple orchard must be excavated. And that is just a start. For reconciliation to work, Canadians, including the Left, the media, political leaders, aboriginal leaders, and regular aboriginal people, must stop acting like they can talk over or dismiss people who disagree with them.
And further, the concept of Indian Residential School denialism needs to be rolled up into a tight cone-like shape and launched into outer space. Preferably, in the direction of the sun. It needs to disappear forever, and people who bring it up need to be scorned caustically. No one can or should have monopolistic control over historiography or historical research of any kind. So sit down you self-anointed equity-deserving clowns, because no lasting knowledge or history is ever going to be produced in the fashion you would like. Be good little Leftists and start participating in a non-revolutionary democratic society with liberal values like free-speech and freedom of intellectual/historical inquiry.
Readers of this newsletter know that I am contributing authour to the best-selling book, Grave Error: How the Media Misled Us (and the Truth about Residential Schools). On Tuesday, Michelle Good, the author of the fiction novel “Five Little Indians,” wrote an op-ed for the Toronto Star in which she claimed Grave Error was a “vitriolic and hateful diatribe denying the truth about residential schools and the intergenerational harms they caused, was self-published by a gaggle of hard-core denialists, determined to shore up the myth that residential schools were well-intentioned, abuses suffered there exaggerated or fabricated and that intergenerational harms do not exist.”
One of the books co-editors, Professor Tom Flanagan (the other is Chris Champion) was interviewed by journalist Clayton DeMaine, giving him the opportunity to set the record straight. In a piece for True North Wire, DeMaine describes the work as “a scholarly book debunking media claims about supposed unmarked mass graves.”
Professor Flanagan has challenged Good to a debate. She is welcomed to point out where there may be flaws in the evidence or reasoning used by the more than dozen authors who contributed to Grave Error. Further, Professor Flanagan explained that,
Grave Error is fully documented, with 800 footnotes. The book was published by True North; it was not self-published, nor was it rejected by the publishing industry. We chose True North because we wanted to release it quickly to counter what we saw as misinformation. As for the claim that it is a ‘vitriolic and hateful diatribe’—I’d like to see examples of what she considers vitriolic and hateful. It’s difficult to comment without specifics. Many readers and reviewers have said the book’s tone is measured and factual.
Conservatives, and intelligent principled Canadians, are going to continue challenging the Kamloops claim and the premise of Truth and Reconciliation. We just are! If it is made criminal to do this, a greater desire to do more of it will emerge. The truth cannot be suppressed. Not the truth of Canadian history and cultural heritage, including the truth of fruitful cooperative relations between settlers and aboriginals over more than a century of fur-trading in early Canada, nor the truth of Indian Residential Schools and colonialism. It is not denialism to argue that many of the claims associated with Indian Residential Schools, claims which are parroted by media and political leaders, are false or exaggerated. And it is not denialism to argue that colonialism was a net-benefit to both aboriginal and non-aboriginal Canadians. These are valid opinions supported by research, if you don’t like these opinions because there is something wrong with the research, then point it out. Otherwise, you are going to need to learn to STFU, there is nothing else left for you or anyone else when it comes to truth and free speech and being decent by not dehumanizing those whose opinions cause anger (warranted or otherwise).
There is also nothing nefarious, racist, fascist, bigoted, wrong-headed, silly, misguided, or disingenuous about white Anglo or Franco Canadians who know history, and consult with others who also know history, and conclude that the mainstream narrative surrounding Orange Shirts and residential schools doesn’t add up. Debate them, don’t hate them. Don’t call them denialists and try to silence them. Look in the mirror, look inside yourselves Rosie, examine the evidence brought forward which challenges convention. Don’t gaslight, don’t call others denialists, while you deny their evidence, arguments and humanity.
Turning to Professor Frances Widdowson who was recently assaulted while trying to discuss the veracity of the Kamloops claim with students and the public at the University of Winnipeg. Thankfully many reels of video footage were captured so the extent of the breakdown of civilization that took place on campus has been well documented. During the chaos the police were called but never came. Disgracefully, one of the activists who assaulted Professor Widdowson was later seen smiling with Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew. There had been calls on social media for Kinew to apologize to Professor Widdowson for what happened at the University of Winnipeg, however, the photo below illustrates an apology from Kinew is unlikely, as is one from the Chief of the Winnipeg police.
