The Daily News from the Art of Liberty Foundation

15 Minute Video: How China Crashed Diamond Prices by 95% (And It's Not Coming Back)

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Sat, 06 Jun 2026 15:00:11 GMT

For 100 years, one company controlled the diamond supply on earth. Then factories in a Chinese province most Americans have never heard of changed everything.

This video traces how Chinese industrial diamond factories dismantled a century-old monopoly, crashed wholesale prices by 95%, and destabilized the economies of entire nations

Min 1:26- By 2019, China was producing 15.4 billion carats of synthetic diamond a year. The overwhelming majority of that output was industrial-grade.

Covered in this video: China’s Cold War era synthetic diamond program, CVD vs HPHT reactor technology, the Henan province supply chain, De Beers financial collapse, Botswana’s economic crisis, the American engagement ring market shift, lab grown resale values, and what this means for anyone buying or holding a diamond in 2026.

Which is Better? CVD vs HPHT Lab Grown Diamonds Explained

CVD Diamond Growing Workshop

Data and sources referenced:

De Beers / Anglo American annual reports and SEC filings (EBITDA, writedowns, production data)
Analyst Paul Zimnisky (wholesale pricing data, market analysis)
Analyst Edahn Golan (lab grown pricing trends)
Natural Diamond Council market reports
Gemdax / Anish Aggarwal industry analysis
FTC compliance letters on lab grown marketing terminology

Raw Carat breaks down jewelry and gemstones with real data, not marketing. New video every other day.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Go paid at the $5 a month level, and we will send you both the PDF and e-Pub versions of Etienne’s new book: To See the Cage Is to Leave It - 25 Techniques the Few Use to Control the Many and a coupon code for 10% off anything in the https://artofliberty.org/store/.

Go paid at the $50 a year level, and we will send you a free paperback edition of Etienne’s new book: To See the Cage Is to Leave It - 25 Techniques the Few Use to Control the Many OR “Government” - The Biggest Scam in History… Exposed! OR a 64GB Liberator flash drive if you live in the US. If you are international, we will give you a $10 credit towards shipping if you agree to pay the remainder.

Support us at the $250 Founding Member Level and get a signed high-resolution hardcover of “Government” - The Biggest Scam in History... Exposed! + Liberator flash drive + a signed high-resolution hardcover of Etienne’s new book: To See the Cage Is to Leave It - 25 Techniques the Few Use to Control the Many + everything else in our “Everything Bundle” of the best in voluntaryist thought delivered domestically. International pays shipping. Our only option for signed copies besides catching Etienne @ an event.

Bot web traffic has overtaken human web traffic, data shows

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Sat, 06 Jun 2026 14:02:44 GMT

By Samantha Elkins

Humans might browse five websites before making a purchase, while an AI service might browse 5,000.

Website traffic from AI agents and bots has eclipsed its human-generated counterpart for the first time, according to Cloudflare, an earlier-than-expected milestone that speaks to AI’s rapid advance and impact.

“Welp, that happened faster than I predicted,” Matthew Prince, co-founder and CEO of Cloudflare, one of the largest internet hosting services, wrote Thursday on X.

“Thought it would be end of 2027, then early 2027,” he continued, “but agentic traffic growing so fast that bots have now passed human traffic online for the first time in the Internet’s history.”

The rise is attributed to the continued proliferation of AI agents, largely autonomous programs that use tools that collaborate with high-level programs and data, with little human feedback.

Cloudflare, which has a feature to display bot versus human-generated search requests, says 57.4% of requests are now initiated by bots, compared with 42.6% coming from humans.

Humans might browse five websites before making a purchase, however, while an AI service might browse 5,000 websites.

The exact day the AI agents and bots surpassed human activity remains unclear. In response to a comment under his X post, Prince wrote that the data is “a bit messy (so charts are too). But clearly on the other side now.”

In an interview with NBC News, Prince said he remains “stunned by the rate of growth” of nonhuman traffic online and explained that the increasing rate of bot traffic could have widespread implications.

“The web actually shrank” from 2015 to 2025, he said. The Pew Research Center backed this fact in a report that says that 38% of webpages that existed in 2013 were no longer accessible a decade later due to deleted websites and inactive links.

The flip started in the last six months, he said, “and we’ve seen now just exponential growth of the web, and really interesting, creative things, and that again is being powered by AI.”

In response to the news, some commenters have brought up the “dead internet theory,” which holds that due to the rise of AI, the internet will one day largely be composed of bots interacting with one another, and humans and their content will largely be rendered irrelevant. Prince said he thinks the growing capabilities of AI actually are proving the theory wrong.

“I think a lot of people kind of have said, ‘Well, this has proved sort of the dead internet theory.’ I think that’s actually kind of wrong at a lot, a lot of levels,” he said. “You don’t need to be a web designer, you don’t need to know how to program, in order to create these things anymore. It’s given access to content creation to a much broader audience.”

The rise in bot traffic also raises questions about how the internet’s business model will operate in the future, Prince said, because “bots don’t click on ads.”

Prince noted that one way to reconstruct the internet business model may be charging bots for access to digital users’ content. If implemented effectively and correctly, he said, “we actually might be on the cusp of the golden age of the internet.”

This model could make the web free for the humans again, Prince said. “I think that’s actually kind of an idealistic outcome that we’re trying to figure out if we can help catalyze,” he said.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Canada is Dead: Top 20 reasons why I’m leaving permanently

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Sat, 06 Jun 2026 10:01:55 GMT

By Dan Fournier

“Be like water, my friend” – Bruce Lee

This post is segmented as follows:

Since this is a rather long post and I know that most people are very busy and may not have the time to read it all, I am posting a “in a nutshell” summary (a few sentences) for each section hereunder with the same copied atop each respective section. Thus, one can read the general gist of these 20 reasons within just a few minutes. In each section further below, I offer a “details, analysis & evidence” part which outlines the nitty gritty of each for further scrutiny and contemplation.

Feel free to add your own reasons for leaving (or wanting to leave Canada) in the Comments section of this post below.

In a nutshell (a quick summary of the 20 reasons)

# 1. – Taxation Hell

While Canada doesn’t necessarily have the highest taxation rates in the world or OECD countries, its citizens bear a significant tax burden which include many indirect taxes and even taxes over taxes. I’ve identified nearly 20 different types of taxes Canadians need to pay. On average, Canadians forego nearly half of their yearly earnings just to pay these taxes.

# 2 – Rampant Inflation & Increases in the Cost of Living

Since the COVID-19 Pandemic, costs of goods and services – particularly food, have risen dramatically straining family budgets and increasing worries about making ends meet. Over a 25% of Canadians now rely on food banks for sustenance and nourishment. This is largely due to inflation which is brought about by dramatic increases in our nation’s money supply coupled with reckless government spending.

# 3 – Unaffordable Housing

There are many factors which have contributed to the current state of unaffordable housing in Canada. These include increases in construction costs and surging immigration but to name a few. As the property market has been severely inflated over the past few decades, so have property taxes. Over the course of a twenty year period, home owners can easily pay $100,000 in property taxes. The trend is clear. Fewer and fewer Canadians can now afford to buy a home, leaving them with the lesser option which is to rent a flat whereby those funds are gone forever.

# 4 – Crumbling Infrastructure

Many factors have contributed to Canada’s failing and crumbling infrastructure. Roads, railways, utilities, and energy systems have all been negatively impacted by government incompetence, mismanagement, over-regulation, and the pursuit of nonsensical net-zero energy policies. A recent report from the Canadian Infrastructure Council revealed that over $126 billion in public infrastructure is in “poor or very poor condition.” And the structural reasons for these failures are not being addressed, leaving the country’s infrastructure on par with that of third-world nations.

# 5 – Exodus/Emigration, Brain Drain, Lack of Innovation

Emigration out of Canada is up sharply in the last few years. The reasons are numerous including high cost living, unaffordable housing, and lack of career opportunities for talented individuals. In 2025 alone, Canada saw an outflow of over 120,000 citizens and permanent residents. The lack of innovation and poor business environment are also contributing to the exodus.

# 6 – Broken Government with Traitorous, Sellout Politicians

Like with many other Western governments, Canada suffers from what we call regulatory capture. This basically involves our politicians being compromised to serve outside interests rather than those of their constituencies. Moreover, they serve these outside interests through a panoply of deceptive means and tactics such as infusing rights-stripping clauses into bills which they often don’t even write themselves. Furthermore, the salaries and yearly raises they enjoy, along with hefty pensions (for life) raises additional concerns as to what exact benefits they are providing to everyday Canadians in performing their duties.

# 7 – Sinister Prime Ministers

Prime Ministers in Canada exert a large amount of power and influence particularly through their Cabinets and oath obligations to the Privy Council. The previous prime minister, Justin Trudeau exerted a lot of over-reaching, dictatorial-like powers during the COVID-19 Pandemic. He illegally invoked the Emergencies Act to crush protesters during the Freedom Convoy in Ottawa. And, similarly, his father, Pierre Trudeau also exercised such power during his tenure. The current prime minister, Mark Carney, has been unimpededly exercising his duties amidst a panoply of financial conflicts of interests. All three have demonstrated immoral and traitorous behaviour which has irreparably harmed Canada and its citizens and residents for years to come.

# 8 – Health Death Care Tyranny

While the Canadian health care system is lauded as one of the best in the Western world, the reality on the ground very much proves that it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. Waiting times in emergency rooms and for medical procedures have been steadily increasing over the past few decades, leaving patients with worsening health conditions with many dying before receiving needed treatment and interventions. Waiting times for getting access to a family doctor is also common; and this, amidst recent dramatic increases in immigration which has further strained hospitals and the health care system as a whole. Furthermore, worrisome trends such as the increase in state-sanctioned euthanasia (MAiD) and suppression of alternative health treatments are exacerbating the problem.

# 9 – Political Targeting & Lawfare

The COVID-19 Scamdemic truly unmasked tyrants posing as our political leaders, as they showed their true colours employing some of the most abusive, unconstitutional, and reprehensible actions against everyday Canadians and small business owners. Their range of morally deficient tactics stretched from using lawfare, censorship, bullying, unlawfully freezing bank accounts, de-banking dissidents, establishing shady tribunals, to using crushing and over-excessive violence against peaceful protesters during the 2022 Freedom Convoy. They’ve actually been found guilty of some of these offences in formal inquiries and in federal court, yet remain mostly immune from actual denunciations or penalties.

# 10 – Politicised Law Enforcement

During the pandemic and Freedom Convoy, countless members of law enforcement across Canada were used to enforce mandates and measures that were in stark contradiction to the supreme law of the land (the Canadian Constitution). The vast majority of rank and file police officers were just “following orders,” largely unaware that they were in fact curtailing upon the Constitutional and Charter rights of Canadians. Blatant instances of the politicisation of law enforcement ensued which further eroded the impartial rule of law in Canada, decreasing trust in the very institution which is designated to uphold and enforce laws in our country.

# 11 – Bank of Canada Takeover by the BIS

Money creation and issuance is a well-kept secret, as is how a private foreign entity exerts its control over our central bank – the Bank of Canada. The careless action taken on behalf of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in 1974 changed the course of history in Canada. Since then and with the uncontrolled expansion of our monetary supply, our external debt burden skyrocketed to astronomical, unsustainable, heights. And this burden is laid on the shoulders of Canadians who have to foot the related bill for servicing this debt in the form of interest payments. Dramatic increases in cost of living suffered by Canadians in the last decade or so is symptomatic of this predicament. Without any changes to this perverse monetary system, the problem will inevitably only be compounded and get worse each and every year.

# 12 – Unsustainable, Trillion Dollar Debt Burden

Canada’s federal debt grew steadily between 5% and 10% per year until 1975 when it began to explode; growing for the next 12 years at more than 20% per year. It broke the $100 billion mark in 1981 and the $200 billion mark in 1985. It broke the $300 billion mark in 1988, the $400 billion barrier in 1991 and the $500 billion level in 1994. Fast forward to this year and it has nearly reached $1.3 trillion. Interest payments on this gargantuan debt is borne by you, the taxpayer. For over the past decade, the Canadian Liberal Government has run consistent budget deficits, each in the billions of dollars which further increases its need to borrow. The budget deficit for this year will increase sharply to $68.5 billion. It is all completely unsustainable – at least according to the current Director General, Economic and Fiscal Analysis for the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO).

# 13 – Protecting Oligopolies & Stifling Competition

There are certain markets in Canada that are dominated by a handful of large, but very dominant and powerful, corporations. These are referred to as oligopolies. Though many exist in Canada, banks, telecommunication companies, and airlines are sectors that affect all Canadians. Players in these markets control the lion’s share of their respective markets, leaving consumers with less choice and higher costs. The situation is worsened by unfair practices, regulatory ineptitude, and barriers to entry which prevent and discourage new entrants into these markets. Inevitably, such models stifle competition and further consolidates power in the hands of a few to the detriment of the many.

# 14 – Hub for Globalist Agendas

Canada has long been a testing and implementation ground for heinous agendas perpetrated by globalist and corporatist organisations such as the United Nations and the World Economic Forum (WEF), but to name a few. Too numerous are such agendas to list here, but those pertaining to public-private swindles, regulatory capture, replacement migration, and the great climate hoax are worth exposing, as they have caused a tremendous amount of damage to the Canadian economy and the livelihoods of citizens and residents.

# 15 – Geoengineering Crimes

Most Canadian citizens are unaware that geoengineering and weather modification has been taking place in Canada since at least the 1950s. These practices vary in purpose with one stated as a need to cool down the planet (on a very false and flawed pretext of “Global Warming” or “Climate Change”) through the use of cloud seeding (with toxic metals) using aircraft, among other methods. Chemtrails is a term often used to describe this practice. And while it is often assigned the faux label as some kind of conspiracy, it has been taking place for well over a decade across the country with devastatingly negative impacts on the health of Canadians and to our natural environment.

# 16 – Attack on God & Christianity

Though the very roots of Canada were founded on the Supremacy of God with early Christian colonisers and settlers laying moral foundations upon which the fabric of our society has been based, things are rapidly changing. The separation of church and state was largely spearheaded and brought about by Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in the 1960s who sought to replace the institution with a more secular model. God and religion – particularly Christianity – in Canada have been progressively and systematically removed from key societal pillars such as education, taking morality and social cohesion along with them. At least one federal bill introduced in Parliament seeks to remove constitutional religious rights of Canadians and is nearing its final approval and passage. Should it pass, even quoting from the Bible or a religious text could land you in prison.

# 17 – Pro-War Stances, NATO Follies

While most are focused on how the United States of America is engaged in starting and supporting endless wars, many Canadians would be surprised to know the extent to which the Canadian Government has been also involved, forking over billions of taxpayer funds to the current wars in Ukraine and Israel as well as previous ones. Canada’s financial and military support for Israel is long in the making, and one of its former prime minister from the 1960s also had a huge part in the colonisation and ongoing occupation of Palestine and even its partitioning. Canada’s financial contributions to NATO have proved a heavy burden on not only the state’s coffers, but also on boasting of its [disingenuous] reputation as a “peacemaker” country.

# 18 – The Presstitute Mainstream Media

It has become abundantly apparent in recent years how the mainstream media in Canada finds itself in alignment with government policies and diktats rather than serving as its watchdog or the fifth estate. This phenomenon was particularly acute during the COVID-19 Pandemic, as has been exposed by a former seasoned veteran journalist who dared to reveal their deceitful ways.

# 19 – Indoctrination of our Children in a Corrupt Education System

Though Canada has long been considered an education beacon in the Western world, the fact is that its education system, at all levels, has been gradually and steadily degrading over the past few decades. Classroom environments and curricula are increasingly geared towards methods of indoctrination rather than discovery and learning based on questioning and critical thinking. The intention is to create docile and unquestioning students, readying them for their place as obedient subjects in modern society. In recent times, more serious issues such as indoctrinating gender ideology among not only students, but also teaching and administrative staff has had devastating consequences on our youth, not excluding sexual abuse and exploitation.

# 20 – There is no future in Canada for our youth

Canada has been through some dramatic changes in the past few decades. Though many of these changes have negatively affected all Canadians, it is perhaps our youth who will ultimately pay the greatest price. From the unsustainable debt burden they will carry to an unaffordable housing market to grim employment prospects, the youth of our nation sit before a dire predicament. Many reasons outlined in this treatise have propounded the current sombre impasse our country finds itself in. What hope does our youth have by staying in such an unpromising setting? Are they not better off packing their bags and taking their chances elsewhere? Or, are they doomed to stay on the train to nowhere that is modern Canada?

Introduction

Back in 2008. I already saw the economic writing on the wall for Canada with its declining trajectory. I had thus decided to sell my house, pack my bags, leave a relatively good teaching job in a college in Quebec, and head off to teach in China.

I lived and worked there from 2008 until late 2021 and enjoyed a very good standard of living filled with enriching experiences. I got married there and had my son.

Amidst the madness that was the global COVID-19 Scamdemic, I decided to come back to Canada in November of 2021 with my wife and son to resettle in my native province of Quebec.

Sadly, upon my return, and though I had returned a few times to Canada whilst living abroad, I quickly realised that this country had dramatically changed. Admittedly, I no longer recognised it – not in terms of its natural beauty which remained mostly intact – but of its character and spirit.

I readily profess that I got some kind of reverse culture shock, as I described in my first Substack post, Canada had become unrecognisable to me:

“This great nation was no longer the one whereby its citizens were openly fun-loving, sociable, free, proud, and as considerate as before (at least for the most part); this really saddened me (and still does!) Instead, what I returned to was divisiveness, bitterness, anger, along with people who have seemed to have forgotten the values that underpinned what it really means to be Canadian.”

The Canada I returned to was not the same as the one I once grew up in.

That Canada is gone; it doesn’t exist anymore.

After four years of being back in Canada, I must admit that things have only gotten worse.

And by worse, I mean pretty much for all the important pillars such as social cohesion, the economy, politics, health, education, and moral uprightness.

As I transitioned from being a long time teacher into an inquisitive independent journalist, I gradually uncovered layer upon layer of rot and ugliness that underpins said societal structures, particularly in politics and government.

Despondently, I increasingly witnessed the ugliness surrounding the despotic and tyrannical nature and rule of this nation’s government and many key institutions.

Moreover, I find the country’s predicament to be morbidly irreparable.

Through my work over the past four years, I have meet countless freedom-oriented individuals who have unswervingly dedicated themselves to reverse the dark course of our nation.

To this day, I continue to cherish their work and our common fight.

However, realistically speaking, I don’t foresee a significant deviation or reversal in the oppressive, authoritarian, and tyrannical course our nation’s so-called leaders have traitorously and immorally embarked on.

They, along with high-level members of our key institutions – be it in the judiciary, law enforcement, health care, education, or what not – have sold out to the same masters our politicians are beholden to.

So, as we move forward in 2026, I have decided to once again leave Canada. But this time, for good.

As it stands and moving forward, my son has no future in this [once wonderful] country.

Same goes for me.

Same goes for my wife.

I am still grateful for what Canada has provided, particularly during my youth.

For decades in the 20^th Century it was a remarkable country filled with peace, joy, and opportunity – the envy of other nations which attracted immigrants seeking a better quality of life.

But that Canada no longer exists. It has been systematically destroyed over the course of the past few decades.

Through my inner sense of duty, along with my writings, articles, and interviews, I will continue to fight and do my humble part to try to restore freedom to Canada as best I can.

Through this post, I hope to convey a sense of urgency and duty among the citizenry.

Nothing will ever get fixed if we ignore our sternest problems.

Instead, we must carefully examine them, seriously contemplate on how they can be resolved, and, most importantly, take decisive actions to remedy them. In the absence of these, Canada is a doomed nation.

Reason #1 – Taxation Hell

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

The tax burden on Canadian residents has long been hefty.

According to the Fraser Institute, Canadians celebrate Tax Freedom Day on June 8, 2025; in other words, on June 8 which is nearly half way through the year Canadians finally started working for themselves. What they earned up to that point has been forked over to various government agencies in the form of taxes. In 2025 for instance, the average Canadian family will earn $158,533 in income and pay an estimated $68,266 in total taxes (43.1%).

This past July, the Fraser Institute determined that an average Canadian family spent 42.3% of income on taxes—more than on housing, food and clothing combined (see PDF report here).

In Canada, there exists a seemingly interminable lineup of direct and indirect taxes. Indirect taxes are those you may not perceive such as carbon taxes added to fuel charges.

Canadians are subjected to a boundless array of taxes including but not limited to the following:

Federal & provincial Income tax
Federal & provincial Sales tax
Property tax (see calculator)
Land transfer tax (see also here)
Capital Gains tax (that vary from 22.3% to 27.4% depending on the province)
Taxes on Dividends (that vary from 28.3% to 49% depending on the province)
Estate (inheritance) tax (50% of capital gains)
Probate fees / Estate administration taxes (to validate wills)
Gift taxes
Luxury tax
Kiddie tax
Sin taxes (Excise Duties) (on alcohol, tobacco products, etc.)
Gasoline taxes (including Carbon taxes)
Fuel Consumption Levies (see also here)
Carbon taxes
Import Duties / Customs Tariffs
Health care financing
Recycling and Eco fees
Air Travellers Security Charge & Airport Improvement Fees (AIFs) (see examples for Air Canada airline here and an airport such as Toronto Pearson here)

The above list is non-exhaustive and doesn’t include other all existing indirect or hidden taxes.

The list above provides a bleak and depressing reminder of the extent to which we are over-taxed in Canada.

Reason #2 – Rampant Inflation & Increases in the Cost of Living

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

The increases in the cost of living and our rampant inflation in Canada are largely attributable to reasons outlined in sections (Reasons) #11 & #12 below.

Increases in the prices of goods and services have been sternly pronounced in recent years, particularly since the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Food prices, including meals at restaurants, have been particularly steep. Food now comprises a hefty share of families’ monthly cost burdens with many struggling to put food on the table.

According to Food Banks Canada, in March of 2025, there were nearly 2.2 million visits to food banks in Canada — the highest number in history. The average number of visits to food banks per month sits at just over 2.1 million.

Moreover, food bank usage has doubled since March of 2019.

Soaring food prices, among other price increases, are largely due to the COVID-19 era increase in the money supply that was the policy of the Trudeau Government which will be explained in later sections. In short, when you increase the number of dollars in circulation by nearly 50%, the purchasing power of each dollar decreases significantly.

That is not the only explanation for increases in prices, as other factors such as carbon taxes, for instance, have also exacerbated the situation. Increases in energy costs such as gasoline and fuel pretty much increases the costs of all goods since most need to be transported at some stage.

In terms of raw numbers, Food Banks Canada also shows that food insecurity has now reached an all-time high, affecting a quarter of Canadians, or almost 9 million people, including over 2 million children.

According to Statistics Canada, over a quarter of the country’s population have experienced some level of food insecurity, an increase of nearly 1.3 million people from the previous year.

Needless to say, these number are staggering. Over 25% of the population are struggling with the costs of food.

I have mostly focused on food costs in this section, but of course the cost of so many other goods and services have soared in recent years, largely due to the same factors along with increases in wages and labour costs.

For more details the sources of what has been causing this inflation and hefty rises in cost of living, feel free to consult (Reasons) #11 & #12 below.

Reason #3 – Unaffordable Housing

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

Housing costs in Canada are now at highly inflated levels with the average selling price being about $663,828, according to Canadian Housing Market Report data from March of 2026.

Needless to say, that makes the purchase of a house for first-time buyers extremely difficult – even for professionals with a university education and a decent paying job.

In particular, the vast majority of young adults and first-time house buyers will have to take out mortgages (note the term mortgage literally means “death pledge”) of hundreds of thousands of dollars over 15 to 25 years at nearly 5% interest rate.

For instance, if a couple borrows $400,000 for 25 years at an interest rate of 5%, they will pay close to $300,000 in interest payments atop the original $400,000 of the principal capital which amounts to nearly $700,000 in total cost.

This is a death pledge indeed.

Over the past several decades many factors have contributed to increases in property prices. One of the main drivers is the expansion of our money supply (as described further below in this work) which has caused a tremendous amount of inflation. In other words, increases in costs of building materials and services have greatly impacted prices of homes. This is in addition to increased energy costs, a constrictive regulatory environment in the construction industry, speculative buying (especially in British Colombia), and ballooning population growth (through pronounced migration since 2021 – see ‘Replacement Migration’ in Section #14 below for more details).

Many of these factors could have been better mitigated had the federal government not intervened in these respective areas.

Another less talked about phenomenon that has arisen from these trends has been the yearly increases in property taxes heavily carried or imposed on home owners. Inevitably, when your property value becomes re-assessed by the municipality, usually to the high side, you have to pay more in taxes. Suppose you have to pay $5,000 in property taxes a year; well, in just a decade that would amount to a hefty $50,000. Keep you home for 20 years and that tax bill balloons to a mammoth $100,000.

There exists a word to describe this: theft.

And Canada is really good at it.

