Patty retweeted
After Years Of Division, Is Canada Rebuilding?🛠️ - mailchi.mp/50ee5d801be1/is-t…
Patty retweeted
It is a testament to her insensitivity and truculence that she feels it's important to post this during the biggest surge in Jew-hatred since World War II.
It says little about anyone else, but it says plenty about her.
#cdnpoli
Patty retweeted
Ever wonder why far-left socialists/communists and religious Islamists are marching together under the Palestinian flag?
That’s the "Red-Green Alliance" red represents the leftists, green represents their ideological opposite political islamists.
But they have united under a shared rule… the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Their target? Pretty obvious at this point. Western capitalism, institutional power, and traditional democratic laws.
The best part? Governments are now completely paralyzed by the very "cancel culture" and equity frameworks they legislated into existence to get global applause for how “compassionate” and “virtuous” they were. If authorities crack down on the chaos, they risk being labeled the "oppressor" inside their own system.
Any government who still refuses to crack down on this attempted overthrow of the very system we have all benefited from. A system of liberty and prosperity that the third world remains the third world for not embracing… is a government no longer working for its citizens. By standing by, and still trying to cash in on the hollow moral superiority and virtuous points, they prove they are not the solution but an active part of the problem.
Patty retweeted
很多人以为，叫醒一个被洗脑的人，只要把铁证拍在他面前就行。
前克格勃特工尤里·贝兹梅诺夫（Yuri Bezmenov）几十年前就拆穿过这种天真。
极权洗脑真正摧毁的不是真相，而是人处理真实信息的能力。
事实本身失去了意义。
贝兹梅诺夫把这个过程称为“士气瓦解”。
处于这个状态的人，已经丧失了分辨真伪的基本机能。
哪怕你用海量真实证据、文件、照片淹没他，甚至强行把他拽到苏联指着集中营看，他也绝不会相信。
直到那一脚结结实实踹在他屁股上。
彻底瓦解一个国家为什么要花 15 到 20 年？
因为这是在敌国完整教育一代学生的最短时间。
把敌对意识形态不受挑战地灌进年轻人的脑子里，整整培育三代人。
认知底座一旦被物理焊死，再硬的事实也敲不开。
那些自以为代表进步的大学教授、民权活动家和激进左翼，在整套颠覆机制里究竟算什么？
贝兹梅诺夫给出的定位极度冷酷：工具。
在制造动荡、破坏秩序的阶段，他们冲在最前面拆解社会。
这些人真以为新秩序建立后，自己能顺理成章坐上权力的牌桌。
但结局从来不是加冕。
马列主义者一旦真正掌权，最先被清洗的恰恰是这批狂热的理想主义者。
因为他们懂太多，幻灭之后反弹最烈，会变成新政权最危险的刺头。
夺权后的统治者要的是掠夺和绝对稳定，不再需要任何激进运动。
大罢工停了，所有平权口号一夜清零。
曾经冲锋陷阵的学者、活动家、同性恋者，被成批送去流放、关进监狱、排队枪毙。
用完了。
整套剧本走完四步：思想瓦解、制造动荡、引爆危机、暴力维稳。
等到刺刀下的新秩序彻底落锁，贝兹梅诺夫最后留下的只是一句冷笑：
再见，同志们。
Patty retweeted
GOLDSTEIN: Two prominent journalists say bias against Conservatives in Ottawa is real torontosun.com/opinion/colum…
Patty retweeted
Excellent article.👇
Schools matter.
What we teach our children matters.
Small c conservative values matter.
Our children don’t have any.
spiked-online.com/2026/10/15…
Patty retweeted
Let's be clear, Bob Rae was a disaster when he ran Ontario.
After that, he worked with and supported the Trudeau government which was a disaster for Canada.
Now, he's endorsing Olivia Chow.
Choose wisely Toronto.
Don't follow Bob's advice, he has a bad track record.
Patty retweeted
xitter.cf/trobinsonnewera/status…. He seems to be having a good night though @afneil
Patty retweeted
Wondering what "globalize the Intifada" meant?