To echo the words of Professor Widdowson, “Wake Up” people. Canada is really going through it. It is obvious where the source of the division and animosity is coming from. Obvious, that is, to anyone not yet riddled with the guilt-virus of Truth and Reconciliation or manipulative tear-jerking Orange Shirt and Red Dress propaganda. The source of all of this nonsense is the Left and everything that is Leftism, including everything that concerns Orange shirts and (un)Truth and Reconciliation.
To be clear, what is dividing Canadians operates under the broad banner of social justice. It is a Leftist social revolution that is upending social cohesion. Where aboriginal issues are concerned, we see it in Land Acknowledgements and “Land Back,” the illiberal Universal Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People (or DRIPA as it is expressed in B.C. law), Gladue Sentencing guidelines (giving lesser sentences to aboriginal criminals because they are aboriginal), aboriginal gangs and repeat offenders out on bail, unending aboriginal dependence, misappropriation of Canadian taxpayer funds by the billions to service unsustainable, totally dependent, isolated, often dangerous aboriginal reserves, and so much more.
Hearing over and over again about historical wrongs committed by European land-thieving settlers against peaceful, honest, blameless aboriginals, is enough to drive any Canadian who isn’t a historically illiterate unprincipled twit up the wall. Why is there never any thanks extended for the benefits of civilization? Every single aboriginal person in Canada benefits from Western civilization, yet I have never heard a word of awe expressed by an aboriginal about the achievements of the West, or about how aboriginals now live much longer, more fruitful, and peaceful lives then they ever did before contact with Europeans. They no longer get hacked to death by warring tribes, they no longer die from communicable diseases with no vaccines, they no longer starve. There is little appreciation shown for what Westerners have done to lift them out of forms of suffering associated with primitive cultures. And there is no appreciation of the achievement of Western civilization, and never a good or positive word spoken about how aboriginals have benefited from it.
It’s all blame and resentment. The onus is entirely on the side of the non-aboriginals — the “settlers” who pays the bills for a dependent aboriginal population— to adjust, appease, reconcile and accommodate. There is never any talk of aboriginal responsibility. Aboriginals are not blamed for anything, their present circumstances are entirely the fault of the other. What a sad and twisted state of affairs, one that is sure to keep aboriginals dependent, despairing, angry at the majority of Canadians, marginalized, and disconnected from the modern world. Just keep feeding them Truth and Reconciliation agit-prop, and donning the ridiculous orange shirts, and the suffering of the aboriginals, the suffering used by the grifters to extract and misappropriate tax dollars, will perpetuate and expand indefinitely.
A final comment on the lack of political leaders in Canada who criticized Orange Shirt Day. Dallas Brodie as usual has been excellent. She is a force to be reckoned with. She really deserves her own post, so I will wait until then to expand. But in short, she is a warrior who is highly critical of what she calls the “Truth and Reconciliation industry.”
Maxime Bernier, leader of the Peoples Party of Canada, was blunt and honest in his comments regarding Orange Shirt Day. This was not the first time Maxime Bernier has been the soul leader of a federal party to openly criticize the aboriginal industry. He is, quite simply, the only leader of a national party who dares stand up to the dreaded aboriginal lobby. How is that even possible? Canadian conservative leaders across the board have failed the country in this regard. Hopefully some of them will read this, and follow Bernier’s example. This is how it’s done. From X:
On this “National Day for Truth and Reconciliation,” let’s remember that no bodies were found, that the residential schools “genocide” is a hoax, and that reconciliation requires an end to the bs, the victim mentality, the fake white guilt, and the grifting based on it.
Why is that so hard? My best guess is that there are several reasons, lack of principles and cowardice being the big ones. Not surprisingly, Bernier could not escape persecution from the authoritarian Orange Shirts. Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Chief Woodhouse-Nepinak called the cops on him. She wants Bernier arrested for Indian residential school denialism.
I could not approve more of the manner in which Bernier has responded to this obvious attempt to silence his dissenting views. From X:
Chief Woodhouse-Nepinak reacts like typical petty tyrants who think they can use state coercion to shut down political opponents and people they disagree with.
Nothing I wrote can be considered hate crime under current Canadian law — at least until new censorship laws are adopted by the Carney government.
Everything I wrote is true. No bodies were actually found in Kamloops since the 2021 announcement that the remains of 215 “missing children” had been found. There was no genocide.
And does the chief really believe the police can arrest me because I mentioned the bs surrounding this issue, the fake white guilt and the grifting based on it?! Is she against freedom of expression? She’s clearly not fit to be a national leader.
It’s obvious that chief Woodhouse-Nepinak doesn’t care about truth and reconciliation. What she wants is to ban *any* questioning of the narrative that would threaten the flow of billions of tax dollars from Ottawa.”