Sure many would argue that municipalities use these funds to improve city infrastructure and services. Yeah, that might be true to some extent. But ask yourself whether your municipality has been adding services over the past several years or have been decreasing them. As a personal example, I remember in my city of Sherbrooke a few decades ago the garbage and recycling trucks came for pick up every week. But in recent times, they only come about every three weeks. More taxes, less services.

Add the fact that if you own a second home in Canada and you sell it, you will be required to pay a capital gains tax on the proceeds of your sale.

More theft by your beloved government. How nice of them.

I think you get the point.

The moral of the story here is that these burdens no longer make home ownership in Canada a feasible endeavour.

The net result is that the large majority of Canadians will have to rent a place instead of buying one.

Accordingly, they won’t be able to secure real estate wealth nor capital appreciation, leaving them poorer than if they could own their own home.

This also doesn’t bode well for young couples to start a family, as housing costs alone account for a big chunk of their monthly expenses.

Smaller or no families equals decreased economic wealth.

It’s a vicious cycle and it is rather challenging to envisage these trends reversing anytime soon.

Reason #4 – Crumbling Infrastructure

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

The inaugural report from the Canadian Infrastructure Council (November 28, 2025) reveals that over $126 billion in public infrastructure is in “poor or very poor condition.”

The Canadian Infrastructure Council was tasked with figuring out just where Canada’s housing enabling infrastructure stands. Launched in December 2024, the council was specifically directed to examine three public infrastructure sectors:

water and wastewater;
solid waste management; and
public transit and active transportation.

It’s not that the Canadian Government has not invested in infrastructure, but rather the poor and ineffective manner in which it has done so.

Participants in the evaluation noted that Canada’s infrastructure financing and funding programs tend to favour established design standards, delivery models and risk-averse practices which can stifle innovation. In other words, regulations surrounding how funding is allocated for infrastructure programs are burdensome.

Moreover, procurement (of related goods and services) models tend to favour “lowest-cost bidder(s),” are short-term focused, and fail to attract investment as the benefits are long-term, dispersed, or difficult to quantify.

Much more can be added about the findings, but the main gist of it is that Canadian infrastructure programs established and implemented by the government are inefficient and ineffective as a whole.

Roads in Canada are abysmal to say the least. Potholes can be found in abundance, lack of clearly painted lines, and overall poor road maintenance are systemic across the country. Sure the bad winter weather doesn’t help, but the situation never seems to improve but instead deteriorates steadily. Increases in construction, maintenance, and energy costs further aggravate the situation.

Upon my return to Canada from spending several weeks in China last summer I remarked in an interview:

“This is what happens when you go travel, you know to Asia...When I come back to Quebec and I look at our roads and our infrastructure and all that, I’m coming back to a third world country.”

In the above quote, I note the comparison of our infrastructure to Asian countries (like China). Having lived 13 years in China, I saw a tremendous amount of development. Cranes are everywhere – even in Tier-3 cities. Roads, bridges, and buildings get built quickly. Only perhaps in some large cities in Canada will you see construction cranes helping to erect new buildings. But for the most part, you can see that there is not much construction going on. Maintenance does occur such as on roads and highways, particularly during summer, but it is often very slow, inconvenient for drivers, and very costly.

Back in around 2009, there was a tiny bridge overpass (of about 10 meters in length) close to where I lived in Quebec that actually took an entire year to complete just maintenance work on it. They closed that roadway for a year which meant that local residents had to make a huge detour just to commute to their workplaces and run their errands. Completely ridiculous. Laughable.

Upon my return last summer I wrote an article, The West is Dead. Why the East will continue to dominate the rest of the 21st Century, in which I highlighted some of the main reasons for our failing infrastructure. I noted two main factors for the decline:

Strict Government Controls; and
Unfavourable Inflation & Taxation Regimes

In my article I also compared rail infrastructure, noting that Canada didn’t even have one kilometre of track for high-speed trains and elaborated on the reasons for it:

“In Canada, there’s long been a proposed high-speed rail route which would run from Quebec City passing through Montreal and Ottawa, finally reaching Toronto which is roughly 1,000 km in total distance.
...
Moreover, just the initial study and feasibility plan is projected to cost at least C$3.9 billion and the costs of construction and physical asset procurement are currently estimated at between C$80 to C$120 billion. Reality, however, shows that most large-scale projects in Canada end up taking much longer to complete with costs commonly doubling from original estimates.
So, we can easily notice that the costs to produce a similar high-speed rail line in Canada are at least ten times that of the one in Thailand.
Moreover, the referenced article from last March indicates that the first (planning) phase alone would take 5 years and God only knows how long it would take for the actual construction. Reasons for such long delays include inter-provincial and federal politics, regulations, environmental assessments, and consultation with Indigenous communities.”

The last part of the quotation from above shows that regulations, environmental assessments, and consultation with Indigenous communities were all important factors which stymied efforts for high-speed rail in Canada.

A high-speed train line connecting Québec City and Toronto, with stops in Trois-Rivières, Laval, Montréal, Ottawa and Peterborough, would prove economically beneficial for the country’s two most populated provinces (Ontario and Quebec which account for two-thirds of the total population). But sadly, there doesn’t seem to be much hope that the endeavour will ever materialise.

The above is merely one example among many failed infrastructure projects in Canada. There are also many unrealised projects such as pipelines that could have proven beneficial, but were impeded by the Liberal Government.

Finally, another key driver that has contributed to poor infrastructure has to do with the net zero agenda.

On the back of taxpayers, Canada has “invested” hundreds of billions of dollars into so-called green energy projects that have actually proven detrimental to the country.

Such nonsensical policies have increased fuel and transportation costs (including carbon taxes) across the country which have significantly contributed to higher inflation. And this higher inflation, inevitably, has led to higher construction and servicing costs for infrastructure projects.

Reason #5 – Exodus/Emigration, Brain Drain, Lack of Innovation

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

Mass Exodus/Emigration

Emigration occurs when a Canadian leaves permanently.

Emigration trends in Canada are up sharply since 2025.

“When someone emigrates they take their skills that power the Canadian economy. They also take their taxes, their spending, and often their families with them.”

The quote above comes from a January 1, 2026 post by Linda Ragona from her Ragona Sisters: Canadian Real Estate & Market Talk YouTube channel.

“Canada saw record high exodus in 2025. Over 120,000 citizens and permanent residents left the country in just 12 months,” Ragona explains adding that it is the highest number in any 12 month period on record.

She adds that this “warning sign” only showed up at two other times in Canadian history: once in 1968 and again in 2017. Reasons? An overheated housing market and losing talent to other countries – referring to the brain drain. Affordability challenges were also a key driver.

For 2025, she notes that Ontario and British Columbia have seen the largest population declines according to Statistics Canada. And Quebec also shows elevated outflows compared to other regions.

Ragona notes that this trend isn’t just about Canadians wanting to escape the harsh winters, but rather:

“It’s about potential where people can feel they can afford to build a life, raise a family, or actually own a home before they turn 50.”

“It’s about potential where people can feel they can afford to build a life, raise a family, or actually own a home before they turn 50.”

“At its core, this is about Canada failing to compete globally. The first to leave are usually prime-age, skilled workers with resources to make the move—the people Canada can’t afford to lose. Those with fewer skills rarely have the resources to move, even if they really want to.”

The article also notes that emigration is also under-counted since most people don’t notify the government of their permanent relocation.

“Canada’s rising emigration underscores a bigger problem: the country’s inability to compete globally,” states the report.

This is not surprising given Canada’s very poor track record on innovation in the past few decades (more below on this).

For Canada they are also seeing record capital flight, falling business investment, and Canadian entrepreneurs creating their companies—and jobs—abroad – particularly in the United States.

In a more recent article from January 22, 2026, Canadians Are Leaving In Record Numbers, Most Are Prime-Aged Workers, Better Dwelling highlights that more than half of the emigration is driven by workers aged 25 to 49 with the share of seniors rapidly growing as well.

While the latter group is quite understandable, the former group should be cause for concern, as their exodus can easily spell trouble for the Canadian economy.

But even the senior cohort is cause for concern, given its acceleration and that fact that they will be spending their retirement savings abroad instead of in Canada. Moreover, data (from Statistics Canada) shows 16,609 seniors emigrated in 2025, up 3.0% from a year earlier, and a whopping 80.5% higher than a decade prior.

If things don’t change for the better in Canada very soon, it is very likely that these emigration trends will continue to accelerate.

Lack of Innovation

While I would abstain from saying that Canada lacks talent and well educated individuals, the simple fact of the matter is that the country has been dragging its feet for years in terms of innovation.

Sadly and as evidenced above, a large portion of our talent are emigrating to other countries to secure better career and business opportunities.

No matter which sector or field you look at, Canadian businesses have been in decline with little indication or hope for a turnaround.

There are several factors that have contributed to this decline over the past few decades, including a deteriorating education system, an overabundance of regulations and other barriers to innovation and entrepreneurship – including climate zealotry and preferential treatment or protectionism for large corporations (case in point: during the COVID-19 Pandemic large retailers were allowed to stay open while mom & pop shops were shuttered) compared to smaller business owners and individuals.

To illustrate the lack of innovation, one merely needs to have a look at the following infographic which shows where science & technology clusters are located around the globe (notice that Canada doesn’t have a single hub):

How embarrassing.

Reason #6 – Broken Government with Traitorous, Sellout Politicians

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

Where to start?

We could go back decades, if not an entire century or more.

The main trend plaguing Canada – and most Western nations for that matter, is regulatory capture.

Regulatory capture can be broadly defined as the circumstance whereby politicians and key decision makers (from various organisations) are “captured” or compromised to serve outside interests rather than those of the constituents they are supposed to serve.

Regulatory captures occurs at three levels:

Local / Municipal
Provincial
National

It can also occur at the international level such as with supranational organisations like the United Nations. But for now, we will just focus on the three listed above.

At the local or municipal level, we are talking about those council members that “represent” various constituencies across the land. Sure there are many honest ones in the bunch. But sadly, many get captured and compromised via various methods which include, but are not limited to, financial incentives and perks, bribes, coercion, and threats.

Have you ever attended a local town or city council meeting?

This is where many decisions that will affect the local community and environment are made, where budgets and allocation of funds for designated projects get approved (or rejected).

These meetings are generally open to anyone who wishes to attend, raise concerns or complaints, and ask questions. Sadly, most citizens don’t bother attending these meetings. As such, it stands to reason that by our own collective ignorance and indifference, we are also largely responsible for the bad outcomes derived from these meetings, as our absence enables them.

Moreover, sadly but understandably, the average citizen is disenfranchised with local politics and would rather keep at bay. I myself am guilty of this, as I’ve been previously approached by a major political party to run and represent locally which I readily declined.

Another way that municipalities get compromised lies in the way they have been established or set up. I cover this in detail in Section #14 under the sub-section ’UN infiltration of Municipalities (through Municipal Corporations)’; so, be sure to have a look at that.

At the provincial level, things definitely escalate in the sense that politicians increasingly serve outside interests or those that go contrary to common sense or the common welfare of citizens of that respective province.

This was on full display during the COVID-19 Scamdemic.

Look no further than in Quebec where diktats and measures were imposed during the so-called pandemic which included strict curfews, social-distancing, vaccine passports, lock-downs, church closures, raiding family gatherings during Christmas, and so on.

At the time, in late 2021 when I had just returned from China, I observed this tyranny first-hand.

When I found my way back to my home province of Quebec I remembered watching Premier François Legault on television urging parents to get their children vaccinated (against COVID-19) for the greater good and to protect “grand-maman” (grandmother).

Knowing then what I know now about how these shots were essentially death jabs, I can’t help but recall how manipulatively evil and sinister those statements uttered by our provincial “leader” were.

Using his position of authority to convince and propagandise children into getting experimental COVID-19 shots is heinous, to say the least.

It is beyond morally reprehensible.

But one needn’t look further that his own behaviour put on display for all to see during a particular press conference on COVID-19.

If one is to search “Quebec COVID-19 update, June 8, 2021” on YouTube one will easily find this press conference. In it, we can clearly see Premier François Legault flash the 666 (devil, number of the beast) and Masonic “Okay” sign with his right hand at around the 00:38 to 00:40 mark – a solid 2 seconds.

Was Legault signalling his allegiance to his overlords? You be the judge.

But as we have no existing real and honest press media in the province of Quebec, he was never asked about this incident.

Many more examples (from across all provinces) can be stated here, but I will just include one more regarding church closures in Alberta with the famous pastor Artur Pawlowski yelling “Get Out! You Nazis!” at the local police when they tried to disrupt his Easter Weekend church service:

Pawlowski was subsequently arrested and penalised for this, exercising his Constitutional rights.

At the federal level the situation worsens exponentially.

Again, too many examples of government overreach could be included here. But I will merely provide a few to bring home the point.

During the COVID-19 Scamdemic, the Trudeau Liberal Government exerted and displayed an exorbitant amount of dictatorial behaviour towards any who dared to question or counter any of their unconstitutional diktats or orders.

This was on full display during the Freedom Convoy protests which took place in the nation’s capital, Ottawa, in February of 2022.

In an article about Mark Carney, I wrote the following about this ugly saga of Canadian history [with original links included]:

“But in fact, it was rather the Canadian government that acted in an anarchistic fashion. They fervently crush dissent and opposition using their ironfisted rule and unlawfully froze citizens’ bank accounts, completely foregoing the presumption of innocence before being proven guilty. And on Valentine’s Day, the Trudeau Government showed its love by invoking the Emergencies Act which later proved to be ultra vires in federal court – which means they were acting beyond their power and authority.”

More recently, now Prime Minister Mark Carney is doubling-down on his stance regarding the invocation of the Emergencies Act. Even though the government lost their appeal at The Federal Court of Appeal this past January, Carney now wants the Supreme Court of Canada to intervene in the Liberal Government’s favour by overturning the Emergencies Act ruling.

This is not how a legitimate democracy is supposed to work.

Over the past few years, we’ve heard the testimony of hundreds of Canadians – victims, expert witnesses, and others – regarding the absurd measures imposed during the scamdemic during the The National Citizens Inquiry (NCI).

Many of those testimonies are heart-wrenching to listen to, but will rightly serve as a reminder in the historical record of Canada regarding the mistreatments and follies conducted by our country’s “leaders” and “experts” during this dark chapter.

“We penetrate the cabinets” – WEF Chairman Klaus Schwab

Back in 2017 then World Economic Forum (WEF) Chairman Klaus Schwab bragged about how his organisation had “half” or “even more than half” of Justin Trudeau’s Cabinet was essentially under its control.

You can watch the clip with the words from the horse’s mouth hereunder (note: these videos continuously get scrubbed from YouTube, so search for it if ever the link below becomes deleted):

On behalf of one of his constituent’s, a Member of Parliament actually asked about this assertion of the WEF in the House of Commons along with which members (of the Cabinet) were under control of the WEF, but got readily shut down by the Speaker of the House (at the time):

This really makes one wonder whether the House of Commons itself is under foreign control.

Why the hell would the Speaker not permit such an important and relevant question?

One needn’t look very far to see that countless Members of Parliament (and the Senate) have indeed been either members of the WEF or have had associations with the supranational organisation.

Dysfunctional and Very Costly Parliament & Senate

Even as a young adult watching Parliamentary sessions and debates on television, I knew they were largely clown shows filled with a whole lot of bickering, childish antics, and unconstructive debates that lead to zero fruitful outcomes. Pure political theatre.

Not much has changed since then, as the same holds true.

Apart from huge amounts of [taxpayer-funded] spending on outrageous and useless government programs approved these Parliamentarians and Senators, we also must fork over our hard-earned money to pay for their over-bloated salaries.

“The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on all members of Parliament to stop the April 1 politician pay raise as new estimates show this year’s raises will range from $8,800 to $17,600.”

A $8,800 to $17,600 pay raise. Wow. When is the last time you were told you might get such a raise?

Well according to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation that is what Members of Parliament (MPs) plan on giving themselves this year. “A backbench MP’s salary is currently $209,800. A minister collects $309,700, while the prime minister takes home a $419,600 annual salary,” affirms the CTF while average Canadians are struggling to keep up with the rising cost of living.

It seems like every year, MPs are voting in favour of such bloated raises.

Same goes for members of the Senate of Canada. “In 2025, a Senator’s base salary was $184,800 which will rise in 2026 by $7,761 to $192,561,” according to a recent article.

Atop of these hefty salaries, we must not forget that both MPs and Senators enjoy lucrative annual pensions averaging just over $81,000, usually for life. Considering an average of 593 such pensioners at that average, we are talking about a yearly servicing cost of over $48 million, excluding health, dental, and other benefits.

That’s a lot of bacon my fellow Canadians!

And what have they done to merit such salaries and pensions, many may ask.

When is the last time they introduced or passed a bill that has benefited you, your family, or personal situation?

Back in October of 2024, I wrote an open letter to all 105 Canadian Senators regarding my concerns about Senate bill S-243 (An Act to enact the Climate-Aligned Finance Act and to make related amendments to other Acts). Not a single Senator took the time to answer my letter or concerns. This was a clear breach of duty since my taxpayer funds go to pay their salaries.

At least it served as a reminder that Canadian Senators, as is largely the case with MPs, don’t work for us, but rather for outside interests.

We are just getting started regarding these sellout politicians. In the next section, I will expose how they are actually largely working against your interests and welfare.

Traitorous, Sellout Politicians & their Tyrannical Bills & Laws

Again, the rot runs deep and we can go back decades with how damaging bills have been introduced by our sellout politicians.

But instead, I will focus on recent ones that the current Liberal Government has been trying to shove down the throats of Canadian citizens and residents.

Here are the current troublesome ones with a brief summary their sought power grabs:

Bill C-2 (Strong Borders Act)
- Under the bill, police could approach any service provider, including those bound by professional privilege like doctors and lawyers, to ask whether an individual was a client, for how long, from where, and whether the company knew of other providers who had dealt with that person, all without a warrant.
- This bill drew fierce opposition and stalled in its Second reading
- Related article here
- see Bill C-22 below which is a watered down version they are now instead pursuing.
Bill C-8 (An Act respecting cyber security, amending the Telecommunications Act and making consequential amendments to other Acts)
- It would essentially give Cabinet Ministers the ability to boot Canadians off the internet under the guise of “threat to national cyber security.” They could order Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to cut internet access or a cell phone service provider to do the same.
- Terms in the text of the bill such as “threat,” “misinformation,” “false information,” and “hate” are not clearly defined.
- Watch the following video with Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms lawyer John Carpay explaining its (and other bills) dangers.
Bill C-9 (An Act to amend the Criminal Code)
- The text of the bill’s Second Reading in its current form proves highly problematic, as it would repeal previous defences enshrined in the Criminal Code [specifically 319(3)(b) and 319(3.1)(b)] which currently allows for quoting from religious texts such as the Bible, Quran, etc.
- A lot of it has to do with censorship of speech.
- See the related video from the Canadian Constitution Foundation for more details about the bill’s inherent dangers.
- As C-9 has just passed the House of Commons, see here and here for more on its dangers
Bill C-15 (Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 1)
- This one is particularly egregious in that it would permit any minister to ignore almost any federal law (since 1867).
- Learn more here, here, here, and here.
- PASSED: Actually, as the Senate passed the bill, it has received Royal Ascent on March 26, 2026 meaning that ministers can now ignore federal laws. What could go wrong?
Bill C-16 (Protecting Victims Act)
- It creates new “offences” and would criminalise certain interactions between family members based on a “pattern of coercive or controlling conduct,” even if no violence, threats, or illegal acts occur.
- Even Conservative MP Dr. Leslyn Lewis has called out the bill for its fundamental flaws.
- Read more here.
Bill C-22 (An Act respecting lawful access)
- This bill would essentially mandate mass metadata surveillance of Canadians.
- It seeks to invade individuals’ right to privacy by tracking their whereabouts and obtaining their online metadata without their knowledge, consent, or a legal warrant. (see related articles here, here, and here)
- It basically helps to build a backdoor to your cell phone and electronic devices.
- Watch the following video for more on this surveillance bill.

There are other bills which include destructive elements, but the ones above provide a sobering and frightening sample on how they can erode your rights should they become law (note that as of March 26, 2026, C-15 is now law).

An important thing to consider is that we have no way of knowing and verifying if the sponsors of the bills, that is to say those who write the text of the bill, have actually done so themselves or have simply attributed their names to it (while it was written by another, secretive, party).

For example, I had found that it certainly appeared to be the case with Bill C-63 (Online Harms Act) likely written by outside parties rather than its actual sponsor.

Another issue lies in the fact that many power grabs often get stealthily thrown into certain bills such as Budget [Implementation] ones, as was the case with Bill C-15 listed above:

To sneak in these kinds of power grabs deep inside unrelated bills is an age-old sly trick they use.

Luckily, we have some alert citizens (and the occasional journalist) and Parliamentary Committee members who spot them and exposed them for what they are or truly seek.

Yet another deceitful tactic employed by Parliamentarians and Senators has to do with how they deceptively title a bill to make it sound benevolent in nature – while really seeking malevolent power grabs.

Take for instance the aforementioned, nicely sounding (“Protecting Victims Act”), Bill C-16 Act. Now, who wouldn’t want to protect victims? Many other bills to protect children online (such as with Canadian Senate bills S-209 and S-210) appear benevolent at first glance, but in fact seek to strip adults of certain rights.

The problem is that with these deceptively titled bills, they actually tend to do the opposite of what they imply.

Broadly speaking, many bills introduced by our lawmakers serve to help bring about various nefarious agendas outlined in sections #14 and #16 of this post further below.

The silver lining, perhaps, is that we have a very dysfunctional Parliament. So, we stand a chance that some of these destructive bills will not see the light of day and become law. The problem is, however, even if they don’t, the same destructive elements are usually re-introduced or recycled into new bills like white on rice. Rinse and repeat.

Reason #7 – Sinister Prime Ministers

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

While there can be much debate about which Canadian prime ministers have done the most damage to Canada, I will include three which I find to be the case:

Pierre Elliot Trudeau, PM from 1968 to 1979 and 1980 to 1984
Justin Trudeau, PM from 2015 to 2025
Mark Carney, PM from 2025-03-14 to ?

Though the above prime ministers are from the Liberal Party of Canada, I would like to stress that for the most part it doesn’t really matter which party the prime minister is from or represents. This is not about politics itself, left or right, blue or red, but rather about the moral character and traitorous nature of the incumbents themselves. And in these respects, I will be more than glad to oblige and demonstrate their culpability hereunder.

Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau

Let us begin with Papa Trudeau.

While many may not know it, the man was imbibed with Socialist/Communist leanings.

Pierre Trudeau was groomed at the London School of Economics (LSE) where practically all of their staff since it foundation in 1895 have been staunch Fabian Socialists – who really espouse Communism.

Moreover, while studying Economics at the LSE in the late 1940s, Trudeau was inculcated to espouse the mantras of the welfare state which consisted of the Fabian tenets of the UK Labour Party and its ilk.

More specifically, he was deeply influenced by British Economist Harold Laski who was a prominent figure at the school during that period. Laski, a Zionist, espoused Marxist ideology, and had served as the Chairman of the British Labour Party from 1945 to 1946, just after World War II.

“Postwar London was a hotbed of socialist and liberal ideals,” notes author Sara Borins in her book Trudeau Albums.

And there is little doubt, as per the historical record, that Pierre sought to replicated these ideals in his native Canada.

As I previously wrote on the matter, in his two stints as PM, first between 1968 to 1979 and then from 1980 to 1984, Pierre Trudeau not only reshaped Canada’s political landscape, but also its Individualist-Socialist-Marxist liberal social mores. I also added:

“These were not only continued under the reign of his son Justin, but amplified to extreme levels, as has been painfully demonstrated throughout his rule (from 2015 to 2025).
Lastly, it is no secret that Pierre Trudeau, like his son Justin, admired the communist regime in China. In fact, Pierre met Chairman Mao twice in person.”

In the opening paragraph for this section, I mentioned that moral character is an important characteristic in a leader.

Through his more liberal and “progressive” values, Pierre Trudeau has certainly infused and introduced many of them during his tenure as prime minister and was often portrayed in the Canadian press as a benevolent liberator for women’s rights, their right to abortion, and so on.

All this while he not only gained the reputation as a swinging 1970s Playboy, but was on the receiving end of some very damaging allegations about his sexual exploitation of certain women, including minors.

As I previously wrote, during a November 25, 2024 PBD Podcast, former child sex-slave victim Anneke Lucas revealed that in 1972, then Prime Minister of Canada Pierre Trudeau basically wished to kill (sacrifice) her. In the related segment of the interview, Lucas explained (verbatim):

“About [Pierre] Trudeau, I said [to David Rockefeller] that I could never please him as long as was alive. That’s how scary that was.
...
It means that he couldn’t kill me because at that point I was not a throwaway child.
And he scared me enough so that I then tell [David] Rockefeller that that’s what he wants – a child to kill.
Then you understand that the next time he can, if he wants to use that, he can use it.”

The above account is not the only instance whereby Pierre Trudeau is alleged to have committed heinous sexual acts on minors.