This is what it always fucking meant.
WAKE UP.
Patty retweeted
Alberta farmer Neil Hart on CBC this morning: When he collected signatures for the independence petition, more people told him they’d vote yes on Monday but wouldn’t sign — because after the trucker convoy, they don’t want their names attached to anything that could bring government attention and Convoy like political reprisal
“I’m not putting my name on anything, but I will vote where nobody can see what I’m doing.”
He says petition numbers understate support. The real poll is Monday
Patty retweeted
Please read, mark, learn, inwardly digest and share as widely as possible.
A new version of chaos on the horizon to force martial law and cancel the election
the-network-uk.org
@KerryHopkinsTV @CryptoRichYT @the_irascible @TRobinsonNewEra @MontgomeryToms @joerogan @elonmusk @RealDonKeith @danwootton @Iromg
Patty retweeted
🚨𝗙𝗢𝗨𝗡𝗗 𝗜𝗧! | Carney 2012🚨
Before Brookfield
Before U.N
Before Trump
Before Tariffs
Before Trade War
Telling a room of executives that Canada should organize itself to present its infrastructure to China's sovereign wealth funds.
Says it's "a tremendous opportunity."🤔
Patty retweeted
Feds @GCIndigenous tell senators that 578 First Nations are in breach of federal law and a Federal Court ruling that mandate disclosure of financial records.
“You did not compel them to publish?”
— Senator @gignacclement
blacklocks.ca/fed-disclosure…
@SandraPupatello @SenateCA #cdnpoli
Patty retweeted
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
Graham Bell gets @ParksCanada treatment as Monuments Board faults telephone inventor over 1883 views on genetics. Revisionism follows Trudeau directive to root out offending moments of Canada's past.
blacklocks.ca/fed-board-revi… #cdnpoli
Patty retweeted
My dear American friends, yesterday I showed you an email. Today I want to show you what comes after, because history has already written this chapter many times, and every time in blood.
Every Marxist revolution goes after the same first target. Not the army, and not the rich. It goes after the people who think.
Lenin understood it early. In 1922 he put Russia's leading philosophers, scientists and writers on ships and expelled them. Many of those who stayed were shot or sent to the camps. In 1940, in the forest of Katyn, Stalin's secret police executed around 22,000 Polish prisoners: officers, but also doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers and priests. A nation's educated class was killed one by one, each with a bullet in the back of the head.
Mao perfected the method.
In 1956 he launched the Hundred Flowers campaign. "Let a hundred flowers bloom." He invited China's intellectuals to speak freely and to criticize the Party. They believed him, and they spoke. A year later the trap closed. The Anti-Rightist Campaign branded more than half a million people as enemies. Professors, writers, engineers and doctors lost their careers and their families, and many were sent to labor camps they never left.
Mao was proud of it. In 1958 he compared himself to the First Emperor of China, who was infamous for burying 460 scholars alive. Mao boasted that the Communists had buried 46,000.
His masterpiece came in 1966, with the Cultural Revolution. This time he didn't need the police. He used children.
Schools were closed and students became Red Guards. Their teachers were dragged onto stages for "struggle sessions." Their heads were shaved, placards were hung around their necks, and they were forced to kneel while crowds beat and spat on them. In August 1966 Lao She, one of the greatest writers in modern Chinese literature, was beaten by Red Guards. The next day he was found drowned in a lake in Beijing. That same month, at a girls' school in Beijing, students beat their vice principal Bian Zhongyun to death.
Then the revolution entered the home. Children learned a slogan: "Father and mother are dear, but not as dear as Chairman Mao." Sons denounced fathers and daughters denounced mothers. Zhang Hongbing was 16 when he reported his own mother, and she was executed. A child turning on his parents was celebrated as the highest form of virtue.
Once the Red Guards had done the dirty work, Mao discarded them too. From 1968 on, around 17 million young people were sent to the countryside to "learn from the peasants." A whole generation lost its education, its youth and often its sanity. The revolution devours its own children, every single time.