Bold. Truthful. And correct, especially about the billions of tax dollars. Truth and Reconciliation is a parasitic rent-seeking grift, that is meant to endlessly extract tax-payer funds from the government, while distracting from the very real and serious problems of the poorest and most isolated aboriginal Canadians. From the perspective of those who profit, they have found the perfect grift. The distraction away from the real problems faced by marginalized aboriginals ensures that those problems are never addressed. If they were addressed the source of the grift would disappear.
So suffer on and long, perhaps forever, you most poor and powerless aboriginal people of Canada. Your leaders need bigger mansions and their universities need entirely new buildings constructed for privileged aboriginal students. Not you though, you poor and isolated ones. These mansions and aboriginal student centers are quite lavish and expensive and the neo-tribal elites have big plans to build more of them. You can sit on your reserves, and eek out your simple lives. They will speak often of your suffering at committee meetings where influential decision makers will be so moved as to grant generous bursaries to fuel more construction, orange shirts and Truth and Reconciliation. And of course expenses related to all the things being indigenized will need to be covered. And don’t forget we have unmarked graves to find with our ground penetrating radar machines, all very important and costly work that I’m sure you would agree, or perhaps not, is worth the price of your misery.
Wake up people, civilization in Canada is on the brink of disaster, marginalized aboriginals are left to languish in poverty while others grift off their despair. It is nothing short of third world level corruption and cruelty. Tax payers foot the bill. It’s theft of billions annually from the public purse. Everyone loses except for the grifting rent-seekers of the aboriginal industry. Maxime Bernier and Dallas Brodie cannot be the only Canadian politicians who are getting things right on this. Where are the principled leaders with back-bone and boldness?
I leave you with an image for your nightmares:
Social Justice Indoctrination of children is accomplished in a variety of ways. On Truth and Reconciliation day they all where orange shirts. Also notice the Black Lives Matter and Pride Flags displayed prominently at the front of the indoctrination center. Image via Chanel Pfahl
11 UK cops storm home, drag naked woman from bath— her crime? One text calling her attacker a slur
Merseyside Police defended deploying 11 officers as ‘proportionate’ for public protection
A woman in UK being arrested for a supposed hate crimeGrok
Follow Us
Elizabeth Kinney, a 34-year-old single mother of four from Tranmere, Merseyside, was dragged naked from her bathtub last month when 11 police officers – ten men and one woman – burst into her home to arrest her.
Her crime? While recovering in hospital from a fractured skull and serious injuries inflicted by a male acquaintance, Kinney sent private text messages to a former friend that included the word “faggot” to describe her attacker.
The recipient reported the messages as “grossly offensive.”
On 20 November, Kinney pleaded guilty at Sefton Magistrates’ Court to sending a malicious communication aggravated by homophobic hate. She was fined £364, given a community order and forced to apologise in open court.
No charges have been brought against the man who assaulted her. Appearing on Piers Morgan Uncensored, Kinney described the raid as “terrifying and humiliating.”
Merseyside Police defended deploying 11 officers as “proportionate” for public protection.
Free speech trampled at the University of Victoria. Admin bans visiting prof, Frances Widdowson; cops arrest prof for trespassing on public property; Indians drum and scream to drown out dissent; antifa assault freedom fighters.
very powerful recording of authentic demonic possession caught on video
Honoré Daumier (1808–1879), Two Lawyers Conversing
Despite the commendable efforts of President Donald Trump and Secretary Marco Rubio to alert the American public to the rising tide of free-speech suppression in the EU, Soviet-style legal practices in certain segments of the EU judiciary remain very much alive and kicking. Let us be clear: The Second World War has never really ended; it has merely entered a prolonged verbal conflict, potentially on track to assume again violent and war-like dimensions.
The latest case is that of Martin Pfeiffer, former Austrian editor of the now defunct literary magazine DieAula, who was sentenced on December 3 of this year to four years in prison for “re-engagement in National Socialist activities” under Paragraph 3g of the Prohibition Act (Verbotsgesetz). The magazine rarely dealt with ideological subjects, focusing instead on cultural themes and the idea of empire—topics closely associated with the conservative party in Austria, the FPÖ.