As I previously covered, Cathy O’Brien, had recalled her own sexual encounters with former Canadian Prime Ministers Brian Mulroney and Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Highly disturbing allegations regarding his depraved interactions with under-aged sex-slave minors are found in excerpts of O’Brien’s book TRANCE Formation of America which I have highlighted.

Whether these are true or not, we may never know. But given the more recent account previously recounted by victim Anneke Lucas as described above, it wouldn’t be that surprising if O’Brien’s allegation are indeed factual. Decide for yourself.

As to Pierre Trudeau’s traitorous nature, well, look no further than my most viewed article on Substack (with roughly 20k views) titled Apologies to the World: The Great Climate Scam was launched at a Club of Rome Meeting in 1971 by Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, continued by Justin Trudeau.

In it, I present how Papa Trudeau was one of the lead contributors of the Great Climate Scam (see related section below in this post) perpetrated on humanity which is still ongoing and is unconstestably the largest swindle in human history. The evidence I present therein is thick and abundant.

While Trudeau senior shouldn’t take the entirety of the blame for this swindle (especially given that it was the Rockefellers [who] created 990 “Climate Change” institutions, foundations, and activist groups to implement the plan), we should never forget that it was him who got the ball rolling, later to pass the baton onto his son and our current PM (more on these below).

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau

Much can be written about Justin Trudeau, his narcissistic personality disorder, oversised ego, and his lack of empathy and morals. But I will merely provide a few examples to demonstrate these characteristics of Canada’s 23^rd prime minister.

Let us begin with his psychotic tirade against the unvaccinated during the COVID-19 Scamdemic.

On two occasions Trudeau showed his true colours and disdain for Canadians who refused to take an experimental mRNA jab during the pandemic.

In September of 2021 during an interview with Julie Snyder, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called Canadians who refused to take the COVID-19 vaccine a whole bunch of derogatory and insulting names.

For those who don’t understand French, here is a translation of the key passages Trudeau uttered on air [with emphasis added]:

“We are deciding right now that we are going to get out of the pandemic with vaccination.

And we know, we know people who are still hesitating a little and we’re going to continue to try and convince them [to get vaccinated].

But there are also people who are fiercely against vaccination [interviewer: “they are extremists”] who don’t believe in science, they are often misogynist, also often racists too.

It’s a small group but they take up space.

And now, we have to make a choice, as a leader, as a country, do we tolerate these [unvaccinated] people?

...

Right now we are in a fourth wave where it’s almost exclusively unvaccinated people that are clogging up our hospitals all over the country.

There comes a time when we have to put our foot down and say: “Excuse me, there is no debate about the science.”

The way we are going to go back to the things we like doing. We must stand up for vaccination.

So, yes I took a position that is firm against “these people.” [the unvaccinated]”

Firstly, who the hell are you, Mr. Trudeau, to call me a racist or misogynist who doesn’t believe in science just because I didn’t take the experimental jab? Choices pertaining to my own medical situation are my own business, not yours. And I think the same goes for all other Canadians.

Secondly, affirming that “there is no debate about science” is a very ignorant, foolish, and careless thing to say, as science is all about debate and questioning.

Thirdly, I would like to clarify that stating that “it’s almost exclusively unvaccinated people that are clogging up our hospitals” is a bold-faced lie that is not based on fact, as I have clearly outlined in a prior article.

A month prior to that interview on French television during a campaign in Calgary on August 19, 2021, Trudeau had also castigated Canadians who chose not to vaccinate themselves with the experimental mRNA jab, stating:

“You deserve better. You deserve a government that is going to continue to say: “get vaccinated.” And you know what? If you don’t want to get vaccinated, that’s your choice. But, don’t think you can get on a plane or a train beside vaccinated people and put them at risk.”

When I returned to Canada from living 13 years in China on November 1, 2021, we had to quarantine for about 10 days in Toronto where we had landed by plane. At this time, Trudeau’s government was implementing the unconstitutional restriction to prevent unvaccinated persons from taking an airplane or train (as was referenced in his speech above). After our quarantine we were scheduled to take the train to go back to my native Quebec. Luckily, we were within that small window where we were allowed to travel despite our vaccine status (of non-vaccinated for COVID-19).

Also note that as I indicated in the previous Section (#6), Justin Trudeau and his Cabinet had invoked the Emergencies Act which later proved to be ultra vires in federal court and re-affirmed at the Federal Court of Appeal.

In other words, Trudeau – like his father who had previously invoked the War Measures Act during his tenure – took it upon himself to frivolously act as a dictator because he disliked everyday Canadians from expressing their constitutional rights to protest and show their discontent with their government.

As I mentioned in the previous sub-section for Papa Trudeau, Justin followed in his pa’s footsteps to continue the mad push for the Climate Scam. Here are six ways in which he has done so, as per my previous reporting (all receipts included):

6.1 Climate Scamming in 2019: Oh yes, Greta!
6.2 Climate Scamming in 2020: WEF, Please help!
6.3 Climate Scamming in 2021: COP CONning in the UK
6.4 Climate Scamming in 2022: Carbon-Tax me harder baby!
6.5 Climate Scamming in 2023: Just Transition Me already!
6.6 Climate Scamming in 2024: Justin’s own Right-Hand Man

Justin Trudeau has been the idyllic poster child for globalism and has served so many foul globalist agendas through his prime ministership.

I can’t prove it, but must concluded that he has been remarkably well compensated for these services by the global elite who have supported him.

Much more, of course, could be written about with regards to Prime Minister Trudeau and his depraved ways – such as promoting the extremely damaging gender ideology and other harmful agendas (as outlined in this post), but suffice it to say that the damage he has inflicted on Canada is beyond measure, leaving countless repercussions that will reverberate for a very long time to come.

Prime Minister Mark Carney

Oh where to begin with Marky boy? His City of London and banking connections? His climate ruse? His profiteering and conflicts of interests? Or his globalist affiliations?

A lot to uncover so let’s get to it.

Firstly, apart from his Marxist-leanings, I’d like to focus on just how shrewd and cunning Mark Carney actual is as an individual.

This can be exemplified in his testimony at a Parliamentary inquiry in the U.K. on the heels of the 2007-2008 Financial Crisis which saw zero bankers go to jail despite having subsequently swindled billions through bank bail-ins, with over seven million people having lost their homes during the crisis. I am talking about how Mark Carney, then Chairman of the Financial Stability Board (FSB), helped cover the crimes of his banking buddies as HSBC. This is meticulously detailed by American attorney John Titus in his documentary All the Prenary’s Men (see also here):

Helping to cover HSBC bank which had laundered billions of dollars for Mexican drug cartels doesn’t exactly put Carney in a positive light. Yet, that is exactly what he did.

As I knew that the powers that be would place their PM puppet stooge in Trudeau with Carney, I had spent over three months preparing an article on the future PM as I was 100% sure he would be place.

I published the completed article, Meet Canada’s new Prime Minister Mark Carney who will usher in his Globalist Climate Swindle, on the day Mark Carney officially became Prime Minister. This article is now my 2^nd most viewed.

There would be way too much to reiterate with regards to Carney from this article, but

if you take the time to read it you will get to know exactly who your new prime minister is, what he stands for, and who he really serves.

Many other Canadians have reported on the nefarious doings of Mark Carney – too many to list here. But one in particular, David who goes by the handle Moose on the Loose, has done an outstanding job in reporting Carney’s numerous conflicts of interests and profiteering schemes through his prime ministership. In fact, he has created this humongous chart he calls ‘Moose Chart’ (moosechart.ca):

What appears above shows Mark Carney’s connections, affiliations, investments (many through Brookfield Asset Management for which he was Co-Chair) that represent apparent conflicts of interests and profiteering.

The entire chart is so huge that what is shown above represents merely about 10% of the totality of David’s work (which is ongoing and a work in progress). Click on the link to see for yourself how huge it is (receipts and related sources included).

In comparison, Prime Minister Marxist Carney really puts Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to shame with regards to corruption and profiteering.

It really boggles the mind knowing this extent of Mark Carney’s corruption and profiteering doesn’t produce more backlash from the mainstream press and everyday Canadians.

My fellow Canadians, let me ask you: How do we put up with this?

While I won’t dare further go down this deep and endless pit of despair described in the chart above, I will go over another major conspiracy Mark Carney has been the principal architect for.

I am talking about the modern Climate Change Hoax agenda for which he has been the front man directing a very large part of it.

I have documented and charted this myself in a previous article titled Canada’s Carbon Colony: You will Not own a Home, nor be Happy. In it, not only detailed how Canadian institutions (such as the OSFI) have been implementing highly damaging aspects of the net zero agenda including carbon taxes, but also the broader apparatus by which this hoax and swindle of the century is actually structured:

Notice that there is only one name in the mind map above: Mark Carney.

That is because it is through his numerous roles (as United Nations special envoy on climate action and climate finance, Co-Chair of GFANZ, and the Council for Inclusive Capitalism, but to name a few) in this climate hoax, he is the principal architect who has been coordinating and driving it.

Carney is the consummate professional.

He leaves no stone unturned.

Compared to Justin Trudeau, he is no slouch and is thus even more dangerous.

So going forward Canada, you really need to keep an eye on his actions (rather than his sly and coy words); for, there are many more schemes he is working on behind the scenes such as with the bills mentioned in the previous section.

Reason #8 – Health Death Care Tyranny

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

A key metric for a healthy nation lies in the birth and fertility rates of its female population.

Sadly, Canada’s fertility rate, as of 2024, has plunged to its lowest level in history which now sits at just 1.25 children per woman.

Canada once boasted a robust fertility rate of 3.94 children per woman in 1959.

While many factors, including socioeconomic ones and abortion have contributed to this downfall, other worrisome trends related to health care itself have contributed to it as explained below.

While Canada has long been praised for its “free” (which it is not, as it is mostly taxpayer funded) universal health care system, the reality is that it is poorly managed across all provinces with large waiting times in emergency rooms and for medical procedures. And it’s been like that for decades.

Moreover, it remains a struggle for citizens and new residents to get a family doctor.

For example, when I returned to Quebec in late 2021, they told me there was a five year waiting list to get a family doctor. I suspect it is similar in other provinces.

Needless to say, this is highly discouraging and adds anxiety regarding whether or not one can receive medical evaluation and treatment when health issues suddenly arise.

This is especially the case for infants and children, along with women who are pregnant and need regular follow-ups.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying there aren’t great doctors and nurses in our hospital systems. There certainly are very competent, caring and compassionate ones. Rather, the contention is more with the administrative means by which these centers operate.

My own father was a renowned specialist (Microbiologist) in my city of Sherbrooke for decades. Near the end of his career of practising medicine, he became quite appalled with how the health care system in the province of Quebec was getting worse and worse every single year. Our city had three major hospitals and it underwent a process to cut costs and streamline health services for residents of the city. In the end, they closed one of the three hospitals and it actually ended up costing them more to run these two than the previous three, as explained my father.

The case of Sherbrooke, Quebec, is most likely replicated across the country and is perhaps symptomatic of a larger trend. Is it mostly due to incompetence and mismanagement? Or, can it be ascertained that it is actually by design? One has to wonder.

The lack of private options for patients also remains a problem since alternatives to the traditional health care system remain scarce compared to many other countries.

So much can be written about “Death Care” in Canada, but I will focus mostly on five aspects: the COVID-19 culling, Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID), sterilising our youth, suppressing cancer treatments, and going after our farm animals and pets.

COVID-19 Culling

The COVID-19 Pandemic was a worldwide depopulation event and Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Government was a willing conspirator and fervent enabler.

Destruction of life, liberty, and dignity came upon us on so many levels during this sordid chapter of history.

And most of it was by design, very much intentional.

Curfews, lockdowns, social distancing, dangerous experimental “vaccines,” media manipulation, propaganda, fear tactics, intimidation, closing of individuals bank accounts, falsification of statistics and numbers, lies, covert military experimentation, psychological manipulation, violence, and more violence, were all used on a massive scale.

I covered much of this madness in my six part series The Covid-19 – Holocaust Comparison (free 188-page eBook here) for those inclined to rewatch this horror flick.

I even interviewed an actual Holocaust victim, Vera Sharav on my podcast who was the producer of the docuseries upon which my own series was based. That series, called Never Again Is Now Global highlights the parallels between Nazi Germany and global pandemic policies and mandates related to Covid-19.

Canadian researcher Denis Rancourt presented his conclusions after three years of study which showed that it wasn’t the COVID-19 pandemic itself that caused excess mortality, but rather the measures and vaccination imposed.

Rancourt said depending on what baseline is used for comparison, 28,000 to 31,000 Canadian deaths can be associated with administration of vaccines for COVID-19.

He proved that Canada’s mortality statistics (only 488 instances of death reported following [COVID-19] vaccination) are incorrect and published several papers on the matter, including a 521-page one detailing the excess all-cause mortality in the world (125 countries) during the Covid period 2020-2023.

By and large during the pandemic, we saw a coordinated response between the Trudeau Government and the various health agencies including Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada (note that these are distinct agencies) aggressively pushing and promoting the COVID-19 “vaccine” along with imposing extremely hard and unconstitutional measures on Canadian citizens and residents.

Due to these extreme and unnecessary dictatorial policies and measures, countless victims have suffered, leaving family members grieving at the loss of their loved ones.

Never forget.

Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID)

What is Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID)?

The acronym MAiD stands for medical assistance in dying (French: AMM, or aide médicale à mourir).

It is basically legalised euthanasia which permits a medical practitioner (or nurse practitioner) to administer a substance to a person that causes their death.

While I try to steer clear of any ethical or moral debate about whether this “service” is rightly or justifiably used to end an individual’s suffering by opting for death, the fact is that it is now the fifth leading cause of death in Canada.

MAiD in Canada is the world’s fastest-growing assisted-dying program.

Here are some statistics showing the numbers of deaths since MAiD’s launch in 2016:

Screenshot taken on 2026-03-24 from a query on chat.deepseek.com showing summary statistics of Total MAID Deaths with the percentage of All Deaths in Canada from 2016 to 2023. Sources cited: here, here, and here.

MAiD figures for 2024 were recently published by Health Canada which show that a total of 16,499 people received the “service” in that year.

According to the same report, MAiD deaths now account for over 5% of all deaths in Canada.

Five percent. Let that number sink in folks. What will this percentage be in 2030? 2035? 2050?

What is contestable about MAID?

In a prior post I wrote:

“Moreover, as part of the broader globalist depopulation agenda the Canadian federal government and even some of our provincial governments have been particularly nefarious in promoting MAID to our veterans, children/infants, and “mature minors” (whom they deem mature enough to decide to kill themselves without the knowledge or consent of their parents).”

While the above paragraph may seem like some twisted tale from a dystopian novel, it is actually reality.

What I wrote and referenced through links is verifiable and, sadly, undeniable.

While MAiD has been promoted as a compassionate program enacted to help end the suffering of individuals, it has unfortunately metastasised into a killing machine, further ensnaring unsuspecting victims into its sphere.

Countless cases have been documented showing this, including victims who have received MAiD without their consent and after refusing it upon second thought. Just a few examples:

In relation to all these deaths, there are also concerns about rampant organ harvesting resulting from the MAiD regime which opens up a whole other can of ethical concerns.

Another area of concern over the past several years with regards to MAiD has to do with increasing expansion. That is to say, the increase in categories of possible recipients. These include the likes of Indigenous peoples, the homeless, retired elderly, and the mentally ill.

Apart from these vulnerable members of society, I have previously written about how they want to expand MAiD to include infants with birth defects, persons with intellectual disabilities, as well as veterans from our Canadian Armed Forces.

The expansion of MAiD appears to be snowballing out of control.

Perhaps one of the main motivators for the government to expand MAiD services has to do with saving costs.

While it hasn’t been directly admitted or acknowledged by the government, a very disturbing study has explored this very subject.

As I previously reported on, as per a research paper published in the Journal of Death and Dying (archived here) the Canadian government would plan to save $1.273 trillion from 2027-2047 by persuading millions of members from these vulnerable groups in seeking MAID.

The journal article, titled Government Economics of Expanding Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying to Vulnerable Populations and the Ethical Implications of Allowing the State to Control Death provides a chilling opener:

“Abstract
This study explores the potential economic savings from expanding medical assistance in dying (MAiD) in Canada, where it is currently a leading cause of death, to include vulnerable groups that cost the government more than they contribute in taxes. These groups include individuals with severe mental health issues, the homeless, drug users, retired elderly, and indigenous communities. Both voluntary and non-voluntary scenarios were analyzed, projecting total savings of up to CAD $1.273 trillion by 2047. With an estimated 2.6 million deaths in the voluntary scenario, mostly among mentally ill and elderly populations, this cost-saving measure raises significant ethical concerns. Financially incentivizing MAiD could shift healthcare priorities away from providing necessary support, potentially devaluing vulnerable lives and fostering a troubling reliance on assisted death as an economic solution. The findings highlight a need for ethical scrutiny of MAiD policy expansion.
Source/credit: Journal of Death and Dying – Government Economics of Expanding Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying to Vulnerable Populations and the Ethical Implications of Allowing the State to Control Death by Uzair Jamil and Joshua M. Pearce, first published online: February 28, 2025.”

The paper even suggests employing government-funded professional “dying assistants,” i.e., killers or hitmen, is also being considered (at cost of C$227 per head):

“Outsourcing Approach to MAiD
An alternative approach could involve hiring government-funded professional dying assistants (killers) to carry out the MAiD procedure inside or outside hospitals. The lowest-cost hitmen that could be out sourced (OS) can provide the same function for as little as 150 Euros (Rios, 2010), which translates to approximately CAD $227 (CMAiD,OS = 227), based on an exchange rate of 1 Euro = 1.51 CAD (xe, 2024a).
Source/credit: Journal of Death and Dying – Government Economics of Expanding Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying to Vulnerable Populations and the Ethical Implications of Allowing the State to Control Death by Uzair Jamil and Joshua M. Pearce, first published online: February 28, 2025.”

Needless to say, this is highly disturbing.

If Canadians don’t push back, I’m afraid this tactic of incrementalism will expand MAiD to include just about anyone, accelerating their depopulation agenda.

Sterilising our Youth

We know that with the trans agenda comes all the nightmarish stories about tweens or teens having been brainwashed into thinking they were born in the wrong bodies (as extensively reported on by Billboard Chris) only to be further manipulated into taking dangerous puberty blockers and even irreversible transition surgeries.

Tragically, countless such child-abuse cases have occurred in Canada with the help of educators, school “counsellors” and medical “professionals”.

How utterly deplorable.

The following is a harrowing illustration of a case which no sane parent would ever accept.

A 14 year-old girl prescribed puberty blockers within 9 minutes of consulting her doctor

While each province in Canada has its own laws surrounding what is deemed as “mature minors” (which kinds of treatment decisions minors are allowed to make without the knowledge or consent of their parents), the following which occurred in Quebec is particularly troubling.

As reported on by Radio-Canada (the French equivalent of the CBC) itself (archived here) a girl named Sasha (likely a pseudonym to protect her identity) walked into her doctor’s private clinic to commence her plan transition to the other sex.

Though the investigative article reporting on this is in French, here is a Google translation into English of its summative parts [with emphasis added]:

“On January 30, 14-year-old Sacha* arrived alone at a chic private clinic for her medical appointment. The young girl identifies as transgender and, to begin her transition to the other sex, she needs a prescription for male hormones, testosterone. She has not been referred by any doctor, psychologist, or therapist.

...

In less than three minutes, Sacha describes to the doctor who sees her tortuous relationship with her body, which she says she has hated since the age of 12. Having been diagnosed with an eating disorder that she doubts, Sacha says she became convinced she was transgender after watching a video of a young trans man online. He, too, realized “he wasn’t in the right body” after being diagnosed with an eating disorder.

...

After asking the young girl if she had her parents’ support, the doctor continued: “Are you considering surgery in the future?” Sacha didn’t immediately understand: “Surgeries... like?” “Mastectomy, removing the breast,” the family doctor clarified, before giving him the contact information for the Montreal clinic where these operations are performed.

...

When injected long-term, the testosterone she wants from the doctor can make a woman infertile. The possibility of a future pregnancy is raised in a question: “I understand that it’s a bit far off for you, at 14 years old... Is fertility something you want to preserve before starting?” the doctor suggests. “Uh... no. I always knew I didn’t want children,” Sacha replies. “OK!” the general practitioner continues.

After a nine-minute consultation, Sacha receives his prescription: 30 mg of testosterone to be injected once a week.”

Thankfully, Sasha never injected herself with testosterone because she isn’t transgender, but instead was posing as an undercover actress used by the “Enquête (investigative) team to verify how such consultations occur.”

For once, I will give well-deserved credit to Radio-Canada’s team for real investigative journalism.

In any sane country, what transpired with the case of Sasha would be deemed a criminal act and legal procedures would be pursued against the medical practitioner who prescribed Sasha these harmful substances.

I am not sure what happened to the medical doctor Sasha consulted, but can only hope she got her license to practice medicine was revoked, or at the very least she was put under investigation by the Quebec College of Physicians (CMQ). But given the CMQ’s penchant to push MAID services on infants born with malformations or certain syndromes, I wouldn’t hold my breath that they would conduct an upright investigation into such a matter.

Suppressing Cancer Treatments

One of my most viewed podcasts is with Dr. William Makis, a Canadian cancer specialist.

Dr. Makis was highly persecuted by Canadian and Albertan health “authorities” for his outspokenness during the COVID-19 Scamdemic.

During the pandemic, he documented countless irregular deaths attributed to the COVID-19 shots on his X account (which now has over 658,400 followers) and COVID INTEL Substack (with 139,000 subscribers).

Dr. Makis also exposed how the shots were causing turbo cancers in patients as young as in their teens.

And for these inconvenient revelations he was fervently punished by the very corrupt College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta (CPSA).

Despite having his medical license revoked, the cancer specialist who has 115 peer-reviewed medical papers published in international medical journals developed cancer-treating protocols to help cure patients that contracted turbo cancers from the COVID-19 shots as well as regular cancer patients.

As he was no longer allowed to practice medicine in the province of Alberta, he nevertheless offered coaching services alongside regular cancer treatment in order to help treat people afflicted.

Through these protocols and health coaching, he has helped over 9,000 cancer patients either fully recover or largely recover. He has documented and reported on these over the past few years on his website and X account.

I know first-hand that Dr. Makis’ cancer protocols and coaching work since my own father-in-law in China is receiving them and with nearly four months of treatment thus far, has seen his cancer level reduced significantly (as per hospital lab results and blood work).

But the Canadian and Albertan governments wants NOTHING to do with permitting Dr. Makis from helping to treat cancer patients, making it illegal to do so, and even physically threatening him and his family.

It’s a medical mafia indeed, as Dr. Makis puts it.

It’s rather disgusting and morally reprehensible on the part of these totally corrupt individuals who pose as members of these governments.

This is exactly what I mean by death care.

Preventing a qualified, extremely knowledgeable and competent health care professional from curing patients is pure evil and goes to show that they don’t give a damn about actual health care.

Protecting Big Pharma interests rather those of patients appears to be the order of the day in Canada.

Amidst its Brain Drain crisis, Canada is losing yet another brilliant mind in Dr. Makis who in the process of relocating to Florida in the United States where he has been issued a license to practice medicine and will be treated with respect and with human dignity.

Universal Ostrich Farms vs Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)

Death care in Canada isn’t solely limited to the human species.

Animals and pets are also marked for elimination.

In one of the most reprehensible and sordid chapters in Canadian history, we saw the heinously inhumane culling of innocent animals – over 300 ostriches in Edgewood, British Columbia who posed zero threat to anyone.

I documented this tragedy on my Substack on a very dark Remembrance Day: Canada Has Fallen. Never Forget what just happened. (Black Poppy Day).

On November 6, 2025 in the dead of night, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) culled over 300 ostriches using 900 rounds over 4 hours amidst the gut-wrenching, horrifying screams of their owners and other onlookers.

The cull was green-lighted by members of our very corrupt and immoral (my opinion) Supreme Court of Canada as per their November 6, 2025 decision.

Though the highest court in the nation is one that is supposed to be impartial and non-political, they have proven otherwise not just in this case, but in many others.

Perhaps these judges should be sent back to law school.

Under section 445(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada, this inhumane act employed in the culling of the ostriches is actually considered illegal.

Yet, law enforcement – including the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) did not prevent it from happening.

In fact, members the RCMP preferred to intimidate a journalist reporting on the cull, with another officer blowing kisses on the day they killed hundreds of healthy ostriches and destroyed a farm family’s way of life and livelihood.

Such respectable members of our national law enforcement, wouldn’t you say?

If we don’t have rule of law left in this country, what do we have?

Seizing & Killing of Healthy Family Pets

Killing animals in Canada is not limited to farm animals as with the case illustrated above.

Family pets are also targets of mischievous and corrupt organisations.

Across Canada, many provincial SPCAs (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) actually do more harm to pets and their owners than protect them.

This has been the case with Dr. Monica Marcu in British Columbia whose German Shepherds got seized and most likely eliminated, according to their owner.

Screenshot showing some of the German Shepherds who were stolen by the BCSPCA and the RCMP (according to Dr. Monica Marcu) on the premise that they were living in unacceptable conditions. Source: SGT Report.