Cambodia, 1975. The Khmer Rouge emptied the cities in days. Glasses, soft hands, speaking French: any of these could mark you as an intellectual, and being an intellectual could get you killed. In four years roughly a quarter of the population was dead.
Look at the pattern, because it never changes. First, convince the young that the world is rotten and the old are guilty. Second, silence or destroy the people who could contradict the story. Third, break the family so that the only loyalty left is to the cause. Fourth, give the young power. Fifth, when they've finished the dirty work, throw them away.
I am not telling you America is China in 1966. I'm telling you the first steps look familiar. Careers are destroyed over a single opinion. Professors sign ideological pledges just to get hired. Children are taught to see their parents as bigots and their country's history as nothing but a list of crimes. Political violence is excused online, and sometimes even celebrated. Every year it gets a little more radical, and every year the people who warn about it are called alarmists.
This is not a left versus right debate. Reasonable people can disagree about tax rates, healthcare or trade, and that's politics. What I'm describing is something else. It's an ideology that has killed tens of millions of people in the last century, and it always starts by promising justice to the young. We should call it what it is: evil.
You fight evil by refusing to become it. Teach real history. Defend free speech, especially for the people you disagree with. Protect the teachers and parents who refuse to bow. Above all, give young people something to own, build and defend, so that no one can sell them the fire.
I come from a continent that has already lived this story. Please don't let your children write the next chapter.
My dear American friends, I've shown you where the disease came from and who sells it. Now I want you to look at this email.
January 5, 2020, 2:44 in the morning. Peter Thiel writes to Mark Zuckerberg, Nick Clegg, Sheryl Sandberg and Marc Andreessen. It became public years later, in a lawsuit between the state of Tennessee and Meta. The subject line is one word: Millennials.
Thiel starts from a number: 70% of Millennials say they are pro-socialist.
Read that again. Seven out of ten young adults in the richest, freest, most innovative country in human history say they want the system that ruined every country that tried it.
And Thiel, one of the sharpest minds in Silicon Valley, says something important. Don't just dismiss them as stupid or brainwashed. Understand why. His answer: when you're crushed by student debt and housing is unaffordable, you have no capital and no way to build any. And if you have no stake in capitalism, you turn against it.
He's right. But follow the thread one step further, because that's where it gets interesting.
Who made college unaffordable? Washington flooded universities with easy federal loans, and universities raised their prices year after year, because they could. The same universities that then taught those students, for four years, that capitalism is the problem.
Who made housing unaffordable? Zoning rules, permits, environmental reviews, endless regulation that makes it nearly illegal to build. Remember Piketty's famous rise of capital? It was mostly housing. Scarcity created by the state.
So here's the full picture. The state creates the scarcity. The universities teach that capitalism caused it. The politicians sell socialism as the cure. The arsonist is selling fire insurance.
That's why 70% is not a natural opinion. No generation wakes up one morning wanting central planning. It takes decades of teaching, a captured culture, and an economy rigged to give young people no stake in it. In a healthy country, that number would trigger a serious public investigation into what American universities have been teaching for fifty years. This is not a debate. It's the result of a long, patient operation, exactly the war of position Gramsci described from his prison cell.
Now let me tell you what history says happens when an ideology captures a generation and turns it against everything that came before.
China, 1966. Mao unleashes the Cultural Revolution and hands it to the youth. Students become Red Guards. Their mission: destroy the "Four Olds," old customs, old culture, old habits, old ideas. Temples, books, art, centuries of history, smashed.
In August 1966, at a girls' school in Beijing, students beat their vice principal, Bian Zhongyun, to death. She was one of the first. Teachers across the country were humiliated, tortured, killed by the children they had taught.
In 1970, a 16-year-old boy named Zhang Hongbing denounced his own mother for criticizing Mao. She was executed. He spent the rest of his life trying to apologize for it.
Children were taught that loyalty to the Party came before loyalty to their parents. Historians estimate the Cultural Revolution killed somewhere between hundreds of thousands and millions of people.