What is striking is that the laws under which Pfeiffer was indicted—particularly Paragraph 3g of the Prohibition Act (Verbotsgesetz), enacted in 1947—date from the period when Austria was still under the joint occupation of the four Allied powers: the Soviet Union, United States, United Kingdom, and France. Moreover, Pfeiffer was prosecuted retroactively for articles he had published between 2005 and 2018—in some cases more than fifteen years earlier. The judiciary in the city of Graz simply brushed aside both the statute of limitations and the principle of nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege (“no crime, no punishment without prior law”). The highly abstract, almost untranslatable compound nouns of German/Austrian legal jargon—Wiederbetätigung (“re-engagement”), Volksverhetzung (“incitement to hatred of the people”), etc., defy precise rendering into English, which only adds to their opacity when viewed through the lens of an American lawyer.
Pfeiffer’s case demonstrates that any dissident author—regardless of his political persuasion or nationality—can be subjected to ex post facto prosecution if the ruling class deems him a nuisance. This tactic of selectively targeting “enemies of the people” was a standard tool of the judiciary throughout former communist Eastern Europe.
In passing, it is worth noting that Pfeiffer’s trial bears a striking resemblance to the many show trials of communist Yugoslavia. In 1984, my late father, a Catholic conservative and former attorney, was sentenced to four years in prison for “hostile propaganda” under Article 133 of the Yugoslav Criminal Code (neprijateljska propaganda, YU-KZ). He had written anonymous critical articles for the London-based Croatian émigré bi-weekly Nova Hrvatska, exposing the communist regime’s harsh repression of the Croatian Catholic Church and culture. He was subsequently adopted as a prisoner of conscience by Amnesty International and championed by U.S. Congressman Tom Lantos, Senator Bob Dole, and several other conservative politicians and journalists, among them Pat Buchanan.
There is a far more scary dimension to Pfeiffer’s story. After 1945, both the United States and the nations of Europe were compelled to adopt the model of the “proposition nation”—an abstract political community defined not by historical continuity, race or shared culture, but by universalist, immigrant-welcoming, open-entry-for-all principles. The mass influx of non-European migrants into the EU over the past decade was therefore entirely predictable: it was the logical, even deliberate, outcome of the post-war Allied strategy to suppress Europe’s historic interethnic tensions by diluting the cultural and racial homogeneity of its peoples. Likewise, the introduction of the Schengen open-border regime in 1985 (fully implemented in the 1990s) was perfectly in accordance with the liberal-capitalist dogma of the “free movement of people and capital.”
Germany was particularly affected by these capitalist open-border policies. As the late German legal scholar Günther Maschke observed, “The German people had to adapt to the constitution, instead of the constitution being adapted to the German people.” German constitutionalism, he continued, has become a kind of “civil religion” in which multiculturalism has replaced traditional national identity with a purely legal construct—what Maschke called an imaginary “Basic Law country.” When this is combined with the quasi-sacralized, unquestionable historical narrative of the Holocaust, the result is a birth of a political entity that should be seen as a “secular theocracy.” Within this framework, the only form of patriotism still tolerated in Germany and Austria is Verfassungspatriotismus—constitutional patriotism.(1)
Victimhood Inversion
Today, core elements of the German and Austrian Criminal Code function in some ways reminiscent of former Soviet criminal law. Germany and Austria must demonstrate, daily, that they can meet their “self-re-education tasks” even more rigorously than its post-WWII mentors. Comparable dynamics exist in other EU member states, where semantic drifts have turned the charges of fascism into an all-purpose label of the ultimate cosmic evil.
Despite the phenomenal rise of right-wing parties across the EU, many judicial institutions—both in Europe and in the United States—remain largely staffed by judges and prosecutors from the post-1968 Marxist-inspired “boomer” generation, along with various former left-wing Antifa activists, modern SJWs and virtue-signalers (2). These judges and prosecutors make little effort to conceal their hatred (and fear) of Trump, while also displaying open hostility toward right-wing populist movements and parties such as the growing AfD in Germany or the FPÖ in Austria. In addition, a network of influential and wealthy non-governmental organizations across Europe, such as the CRIF and LICRA in France, the Amadeu Antonio Stiftung in Germany, and the hard-left DÖW in Austria—operate in a manner comparable to U.S. advocacy groups such as the ADL or the SPLC. Their primary function, very similar to that of the old Soviet people’s commissariats, is to monitor academics, journalists, and public figures suspected of non-liberal ideological transgressions. German nationalists derisively label such snitching NGO outfits Gutmenschen (“do-gooders”); their French counterparts are called bien-pensants. In plain English, these so-called NGOs represent the academic thought police.