I contacted Dr. Marcu for further comment.

“There are MANY farmers and breeders and families whose animals were stolen -”seized” without good reason by BC SPCA, which works without oversight and transparency!” she wrote.

“Once they take your animals, OUR FAMILY members, they don’t have to say what happened to them, how they murder them or sell them and such,” she added.

“My beloved GSDs were MY FAMILY and I MISS them so much that I cry every day and cannot find peace, nor joy, they were my reason to live after my husband’s passing. I was deprived of my children and family, my beloved lovely and intelligent dogs!”

Her allegations about the BC SPCA are not unfounded.

The Society for British Columbia Public Guardians and Animals (BC SPGA), an advocacy group has documented abuses by not only the BC SPCA in British Columbia, but also with regards to the Ontario SPCA.

These provincial organisations that are purportedly supposed to protect pets and animals appear to operate in contradiction with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as they deprive pet owners from some of their fundamental rights.

The BC SPGA notes that “since there is no legislation to protect animal guardians the majority of animal seizures end in trauma, seperation (sic), fright and grief for the animals and their families.”

“The animals are the innocent victims who are removed from their loved ones and either killed or re-sold for profit,” the animal advocacy group adds.

The outfit offers support and information about what you can do when the BC SPCA seizes your pet.

While countless cases of pet seizures have been occurring across the country by SPCA outfits, some pet owners have pushed back through courts to get their beloved family members returned (see here and here). But sadly, not all pet owners have the financial resources to seek legal remedies through courts.

Reason #9 – Political Targeting & Lawfare

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

Many forms of lawfare have been utilised by the Liberal Government to intimidate and exhaust the financial and emotional means of political dissidents and those who expose their misdoings and crimes.

Briefly put, lawfare means to use the legal and court system (and/or shady tribunals) to punish an individual (or business or organisation) through lengthy and costly proceedings. The process itself is the punishment.

Apart from lawfare, many different tactics are employed to target dissidents and political opponents. Some specific examples are provided in the following sub-sections.

Freedom Convoy Protests

Many abuses came about during the Freedom Convoy protests in Ottawa which took place in February of 2022 on the part of federal and authorities and the Ottawa Police.

Having suffered greatly during the COVID-19 Scamdemic, Canadians sought to express their grievances as per their fundamental rights, Section 2(c) – freedom of peaceful assembly and Section 2(b) – freedom of expression of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Peaceful protesters were met with a lot of police intimidation and an endless supply of gaslighting and castigating by figures such as Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland as well as then Interim Ottawa Police Chief Steve Bell whose force appears to have used very questionable policing tactics.

“If you are involved in this protest we will actively look to identify you and follow up with financial sanctions and criminal charges.” – Interim Ottawa Police Chief Steve Bell

To end the protests, the federal government, amidst the fervent advice of then advisor Mark Carney, brought in a merciless squad of goons to violently crush the protesters, including the elderly.

Is this Canada or an authoritarian police state?

Unlawful Bank Account Seizures

During the Freedom Convoy protests, then Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland admitted that bank accounts had been frozen (without a court order) of persons who had donated to the GiveSendGo campaign to support the cause under the Emergencies Act.

This was done to law-abiding citizens without any due process.

Accounts of many other Canadians citizens were frozen during this period, including that of former Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) Officer Vincent Gircys who was acting as an unofficial liaison between the protesters and local police in Ottawa during the protests.

I interviewed the veteran officer of 32 years and asked them why his own bank (CIBC) had done so to which he replied: “I have no idea.”

Gircys along with other plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in federal court regarding this abuse and won their case in which the Honourable Mr. Justice Mosley deemed the invocation of the Emergencies Act as ultra vires meaning it was illegal.

In a subsequent legal Notice of Action, Gircys and 19 other victim plaintiffs are seeking damages suffered by the Emergencies Act with the defendants consisting of then Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Deputy Prime Minister (and Finance Minister) Chrystia Freeland, among other government officials and Brenda Lucki, then Commissioner of the RCMP.

Around the 23^rd of February of 2022, banks who participated in the seizures began to unfreeze the accounts of the “designated persons” amidst speculation that many Canadians were going to their respective banks to pull the entirety of the funds from their accounts during this period which was beginning to cause a run on the banks.

De-banking Dissidents

On the similar topic of bank account seizures, another worrisome trend is that of “de-banking” dissidents, or those deemed enemies of the state.

In early 2023, I interviewed one such “dissident” who was rather outspoken against COVID-19 Pandemic measures and made a post about his plight: Scotiabank de-banking political dissidents.

“Jeremy Mackenzie received a call from a Scotiabank representative presaging that his account was to imminently be suspended and that the bank’s relationship with him was beyond their “risk appetite.”

Notice the phrase “risk appetite,” as this appears to be a common cop-out or rationale for de-banking individuals.

An important question here, however, is who exactly directed the bank to take this unusual action?

Were there outside political forces at play? Perhaps Trudeau’s Liberal Government? If so, then that would imply the bank’s complicity in it being used as a political weapon.

Now, if you think that banks will merely only de-bank “rebel dissidents” such as Jeremy Mackenzie, think again.

Seasoned attorney Eva Chipiuk (who actually cross-examined Prime Minister Trudeau during the Public Order Emergency Commission’s (POEC) inquiry held in November of 2022) also received the same treatment (archived here) last summer.

Her July 24, 2025 X post read “Well, I wasn’t expecting this, @RBC. Welcome to Canada, where tyranny has great customer service,” followed by a photo of the letter her bank, the Royal Bank of Canada, sent her which [partially] states:

“After careful consideration, we regretfully advise you that the recent activity in your accounts is outside of RBC’s client risk appetite, and consequently we are no longer in a position to continue our banking relationship with you.”

Notice the recurring mention of “risk appetite.” What exactly does that mean? By which standards or banking policies do these relate to?

There are many more related examples that could be cited. But what should be observed here is that it appears that Canadian banks are being increasingly weaponised against citizens (and even businesses for that matter), as they take it upon themselves to be arbiters of what is acceptable behaviour and what is not.

How long before your bank de-banks you?

Shady Tribunals

Collins Dictionary defines tribunal as: a special court or committee that is appointed to deal with particular problems.

Originally, and in the past, they were mostly used to settle employment and housing type disputes between parties.

But in the past decade or so, tribunals in Canada have morphed into Stasi-like self-appointed entities comprised of questionably qualified members who seem hell bent on destroying an individual’s reputation for not conforming to party ideology. In other words, they seem to be a weapon to punish rather than a body concerned with fair and impartial dispute resolution.

Not that dissimilar to the Spanish Inquisition which was used as a formal, severe, judicial body to investigate and enforce religious uniformity through systematic inquiry and punishment, this is what modern day “human rights” tribunals have come to be.

Here is a case that perfectly illustrates this point.

It was recently reported that the BC Human Rights Tribunal has concluded and ruled that former Chilliwack Board of Education trustee Barry Neufeld must pay $750,000 to LGBTQ members of the Chilliwack Teachers’ Association over comments deemed offensive and labelled as “hate speech.”

Michael A. Rothman on X summarised the situation succinctly, stating on his X post (archived here):

“𝗔 𝗖𝗔𝗡𝗔𝗗𝗜𝗔𝗡 𝗦𝗖𝗛𝗢𝗢𝗟 𝗣𝗥𝗜𝗡𝗖𝗜𝗣𝗔𝗟 𝗦𝗔𝗜𝗗 𝗦𝗢𝗠𝗘𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗢𝗡 𝗙𝗔𝗖𝗘𝗕𝗢𝗢𝗞. 𝗜𝗧 𝗖𝗢𝗦𝗧 𝗛𝗜𝗠 𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗬𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗡𝗤 𝗛𝗘 𝗛𝗔𝗗.
Barry Neufeld was a longtime educator and former school principal in British Columbia. In 2017, he posted on Facebook criticizing a provincial program called SOGI — Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity — which was being taught in schools. He wrote that allowing little children to choose to change gender is nothing short of child abuse.
That was his opinion. On his own Facebook page. As a private citizen.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝘂𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘁. 𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝗖𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗱𝗮’𝘀 𝗮𝗱𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝘁𝘂𝘀 𝗱𝗶𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁.
The case went to a Human Rights Tribunal — not a real court, but an administrative body with looser evidentiary rules where accusers can remain completely anonymous. These tribunals were originally created to handle discrimination in housing and employment. They have since mutated into speech police with the power to financially d∗stroy private citizens for things they post on social media.
In a 140-page ruling, the tribunal found that Neufeld’s comments promoted harmful stereotypes and were discriminatory. The damages ordered: $750,000 Canadian dollars.
He now has approximately $1,000 left in savings.
𝗟𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗶𝗻. 𝗔 𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗿 𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗿𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝘀 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗿𝘂𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗷𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝗼𝗻 𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲.
This is not a fringe case. Canada is now pushing legislation to expand hate speech laws even further. The direction of travel is unmistakable — the government decides which opinions are acceptable, and the tribunals handle the rest. No jury. Sometimes no named accuser. Just a bureaucratic body with the power to wipe out your life savings.
This is what the First Amendment was designed to prevent. Americans look at Canada today and see a warning, not a model.
𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗮 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗿𝘂𝗶𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗙𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗯𝗼𝗼𝗸 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁, 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼 𝗳𝗿𝗲𝗲 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗰𝗵. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗰𝗵. 𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁’𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗱𝗼𝗺 — 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁’𝘀 𝗮 𝗰𝗮𝗴𝗲.”

As a long time educator myself (36 years in the sector with 23 teaching), I find this absolutely horrifying.

What’s worse, is that a case like the Neufeld one above serves an even more sinister purpose. It serves as a warning to educators and teachers that they must fall in line with certain ideologies (such as the LGBTQ+, gender ideology, etc.), elsewise they will be severely ostracised and punished – professionally and financially.

How else can one interpret this?

I will cover more on tribunals in Section Reason #14 – Hub for Globalist Agendas in the sub-section ‘UN Public-Private Schemes” whereby as per new legislation, administrative tribunals can be set up by a UN NGO who could determine its own “laws.”

Scary stuff.

Reason #10 – Politicised Law Enforcement

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

“Without justice, there is no freedom,” a seasoned attorney once told me as a guest on my podcast.

During the COVID-19 Scamdemic, Quebec-based lawyer Gloriane Blais was disbarred from her bar association following her outspokenness about the Covid-19 measures and vaccines.

Blais was a seasoned lawyer, having tried cases all the way up to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Her ordeal demonstrated how yet another key institution, courts have become particularly politicised since the fabricated pandemic.

Sure politics in law have long existed in Canada and elsewhere with corrupt judges, bribes, coercion, compromised juries, and son on for a very long time (probably since their inception back millennia ago in Mesopotamia). But things really ramped-up in the Covid era.

The main point here is that laws are only good if they are enforced in a correct and impartial manner.

And if a proper, uniform, impartial enforcement of the law doesn’t exist, then you don’t live in a serious country; you live in a Banana republic.

We will examine, hereunder, cases which prove that law enforcement in Canada is in a rather fragile predicament. But just before looking at them, it is imperative to examine something fundamental.

Mandates & Measures vs. The Law of the Land

As was the case in countless other countries, during the COVID-19 Scamdemic Canada saw its fair share of lawlessness – not by everyday citizens, but rather by many who occupied positions of authority in law enforcement such as police officers.

What I mean by this is that many law enforcement officers across the country in all provinces and territories exercised their authority to enforce mandates (not laws) decreed by their their respective higher-ups such as their chiefs and/or Police Service Boards (see here for Ontario) who typically appoint Chiefs of Police.

Many of these rank and file police officers were largely just “following orders” from their superiors without actually fully knowing or comprehending the laws of the land.

This was explained to me by a seasoned retired police officer of the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP):

“... many police officers are not fully familiar with the Constitution, and more specifically its section 52(1), they tend to make mistakes when carrying out orders for duties they are given which may conflict with this particular section of the Constitution.”

Section 52(1) of the Canadian Constitution Act (1982) – The supremacy clause states:

Simply put, this provision makes it clear that any law that is not consistent with the provisions of the Constitution is to no effect and thus unenforceable.

The law office of Ducharme Weber further validates the provision by stating that it: “reaffirms constitutional supremacy. It imposes an obligation on bodies empowered to determine questions of law to do so in a manner consistent with the Constitution and to invalidate or treat as invalid a law to the extent of its inconsistency with the Constitution.”

This notion is not limited to police officers. In my very first news article post back in September of 2022, I noted the case of a Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officer who actually knew the law, refused to carry out unlawful orders, but was nevertheless dismissed from his duties.

I could provide many examples of how police officers exercised their powers to enforce the unlawful decrees during the pandemic, but I will merely provide two I mentioned elsewhere in this post:

Police in Gatineau (Quebec) raided a home for what they deemed an “illegal gathering”;
Police arrived to disrupt a church gathering in Alberta.

Tamara Lich & Chris Barber, Patt King, Coutts 4, and Others

Alberta based journalist Jason Lavigne (the gentleman who convinced me to start my own podcast) covered many cases whereby outspoken protesters during the pandemic were harshly persecuted by law enforcement.

Lavigne discussed many of these cases on my podcast early last year, outlining the following as notable ones:

The Coutts4 (Anthony Olienick, Chris Carbert, Chris Lysak, and Jerry Morin)
Pat King trial (see also here)
Tamara Lich & Chris Barber (Freedom Convoy organisers)

These red-blooded Canadians were severely persecuted and punished by the authorities who used various means – ranging from public ridicule to lawfare to imprisonment – in order to ruin their lives, wreck them financially, crush their spirits, as well as make examples of them so that the rest of the Canadian population “stays in line.”

I’ve also documented the cases of two medical doctors who were severely reprimanded and punished for their outspokenness during the pandemic, namely Dr. Daniel Nagase and Dr. William Makis, among others who were trying to expose stillbirth deaths caused by the COVID-19 “vaccines.”

Dr. Nagase also told me that the authorities had even [unlawfully] seized his Canadian passport preventing him from travelling outside of the country.

Can you imagine the state seizing your passport? Is this China or Canada?

It seems that these “authorities” have gone completely rogue, literally turning Canada into a “police state.”

My talks with two former Seasoned Police Detectives on the subject

While the closing statement of the previous sub-section may seem a bit far-fetched, the mention of Canada turning into a “police state” was actually proclaimed to me by a seasoned veteran police officer.

I’ve had the privilege of interviewing former Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) detective Vincent Gircys on a few occasions:

I also interviewed former Toronto Police Detective Donald Best:

Between them, they have over 60 years of experience in law enforcement and in conducting investigations.

Over the past several years, they have been exposing key deficiencies in law enforcement in Canada.

The pair have increased awareness on this vital issue which concerns all Canadians and have done their utmost best to bring about a restoration of the [proper] rule of law in this country.

We owe these fine gentlemen a whole debt of gratitude for their integrity, courage, sense of duty, and patriotism.

While I won’t go over all the details of their revelations and respective stories, I will nonetheless highlight some key points or takeaways they have made about law enforcement in Canada.

Donald Best revealed how the judicial system in Canada can easily be turned against just about anybody. He himself was wrongly persecuted and even imprisoned, subject to solitary confinement and sleep deprivation during his incarceration which is tantamount to torture.

Former OPP Officer Gircys noted that many police officers around the country aren’t properly familiar with their oaths. And even though the oaths police officers take vary from province to province, the [Canadian] Constitution “is the most important law of the land,” the 32-year veteran emphasised.

Gircys, who is also Police for Freedom Canada’s Chapter leader for Ontario, points out that at the start of his career with the OPP he was given a King James Bible. He testified thousands of times in court, each time placing his hands on the Bible “to swear an oath.”

“Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law,” is the first sentence of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which was written and established in 1982 – the same year Gircys commenced his career in law enforcement.

In my interview with him, he further emphasised the notion of the Supremacy of God and how we have veered away from that. A largely unknown fact is that the Parliament building in Ottawa has inscriptions of biblical quotes, he reminded me.

The point here is that the very foundation under which the premise of the rule of law in our country is governed has largely been forgotten. It matters because of the moral imperative law enforcement officers and members of the judiciary have in the execution of their respective functions. In its absence, we are left with poor judgments and loose and selective interpretations of the law or even travesty of justice.

The last point I want to get through with regards to these two former police detectives has to do with their coverage of the Detective Helen Grus case which we discussed in our podcast together.

Detective Helen Grus case

For those unfamiliar, you can read a very good overview of Ottawa Police Detective Helen Grus’ case from a summative article by former Toronto Police Detective and journalist Donald Best:

Donald Best has been covering this case since its start and has documented it meticulously on his website.

I have interviewed Donald Best twice on my podcast; and, in the second instance – alongside former Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) forensic investigator Vincent Gircys we discussed the Helen Grus case. The pair of former police detectives had this to say about the case:

Both Best and Gircys currently serve as directors in the grassroots initiative called the GRUS JUSTICE PROJECT which highlights this pivotal case in Canadian law enforcement.

In addition, a documentary film called Silencing Detective Grus (media release here) is currently in production which will be released in the first quarter of 2026. Here is the trailer for the film (alternate video link here):

Reason #11 – Bank of Canada Takeover by the BIS

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

“Once a nation parts with control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes the nation’s laws. Usury, once in control, will wreck a nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred responsibility, all talk of the sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile” - William Lyon Mackenzie King, Tenth Prime Minister of Canada, 1935

Sadly, I would contend that about 99% of the population has no clue as to how currency is created (conjured up) and issued.

Yet, we all use this “money” to buy our daily necessities, homes, cars, and so on. But do we really know and understand what it is and where it comes from?

While the masses know something is definitely wrong in that they see prices and the cost of living steadily increase, they don’t understand its source – inflation which is caused by increases in the money supply.

This is where the Bank of Canada (or any other central bank for that matter) comes into play.

In order to provide a better understanding about how our Canadian dollar is “created” and who exactly issues it, I decided to write two specialised posts which explain some of the roles and functions of the Bank of Canada. Moreover, therein the first post I provide historical data about the net federal government financial debt (in dollars) stretching back to 1867.

I would strongly encourage the reader to set time aside to read these two posts carefully and ponder them:

The first article shows how none other than Pierre Elliot Trudeau basically sold out the country to the International Banking Cabal when, in 1974, he joined the deliberations to form the Basel Committee with the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) – the central bank of central banks.

Prior to 1974, the nation could borrow interest-free, but that all changed since joining the Basel Committee.

In that same article, I included the following graph which clearly shows the point from which our national level of debt (due to reckless increases in our money supply, a.k.a. “money printing”) ballooned, impoverishing both the nation and its citizens:

At first glance, does this level of debt (from about 1974-1975) look normal (and acceptable) to you?

Notice that the graph only reaches the year 2015. Needless to say, our debt has expanded much further since then, reaching nearly $1.3 trillion dollars.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (as of March 31, 2026) estimates your share of this debt at nearly $31,000.

Keep in mind that this is not your doing, but rather the successive governments (including and since the first Pierre Trudeau administration) who have betrayed our nation by signing us on to the BIS’ Basel Committee.

I also detailed how every two months, the Governor for the Bank of Canada attends meetings at the BIS headquarters in Switzerland and how these meetings are held in secrecy.

The above video is an official one from the BIS’ own YouTube channel. Notice that it has its Comments section turned off. Hhum, I wonder why.

Not even our elected officials (Members of Parliament) can know of the secret dealings that take place with these committees at these meetings (from this supranational entity). Yet, monetary policy set by the Bank of Canada comes from the marching orders of these secretive meetings from this supranational, private, organisation.

The same happens with other countries’ central banks, as was observed by

Gerard Rennick, an Australian Senator:

In my second article on the subject, I go deeper into the weeds of this treasonous betrayal, further outlining the nefariousness of the looting scheme.

I go over figures showing the costs of servicing our debt burden (with interest expense payments) which for 2023-2024 alone reached a whopping $81.8 billion (federal + provincial) or $46.5 billion (federal only).

I also go over who these interest expense payments go to, with a large chunk of it being funnelled to ‘Foreign Investors’ (largely foreign private banks and financial institutions) which in 2019 accounted for $225 billion.

I haven’t been able to find more recent figures on this, but, needless to say, that’s a lot of bacon.

In addition, I ponder as to why exactly the Bank of Canada cedes its authority to the BIS and its Basel Committee when in actuality, the relationship is a voluntary or non-binding one; in other words, our central bank doesn’t have to follow the orders of the BIS and its Basel Committee and could act independently from it if it wanted to.

I also go over the sweeping immunities the BIS and its current and former employees (including Mark Carney) enjoy – which means they can never be prosecuted nor have any of their documents seized or examined, in addition to the Canadian law (the Bank for International Settlements (Immunity) Act) which further enforces this protection.

Finally, I examine how the BIS is paving the way for a CBDC, or completely digital Canadian dollar (which I further expand upon in a separate article).

For more information on CBDCs, be sure to also check out the Canadian Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF)’s March 2025 paper titled CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCY? What it is and how it could impact your privacy, security, and autonomy.

COVID-19 Era Money Printing (a dramatic increase in the money supply)

Soaring prices of goods and services – particularly food as outlined in Reason #2 above have been largely attributable to how the Bank of Canada has, rather recklessly, grandly increased our money supply to mitigate the so-called ravages of the pandemic.

One could argue, however, that this was a deliberate policy approach to further impoverish Canadians. At the very least, it can be seen as an incompetent pursuit by those managing our nation’s money supply, namely the brains that run the Bank of Canada.

Here is what they did and how they did it.

Firstly, it must be recalled that increasing a nation’s money supply causes inflation which causes a visible increase in prices for many goods and services.

The following chart from TradingEconomics shows visually the extent to which our nation’s money supply (measured in M2) has ballooned during the COVID-19 Pandemic starting in early 2020:

Looking at the chart above you can see that Canada’s money supply – measured as M2 – was at about 1.82 trillion in January of 2020 compared to the latest figure at about 2.78 trillion (as of January, 2026). That represents an increase of nearly 50%.

The policy response by the Bank of Canada around August of 2020 was officially called Our COVID-19 response: Large-scale asset purchases. It entailed large-scale purchases of government bonds which they dub “QE,” or Quantitative Easing which is just a fancy moniker for money printing.

You see the Bank of Canada likes to obfuscate what they are really doing with colourful and benevolent-sounding language for which they are helping the masses. Sure, some relief did help during the pandemic, but the longer-term consequences of this reckless and poorly thought out decision have been devastating to our country and Canadians.

What will be the next crisis or excuse to yet again drastically increase our money supply?

Reason #12 – Unsustainable, Trillion Dollar Debt Burden

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

While I already touched upon this issue (our debt burden) plaguing Canada, it is worth revisiting, as its consequences going forward will likely prove disastrous.

Here’s a broad overview of Canada’s level of debt according to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (screenshot taken on April 1, 2026):

Nearly $1.3 trillion is the total debt.

The debt increases by nearly $110 million every single day, or $4.5 million per hour.

And the per capita amount is almost $31,000 which represents your share of the debt.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation affirms what I stated earlier, stating “Canada’s federal debt grew steadily between 5% and 10% per year until 1975 when it began to explode; growing for the next 12 years at more than 20% per year.”

The two main causes which are attributable for these debts are poor decision making with regards to:

monetary policy: how central banks influence the economy by raising or lowering the money supply; and
fiscal policy: how the government uses its taxes and spending to affect the economy.

For the former, we have the Bank of Canada to blame. For the latter, fiscal policy, the burden lies on poor decision making by the Federal Government with its annual budgets and various spending programs (examples here).

In the past decade or so, each year the Liberal Government spent more than it collected in taxes. This is called a budget deficit.

As it needs to borrow to spend what it doesn’t have, that further increases and compounds the debt burden (as explained in the previous section).

Put succinctly, the Liberal Federal Government (and others prior to it) have been reckless in spending on a whole bunch of programs for which it didn’t have funds.

The path, needless to say, is unsustainable.

That is not just conjecture on the part of this author. Instead, take it from the statements of Jason Jacques who is the Director General, Economic and Fiscal Analysis for the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO).

Jacques stated [with emphasis added]:

“The most important word in the release this morning was ‘unsustainable.’

...

We didn’t choose it carelessly. I’ve been in the office for 17 years. I was working in the Federal Government putting together budgets for 10 years prior to that.

...

You choose these words with prudence and care. And certainly we don’t want to be alarmist. And at the same time, like the current path we’re on in terms of the federal debt as a share of the economy is unsustainable.”

Jacques was speaking as a witness with regards to the Federal Infrastructure Spending and Economic and Fiscal Outlook for 2025. This was on the heels of the September 25, 2025 PBO Releases Latest Economic and Fiscal Outlook which observed the following federal spending madness for the last two years:

“In the absence of final financial results for the previous fiscal year, the PBO estimates that there was a budgetary deficit of $51.7 billion (1.7 per cent of GDP) in 2024-25. For the current fiscal year, 2025 26, the PBO projects the deficit will increase sharply to $68.5 billion (2.2 per cent of GDP). Due to persistent budgetary deficits, the federal debt-to-GDP ratio is projected to rise above 43 per cent over the medium term.”

That’s a $51.7 billion budget deficit for 2024-2025 and a projected one of $68.5 billion for the current fiscal year.