The Soviet Union did it first. It turned a boy named Pavlik Morozov into a national hero for denouncing his father. Generations of Soviet children were raised on his story.
Cambodia, 1975. The Khmer Rouge declare Year Zero. Teenagers with rifles empty the cities. Wearing glasses was enough to mark you as an intellectual. In four years, roughly a quarter of the population was dead.
Every time, the same pattern. Take the young. Teach them that the past is guilty. Teach them that their parents, their teachers, their history are the enemy. Then give them power.
So when you see statues pulled down, words banned, books rewritten, and parents treated as obstacles in their own children's schools, understand what you're looking at. It's not the end of the story. It's the opening act. It always starts with the young, and it always starts with good intentions.
If the West ever gets its Marxist youth revolution, it won't end in Scandinavia. It will end the way it has ended every single time it was tried for real. And we will have learned nothing.
Thiel saw the number. I'm telling you where it leads.
The answer is not to hate the young. It's to give them back a stake in the system. Let them build. Let them buy a home. Make college worth its price or skip it. Let them start companies instead of drowning in debt. A generation that owns something defends it. A generation that owns nothing will burn it down.
I come from your future. Don't let your children write the next chapter of this story.
Patty retweeted
The post below grows more concerning daily. Recent events reveal clear coordination between governments, intelligence agencies, law enforcement, and tech monopolies. The following initiatives serve a single strategy:
Social media bans
Device scanning
In app monitoring
VPN restrictions
App bans in democracies
AI scare campaigns
AI cyberattacks
AI consciousness hype
Religion and AI companies coming together
Arrests for online posts
Anti speech legislation
AI data centres
Age verification
Identity mandates
Eliminating online anonymity
New pornography possession bans
National digital identity applications
Predictive policing
Surveillance cameras
Automated content moderation
These measures advance identical objectives managed by the same network.
The state weaponises these excuses to justify total control:
Online child safety
Child protection
Anti fraud measures
Anti racism campaigns
National security
Immigration control
Anti terrorism
Serious crime prevention
Business survival
Convenience
My investigative pieces outline key operatives and actions, but I've omitted what I believe their ultimate endgame is. High level sources across multiple sectors confirm my hypothesis.
I continue producing investigative reports, yet daily developments outpace publication timelines. Every single day, officials, tech executives, product launches, and intelligence agencies produce fresh evidence that demands thorough exposure. I can't keep up.
I wish I had time to write a book because there's a book inside of me that's dying to get out.
The post below is just a glimmer.
Ursula von der Leyen has confirmed that everyone in the EU will need to use the EU's app for identity authentication before being able to access or post on social media websites.
🇪🇺 As an expert in online child safety, I am here to expose the misinformation and misdirection in von der Leyen's statements.
Today von der Leyen said:
"This is not about whether children can access social media, it is about whether social media can access our children".
💡The first part is true. This isn't about children. It's about surveillance and combating political dissent. A state that can't control its own citizens is more dangerous than a state rife with criminals. The second part is a PR soundbite that politicians are using like a campaign slogan straight out of 1984.
🇪🇺"The question is no longer if children face risks online, but what can we do to give children a safer start online".
💡No. You can't give children a "safer start" online any more than you can offline. In the offline world, the government doesn't enforce curfews or ban children from entering liquor stores, bars or restaurants. That's a parent's responsibility. The digital world should be no different.
🇪🇺"The age verification app is one of the tools to get it done".
💡This is a contradiction because she also said "It won't be foolproof".
🇪🇺"It's easy to use, it is privacy preserving and it is open source".
💡The app was compromised as soon as it was released. "Privacy-preserving" age verification is an oxymoron. You can't verify a person's age without verifying their identity. Where or how that age is shared afterwards is irrelevant.
🇪🇺"This is basically about putting back the power into the hands of parents".
💡More from 1984. The EU is doing the opposite. Parents are having their authority stripped by politicians who think they know better. Many parents are capable and unaffected by peer pressure, and they know how to use parental controls to block any app classified as 13+. Some teens are safe, their parents trust them, and the state has no business overruling that trust.