Most worrisome, however, is the climate of fear-induced self-censorship among European academics. Many believe that by remaining apolitical, silent and not rocking the boat they will best safeguard their careers and perks—a grave illusion long disproven by dissidents in the former communist countries of East Europe. Sooner or later the thought police will show up on their doorstep regardless of how mute they were in their former political activities.
In the contemporary West, there is no need for gulags or firing squads given that more sophisticated methods of repression have become far more effective: deplatforming, debanking, or even worse, what the French call l’inversion accusatoire—the “reversal of the accusation.” Broadly speaking, this means “victimhood inversion”, a technique once common in the communist judiciary of East Europe: to cover up one’s own mega crimes, one accuses the opposing side of even greater crimes. The dynamic of mutual victimhood inversion is visible today in the conflict between the Hamas and IDF with many more to come shortly.
Many of the legal and rhetorical tactics recently deployed against President Trump were pioneered decades ago in the multi-ethnic Soviet Union and throughout the formerly communist Eastern Europe. Consequently, European prosecutors and media outlets eagerly reach for the same communist shut-up nouns—“Nazi,” “Ustasha,” “antisemite,” “white supremacist,” “racist”—in order to dehumanize political dissenters, while almost never mentioning the millions who perished under communist regimes between 1945 and 1950. President Trump is surely well aware of these legal and semantic shifts having himself endured similar “lawfare” waged and staged by his domestic enemies. The long-term outcome of this judicial parody in both the EU and the United States is entirely predictable: growing mutual distrust, escalating interracial and interethnic conflict, institutional breakdown, and, ultimately, the collapse of the System.
Notes:
Günther Maschke, Das bewaffnete Wort (Wien und Leipzig: Karolinger Verlag, 1997), p.74.
Alain de Benoist, “Die Methoden der Neuen Inquisition,” in Schöne vernetzte Welt (Tübingen: Hohenrain Verlag, 2001), p. 190–205.
Canada is not simply “off track.” It is developing a two-tier justice system — one harshly punishing the peaceful, law-abiding citizen, while turning a blind eye to violent criminals and politically inconvenient offenders.
The government’s priorities are not your safety. Their priorities are control, optics, and narrative management.
Michael’s Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
And every new incident — every headline — confirms it.
Part I — The Government’s War on Law-Abiding Canadians
While crime rises across the country, the Trudeau government is laser-focused on one group:
legal gun owners.
Bill C-21 — The Handgun Freeze
Bill C-21 froze the sale, purchase, and transfer of handguns. Overnight, millions of responsible, vetted Canadians were told:
“You may never buy or sell a handgun again. Your property is now trapped.”
Only existing owners can possess them. No new generations can enter the sport. The culture is being choked out intentionally.
The Arbitrary Rifle Bans
First, the AR-15. Then hundreds of other rifles and shotguns.
Now the Liberals are openly rumbling about banning the SKS and other common hunting rifles relied on by farmers, rural communities, and northern families.
This wasn’t about crime. It was about disarmament.
The most vetted people in the country — PAL holders — are treated as ticking time bombs, while real criminals laugh at Ottawa’s theatrics.
Part II — When Criminals Do It, Government Looks Away
Here is where Canada’s justice system breaks down entirely.
When ordinary Canadians make a mistake, enforcement is instant.
But when actual criminals put the public in danger, enforcement is slow, hesitant, or nonexistent.
Case 1 — Illegal Shooting on a Public Bridge (Huntsville / Georgian Bay)
Videos circulated widely showing a group of men firing rifles from a snowmobile trail bridge:
multiple shots into the water
bridge rails struck
property damage
dangerous discharge near trails
The OPP appealed for help. The videos are clear. The faces are clear. The actions are reckless.
And yet — weeks passed with no swift arrests, no press conferences, no national outrage.
The media had no problem plastering the faces of peaceful protesters across the country for honking horns — but actual gunfire off a public bridge barely got a shrug.
If a licensed hunter or sport shooter fired a single round illegally, he’d lose his PAL, his property, and maybe his freedom.
But this? Silence — except from the public.
Case 2 — Caught With a Loaded Handgun… and the Charges Vanish
was found in possession of a loaded handgun — the kind of offence that, for any ordinary Canadian gun owner, would mean:
years in prison,
a lifetime firearms ban,
and their name smeared across the media.
Instead, something very different happened.
Crown prosecutors withdrew all the gun charges after a self-defense narrative was raised. The Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights (CCFR) highlighted the case publicly, pointing out how astonishing it is that someone caught with a loaded illegal handgun can walk away with no firearms conviction at all, while licensed owners are destroyed over paperwork and technicalities. instagram.com+1
Ask yourself:
Would a licensed PAL holder ever get that kind of mercy?