But actually, the figure for the latter is expected to be closer to $80 billion, as per a November 4, 2025 article from the National Post.

Unsustainable indeed.

Complete madness.

And you the taxpayer, will be footing the bill for their unhinged drunken sailor behaviour.

Sadly, there is no indication whatsoever that the current Liberal Government will be cutting back on its excessive spending any time soon.

One has to wonder if this is done purposely or by design. Or, whether they are simply incompetent fools. Take your pick.

Reason #13 – Protecting Oligopolies & Stifling Competition

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

Oligopolies in Canada have long controlled certain markets, particularly in banking, telecommunications and air travel.

As such, the major players in these sectors have reaped great financial benefits and have seen their positions protected with friendly policies enacted by federal and provincial governments.

This is actually common practice around the globe and is nothing new in business.

But what makes it particularly reprehensible in Canada is that these oligopolies have benefit greatly at the expense of everyday Canadians who have very limited choices when choosing service providers in these sectors.

The following three sub-sections will clearly demonstrate these challenges and the lengths these oligopolies go to protect their cash cows.

Banks

Back in January of last year Andrew Spence, author of the book Fleeced: Canadians Versus Their Banks (an a stunning exposé of the inner workings of our six major banks which was published in Sept. 2024), elaborated in great detail how the major Canadian banks are protecting their oligopoly while fleecing Canadians on interest, fees, and other charges:

Moreover, Ian Bickis from The Canadian Press published Canadians paying billions of dollars in ‘excess’ bank fees: report in the Financial Post which affirms that Canadians are overpaying by billions of dollars a year.

To make matters even much worse, as of December 2025, the failure of a major bank (largely due to commercial loan defaults and industry over-regulation) which has been around for 179 years will have repercussions on the rest of the Big Six (TD, RBC, BMO, Scotiabank, CIBC, and National Bank) since they are also facing the same headwinds. The following video provides the sordid details which are very frightening to say the least:

If you are holding your hard-earned money in any of these Big Six banks, you should perhaps ask yourself: Is my money safe?

You should also ask yourself if you or your business is at risk of being de-banked by members of the Big Six.

The author of the previous video linked above also published another, CAUGHT: US Gov Exposes Canadian Banks’ “Secret Blacklist” late last year in which the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency released a bombshell report exposing TD Bank and BMO for systematically denying banking services to legal American businesses—not based on financial risk, but on political beliefs.

Accordingly, while we thought that Canadian banks were doing a one-off targeting and de-banking of freedom-loving Canadians who had decided to support the Freedom Convoy due to political pressure, we can clearly see that they haven’t let go of their political biases when deciding whom can bank or cannot bank with them.

The business targeted by TD and BMO consisted of those involved industries such as oil, crypto, tobacco, firearms.

What is to say they won’t expand the list such as with business that don’t play along with the Climate Scam or that don’t adhere to LGBTQ+ and Gender Ideology agendas?

What about dissidents who criticise the government or key institutions? Can they also be targeted?

Well, that has already been answered in this post as it pertains to Scotia Bank and RBC.

Where do such blacklists end?

Are these the standards, practices, and behaviours expected of our Canadian banks in providing an essential service to Canadians and Canadian businesses?

Who is supposed to be their watchdog anyway? And why haven’t offending banks been reprimanded for such practices?

Airlines

The airline sector in Canada represents yet another boondoggle.

While there exists hundreds of air carriers, only a handful of them actually account for the majority of air travel across the country.

For instance, at major airports Air Canada and WestJet account for 56 to 78% of all domestic passenger traffic.

According to Competition Bureau Canada’s own findings (as per a June 19, 2025 report), the market remains concentrated and competition from new sources (carriers) is highly limited.

They admit that it is difficult for new airlines to enter the market, stay in business, and grow.

This is a trend that goes back decades. In the 1990s there was a call for “open skies” to make the industry more competitive, but the situation never really changed, as the usual players still dominate the market.

As with many other sectors, this is attributable to protectionist measures by the Federal Government favouring Air Canada is its primary beneficiary.

Air Canada

Before showing how Air Canada (AC) receives preferential treatment, let me just throw in a few quick anecdotes about my personal experiences with them.

While living in China I came back a few times to Canada and each time I found their flight attendants to be rather abrasive (to put it politely). They often berated Chinese passengers with their rudeness and condescending tones. I was regularly disgusted by such conceited attitudes. I am not suggesting that they are all like this, but after witnessing it frequently enough, I can say with assurance that their courtesy standards are very sub-par compared to their contemporaries of airlines in China and Southeast Asia.

When I returned to Canada on October 31 / November 1, 2021, it was smack during the COVID-19 pandemic. Flights were very limited. But the flight we took from Shanghai to Toronto was particularly abhorrent. The Air Canada crew did the strict minimum during this long flight. After the main meal was served, they turned the lights way down low to the point that we could barely see in the passenger cabin. Plus, their attendants were nowhere to be found; they cowardly lurked in the back of the plane for the vast majority of the flight with their masks on, keeping their distance from us dirty passengers. There was trash absolutely everywhere in the aisles (since the crew was neglecting their duties wee and not picking it up) to the point were it was dangerous to walk along to a must needed trip to the WC, especially if one had a young child in need. I was utterly disgusted by this lack of professionalism.

But here we are, the majority of flights out of Canada are mostly available from this protected and favoured airline, Air Canada.

They are constantly changing their international flights at the last minute, never considering the ill effects these changes have on international travellers, and not compensating them for these unjustifiable measures.

We were lucky coming back from Asia in the summer of 2025, as it was just a week before their narcissistic staff went [illegally] on strike, leaving half a million very frustrated passengers stranded and helpless.

What a bunch of smug and vainglorious cry babies.

These strikes happen way too often.

To make matters worse, Air Canada is highly subsidised by the Federal Government, receiving billions (in taxpayer funds) to overcompensate their higher-ups and infantile, self-serving staff.

Furthermore, Air Canada has followed the insane and very costly pursuit of that is the net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 scam, with passengers footing this carbon tax looting bill (which across the industry is estimated at over U.S. $5 trillion).

In this mad pursuit, AC has also committed itself to using “sustainable aviation fuels” (biofuels) which are actually laced with metals, producing soot emissions which form as artificial cirrus clouds; these contain a panoply of toxic metals which make their way into our lungs and natural environment.

I have been documenting these instances by Air Canada flights for the past few years, but the authorities that are supposed to investigate such crimes refuse to do so.

But what else would you expect from a country where our skies are 100% monitored and controlled by a private entity, NAV CANADA, with zero accountability to the Canadian public?

Telecommunications

The Canadian struggle to foster greater competition in telecom and internet services dates back decades, notes a Globe and Mail article from August of last year.

In Canada, there are five major players in the telecom market:

Rogers
Bell (BCE Inc.)
Telus
Shaw
Videotron (Quebecor)

These players provide both phone services and well as internet access services.

While prices for cell phone plans have decreased somewhat in the past few years, the trend is that they are on the rise moving ahead with price increases ranging from 7.5% to nearly 13% (year over year).

Barriers to entry in the Canadian cell phone market remains high with limited access to networks and regulatory constraints (such as with wireless spectrum licences) for new participants.

As for broadband internet, in nominal terms, according to World Population Review data for 2026, Canada’s broadband (wireless internet connection with a download speed of at least 50-60 Mbps) ranges between $70.87 to $84.93 (note that these figures are in $U.S.).

The main industry regulator in Canada, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), holds a lot of power over what happens with providers.

The Canadian Telecommunications Association recently commented the following about the latest CRTC decision on the Wholesale Internet Access Framework [with emphasis added]:

“The Canadian Telecommunications Association is extremely disappointed that the Government of Canada has chosen not to alter the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission’s (CRTC) wholesale internet access framework, despite widespread opposition from across the industry, including smaller independent network operators and wholesale providers.
This decision undermines the very goals it claims to support. It discourages investment, weakens competition, and ultimately harms Canadian consumers.”

So there you it – affirmation from a trade association in this industry which confirms what I previously stated. Governments and regulators working hand-in-hand to protect their cronies.

Regulators are the first groups captured by major industry participants, many say. And I would tend to agree with that.

Reason #14 – Hub for Globalist Agendas

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

Canada is one of the principal testbeds for implementing globalist agendas concocted by thieving institutions such as the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the United Nations (UN).

The purpose of these globalist agendas using Canada as one of its hubs is twofold:

To usurp domestic laws and implement supranational ones, removing national and individual sovereignty; and
To plunder billion$$$ from our coffers (taxpayers).

Of course the bulk of these agendas are sold as “benevolent” endeavours disguised as “programs” through private-public partnerships (better known as fascism) coupled with looting the coffers of the state (i.e., our tax dollars).

Apart from the WEF and the UN, The Global Fund is another principal looting entity through which billions of dollars are funnelled out of Canada, never to be seen again; it has already extorted C$5.4 billion plus US$100 million to date.

Hundreds, if not thousands, of examples of such kinds of public-private programs could be referenced here, but I will instead focus on a few that demonstrate the cunningness through which they achieve their globalist goals.

UN Public-Private Schemes

People-United has done a good job at exposing various public-private rackets through a series of exposés. For instance, in Part 4 of one of their series, they show how the UN’s Public-Private Partnership Schemes Operating at the Federal Government Level.

“There are endless transfers of power from the domestic Canadian government to the private sector. It is beyond the scope of this newsletter to get into all of them, but the links below will give you a good start if you wish to deep-dive to learn just how much the UN has privatized most of Canada already. We underline the relevant words associated with the UN world government:”

To keep things as less technical as possible, I will just highlight (with links) some of the ways in which the UN has privatised many of Canada’s institutions for pillaging and other malicious intents:

The Department of Employment and Social Development Act, S.C. 2005, c. 34 legislation defines who are considered Government “partners” (think public-private partnerships) which includes under section (e) “a non-profit corporation or public body performing a function for an entity referred to in any of paragraphs (a) to (d).”
- What this basically means is that a corporation acting as a partner can implement or help realise any program that the Minister of the Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) sets forth.
- The ESDC Minister of Employment and Social Development (now called ‘Minister of Jobs and Families’) can assign grants (taxpayer funds) to set up programs – many of which are controlled by UN NGOs (non-profit corporations) that support UN Foreign agendas such as Agenda 2030 and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Under this legislation, the Minister can delegate authority and power to these UN NGOs to basically do as they wish.
- As per the legislation, administrative tribunals can be setup by a UN NGO who could determine its own “laws.”
- These tribunals (formally called ‘Social Security Tribunal) with members appointed will act as a completely separate ‘justice’ system running parallel to our regular courts.
- As these tribunals could impose UN policies, laws, and agendas which can be considered abusive and corrupt, Canadians who find themselves in such tribunals (pseudo courts) would be unable to defend themselves under Canadian laws such as with the Constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The ESDC is essentially a UN-controlled department whose main role is to impose UN Agenda 2030 and SDGs.

UN infiltration of Municipalities (through Municipal Corporations)

This section could get highly technical, but for simplicity stake I will just summarise the gist of what has been occurring across the country at the municipal (government) level and link to People-United’s work on this municipal fraud.

Ever noticed how your local town council often passes local laws that are detrimental to your community? Perhaps they include the likes of education bylaws that seek to incorporate LGBTQ+ agendas into kindergarten and primary school classrooms or your local library or churches? Well, the following will help explain the phenomenon that has been occurring for decades already across all provinces and territories in Canada.

Major cities such as Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, and Montreal (see also here) are set up as municipal corporations (see also here for Ontario Municipal Services Corporations).

In terms of jurisdiction, it should be noted that while provinces have exclusive authority over municipal institutions (including municipal corporations), it is the federal Parliament that has exclusive authority to create criminal law in order to ensure its uniform application across the country. Accordingly, we can find the following formal definition of a municipality in the Interpretation/Definitions section of the Criminal Code:

“municipality includes the corporation of a city, town, village, county, township, parish or other territorial or local division of a province, the inhabitants of which are incorporated or are entitled to hold property collectively for a public purpose; (municipalité)”

Broadly speaking, cities and towns that operate as municipal corporations can expand their tax revenues and create other entities (including private for-profit subsidiary corporations) for their own interests with little to no benefit for local citizens.

Ever notice how your municipal taxes keep going up, yet the services provided always seem to decrease each year?

That is because a large portion of these municipal taxes are “invested”, i.e., funnelled to private partners of these municipal corporations as well as larger entities such as the United Nations and The Global Fund.

Worse, the municipal corporation (in Ontario) can also “invest” in securities using retirement funds. Put more simply and bluntly: they can legally loot pools of retirement funds.

You can read more about these shenanigans here.

Government ‘Partners’ With Pedophilia Pushers

Another mad push that the globalists are steadfast on achieving is the sexualisation of our youth.

I will cover this in more detail below in section Reason #19 – Indoctrination of our Children in a Corrupt Education System. But for now, I just wanted to provide a few examples of how the globalist operatives in Canada are pushing to change our legislation for the perverted apparatchiks and pedophiles at the United Nations (particularly at UNESCO and the WHO) and the WEF, among others such as the Geneva-based NGO called International Commission of Jurists (ICJ).

Once more, People-United has provided a good overview of how they sneakily go about to bring the perverted changes – largely under the guise of protecting the rights of members of the LGBTQ+ communities.

While I cover how the globalist institutions go about bringing these changes on a global scale, hereunder are some of the stratagems they use to implement them in Canada.

Firstly, money is channelled into the causes through grants such as with the Addressing Anti-2SLGBTQI Hate Through Rainbow Action in the millions of dollars.

Once those funds are procured, at taxpayer expense of course, they are trickled down to their partners and collaborators to “support the LGBTQ2 movement LGBTQ2 organizations have increased knowledge and capacity to advance equality with respect to sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression” with the likes of Egale Canada, among others.

As per People-United, Egale demands that defamation be legalized to shut down all critics of it, its funding sources, and its goals. It has already turned several private lawsuits into public events, by being given ‘intervenor’ status as a way to push for the legalization of sodomy and pedophilia under the pretext of ‘sexual rights’. And the Supreme Court of Canada obliged to Egale by affirming ‘trans rights’ to protective counter-speech.

Egale Canada (with the support of their partners) seeks to normalize and legalize pedophilia in Canada, as can be observed by Robert Leckey the former President of the outfit.

Even the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has now held it a crime to call a ‘groomer’ a ‘groomer’ in public as a means of protecting pedophiles operating in schools and libraries in the disguises called Drag (Drag Queens).

Egale also seeks to allow biological men compete in women’s sports and more can be learned about them here.

The Great Climate Scam

Of all the programs that loot Canadian taxpayers, the Great Climate Scam is the one that has been the most detrimental, at least financially.

This is a topic that I have covered extensively on my Substack over the course of the past four years.

So, in lieu of re-hashing out all the goods, I will merely provide links to each of my work that covers this:

In those articles I have provided the receipts, largely using official government sources. While the precise amount of money swindled for this gargantuan ruse is uncertain, it is conservatively estimated to be in the range of $150 to $300 billion (and growing), commitments and all.

Through its countless programs and outfits (there are hundreds of climate-related ones in Canada), you the taxpayer on on the hook for them while private corporations, foundations, and other supranational outfits reap the benefits. Here are but some of them (at the national, provincial, and municipal levels):

Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada – Net Zero Accelerator Initiative - Strategic Response Fund: $8 billion
Government of Canada: Environment and Climate Change – Section 10: Transfer Payments (2025)
- Department of the Environment: $930,316,722
- Public Services and Procurement Canada contributions: $896,932,536
- Parks Canada Agency: $951,670,624
- Impact Assessment Agency of Canada: $21,353,902
- TOTAL: $2.8 billion+ (for 2025 only)
Environment and Climate Change + Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Support for 80 Community Climate Adaptation Projects (2026): $7.1 million
- (here is a nice example of how those municipal taxpayer funds get looted)
Green Municipal Fund (GMF) Government of Canada Climate Adaptation Action Plan to help support and accelerate community-based climate adaptation initiatives: $530 million + $311 in approved funding (see past Annual Reports to learn how much more was looted)
Clean-energy projects across Alberta and the Northwest Territories: $88 million
See more here: HCi3 FUND – Funding Guide and Sustainable Affordable Housing 2025 Funders List
Environment and Climate Change Canada funding programs
Also check out here, here, here, here, here, here, for additional lists

Are you starting to figure out how this plunder game works?

Wait, there’s more and it reaches all the way to the top of the Canadian political food chain.

It should also be noted that Mark Carney’s personal investments in many of these climate schemes are not only illegal under Canadian laws and Conflicts of Interests rules, but sadly pervasive and not investigated.

Replacement Migration

Open border policies that have been raging across Western Europe, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada over the past several years, causing a tremendous amount of damage, anger, and anxiety to local residents.

This replacement migration policy stems from a United Nations plan that dates back to the year 2000 under its Population Division (which is codeword for eugenics).

The UN has tied the Migration mission to its Agenda 2030 and its International Organization for Migration (IMO).

Over the past two and a half decades, this agenda has received a tremendous amount of funding – much of it coming from member nations themselves, along with NGOs, philanthropic foundations, and the like.

Moreover, very powerful supranational institutions such as the United Nations Development Programme, the European Union (including the European Commission), and the Council of Europe have funded NGOs such as George Soros’ Open Society Foundation for these stratagems; for, it aligns with their destabilisation and depopulation agendas.

These destructive polices have hurt Canada and native Canadians tremendously over the past years, as has been readily demonstrated above in section Reason #2 – Rampant Inflation & Increases in the Cost of Living.

When you import millions of immigrants in just a few years, the repercussions are inevitable, affecting housing, health care, increased crime, along with ballooning costs of products and services.

The following chart showing net international migration to Canada (from 1952 to 2025) whose data is sourced from Statistics Canada speaks for itself:

Does that look like a normal migration trend to you?

If that weren’t bad enough, the Century Initiative, largely backed by Prime Minister Mark Carney, seeks to increase Canada’s population from its current tally of about 40 million to 100 million by the year 2100.

What could go wrong?

Global Policing (during Pandemics & for “Public Order”)

This one is not on many peoples’ radar, but it should be.

It’s another globalist agenda that seeks to install global policing forces that would operate in countries’ borders with Canada being no exception.

This push is largely lead by the United Nations which has its own police force called the United Nations Police, dubbed UNCOPS.

UNCOPS (as in not cops). What a fitting name, don’t you think?

The idea here is to have police officers from abroad who will have no qualms in detaining citizens who do not cooperate during pandemics or who may be considered as “domestic extremists.”

John Whitehead from the Rutherford Institute remarks the following about Global Policing:

“The objective is to prevent violent extremism by targeting its source: racism, bigotry, hatred, intolerance, etc. In other words, police—acting as extensions of the United Nations—will identify, monitor and deter individuals who exhibit, express or engage in anything that could be construed as extremist.”

That is why we are currently seeing a mad push in Canada to pass through bills C2 (strong borders), C8 (cybersecurity/telecom), and bill C9 (An Act to amend the Criminal Code (hate propaganda, hate crime and access to religious or cultural places)) in particular.

You see they want to make it a crime for individuals to express their views and opposition online regarding various viewpoints about pandemics, wars, etc. And for these “crimes” they need enforcement.

They know that domestic law enforcement personnel in Canada would be more reluctant to enforce these questionable and highly-interpretive laws (should they pass), but foreign police forces wouldn’t.

Furthermore, the likelihood of having foreign police forces commit crimes themselves increases, for these same, often cultural, reasons.

Case in point, former Toronto Police detective Donald Best wrote of the dangers recruiting and employing foreigners in our police forces, stating (archived here):

“When a society imports foreigners to police legacy citizens, it is the foreigners’ standards and values that define policing.

Britain, Canada, and the USA have no magic soil that automatically negates foreigners’ values and customs.”

Best’s X post on the matter was in relation to police officers in the U.K. that were of Pakistani origin who had repeatedly raped and tortured a 12 year old girl (see the letter ‘Statement from the Rape Gang Inquiry’ signed by two British MPs for the gruesome details).

Should Canada allow foreign policing forces within its borders, this is the kind of perverse fate it could lead to.

For those interested, I have interviewed the former police detective twice on my podcast where many other law enforcement challenges in Canada were discussed.

Apart from the aforementioned legislation they need, a lot of the infrastructure for this is not only required but is actually already in places such as Guelph, Port Moody, and Montreal (Quebec) through what they call ‘Strong Cities Networks’.

“Strong Cities Network” my ass.

Another angle to this global policing trend has to do with future pandemic responses.

Reflecting on the last scamdemic – which was essentially a U.S.-led military operation, it is not difficult to envisage how troops and police forces can be used in the future pandemic responses, particularly with enforcing mandatory vaccinations, curfews, social distancing, suppressing online dissent, and the like.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has been working hard to implement such kinds of mechanisms for future pandemic responses.

And here is an example of how the U.S. Military is working with the WHO in at least one country, Cambodia, for responses to “multi‐sectorial response to potential public threat incidents.” Activities of their plan include [with emphasis added]:

“In the event of a biological event of suspected or confirmed deliberate origin, a country will be able to conduct a rapid, multisectoral response, including the capacity to link public health and law enforcement, and to provide and/or request effective and timely international assistance, including to investigate alleged use events.”

Notice the phrase “including the capacity to link public health and law enforcement” in the passage above. Does that signify that they could use law enforcement to forcefully detain and quarantine individuals or force experimental vaccines or treatments on them?

We can easily see how they could steer law enforcement to do their bidding during a pandemic or crisis.

Moreover, notice that they say “a country will be able to...” which suggests that this may not be a plan limited to US. Indo-Pacific Command (PACOM).

While Cambodia can merely be seen as a testbed for this kind of mechanism, we can nonetheless conclude that there are powerful entities working on such heinous plans.

Canada’s Commitments with the United Nations

Under the guise of “peacekeeping” which stretches at least back to the Justin Trudeau Government and more recently under Carney’ s Liberal Government, Canada has invested a lot, at least financially, to the UN for its various functions.

In a recent communiqué by Global Affairs Canada, the government has pledged over $40 million to support training and partnerships with other countries, and to “addressing and mitigating misinformation and disinformation in UN Peace Operations.”

By “addressing and mitigating misinformation and disinformation” they are really referring to the numerous allegations and instances of sexual abuse by UN peacekeepers. So, to “mitigate” these means to more thoroughly sweep it under the rug.

Doesn’t it make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to know that your government is spending millions of dollars to further cover up and obfuscate these sexual crimes?

Aren’t these the types of loving peacekeeping officers you want patrolling your community?

In addition, there is an additional financial contribution in the form of a grant, Reducing Barriers to Women’s Participation in UN Peace Operations, for the amount of over $8 million.

Furthermore, there is a strange theme present in UN policing, namely addressing what they call “gender-based violence.” There’s even a United Nations Police Gender Toolkit which exists to guide the peacekeepers.

I wonder if there’s any mention of the manpons that are present in the bathrooms of service members of the Canadian Armed Forces in that toolkit and whether any related hate crimes were committed. But, we’ll leave that quagmire for another day.

While there is no direct evidence that the United Nations is ready to deploy its police force in Canada at the moment, we can nevertheless see that they are working on it and it is just a matter of time – particularly if the aforementioned bills get passed – before we see foreign police officers hard at work arresting domestic extremists (and raping your sons and daughters?).

Foreign Troops in our Canadian Armed Forces

And there is already a plan to recruit foreigners into our Canadian Armed Forces.

A Canadian veteran, retired Master Warrant Officer Jeff Evely who served for 20 years in war zones like Afghanistan and Iraq expressed many concerns about this move.

“The issue is the top security clearance that some of these jobs will require,” he said. “Many of these recruits will be privy to some of our most closely guarded secrets,” he added.

Evely also expressed his concern about where their loyalties lay, given that many of these recruits can be soldiers who are coming from, and trained by, foreign military outfits.

I would certainly share that sentiment.

Furthermore, during the Freedom Convoy Protests in Ottawa we saw that the Liberal Government had no hesitation in using unidentified troops to violently quash the protesters.

And current Prime Minister Mark Carney also has expressed his totalitarian leanings in this regard.

Reason #15 – Geoengineering Crimes

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

The Climate Scam, as described in an earlier section of this post, also includes a multitude of geoengineering and weather modification crimes which I have documented in a four-part series (a 300+ page investigative series with communications to the various Canadian agencies involved) over the past three years:

I won’t rehash the work here, but broadly speaking Canadian authorities are permitting the airline industry to use modified jet fuel which creates toxic contrail cirrus clouds – we seem them across the country, coast to coast.

Photo taken by the author on 2024-09-14 in the city of Sherbrooke (Quebec). Does this sky look normal to you? No? That’s because it is not. Apart from the three chemtrail lines, there rest of the sky is blanketed by contrail cirrus clouds created by the exhaust of the aircraft that uses modified jetfuel (permitted by Canadian authorities). That day had started with a perfectly blue sky.

The health effects and degradation of our natural environment caused by these harmful activities are tragic, to say the least.

Where I currently live in Asia, there is none of this nonsense, as is the case in some other countries like Mexico which have banned geoengineering.