🇪🇺"We don't give our children keys to the car before they have their licence"
💡Comparing an app to a car is a false equivalence used to justify mass surveillance. Governments don't decide when a young person is ready for car keys, guardians do.
💡Forcing every adult and child into a biometric checkpoint just to use an app or website is not licensing drivers. It's the state seizing everyone's keys, locking the garage, and forcing every driver to ask a private company for permission to take a drive.
💡 This is a gross, unethical overreach that strips authority from parents while imposing state sanctioned identity verification on every adult who doesn't even have a child.
💡Additionally, people who pass a test, obtain a licence and drive a car aren't forced to use an app to constantly authenticate their suitability to drive.
🇪🇺"We do not let them buy alcohol until they are legally allowed"
💡False equivalence. We don't force every person to show ID at a shopping mall entrance just because a few people might buy alcohol with a meal at a restaurant. Some parents are okay with their 12 year-old going to the mall with friends while others aren't. Either way, it's their choice. Whatever irresponsible decisions some parents might make, every adult in the country shouldn't be forced to pay the price.
🇪🇺"It won't be foolproof"
💡This is all the proof we need to show that the EU and every government know that banning social media for teens won't protect them. When pressed by journalists about VPNs being used to circumvent a ban, politicians always state the ban isn't a silver bullet and will take time. The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan went as far as to say "we know it's not the solution".
💡Either age verification works, or it doesn't. As a technical expert in this space, I can tell you there are no additional steps to take and no progress to be made. Either the approach does what it is supposed to do, or it's not fit for purpose. If they claim a bulletproof solution is coming, it can only mean one thing. They intend to ban or restrict VPNs to people who verify their identity.
🇪🇺"It will take time to invite the cultural change that is already taking shape in our society, just as it took time to outlaw drink driving, just as it took time to use seatbelts in the cars. Great change never happens overnight, but when it comes to our safety it is always worth it".
💡Comparing a social media ban and age verification to seatbelts is a completely broken analogy. Seatbelts are a safety feature that protects children while allowing them to travel in a car. A ban doesn't give kids a seatbelt. It kicks them out of the car entirely.
💡Instead of supporting parents who want to guide their own children through the digital world, this heavy-handed law strips away parental authority by banning the apps and websites that many parents are perfectly fine with and actively monitor.
💡Furthermore, enforcing these bans requires biometric age verification, which means forcing millions of adult citizens to scan their IDs, faces or credit cards just to browse the internet. That isn't a common-sense traffic law.
💡It's a digital checkpoint on every street. True safety means teaching kids how to navigate the digital world safely with real guardrails and parental guidance, not burning down digital spaces for everyone under the guise of protection.
🇪🇺☠️ The EU wants to ban teens from social media so every person is forced to verify their identity before they can read, share or post anything online. In their words, this is to protect children from dangerous content.
🇪🇺☠️ The EU wants to enforce "Chat Control" so every app has to monitor everything people say privately inside it, including apps with end-to-end encryption. In their words, this is to protect children from dangerous criminals.
💡Where this ends
🇪🇺 "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever".
George Orwell, 1984.
Patty retweeted
This is a must read. Fran is probably the best journalist working in BC today.
Landowners in Richmond BC were blindsided by the Cowichan ruling. How could BC's top court strip private property protections? After slogging through 12 years of court submissions, testimony and rulings, the answer emerged, but it's not good news for British Columbians. My investigation for @BeatNorthern:
northernbeat.ca/opinion/cowi…
Patty retweeted
💥MAJOR BREAKING: Ottawa scrapped the only rule that required employers to hire Canadians first.
Buried in paragraph two of an IRCC release, employers no longer have to advertise a job, prove no qualified Canadian applied, or pay $1,000 for an LMIA — for a high-wage job offer to count toward permanent residence.
The Labour Market test is gone from the PR route, and verification moves out of ESDC, whose mandate is protecting Canadian workers, and into IRCC, whose mandate is selecting immigrants.
Still think the great replacement is a conspiracy?