Would a farmer, hunter, or sport shooter caught with a loaded restricted firearm get charges dropped like that?
Or would they be thrown under the bus as an example, to “send a message”?
This is exactly what a two-tier justice system looks like:
If you are a vetted, law-abiding gun owner: mandatory minimums, seizures, lifetime bans.
If you’re in a politically sensitive situation with an illegal loaded handgun: the state suddenly discovers “nuance” and “context.”
The government calls C-21 and their bans “common sense gun control.” What we’re actually seeing is selective gun enforcement — brutal on the peaceful, strangely gentle on the truly dangerous.
Case 3 — Homeowner Defends Against Crossbow Intruder… and HE Gets Charged
A homeowner is confronted by an armed intruder wielding a crossbow. In his own home. On his own property. Defending his own life.
A fight breaks out. The intruder is injured.
And guess who stands trial?
Not the attacker. Not the armed criminal.
The homeowner.
Canada’s justice system now treats self-defense as more suspicious than criminal aggression.
During the Convoy, the Trudeau government weaponized financial institutions:
seized bank accounts
froze insurance
threatened employment
blacklisted donors
Meanwhile, officials openly admit they’ve “given up” trying to recover billions in CERB and COVID fraud because it would be too hard.
The state hunts the innocent and ignores the guilty.
Case 6 — Daniel Senecal: Raped and Nearly Murdered a 3-Year-Old Girl
After Serving Only 12 Months for Sexually Assaulting a 12-Year-Old BoyIn March 2024, Daniel Senecal was sentenced to just 18 months in jail for sexually assaulting a sleeping 12-year-old boy and choking him. He walked free after only 12 months thanks to Canada’s automatic statutory release rules.Five months later — August 30–31, 2025 — the registered sex offender broke into a Welland home through a bedroom window and committed a horrific, hours-long sexual assault on a 3-year-old girl. He choked her unconscious to silence her screams and used a screwdriver in the attack. The toddler required emergency reconstructive surgery and will carry lifelong physical and psychological scars.Senecal now faces six charges including aggravated sexual assault on a child under 16, sexual interference, break-and-enter, and assault by choking. He is finally being held without bail — but only after irreversibly destroying another innocent child’s life.Contrast with Tamara Lich and Chris Barber (“mischief” case
)
Tamara Lich (a Métis grandmother) and Chris Barber (a Saskatchewan trucker) organized peaceful protests against vaccine mandates in Ottawa in 2022.
Their alleged crime: “mischief” and “counselling mischief” for blocking streets with trucks and bouncy castles.
Crown prosecutors demanded a combined 18+ years in prison — 8–10 years each — more time than many child rapists receive in Canada.
The trial has dragged on for over two years, cost taxpayers tens of millions, and still has no verdict as of December 2025.
Justice demands: → Peaceful honking and dancing = up to a decade in federal prison → Violently raping a toddler months after early release for raping another child = 12 months actually served
One is treated as the most dangerous threat to Canadian society imaginable. The other was released early to prey again. This is not justice. This is a system that punishes citizens for speaking while protecting monsters who destroy children.
**Part III — Self-Defense for Canadians? Illegal.
Weapons for Criminals? Accommodated.**
Canadians are prohibited from carrying:
pepper spray
bear spray for protection
any defensive tool whatsoever
A Canadian woman walking to her car at night has fewer rights than the criminals she fears.
Meanwhile, certain groups retain exemptions for ceremonial blades and other items — and the justice system appears terrified of enforcing laws evenly when “optics” might be uncomfortable.
This isn’t equality. It’s political cowardice disguised as tolerance.
Freedom Doesn’t Disappear Overnight — It Erodes Piece by Piece
Every collapsing nation follows the same pattern:
criminal justice loses neutrality
enforcement becomes political
law-abiding citizens become scapegoats
criminals sense weakness and flourish
property rights crumble
self-defence becomes forbidden
speech is controlled
government power fills the vacuum
Canada is deep into this cycle already.
Our rights are not being taken in one dramatic moment. They’re being eroded slowly, until nothing remains.
And once the foundation collapses, it’s too late to rebuild.
Now Is the Time to Say NO
No to arbitrary gun bans. No to selective enforcement. No to political prosecutions. No to a government that fears its citizens but excuses criminals.
We must speak up now — before the final blow lands and our rights to Life, Liberty, and Property collapse with it.