Canada, what the hell are you waiting for?

Reason #16 – Attack on God & Christianity

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

“Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: ‘Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.’ Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: ‘Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.’” - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Backgrounder, Separation of Church and State in Canada

The attack on God, Christianity, and the nuclear family has been on the agenda for at least half a century.

Ever heard of the 1967 Toronto Protocols? If you haven’t, it is basically a blueprint model for what the globalists envisioned and planned for decades ago. It called for the systematic destruction of Christianity, education, and the nuclear family, among other societal pillars. And looking back at what has transpired over the past five or six decades, it certainly appears like things are very much going according to plan.

As for the attack on God and Christianity itself, well, this goes back at least over a century with the infiltration of the Roman Catholic Church by Freemasonic forces, and later on with Vatican II reforms which took place in the late 1950s and early 1960s. But we’ll leave that part out for sake of brevity.

Earlier in this post, I already mentioned how God is being removed from the fabric of Canadian culture.

In the political sphere, the separation of church and state has occurred and was largely fostered by Pierre Trudeau. The former Prime Minister strongly advocated to move Canada towards a more secular nation as early as in the 1960s.

Trudeau championed a more “modern” or “multicultural” vision where religious principles would not steer or influence affairs of the state.

Though a Catholic himself, Trudeau’s reforms served as a turning point to quietly (systematically) remove the influence of the Church from schools (education) and other societal pillars.

So, thus far we have a removal of God and church in politics and government.

But the attack doesn’t stop there.

In recent years, the military has also been compelled to swerve away from God and religion.

Military chaplains across Canada have been barred from praying at Remembrance Day ceremonies by the Canadian Government and wearing religious symbols.

Needless to say, a lot of frustration ensued. Bishop Scott McCaig of the Military Ordinariate of Canada who oversees Catholic chaplains in the military, said last year the new policy was causing consternation in the ranks. Even Member of Parliament James Bezan stated “Remembrance Day has long been a spiritual and religious service for many veterans, in recognition of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in service to Canada.”

Increasingly, we see plans to limit religious rights of Canadians.

And this appears to be more pronounced in the province of Quebec where the Catholic religion has long been a cornerstone of the Quebecois social fabric stretching all the way back to the colonial roots of the territory from early European settlers.

Back in August of 2025 in Quebec, the Pelchat-Rousseau Report on Secularism was submitted to the Quebec government to limit religious rights.

This report seems to have served as the basis for Bill 94 (An Act to, in particular, reinforce laicity in the education network and to amend various legislative provisions) which came into force on October 30, 2025.

The law and its provisions radically transform the religious landscape in Quebec – particularly within the education network.

Firstly though, it should be observed that, at prima facie, the law appears to be in stark contradiction with at least three paramount sections the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which state:

Section 2(a) – Freedom of religion

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
a. freedom of conscience and religion.

Section 2(b) – Freedom of expression

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
b. freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.

Section 2(c) – Freedom of peaceful assembly

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
c. freedom of peaceful assembly;

In other words, the Quebec law appears to remove Charter rights of Quebecers who are Canadians.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association had this to say about the bill and its threat to civil liberties:

“The Canadian Civil Liberties Association unequivocally condemns the adoption of Quebec’s Bill 94, a law that undermines the fundamental freedoms of students and school staff across the province.”

But I presume it will be up to the courts to decide, as challenges will most likely be brought forth in the near future by intrepid citizens who will challenge the law.

As for “practical” specifics or the provisions of the law, we have the following:

SCHOOLS:
- Prevent not only teachers from wearing religious symbols (such as a crucifix) but also janitors and staff that serve food.
- Gradually end State funding of private religious schools
- Ban prayer rooms in colleges.
- Guarantee the right of universities to refuse to provide prayer rooms.
CHURCHES & OTHER RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS:
- Advancement of religion would not be a basis for an organization’s charitable status. This means that churches would lose their charitable status.
- Churches would no longer be protected from taxation, potentially leading to substantial additional costs, including significant property tax bills each year, among other levies.
- Churches would no longer be able to issue receipts for tax purposes, and that would inevitably lead to a decline in donations. This, inevitably, punishes individual contributors who support their churches or religious institutions.

Bill C-9 Would Federalise Religious Bans

I already briefly outlined some dangers of Bill C-9 in Section # 6 above, stating that the text of the bill’s Second Reading in its current form proves highly problematic, as it repeals previous defences enshrined in the Criminal Code [specifically 319(3)(b) and 319(3.1)(b)] which currently allows for quoting from religious texts such as the Bible, Quran, etc.

Many have warned about the devastating effects this bill would have should it become law, including how it could even prevent or even jail people from quoting from religious texts such as the Bible.

Michelle Rempel Garner, a member of Parliament (MP) for the Alberta in the riding of Calgary Nose Hill warned late last year that the Liberals (with this bill) “are about to criminalise religious beliefs in Canada.”

Christine Van Geyn, the Executive Director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) also exposes C-9 as a censorship law with sweeping powers to curtail religious rights of Canadians:

The CCF has created a template letter for Canadians to easily fill to send to the representatives to withdraw the bill.

This bill has already passed in the House of Commons (on March 25) and is slated for rubber-stamping in the Senate with the First Reading already passed (on March 26) – just one day later!

I am not sure whether this article will be published before that occurs, but if there is still time, I would urge you to contact your Senator (or any/all of them) to express your disapproval for the passage of this bill, should that be the case, of course.

Reason #17 – Pro-War Stances, NATO Follies

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

The statements from the “In a nutshell” segment above may seem somewhat preposterous at first, but the following receipts will prove otherwise.

Canada’s Military and Financial Support to Israel

As I noted in a previous post, I wrote about Canada’s support for Zionist ambitions, stating:

“Though Canada is often seen as a neutral party and “peacemaker” in international conflicts, Umm Kulthum from the Yellowhead Institute recently noted in his brief titled A Brief History of Canada’s Role in the Colonization of Palestine that that has been far from being the case.”

You can click the hyperlinks from the passage above for fuller explanatory details. But hereunder is a summary of the findings.

The author of the brief, Umm Kulthum (pen name), explains that it offers an overview of some of the key roles Canada played in the colonization of Palestine from the Partition and Nakba, to the emergence of “Peacekeeping,” and direct involvement in invasions, and that Canadians should confront the realities of their ongoing involvement. Here are some notable excerpts [with some emphasis added and original links preserved]:

“Canada’s role in the Nakba and the ongoing occupation of Palestine by the State of Israel has been erased from Canadian consciousness.
Looking back on this history, we can see that Pearson’s efforts were ultimately in the service of neutralizing Palestinian resistance (and resistance of their allies).
Since 2003, and well before then, Canada has been one of Israel’s loudest cheerleaders on the international stage, even as Canadians disagree; it supplies tens of millions in arms to Israel that it knows full well will be used to displace and kill Palestinians; and even commits personnel to assist Israel.”

For those unfamiliar, Nakba – which means catastrophe or disaster in Arabic, refers to the flight and expulsion of around 700,000 Palestinians from their homeland which occurred between 1947 and 1948 due to the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.

The author mentioned Pearson (former Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson) who was instrumental in Canada’s role for the drafting of the United Nations’ Partition Plan for Palestine in 1947 (U.N. Resolution 181).

Kulthum also states that Canada supports, funds, and actively participates in the oppression of Palestinians and “treats the incarceration and bombing of over two million Palestinians in Gaza with little concern, condemnation, or humanitarianism.”

More recently (2025), Canada is still arming Israel despite an official ban:

“Canada sent at least 391 shipments containing bullets, military equipment, weapons parts, aircraft components, and communication devices to Israel since late 2023, despite Ottawa’s repeated claims to have ended weapons deliveries to the apartheid state, a new report has revealed.“

The report referred to in the article – EXPOSING CANADIAN MILITARY EXPORTS TO ISRAEL (dated July 29, 2025) – details the matter further emphasising the contradicting repeated claims that Canada had stopped sending weapons to Israel.

So, as the genocide of the Palestinian people rages on in Gaza along with its numerous war crimes, we must not ignore Canada’s contribution to this apartheid state and the inhumane fashion in which it seeks to ethnically cleans and imprison and enslave them further in their homeland.

Canada’s Military and Financial Support to Ukraine

I will try to keep this sub-section as short as possible, given that it is one of the most depressing and abhorrent chapters in Canadian history.

One of my most viewed articles, Ten Inconvenient Truths About Ukraine Largely Ignored by the Media (republished in the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) based in Montreal) encapsulates the true nature and origins of this conflict.

In it, I exposed how it was largely started by U.S. interventionism in the Ukraine with its infamous Maidan Coup which was used to overthrow the country’s democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych.

I also exposed how their new puppet, Volodymyr Zelensky, is an absolute fraud and theif.

Much more can be said, but I will mostly add two things: how many billions Canada has funnelled to this very corrupt and abusive regime along with the role that our former Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland had in the matter.

To date, at least $6.5 billion (but probably closer to around $9 billion, or possibly even $24.5 billion, not excluding $2 billion from Carney’s Liberal Government) has been siphoned out of the country to support the corrupt regime.

This started during the Justin Trudeau Government with no small part by our very own Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland who has stated ties, assets (a residential property located on Sofiivska Street in Kyiv), and personal affections to the Ukraine.

Chrystia Freeland’s Conflicts of Interests with the WEF & Ukraine, Jan. 20, 2023
Canada pledges unlimited funds to Ukraine despite endemic corruption, Jan 26, 2023
Canada’s dangerous escalation in the Russia-Ukraine War is based on lies and deception, Feb 10, 2023
The Wicked Witch of the WEF Strikes Again: The Hefty Price Tag for the Climate Change & Ukraine agendas in the 2023 Budget, Mar 29, 2023

Conveniently, though Chrystia Freeland is no longer a Canadian politician (thank God for that!) she has recently been appointed in an official position, an Advisor, to Zelenskyy and his corrupt regime. How lovely. One has to wonder if her new position and current connections to the Liberal Government will bring forth yet more conflicts of interests and looting.

It should also be mentioned that the Canadian Armed Forces knowingly supported Noe-Nazi forces within the country by providing them with military training.

At the time, I had sent a media inquiry about this for which they didn’t deny providing the training to such Neo-Nazi soldiers stating that “ultimately, Ukraine is a sovereign country and was thus responsible for recruiting and vetting its own security forces.” In other words, they used this as an excuse to wash their hands from this scandal. How convenient.

Canada’s NATO Skullduggery

Canada’s involvement in the theatre of war would be incomplete without examining its involvement in NATO.

For those unfamiliar, The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is an intergovernmental military alliance between 32 member states – 30 in Europe and two in North America which was founded in the aftermath of World War II, basically to ‘Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.’

If you look at its background and track record, it is a rather daunting challenge to not perceive NATO as the Most Dangerous Organisation on Earth.

And as one of only two member states of NATO in North America, Canada has contributed its fair share of destruction in various wars (such as in Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Lybia) over the past several decades.

Many are unaware that there is a specific, distinct, organisation called the NATO Association of Canada with its own set of follies, including its obvious bias (and delusions) about Ukraine and Sinophobia and Russophobia.

Some Canadians may think that the country having joined the NATO alliance to fight wars in faraway lands is not necessarily a bad thing. But what if I were to tell you that they have actually conducted activities that actually target ordinary citizens?

This has been the case and I have published an article outlining Canada’s involvement: How NATO is committing Cyber Warfare against the global masses (republished in GlobalResearch.ca).

In that post, I detailed Canada’s involvement in Fifth Generation Warfare (also known as psychological or cognitive warfare) with its participation in NATO’s Fall 2021 Innovation Challenge.

While I won’t get into all the specifics of this little-known endeavour, you can read it for yourself or listen to a podcast I was on alongside Dr. Robert Malone talking about the subject of Fifth Generation Warfare, how it is widely used on social media, and how it was employed to garner support for the Ukrainian side of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Reason #18 – The Presstitute Mainstream Media

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

Let me start with a recent event regarding how corrupt and collusive the Canadian mainstream media is. And later in this section, I will provide some testimony from a former seasoned journalist for the CBC, Rodney Palmer, who calls them out for what they really are – propaganda outfits.

Canadian Media Summit (Ottawa, Jan. 29, 2026) open affirm they are colluding with Carney’s Liberal Government

If you really want a bitter taste of disgust in your mouth look no further than this display of treason by Canada’s fifth estate.

Back on January 29^th of this year at a Canadian Media Summit, a representative stated to Prime Minister Mark Carney that 180,000 members of the media “had his back.”

Here is the precise verbatim quote by the media representative on stage:

“Prime Minister, know that every person in this room and the 180,000 people who work in this industry have you back. Just as we know you have ours.”

CPAC scrubbed this portion from the internet, but ‘Melanie in Saskatchewan’ on X had recorded a copy of the video on her phone and posted it (archived here).

Also on X, Dean Skoreyko observed (archived here):

We are talking about the entire Canadian mainstream media here folks, 180,000 members strong.

Are you disgusted yet?

Former MSM seasoned journalist reveals the true state of news in Canada

We all know that during the COVID-19 scamdemic, mainstream media outlets in Canada such as the CBC, CTV, Global News, and Radio-Canada (the French equivalent of the CBC) hyped-up the fear surrounding the pandemic whilst pushing a very one-sided narrative on the so-called effectiveness of the “vaccines.”

Moreover, they purposely ostracised and shamed any individual or organisation that countered these prevailing narratives.

They even purposefully provided false information surrounding medical interventions and the effectiveness of the vaccines.

As I had previously exposed (along with journalist Rodney Palmer), the CBC often used regular “experts” on their shows to counter so-called misinformation even though they had undisclosed conflicts of interests. Here is a passage from my previous reporting:

“Part of that criticism, Palmer pointed out at the inquiry, was due to the fact that Tim Caulfield was receiving a $381,000 grant to combat Covid-19 misinformation even though Palmer contended that a lot of the Covid-19-related news the CBC was reporting, itself, contained a lot of misinformation and that the broadcaster was pushing propaganda throughout the pandemic.”

As can be seen from the image slide above (which comes from Rodney Palmer’s testimony at the National Citizens Inquiry (NCI) back in Toronto – watch from the 1:00:15 mark), Caulfield was receiving funds which the CBC failed to disclose.

In a subsequent testimony for the NCI in Ottawa, Palmer elaborated on the coverage of COVID-19 and the vaccines by the CBC, further exposing their lack of objectivity and independence.

Moreover, Palmer noted the inherent conflicts in that the CBC is publicly-funded, i.e., it receives government money for their reporting operations.

Roughly speaking, the CBC receives about $1.2 billion a year (see their 2021-2022 Annual Report) from the government (which really means from you, the taxpayer).

Needless to say, the billion dollar payout doesn’t come without strings attached.

As such, it is a gross and blatant display of conflict of interest in that the media is supposed to be independent and objective in its reporting.

And since the media needs to report on government affairs on a daily basis, outlets such as the CBC will inherently infuse bias in their reporting which misinforms the general public.

As he had done previously, Rodney Palmer more recently (Nov. 28, 2025) re-emphasised the level of propaganda spewed by the mainstream news outlets along with how many of their executives receive huge financial bonuses.

Recent damning testimony by ousted CBC journo about its Liberal Bias and toxic work environment

Travis Dhanraj, a 25-year veteran journalist, recently (Mar 10, 2026) testified at a Parliamentary hearing about his mistreatment by CBC’s management, their intimidation tactics towards him, its toxic environment, and its overt bias in favour of the Liberals at the detriment of the Conservatives.

You can watch the first five minutes of his testimony in which he summarises these facts, as he states them:

Dhanraj describes how he was essentially silenced and intimidated by CBC Management when, among other issues, he tried to get the Conservative leader, Pierre Poilievre, on his show. In particular, he singled out David Cochrane, the veteran CBC host of POWER & POLITICS stating that he essentially had “gatekeeping authority” to decide who got to appear on his show.

Keep in mind that shows like POWER & POLITICS by the CBC are highly influential across Canada, particularly during national elections. As such, preventing guests like the leaders of certain political parties goes to show the broadcaster’s inherent bias toward the Liberal Party of Canada at the detriment of the others. ‘

The ousted and disgruntled former CBC employee also mentioned that management at CBC tried to get him to sign a gag order to silence him which he refused.

In his resignation letter which is available online (Resignation Under Duress – CBC Leadership Has Left Me No Choice) Dhanraj wrote that he was stepping down – which he called an “involuntary resignation” not by choice, but because the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation had “made it impossible for him to continue doing his work with integrity.”

For additional analysis on Dhanraj’s plight, testimony, and CBC skulduggery, listen to Candice Malcolm’s reporting on the matter:

Other Deceitful Practices by the Canadian MSM

There are a couple of other deceitful practices carried out by certain outlets of the Canadian mainstream media.

I previously reported on how the CBC was pushing opinion pieces as news articles.

In that piece I stated that impartial and objective news reporting should be conducted on the basis of the absence of personal bias, unless it is expressly stated as opinion.

For a reporter, journalist, or news outlet, there is nothing wrong with putting out Opinion (Commentary or Column) pieces, but they should be clearly labelled as such in order to not deceive the reader.

Otherwise, it can be considered a form of manipulation, brainwashing, nudging, or propaganda and can have negative effects or consequences.

As a journalist, I do so for each piece I publish on this Substack. For this article, I wrote “Commentary” at the top and many of my articles are actually Opinion pieces which I clearly label at the top.

Here is a recent illustration: I recently published a piece – Is Reuters pushing War Propaganda? – on how this international news outfit was employing this tactic (along with using an overabundance of vague, unidentified sources), seemingly to help garner support for Ukraine in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. For a news outlet to pick sides in a conflict or war is simply wrong. And they knew it, but still did it. I actually gave their reporters a chance to respond to that deceitful practice, but they failed to do so which appears to confirm their culpability in the matter.

There is another, indirect, deceitful way in which the mainstream media in Canada misinforms the general public. It is largely through the use of affiliated journalism and “fact-checking” networks.

Palmer covered many of these in his presentations (linked above) with the Trusted News Initiative (with their 2020 “combat spread of harmful vaccine disinformation” campaign) being a huge culprit, among many others.

GlobalResearch.ca – COVID-19 and the Shadowy “Trusted News Initiative”
Independent Sentinel – You Need to Know About the Trusted News Initiative
Technocracy News – Trusted News Initiative: Orwellian Global Ministry of Truth
ChildrensHealthDefense.org – ‘Trusted News Initiative’ Antitrust Litigation

Another outfit is the Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD) whose donors and funders represent clear conflicts of interests (in pushing certain agendas and narratives), as was detailed and evidenced by Palmer in his January 28, 2023 speech for Bright Light News.

There are so many more such outfits that exist which are spread across the world from which news outlets from various countries receive “best practices” in journalism reporting. And Palmer goes through many of these outfits in his presentation should you want to learn more about them and their deceitful ways.

But yet another deceitful practice I want to focus on is how former media industry insiders are used by such kinds of so-called “fact-checking” outfits not only to counter “mis” or “dis” information, but also provide input for the formation of bills that are introduced into the Canadian Parliament.

One such instance involves former media executives from two of Canada’s most notable outfits. I reported on this in my March 18, 2024 article Bombshell Report: Exposing the Actors behind Canada’s Online Harms Act (Bill C-63).

In this article, I exposed five main organisations involved in devising, drafting, and introducing the very controversial Bill C-63 better know as the ‘Online Harms Act.’

Though the bill has not successfully passed in the House of Commons, its spirit lives on in Bill C-9.

Of the five main organisations that designed and devised C-63, we find an American outfit called NewsGuard which describes itself as providing tools to counter misinformation.

Two former Canadian media figures were on the Board of Advisors of NewsGuard, namely Edward Greenspon (Editorial Advisor and former Editor In Chief of The Globe and Mail) and Michel Cormier (Editorial Advisor and former Director of News at Radio-Canada). Between them, the pair has over 60 years of experience in Canadian media.

Importantly, Edward Greenspon was the President and CEO of the Public Policy Forum (PPF), a highly influential think tank that holds a unique position in the formation of public policy in Canada.

At the time, Geenspon was also advocating for internet censorship (via the moniker of “hate speech”). I reported that the PPF had come up with a six-point plan to get the Internet back on course” with notable alignments with the tenets of Bill C-63.

To make matters worse, it was discovered that NewsGuard had ties to ties to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the U.S. Military (particularly through its board member Gen. Michael Hayden), intelligence agencies (CIA), and the NATO’s mouthpiece think tank the Atlantic Council (a pro-NATO think tank) and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

It is no secret that much of the text that get infused into our bills come from such kinds of think tanks and organisations. The above example is merely one that shines some light about how the media industry in Canada (through powerful former insiders) more deeply colludes with the government through back channels.

Reason #19 – Indoctrination of our Children in a Corrupt Education System

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

Having worked 36 years in the education sector, 23 as a teacher, I can say without a doubt that over the past several decades rot has metastasised at all levels of our education system (from kindergarten to university) in Canada.

Moreover, having taught for 13 years in China I learned a thing or two about their education system and public schools which are for the most part indoctrination centers for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). I taught at the two top public schools in the Tier 1 city of Shenzhen and know that, in general, students are taught what to think rather than how to think.

Though to a lesser extent, this is a model that has been propagated across curricula and teaching methods in schools in Canada.

It has seeped its way in bit by bit over the past several decades.

I am not saying that there aren’t good teachers across the country and at each level. There certainly are.

But, questioning and critical thinking skills are becoming rarer across all levels, even in university.

This trend has negatively impacted students’ ability to think independently and is largely geared towards producing obedient and unquestioning subjects, just like in China.

Have you noticed how the vast majority of Canadians were less questioning, less critical, and more compliant during the COVID-19 Pandemic? If you have, then I think I have made my point.

Sadly, a lot of rot has incrementally seeped into class curricula and in extra-curricular activities over the years. Much of this is provincially mandated and though many schools and educational institutions try to resist some of their more negative aspects, they nonetheless find a way to permeate into classrooms and minds of students. I observed this upon my return to Canada in late 2021, as the former college I previously taught at had already integrated a lot of the woke nonsense, gender ideology, and the like.

Look no further than how such a kind of indoctrination has accelerated in the past five or six years with regards to promoting gender ideology and related concepts as per the United Nations model, particularly its 2030 Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) #4 “Quality Education.” While on its surface, its goals and practices guidelines may appear reasonable and noble, they are in fact part of the larger plan to install a nefarious system of control.

The SDG #4 goal on education must not be viewed in isolation; rather, it must be assessed in the broader context of all 17 goals which essentially seek to standardise policies across the globe to undermine democracy according by unelected bureaucrats from the United Nations who have devised them.

Education expert and author Alex Newman from the United States (whom I previously interviewed) provided a very good overview of how our education systems have been co-opted in order to instill high level of controls over members of society with our youth being their primary target.

Of particular note is how the UN and its affiliated institutions such as UNESCO, the World Health Organization (WHO), among others, have gone to extreme lengths to sexualise, exploit, and decriminalize sex with school-aged children (as per their own guidelines and documents).

I discussed these in detail with my appearance on SGTReport.

In Canada and numerous UN-aligned countries, a public school curriculum called SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) has rendered irreparable harm to our vulnerable youth.

Similar to the atrocities documented in my aforementioned article, SOGI represents nothing less than a form of child abuse used as a tool for social deconstruction.

Yet, it remains pervasive across Canadian public schools angering parents, and with some of its funding coming from large Canadian banks such as TD and RBC.

The National Citizens Inquiry in Canada held several hearings – Are children safe in Canada? with expert witness and parents’ testimony to shed further light on these issues.

As Adolf Hitler once said:

“He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.” – paraphrased from Hitlers speeches and dogmas.

Reason #20 – There is no future in Canada for our youth

In a nutshell:

Details, Analysis & Evidence:

The Canada I experienced as a youth is completely different to what it is now.

The Good Old Days...

I was fortunate enough to grow up in one of the best times in Canada.

I’m a “Gen X” and was a teenager during the 1980s.

We had great music with so many awesome Canadian bands. Bryan Adams, Loverboy, April Wine, Rush, the Spoons, Corey Hart, Gowan, just to name some of my favourites.

In the early 1980s, technology was developing at impressive speed, particularly with the introduction of personal computers (my first computer was a Commodore VIC-20 with about 4k of memory and a 16k RAM extension cartridge) along with video games played in arcades or on those fun consoles such as the Atari & Nintendo loaded with classics like Asteroids, Defender, Tempest, Mario Bros.’ Donkey Kong, etc. Countless hours of pure fun and enjoyment playing those games without a negative thought to be found in my mind.

During my lunch breaks as a teen, I usually had $2 whereby I could buy myself a light lunch meal for $1 (usually a big plate of fries with gravy – I know, not the healthiest meal) and used the other dollar to exchange for four quarters to play video games at the arcade which lasted me about 30 to 40 minutes.

On weekends, we would hang out outside with our friends, exploring our neighbourhoods, finding wood planks to build our own little hangout where we’d play our favourite records, eat junk food, and just have fun.

I remember going to the local convenience store where I could buy a chocolate bar or a bag of potato chips for just 25 cents.

By the early 1990s, the internet was in its early days and social media wasn’t really a thing yet. We still hung outside, tried to get into bars with fake IDs, took chances phoning or nervously speaking face-to-face to attractive members of the opposite sex. We were free to make mistakes without fear it was all being recorded.

Though our learning environment in primary, middle, or high school wasn’t necessarily the most stimulating, at least we were not bombarded with indoctrinatory nonsense like kids are subjected to in today’s schools.

Fast Forward to Today...

So much can be said and written about how things have gone terribly wrong with regards to education.

Don’t get me wrong. There are still some good schools in Canada, but they tend to be either select private or Christian ones.

Most public schools have the hallmarks of detention and brainwashing centers as opposed to enlightening learning environments. In such settings, our youth are customarily conditioned to respect and not question authority figures, and to become obedient citizens.

They are regularly conditioned to regurgitate what are deemed acceptable answers on mostly useless, standardised, tests. And this, at every single level. Little room is left for questioning and critical thinking in school curricula. These aspects are not dissimilar to the Chinese education system (which I know intimately, as I though in China for 13 years).

Moreover, many public and even some Christian schools are fully on board with the various woke agendas including the gender identity nonsense, toxic critical race theories, Socialist/Marxist ideals, and the like.

Worse, even kindergarteners are subjected to abusive assaults on their fragile and malleable psyches with Drag Queen story time sessions, books, and summer camps.

Furthermore, in the last several years, schools across Canada have been removing religious or moral studies out of the classroom and replacing them with civil/social engineering alternatives.

In addition, students of today are facing other new significant challenges and difficulties, many stemming from exposure to toxic social media environments (including cyber bullying) and “smart” phone culture which rewards “likes” and posting off-the-top and racy content.

In my podcast interview with education author and expert Alex Newman, I mentioned three superb articles by Joshua Stylman that describe the harmful effects such settings have on on today’s youth. I would thus invite the reader to have a look at the salient excerpts I provided or, better yet, to read those articles in full.

What’s next?

And now, in 2026, as students transition from university into young adulthood and in the “labour market” (what an ugly term!) what awaits them is rather bleak and unappealing.

Since the COVID-19 Scamdemic, Canada has increasingly become a wanton surveillance state whereby everything one does is basically tracked, recorded, and monitored.

The repercussions of this trend is clear: diminished freedoms and liberty ranging from suppressed self-expression (self-imposed, or through silencing and censorship) to financial slavery (Digital IDs and Digital Currency). I think I have made a pretty clear case for these with the new Canadian bills and laws exposed earlier.

What additional forms of control will our sellout traitorous politicians serve up for their true masters going forward?

Artificial Intelligence alone is reshaping the vocational landscape, mostly for the worst.

But for those who will be fortunate enough to land decent entry level jobs are largely doomed to be in positions where they will end up following orders, rather than showing their creativity and worth.

Moreover, they will have to fork over a significant proportion of the earnings in income taxes, unemployment insurance, union fees, and other looting schemes, leaving them with mediocre net earnings.

But perhaps their worst fate lies in the fact that in the absence of help from their parents, most will be unable to purchase a house, given the insanely inflated market as was described in an earlier section above.

My advice to them: pack your bags, travel abroad, and consider finding and living in a place where you will be valued, not exploited, and have genuine opportunities to showcase your talents and grow to your fullest potential.

“Another night in any town
You can hear the thunder of their cry
Ahead of their time
They wonder why
In the shadows of a golden age
A generation waits for dawn
Brave carry on
Bold and the strong
Only the young can say
They’re free to fly away
Sharing the same desires
Burning like wildfire
They are seeing through the promises
And all the lies they dare to tell
Is it heaven or hell?
They know very well
Only the young can say
They’re free to fly away
Sharing the same desires
Burning like wildfire” – Journey, Only the young

Closing Thoughts

I completely understand that this post, my single longest ever at over 34,000 words and 129 pages long (apart from my series), can be perceived as a personal rant or diatribe against Canada. But it is not. Rather, it is a cry out for help.

Its main purpose is to help wake up Canadians as to what has become of their beloved country and to no longer stand for its tyranny and destruction.

We witnessed this very spirit of red-blooded Canadians during the Freedom Convoy in 2022 across the country.

What happened to that flame, fire, and passion?

Where have those freedom warriors retreated to?

It’s time for all Canadians to amass their courage and take back their country in whatever capacity they can.

Will I still fight for Canada?

Of course. Damn straight!

But once one reaches one’s limits...

“I gotta do it my way
Or no way at all
Well, I’ve had all I can take
I can’t take it no more
I’m gonna pack my bags and fly my way
Or no way at all” – Loverboy, Turn me Loose

Are you considering leaving Canada but apprehensive about doing so?

Contemplating and going through with an international move can be daunting or unrealistic to many.

Many factors come into play such as your current employment situation, kids and their schooling, age, health issues, which country to move to, and so on.

As one who has done it three times (twice with a young child), I can say that it is not as burdensome or difficult to accomplish as you may think.

Individuals and families have varying situations, goals, motivations, and financial means.

Some of my paid subscribers have asked me advice on leaving Canada. We’ve had several monthly paid subscriber calls thus far and this very topic is often spoken about.

If you wish to have more input on the dynamics involved in moving out of Canada (including its numerous tax advantages), then you can consider a paid subscription to my Substack which allows you to participate in our monthly calls and ask questions to myself and others who are also planning and realising such moves.

Regardless of whether an international move is something you are currently considering or not, I do appreciate you considering supporting my work as even on this Substack, I am significantly censored and shadow-banned.

Thank you for making it this far into this monster article.

God bless.

Addenda

I will be adding addenda to this post in this section.

Addendum #1 – Canada is NOT a sovereign nation nor a democracy, War & Controlled Demolition

I recently watched the following interview with seasoned attorney Shawn Buckley who is extremely familiar with constitutional law (as well as specialising in the food and drug area).

In it, he describes how Canada is not a sovereign nation, but one that is rather under the control of the King (Charles III, the British Monarchy). And he provides all the references to this effect as per our Constitution.

The interview, Canada Isn’t Sovereign? Shawn Buckley Exposes Constitutional Truths (King, Land & Power) aired on April 3, 2026.

I would strongly advise all Canadians to watch this talk and am highlighting several key points from it hereunder with time stamps should you wish to dig deeper into these:

01:15 – There is no document that affects your life more than the Constitution.
03:51 – Canada is not a democracy.
- “A democracy describes where citizens of a country ... actually get to vote on issues of importance.”
- There has never been a federal referendum on any issue.
- Your “elected” Member of Parliament (MP) who is supposed to represent your geographical area is pre-screened and has to follow party line.
- We don’t have representative government.
07:26 – While some may think that the federal Cabinet runs the country, it does not.
- The British North America Act of 1867 section 9 (EXECUTIVE POWER) states “The Executive Government and Authority of and over Canada is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen.” In other words, the executive who runs our government is the Monarch (now the King).
10:03 – It’s a fact that the UK Parliament can repeal or change our Constitution if His Majesty (the King) would direct them to.
12:30 – The Monarch, King Charles III is the Commander-in-Chief (head of our armed forces).
- Section 15 of the British North America Act of 1867 reads: “The Command-in-Chief of the Land and Naval Militia, and of all Naval and Military Forces, of and in Canada, is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen.” In other words, the King commands our military forces. Canada doesn’t have the independent option of opposing it. So, our Prime Minister must follow the King’s wishes with regards to major military decisions and war.
- Despite Prime Minister Carney publicly displaying his disdain for Trump (on numerous occasions), he supports the bombing of Iran.
  - PM Statement from 2026-02-28: “Canada supports the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from further threatening international peace and security.”
  - PM Statement from 2026-03-03: “Which is why we support efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from further threatening international peace and security.”
14:45 – The Governor General of Canada – the federal representative of the King (Monarch) can, at any time, dismiss the Prime Minister.
16:16 – The foreign king, King Charles III owns all our land in Canada.
- Yes, the King owns the land your house lies on even if you’ve paid the mortgage off.
  - In the copy of your title it will say that you have a fee simple, not that you own the land itself. A fee is a grant (from the King) permitting you to use the land; simple means without restriction.
20:30 – The King is the head of our Executive (branch of government),
- as per part III Executive Power Section 9 of the Constitution which states “The Executive Government and Authority of and over Canada is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen.” Note that by the Queen they mean the Monarch; so, you can substitute this for the King.
- Generally speaking though, in day-to-day affairs it is our federal Cabinet that runs things. They run things but are actually not technically in control.
21:39 – The Privy Council Office (PCO) advises the government and is appointed by the King’s representative – the Governor in Council.
- see Section 11 of the British North America Act of 1867 which states: “There shall be a Council to aid and advise in the Government of Canada, to be styled the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada; and the Persons who are to be Members of that Council shall be from Time to Time chosen and summoned by the Governor General and sworn in as Privy Councillors, and Members thereof may be from Time to Time removed by the Governor General.”
- Note that many members (such as consultants) of the Privy Council Office are appointed (not elected)
  - also see Governor in Council appointees generous salary ranges here.
- on a related note, also consult my Nov. 30, 2022 article Under False Authority, Under False Oaths.
23:56 – In each province, it is the Lieutenant Governors who govern with the advice of the King’s Privy Council Office.
- see related sections 12 and 14 of the British North America Act of 1867.
27:20 – The House of Commons cannot lawfully adopt or pass a spending bill (such as the Budget) that has not been first recommended by message of the Governor General.
- In other words, any bills that spend money (public monies and taxes) need to be first greenlighted by the Governor General.
- We’ve been told that a bill doesn’t become law until the Governor General signs it, but this fact stated above actually suggests otherwise.
- see section 54 of the British North America Act of 1867.
32:09 – Every Member of Parliament (MP) swears an oath of allegiance to the King (Monarch).
- In other words, it’s the King’s House of Commons, not ours (Canadian citizens).
  - This is what is meant by the illusion of democracy, as our MPs (and even Senators for that matter) first allegiance is to the Monarch.
- see section IX. Miscellaneous Provisions #128 of the Constitution.
- See also my previous article which shows that the Prime Minister of Canada actually swears three oaths: 1) of Allegiance to the King (Monarch); 2) of the Members of the Privy Council, and 3) of Office. Note that the second oath is also a promise to the King, and also as a member of the Privy Council, Prime Minister Mark Carney swore it on 2025-03-14).

The full (one hour seventeen minute) video can be viewed hereunder:

War

Buckley is also concerned about war (listen around the 43:00 mark), stating: “I’m worried that we’re going to be in a war with Russia this year or next year.”

An by “we’re” he means Canada (as part of a larger coalition which includes the U.K. and the U.S., among others).

He continues, “Because Europe needs a war for financial reasons.”

I largely agree with those statements. And given the fact that Canada has vastly supported Ukraine in the past years (as stated above in my post), it would come as no surprise.

In addition, if the U.K. and King Charles (as the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces) want us to go to war, as stated and referenced above, we would have no choice.

Buckley further contends that in order to get us into such a war, a false flag event could be employed.

I previously wrote about how a fake cyberattack could be employed as a false flag attack and be blamed on either Russia, China, or Iran.

We have already seen how Canada is supportive of the United States in its illegal war of aggression against Iran.

Furthermore, Buckley mentions NATO and its Article 5 which means that if any member country (Canada is a member) that is attacked, retaliatory measures will be triggered.

“Article 5
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”

And something which Buckley didn’t mention is that Canada could see the imposition of a military draft to force-enlist men and women into such a war. How would you feel if yourself, or your sons and daughters might be forced into such a situation?

A Controlled Demolition of Canada?

With regards to Canada’s “controlled demolition” aspect, it was already in the back of my mind, but what Buckley said during this interview (around the 53:44 mark) really brought it home for me.

There are many elements to this including war, bankruptcy or financial unsustainability (which I discussed in my post), monetary resets, degradation and destruction of culture (woke ideology, gender issues, critical race theory, etc.), mass immigration, and so on. Collectively they can certainly lead to the destruction of Canada. And some, such as myself (as per this post), may argue, that this process is already very much in the advanced stages.

I also contend that the United States of America under President Trump is already in a state of controlled demolition, as per its takeover, war with Iran, and so on. Trump has been chosen as the “fall guy” fit for this purpose. My next guest for my podcast will elaborate on this specific matter and that episode should be posted early next week.

Many in the alternative media space such as Canadian James Corbett as well as Hrvoje Morić from Geopolitics & Empire contend that this is all part of a larger operation to create an Americas regional bloc (similar to the European Union) that would later be merged into a single technocratic totalitarian state.

I partially agree with that assessment, given what has recently happened with Venezuela and what’s on the horizon for Greenland and Cuba.

While many of the geopolitical shifts appear to be happening in isolation (from one another), we must keep in mind that they could certainly be a part of a greater collective endeavour so as to re-shape and re-configure the Americas by the powers that be (i.e., the International Banking Cabal) that’s really in control). In order to achieve this, the two largest countries (Canada and the United States) would need to be reset, so to speak, and more fully taken under their control. And this is the kind of shift, a Fourth Turning if you will, that could be on the menu. Something to keep in mind my fellow Canadians.

Republished in

The Liberty Sentinel

This article has been republished in The Liberty Sentinel on June 3, 2026. A big Thank You to Andrew and Alex for publishing yet another of my articles on their wonderful media outlet.

Freedom’s Phoenix

The article is also published in Ernest Hancock’s Freedom Phoenix. So, be sure to check out their contents-rich website.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Meta Silently Added Face-Recognition Code for Its Smart Glasses to Millions of Phones

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Sat, 06 Jun 2026 10:01:42 GMT

By Dhruv Mehrotra and Dell Cameron

Meta has quietly embedded face-recognition technology for its smart glasses into an app downloaded to millions of phones, according to a WIRED analysis of the company’s software.

Code discreetly added to Meta’s AI app over multiple updates this year shows that the feature, internally called “NameTag,” identifies people captured by the glasses’ camera and, when activated, alerts the wearer when it recognizes someone.

The discovery of NameTag in the live Meta AI app shows that Meta had begun shipping face-recognition code to users’ phones while publicly describing it as something the company was still “thinking through.” In April, Meta said if it were to utilize face recognition, it wouldn’t be rolled out without first taking “a very thoughtful approach.” But WIRED found that as early as January, core components of the system had been integrated into software distributed to millions of people.

Though not yet enabled, NameTag sits inside a Meta AI companion app that’s been downloaded over 50 million times and is necessary for use of key features of its smart glasses, including Ray-Ban and Oakley models. If activated, it will transform faces captured by Meta’s glasses into unique biometric signatures, commonly known as faceprints, and check each one against faceprints stored on the user’s phone—a database that’s currently configured to receive updates from Meta. Recognized faces will trigger notifications, while the rest are cropped, indexed, and saved to a folder marked “pending.”

NameTag would revive a type of technology Meta said it had sunsetted in 2021, when the company announced it would delete more than a billion faceprints belonging to Facebook users following years of controversy over its photo-tagging system. Meta ultimately paid $650 million to settle a class-action lawsuit brought by Illinois users and, in 2024, agreed to a separate $1.4 billion settlement with Texas over allegations it had unlawfully collected biometric data from users.

Its renewed efforts arrive amid mounting opposition to consumer-level face recognition, which privacy advocates argue will give anyone from stalkers to immigration agents easy access to a dangerous technology. Internal Meta documents published by The New York Times in February showed the company had planned to roll out the feature during a “dynamic political environment,” when Meta believed its biggest critics would be preoccupied.

Three AI models powering NameTag have already been deployed from Meta’s servers and now reside on its customers’ phones, according to WIRED’s analysis, which was independently reproduced by outside experts. One model detects faces, one crops them, and a third encodes them into biometric data.

Only traces of the user interface are currently present, hinting at how the feature may ultimately work. A May version of the app rebrands the feature for users as “Connections,” inviting them to “remember the people you met.” It remains unclear whose faces will be included in the system’s recognition database, how those profiles are created, or how many people could ultimately be identifiable through it.

WIRED shared its findings with two outside security researchers who separately examined the app and reproduced key aspects of the analysis: Cooper Quintin, a security researcher and senior public interest technologist with the nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Threat Lab, and an independent security and privacy researcher who goes by the pseudonym Buchodi and has spent more than a decade reverse engineering consumer software and surveillance technologies.

“The feature is not yet exposed to consumers but seems nearly ready to go,” says Quintin. “Despite the billions of reasons not to, Meta seems to have created the capacity to turn their customers into a distributed surveillance machine.”

Buchodi ran additional tests on the recognition pipeline. (Read their technical analysis here.) To see if the matching system worked, Buchodi added a single faceprint to the app’s gallery, taken from the deceased French philosopher Michel Foucault. After triggering NameTag with Foucault’s image, the app produced a notification: “Person recognized.”

“The main components of a face-recognition feature are already in Meta’s companion app,” Buchodi says. “Not many pieces stand between this and a working feature.”

In April, more than 70 advocacy groups—including the American Civil Liberties Union, Electronic Privacy Information Center, and Fight for the Future—demanded Meta scrap NameTag, warning it would let stalkers and abusers silently identify strangers in public. “Our competitors offer this type of face-recognition product, we do not,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement to WIRED at the time. “If we were to release such a feature, we would take a very thoughtful approach before rolling anything out.”

Privacy advocates argue that by embedding face recognition into a mass-market wearable platform, Meta could normalize a capability it previously pulled back amid privacy concerns.

“You’re setting norms and standards by putting technology into the ecosystem,” Joseph Jerome, a former Meta Reality Labs policy official who worked on privacy reviews for the company’s AR and VR products, says of Meta’s role in the wearable tech industry. “I don’t know how Meta can responsibly deploy a technology like this.”

“Regardless of any sensational reporting, the facts are simple: We’ve said before we’re exploring these types of features, and what you’re seeing is just evidence of that exploration,” says Meta spokesperson Ryan Daniels. “Nothing has shipped to consumers and no final decision has been made on what to do here, if anything. If we do decide to roll something out, we will take a thoughtful approach and do so with full transparency. One decision we can be clear about—we are not building a central face database.”

WIRED’s code review shows the NameTag system is currently designed to pull faceprints from Meta’s servers and store them on user devices.

Meta’s earlier system, announced by Facebook in 2010, analyzed photos and suggested tags for people who appeared in users’ images. It quickly scaled to more than a billion users and became one of the largest consumer face-recognition systems ever deployed.

The technology drew scrutiny almost immediately. European regulators and privacy advocates in the US questioned its legality as early as 2011, and there were concerns over whether users had meaningfully consented to the creation of biometric data. In 2019, Meta paid $5 billion to the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice to settle a wider privacy case that included face-recognition concerns.

In November 2021, Meta announced it would shut down the system and delete the face templates it had built, citing growing concerns about the role of face recognition in society. But the decision was never understood internally as a permanent retreat, says Jerome, who joined Reality Labs in mid-2021. “There was always this tension of, well, when do we roll back out face recognition?”

In 2025, according to internal documents reviewed by The Times, Meta planned to debut face recognition on its smart glasses to attendees of a conference for the blind before making it available to the general public. It never did. But the technology answers a real demand: Existing assistive devices already let blind users identify faces they have personally enrolled, and a 2018 study of blind users by Cornell Tech and Facebook researchers found that every participant called recognizing people an important daily task.

Meta did not respond to questions about which users might be identifiable through NameTag; whether it intends for photos, faceprints, or other data generated by the system to ever be transmitted back to its servers; or whether the company has plans to let users opt in rather than out. EssilorLuxottica, which manufactures the Ray-Ban and Oakley smart glasses with Meta, did not respond to a request for comment.

Woodrow Hartzog, a privacy law professor at Boston University, says even opt-in protection—should Meta eventually offer it—would be thin. Consent, he says, can often be tied to a job, a benefit, or access to a service. Framing privacy as a matter of personal choice is advantageous to businesses, placing no meaningful limits on collection while letting companies claim users are in control.

“We know that the more these systems are deployed, the more people come to see them as unexceptional,” Hartzog says. “And the more we come to see them as unexceptional and routine, the more people tend to start to take their moral cues about whether it’s desirable or good to have your face scanned. That’s just human psychology.”

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Since 2022 Just A Handful Of Countries Have Driven All Sovereign Gold Demand

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Sat, 06 Jun 2026 10:01:06 GMT

The bulk of the gold price increase last year can be attributed to US policy shifts: UBS

By Tyler Durden

The 2008 financial crisis marked a structural shift in central bank behaviour

Back in January, UBS showed that most of last year’s increase in gold prices was driven by US policy shocks boosting private demand.

Running in parallel, however, has been a more gradual but persistent rise in official sector gold holdings. A common narrative, one which was started largely on this website, is that this shift began with the Russia–Ukraine conflict, when the freezing of Russia’s foreign exchange reserves heightened incentives for countries to diversify into assets such as gold. (Russia, for example, confirmed in 2021 that its gold reserves are fully held domestically.)

While that is true, UBS chief economist Arendy Kapteyn notes that the true turning point in official sector gold demand came well before 2022. The increase in official sector gold holdings began around the global financial crisis in 2008, not in 2022 (roughly 85% of the increase occurred between August 2008 and February 2022, and about 15% since then).

While sanctions risk has clearly accelerated and reinforced the trend - Russia also stepped up purchases after Crimea in 2014 - but it is likely not the root cause. As highlighted in this IMF paper, the GFC led emerging markets to reassess the safety of advanced-economy assets, given stresses in banking systems and sovereign balance sheets, making gold an attractive hedge.

At the same time, rapid reserve accumulation in the 2000s left many countries heavily exposed to a narrow set of “safe” assets, raising both concentration and correlation risks. In addition, post GFC policies (QE and ultra-low yields) sharply reduced the opportunity cost of holding gold.

What is perhaps most notable is how concentrated - across a universe of roughly 200 countries - the buying has been. Between 2008 and 2022, just six countries — Russia, China, Turkey, India, Poland, and Kazakhstan — accounted for almost the entire increase in official gold holdings. But since 2022, a slightly different group — China, Poland, India, Iraq, Czechia, and Qatar — has driven essentially all net purchases.

See here and here for more detail, for pro subs.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Ballroom donors won $50B in contracts after giving to Trump project, watchdog group finds

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Fri, 05 Jun 2026 19:20:29 GMT

Etienne Note: This article also appears in “Government”, Media and Academia Criminality Exposed, A digest of HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of articles exposing and suggesting inter-generational organized crime’s control of the “Government,” Media and Academia by the Art of Liberty Foundation. You can view the other articles or subscribe on Telegram: https://t.me/Government_Scams

By Jonathan Edwards

Construction at the site of the former East Wing, seen last week. (Anne Lebreton/AFP/Getty Images)

More than half of the publicly identified donors to President Donald Trump’s White House ballroom project have won new or expanded federal contracts worth more than $50 billion during the past six months, according to a report released Thursday by a government watchdog group.

Fourteen of the 27 known corporate donors to the $400 million project, which would replace the East Wing that Trump demolished in October, have seen their government business grow in that window, according to the report from Public Citizen, a nonprofit. Most of those same companies are also facing federal enforcement actions over alleged wrongdoing or have had such actions suspended by the Trump administration since the start of Trump’s second term, the nonprofit found.

The donors have sprawling interests that touch nearly every aspect of American life, including defense contracting, technology and energy. Trump has repeatedly touted the gifts as a boon to taxpayers, but critics of the project say the administration’s refusal to release a full list of donors creates the potential for corruption.

“These giant corporations aren’t funding the Trump ballroom fiasco out of the goodness of their hearts,” said Jon Golinger, a public policy advocate at Public Citizen and an author of the report. “They have massive interests before the federal government, and they hope to curry favor with, and receive favorable treatment from, the Trump administration.”

The analysis builds on a report from the group last fall that found the known donors held $279 billion in government contracts over the previous five years and had spent $1.6 billion on political contributions and lobbying during that time. The new report focuses on contracts awarded in most of the seven months since the East Wing’s demolition, which Trump’s critics have argued created new urgency around potential conflicts of interest.

Of the known donors, no single contributor received more new business with the government since giving to the project than Lockheed Martin. The defense giant received roughly $43.8 billion in new or expanded contract funding since last fall, according to the report.

Booz Allen Hamilton followed, with more than $4.2 billion, and Palantir, with just over $1 billion. Other donors that received new or increased contracts include Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Caterpillar and T-Mobile. (Amazon Executive Chairman Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.) Altogether, more than two-thirds of corporate ballroom donors — 19 of 27 — have received government contracts over the past five and a half years, totaling $338 billion, the report says.

Sixteen of the 27 donors are facing federal enforcement actions or have had such actions suspended by the Trump administration, the report found, including major antitrust reviews involving Amazon, Apple, Meta and Nvidia; labor rights cases involving Google, Lockheed and Meta; and securities matters involving Coinbase and Ripple, whose cases have been dropped or scaled back under Trump.

The White House on Thursday pushed back on the report’s pay-to-play framing.

“The same critics who are alleging fake conflicts of interests, would also complain if American taxpayers were footing the bill for these long-overdue renovations,” White House spokesman Davis Ingle said in a statement. “The donors for the White House ballroom project represent a wide array of great American companies and generous individuals, all of whom are contributing to make the People’s House better for generations to come.”

The White House has closely guarded some details of the project, publicly disclosing only 21 corporate donors. News outlets subsequently identified six more. Public Citizen sued under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain the secret fundraising contract that permits officials to conceal donors’ identities, unearthing the terms set between the White House, National Park Service and the Trust for the National Mall, the nonprofit handling ballroom donations.

Thursday’s report arrives as the ballroom project continues to face legal and political turbulence. A federal judge has ruled that construction must halt until Congress authorizes the project, but a three-judge federal appeals panel allowed construction to continue while the case proceeds. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is scheduled to hear the case Friday.

Last month, Senate Republicans tried to have Congress allocate $1 billion for what it called the “East Wing Modernization Project,” which included other initiatives, a move that collapsed amid public backlash.

Congressional Democrats have pressed for greater disclosure for months. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) has sent letters to known donors asking what they contributed and what they expected in return. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) and colleagues have introduced legislation that would ban anonymous donations for ballroom and other White House grounds projects.

“At every turn, President Trump has sought to conceal the facts about his monstrous multimillion-dollar ballroom,” Blumenthal said in an April statement to The Post.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

The $35 Million Primary

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Fri, 05 Jun 2026 19:09:12 GMT

By Mike Sertic

On the evening of May 19, 2026, in a banquet hall in Hebron, Kentucky, a defeated congressman raised a toast of raw milk, and before the night was out the crowd was chanting for him to run for president. Thomas Massie had just lost. By a margin of roughly 55 to 45 percent, the four-term incumbent had been turned out of the Republican primary in Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District by Ed Gallrein—a retired Navy SEAL and farmer who had never held elected office and who declined to debate his opponent even once.

Massie lost the vote but seemed to win the room. The more telling fact, though, was that the contest that ended his congressional career was not, by most accounts, decided by the people of northern Kentucky at all. It was the most expensive primary for a U.S. House seat in the nation’s history—by some tallies north of $34 million, combined across both campaigns and a swarm of outside groups, poured into a single district most Americans could not find on a map. For anyone who cares about self-government, the race warrants a close look: it is a case study in what happens when national money, presidential power, and ideologically motivated donor networks converge on a local election, and a sobering occasion to ask who, exactly, is governing whom.

The maverick who broke too many rules

Thomas Massie was never an ordinary congressman. An MIT-trained engineer who powers his Kentucky farm with solar panels and once drove a Tesla with the plate “KYNUKE,” he built a national following as one of the few legislators willing to vote no on his own party’s bills, often as the lone dissenter. He had held Kentucky’s 4th District since a 2012 special election, and he had held it comfortably—roughly 75 percent of the primary vote in 2024, around 65 percent of the general. By his own estimate, in an ordinary year he would have won this primary with 80 percent.

This was not an ordinary year, because Massie had spent it collecting powerful enemies. He opposed short-term funding bills on fiscal grounds. He resisted military action against Iran and Venezuela, insisting that Congress, not the president, holds the power to declare war. He sponsored what became the Epstein Files Transparency Act, forcing the release of documents that, by his telling, had already implicated CEOs, an ambassador, a prince, and a prime minister. And—most consequentially—he was one of the very few Republicans willing to criticize the U.S. relationship with Israel: he voted against aid packages, skipped Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s 2024 address to Congress, and refused on principle to take money from groups whose central purpose was supporting a foreign government.

Each of those stances had a constituency that wanted him gone. Together, they drew a coalition unlike anything ever assembled against a single House member.

The most expensive primary in history

By the most widely cited count, from the ad-tracking firm AdImpact, nearly $33 million was spent on the race; some tallies put it as high as $35 million. Either way it shattered the prior record—the 2024 New York Democratic primary that unseated Representative Jamaal Bowman, which drew about $25 million. But the headline figure can mislead, because it is combined spending across both campaigns and every outside group—and the bulk was aimed against Massie. By Al Jazeera’s count, outside groups spent more than $25.8 million, including over $15.5 million from PACs tied to pro-Israel donors. On Massie’s side, two pro-Massie PACs spent roughly $7.6 million, atop the $5.5 million his own campaign raised. The money was lopsided, but it was not one-sided.

The effort aimed at Massie ran along two reinforcing lines. The first was Trump-aligned: MAGA KY PAC, run by Trump advisers Chris LaCivita and Tony Fabrizio, spent roughly $7.5 million backing Gallrein and attacking Massie. Its disclosed early funding came from three out-of-state donors—hedge-fund billionaires Paul Singer ($1 million) and John Paulson ($250,000), and Preserve America PAC ($750,000), the super PAC bankrolled by casino magnate Miriam Adelson—though the group never made its later finances fully public.

The second line, larger and worth naming without euphemism, was a concerted pro-Israel campaign. The groups set out to defeat Massie over his record on Israel and, once the polls closed, openly celebrated having done so. AIPAC’s super PAC (the United Democracy Project), the Republican Jewish Coalition’s Victory Fund, and Christians United for Israel together put somewhere between $9 million and $16 million into opposing Massie or boosting Gallrein, depending on the tally. Massie placed the share higher, claiming pro-Israel organizations accounted for some 95 percent of the outside money against him—”three billionaires from outside of Kentucky,” he told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, “trying to buy this seat.” When the result came in, AIPAC congratulated Gallrein for defeating an “anti-Israel incumbent” and pronounced being pro-Israel “good policy and good politics.”

This was no covert operation that reporters had to expose; it was an avowed, lavishly financed effort to unseat a sitting congressman over a single foreign-policy question, and its architects treated his defeat as a trophy.

Massie’s own side of the ledger was smaller but, in its way, more striking. His campaign committee raised about $5.5 million for the cycle from an unusually broad base: in the first quarter of 2026 alone he drew more than 20,000 donors, roughly three-quarters of them first-time givers, at an average gift under $100, and a single May fundraising drive pulled in over $1 million. His unitemized small donations—those under $200—topped $1 million between January and April, against under $200,000 for Gallrein, whose committee is estimated to have raised more than $3 million from a smaller pool of higher-dollar donors.

Massie had outside help too—from libertarian and pro-gun groups, from allies like Senator Rand Paul and Representative Jim Jordan, and from a super PAC seeded by billionaire Jeff Yass—and a pop-up super PAC called Kentucky 4th PAC spent nearly $6.7 million attacking Gallrein. That group is now the subject of a complaint filed in June by the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, which alleges it gamed federal reporting deadlines to keep its donors hidden until after the votes were cast. The complaint is only an allegation, and the FEC has yet to make a finding, but the opacity seems to have run both ways.

Two things about all this money matter most. The first is the contrast in character: Massie’s funding came from a great many small, voluntary gifts spread across the country—his average contribution under $100—while Gallrein’s effective war chest was dominated by a handful of wealthy donors and aligned issue groups, his average closer to $1,000.

The second is what the two sides shared. Both raised the overwhelming bulk of their money outside Kentucky; the Herald-Leader found the outside PAC spending was funded entirely by out-of-state donors, and for both candidates fewer than 6 percent of named contributions came from inside the district. National megadonors and ideological networks, in other words, dwarfed local input in a safe-seat primary fewer than 100,000 people would decide. Representative Lauren Boebert of Colorado, who stumped for Massie, put it bluntly: “This race will set a precedent for every other race for our entire country.”

The foreign-influence question

The most contested dimension of the race—and the one with the highest stakes for self-government—is foreign influence. It needs careful handling, because the loose version of the claim is both inflammatory and wrong, while a narrower version raises a real and serious problem.

Start with the law, which is clearer than the rhetoric. Federal statute flatly bars foreign nationals and foreign governments from spending to influence any American election, directly or indirectly. AIPAC, the Republican Jewish Coalition, and Christians United for Israel are U.S.-registered organizations; AIPAC states plainly that it is “neither directed nor funded by the Israeli government.” Taken at face value, their spending sits within the same First Amendment protections every domestic advocacy group enjoys, and the loosest charge—that a foreign treasury is cutting the checks—has no public evidence behind it.

But all of that depends on taking the denials at face value. The cleaner claim—that there is simply no foreign money here, and anyone who suspects otherwise is mistaken—asserts more certainty than the system can deliver.

Three complications deserve honest analysis:

First, “funded by American citizens” is looser than it sounds: the law permits contributions not only from U.S. citizens, including the many who also hold a second citizenship, but from green-card holders, who are foreign citizens. A donor pool can be entirely legal without being purely single-nationality American.

Second, AIPAC and groups like it are organized partly as 501(c)(4) “social welfare” nonprofits, which need not disclose their donors—the very structure that makes independent verification impossible. The public can see that money passed through a U.S. entity before reaching a super PAC, but not who originally supplied it; reporting on AIPAC’s books has noted filings showing large sums arriving “from AIPAC” with no disclosure of who gave that money to AIPAC.

Third, campaign-finance analysts across the spectrum have long flagged the (c)(4)-to-super-PAC pathway, anonymous shell LLCs, and weak FEC enforcement as a standing channel through which foreign-linked money could enter undetected. None of this proves illegal foreign money funded the campaign against Massie, and it should not be twisted into that claim. It means only that confident denials and confident accusations alike outrun the facts—and that the disclosure regime is not built to let anyone know for certain, which is its own problem for self-government, whatever the money’s source.

Massie’s own argument was narrower and sharper. He never claimed the donors were foreign citizens; he argued that an organization “heavily engaged in influencing U.S. policy in ways that principally benefit a foreign country” should have to disclose that under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). To press the point he introduced the Americans Insist on Political Agent Clarity Act—pointedly nicknamed the “AIPAC Act”—stressing that it “does not ban speech, restrict advocacy, or prohibit Americans from supporting foreign allies,” but simply requires transparency about whose interests a group advances. Persuasive or not, it is a transparency argument, not an ethnic or religious one, and it should be judged on those terms.

That distinction matters, because the race also drew out a darker undercurrent. In its aftermath some online commentary slid into conspiratorial and antisemitic framing—talk of “control,” “dual loyalty,” “overlords”—the very rhetoric responsible critics of the spending, Massie included, have rejected, and it deserves to be named as the bigotry it is. A serious debate about money in politics and the disclosure duties of foreign-policy advocacy groups is not a conspiracy theory about a religious minority, and conflating the two corrodes the debate it claims to advance.

The legitimate worry that remains is structural, and it holds regardless of one’s foreign policy: when the dominant funding in a local election comes from national networks organized around a single litmus test, a district can find its representation effectively decided by interests that don’t share its daily concerns. The donors who opposed him, Massie said, favored “more war... more bombs... more foreign aid”—the very things he had built his career voting against. One need not share his views to see the problem: a congressman was removed less for failing his constituents than for failing a national donor consensus.

The Trump factor

Money was only half the machine. The other half was the president.

Donald Trump had feuded with Massie for years. After Massie moved to oppose a short-term funding bill in early 2025, Trump posted that he “SHOULD BE PRIMARIED, and I will lead the charge against him”—and he kept the promise. In October 2025 he recruited Gallrein, met him at the Oval Office, and endorsed him before the challenger had formally declared. He called Massie a “loser” and “the worst congressman in the long and storied history of the Republican Party.” He rallied for Gallrein in Kentucky. The day before the vote, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth campaigned in the district—a rare step for a sitting cabinet officer, and one that, Trump later said, came just hours before a planned, then postponed, U.S. military operation against Iran.

This was the only U.S. House primary in the 2026 cycle in which Trump endorsed a challenger to a sitting Republican, and it fit a broader pattern observers called his “revenge tour”: in the same stretch, Trump-aligned efforts helped end the career of Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who had voted to convict him in 2021, and ousted several Indiana state senators who crossed him on redistricting. Massie, with characteristic dark humor, called himself the “main event.”

Which force mattered more—the money or the man—has been argued ever since. Massie said the day before the vote that the pro-Israel spending disrupted his race more than the president did; other reporting found that for ordinary primary voters, Trump’s open contempt was the decisive signal and the money merely amplified it. Several voters told reporters they had backed Massie before and switched because Trump asked them to. The likeliest reading is that the two converged—a national donor infrastructure and a sitting president’s operation aimed at the same target—and that together they were more than any incumbent’s local goodwill could withstand.

When the ads are fake and the debates don’t happen

The campaign’s character was as telling as its cost. With tens of millions to spend, it became a showcase for the most degraded tools of modern persuasion. One pro-Gallrein ad used an AI-generated image of Massie holding hands with Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, accusing him of a political “throuple” with “the Squad”; pro-Massie groups answered by branding Gallrein “Woke Eddie” and a “Trump traitor” and running their own AI spot of the retired SEAL abandoning Trump on a battlefield. Gallrein declined to debate Massie at all, reasoning—not wrongly—that he didn’t need to.

The premise of an election is deliberation: that voters weigh records, hear candidates defend themselves, and choose. A contest waged through synthetic imagery and a refusal to debate, financed from outside the district and tipped by an endorsement from Washington, is closer to a marketing campaign than a deliberation. The voters still cast the ballots—but the conditions under which they did were shaped by forces they neither controlled nor could easily see.

The case for the other reading

The strongest version of the counterargument is that none of this is as alarming as it sounds—that the race was simply democracy working. In that reading, Massie was no martyr but a representative who had drifted from his district. Kentucky’s 4th is deeply Republican and strongly pro-Trump, and Massie had spent years voting against the president those voters overwhelmingly backed. Constituents said as much, telling reporters he had “let the people down.” The money, by this logic, didn’t override their will; it informed them, and they agreed.

There is also evidence that money is not omnipotent. The same night Massie lost, AIPAC’s preferred candidate in Pennsylvania’s 3rd District Democratic primary lost to Chris Rabb, a vocal critic of the war in Gaza. Spending buys attention and amplification, not outcomes outright.

And the spending is itself constitutionally protected speech by American citizens—a First Amendment principle that libertarians, of all people, have long defended against rules that empower the government to decide how much political speech is too much. The libertarian tradition distrusts concentrated power, but it distrusts just as deeply the state’s authority to limit expression in the name of fairness. The discomfort this race produces is not resolved by either reflex.

What it means for self-government

Strip away the personalities and the foreign-policy fight, and the race poses a question that should unsettle anyone who takes self-government seriously: when a single House seat can draw as much as $35 million—from billionaires, national lobbies, and a sitting president, almost all of it raised elsewhere—what does it really mean to be represented?

Self-government rests on a simple proposition: that people should be free, and that any authority over them must rest on their consent. The 4th District’s voters did choose—that isn’t in dispute. But the menu they chose from, the information they received, and the incentives their representative faced were largely set from outside. A congressman who answered to his constituents on the issues most of them cared about was removed mainly because he refused to answer to interests beyond them. The lesson for other legislators is unmistakable: cross the wrong national network, and the most faithful local record may not save you.

The proposed remedies cut in different directions, and people who share the same worry disagree about them. Transparency measures like Massie’s FARA bill wouldn’t limit spending but would at least show voters whose interests a campaign serves; tighter disclosure for super PAC donors aims at the same end. Others see the deeper fix as cultural—a renewed insistence that representatives belong to their districts, and a voter’s wariness toward candidates airlifted in on outside money. Still others argue the answer is more speech and more competition, not more rules, trusting voters to discount manipulation once they see it.

What the race makes clear is that the threat to self-government is not only the familiar one of an overreaching state. It is also the quieter capture of local choice by concentrated private and national power—money, media, and machine politics that can make a district’s decision feel less like a decision than a ratification. Massie, for all his idiosyncrasies, governed as if his vote belonged to his constituents and his conscience rather than to his party’s leader or its donors. That he was punished for it is exactly why the race is worth remembering.

He left the stage in Hebron unbowed, joking that the campaign had “gone on longer than Vietnam,” reminding the crowd he still had seven months left in Congress, and warning his colleagues not to learn the wrong lesson from his defeat. The crowd chanted “No more wars!” and “USA!” and he joined in. Whether American self-government can sustain representatives like him—or whether the price of independence has simply been set too high—is a question the coming election cycles will answer. The Massie–Gallrein race didn’t settle it. It only made the stakes impossible to ignore.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

DOJ Drops BOMBSHELL Superseding Indictment Against SPLC — Far-left Group Secretly Funneled $4.1 MILLION in Tax-Exempt Donor Cash to KKK Leaders, Neo-Nazis, and Charlottesville ‘Unite the Right’ Planne

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Fri, 05 Jun 2026 14:59:28 GMT

by Jim Hᴏft

Bryan Fair is the Interim President and CEO of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). He stepped into the leadership role in July 2025 following the resignation of the former president, Margaret Huang

The same far-left smear machine that built a $786 million empire labeling patriots, Christians, and Trump supporters as extremists stands accused of bankrolling the real racists with donor money.

The Department of Justice dropped a devastating superseding indictment Tuesday against the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) in the Middle District of Alabama.

The new charges expand on the original April 2026 indictment The Gateway Pundit reported, adding explosive details about how the SPLC allegedly used fictitious bank accounts and fake payrolls to funnel approximately $4.1 million in tax-exempt donor funds straight to leaders and organizers of violent extremist groups — including the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, National Alliance, and others.

According to the superseding indictment, the SPLC’s stated mission was to “dismantle white supremacy.” Instead, prosecutors say, the organization secretly paid high-level extremists to recruit new members, host rallies, purchase materials for cross burnings and KKK robes, publish racist literature, and even plan the deadly 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville.

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Kevin Davidson put it bluntly in the charging document:

“The Southern Poverty Law Center’s stated mission included the dismantling of white supremacy and confronting hate across the country. However, unbeknownst to donors, some of their donated money was being used to fund the leaders and organizers of racist groups, including the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryan Nations, and the National Alliance.”

The superseding indictment lays out a years-long scheme involving multiple “field sources” (Fs) paid through a web of fake companies like Center Investigative Agency (CIA), Rare Books Warehouse, Tech Writers Group, and others. These entities had no real employees or business — they existed solely to launder donor money to extremists.

Among the most damning allegations:

F-9 received over $1.2 million in donor funds. While on the SPLC payroll, this informant infiltrated the neo-Nazi National Alliance, raised money for the group, and even stole documents from an extremist headquarters. An SPLC employee (Employee-2) allegedly used the stolen material for a Hatewatch story — then paid another informant $6,000 to falsely take the blame. Employee-2 was reportedly in a romantic relationship with F-9, shared a house and joint bank accounts, and funneled donor cash that made up 66% of all deposits into their personal accounts.
F-37 — a member of the online leadership chat group that helped plan the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville (where a woman and two law enforcement officers were killed) — received over $300,000. The SPLC directed this informant to attend the event and arrange transportation for others. The SPLC then heavily covered the tragedy on its platforms and saw a massive fundraising windfall. The indictment notes the SPLC “more than doubled their previous year’s reported revenue” after Charlottesville — while hiding from donors that they had paid one of the planners.
F-30, a leader in the National Socialist Party of America, KKK member, and Aryan Nations faction leader with chapters in 17 states, was paid over $70,000 to stay in the movement and keep recruiting. He even asked the SPLC to soften the language on his “Extremist File” webpage so it wouldn’t scare off new recruits — and an SPLC employee allegedly agreed and changed it.
F-31 and F-32, KKK members who wanted out of the movement, were instead paid $1,200 monthly salaries plus expenses to stay in and recruit. They were told to claim they worked for the fake “Rare Books” company doing research for college students — a complete lie. Donor money reimbursed them for cross-burning supplies (wood and fuel).
F-27 (National Socialist Movement officer and Aryan Nations-linked Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club) received over $350,000.
F-42, former chairman of the National Alliance, got over $155,000.
Multiple other Fs were paid to attend rallies, create racist paraphernalia for sale, and publish extremist literature — all while the SPLC told donors their money was fighting these exact activities.

To hide the scheme, SPLC employees (including future CFO-level figures) opened accounts at FDIC-insured banks in the names of completely fictitious entities. They submitted false “Sole Proprietorship Resolution of Authority” documents claiming to own these fake companies. When Bank-1 started asking questions in 2020, the SPLC’s own President/CEO and Board Chair wrote a letter admitting the accounts were operated “under the Center’s authority.”

After the accounts were shut down, the SPLC switched to masked ACH payments under names like “RAREBOOKS050” and “IPRESEARCHCON050” to continue paying the Fs.

During the period of the alleged fraud (roughly 2010–2023), the SPLC’s revenue exploded from $38.7 million to $129 million, and its net assets grew to $786 million.

The SPLC has already filed a motion in federal court seeking to dismiss the charges, calling the case “vindictive prosecution.” They claim it’s political retaliation.

But the superseding indictment is packed with specific dates, dollar amounts, bank records, fake payroll documents, and internal details that a Montgomery grand jury found credible enough to charge.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Hidden Ingredient in GLP-1 Tablets Raises New Gut Health Questions

Fri, 05 Jun 2026 14:03:27 GMT

by Dr. Joseph Mercola

A compound hidden inside certain weight-loss tablets raises serious questions about gut health. Most people recognize semaglutide through brand names such as Ozempic and Wegovy. These drugs belong to a class called GLP-1 receptor agonists — they mimic a natural gut hormone that tells your brain you’re full, slows stomach emptying, and helps regulate blood sugar.

Injectable versions deliver the drug directly under your skin, but oral formulations require a chemical absorption enhancer called salcaprozate sodium, or SNAC, so the drug can cross your stomach lining. Even with that assistance, only about 0.4% to 1% of the dose becomes available in the bloodstream.

The remaining 99% travels the full length of your digestive tract, where it washes over the trillions of microbes that ferment your food, train your immune system, and maintain the protective lining of your gut. Researchers writing in the Journal of Controlled Release report that this overlooked ingredient reshapes that ecosystem in ways that could undermine the very metabolic health these drugs claim to improve.¹

What makes these findings especially striking is that your gut already contains the machinery to produce GLP-1 naturally — butyrate-producing bacteria fuel the very cells that release this appetite-regulating hormone — and the ingredient meant to deliver a synthetic version of that signal may be compromising the biological original.

GLP-1 Tablets Hidden Delivery Ingredient Reshapes Your Gut Ecosystem

For the study, researchers looked at SNAC, the ingredient that helps semaglutide tablets pass through your stomach wall and enter the bloodstream. They wanted to know what happens when this chemical moves through the digestive system day after day.

To test this, they gave healthy rats semaglutide, SNAC alone, or both together for 21 days. Afterward, they examined changes in gut bacteria, inflammation signals, and metabolic markers. The goal was to find out whether the delivery ingredient itself disrupts the gut microbiome that supports metabolic health.

•Even healthy animals showed clear biological changes within a few weeks — The experiment used young, healthy rats that didn’t have diabetes or obesity. This allowed researchers to see how the compound affects the body under normal conditions.

Despite starting with healthy animals, repeated exposure to SNAC caused noticeable shifts in gut bacteria, inflammation markers, and digestive metabolism in just three weeks. This finding matters because many people take GLP-1 drugs for long periods of time to control weight or blood sugar.

•Weight gain slowed mainly because the drug reduced appetite — During the first week of treatment, animals receiving semaglutide or SNAC gained less weight than untreated rats. By the end of the 21-day experiment, weight gain dropped about 7.8% in the semaglutide group and about 4.9% in the SNAC group. Researchers traced this effect to lower food intake. The drug worked by making the animals eat less, not by speeding up their metabolism.

•Helpful gut bacteria and enzymes dropped sharply during treatment — Two important groups of bacteria declined significantly. Muribaculaceae fell by 53% with semaglutide and 62% with SNAC alone. Bacteroidaceae dropped by 60% and 77% respectively. These microbes normally break down complex carbohydrates and fibers that reach the lower intestine. When they do this job, they produce helpful compounds that support colon cells and help control inflammation.

Several enzymes that help break down carbohydrates also dropped significantly in the SNAC group. This means the microbial community lost some of its ability to convert complex carbohydrates into beneficial compounds that support gut and immune health.

•Bacteria linked to inflammation expanded — While beneficial microbes declined, another group of bacteria called Desulfovibrionaceae increased about sevenfold in animals receiving SNAC. This bacterial family produces hydrogen sulfide — the same gas responsible for the smell of rotten eggs — which irritates the intestinal lining and erodes the protective barrier that keeps toxins sealed inside your gut.

•Production of butyrate — a key gut fuel — dropped dramatically — One of the most important findings involved butyrate, a short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) made when gut bacteria ferment certain carbohydrates. SNAC lowered fecal butyrate levels by about 77%, while the semaglutide-SNAC combination lowered it by about 75%. Colon cells rely on butyrate as their main energy source. When levels fall, those cells struggle to maintain a strong gut lining.

Lower butyrate weakened the gut barrier and affected the liver. Butyrate helps colon cells maintain tight junctions — tiny seals that keep bacteria and toxins inside the intestine. When butyrate levels drop, those seals loosen and harmful substances move into the bloodstream more easily.

The study also found signs that this change affected the gut-liver connection. Blood from your intestine flows directly to your liver through the portal vein, so when the gut barrier leaks, the liver is the first organ to absorb the damage. Rats treated with SNAC showed a 12.9% increase in liver weight and a 30% drop in cecum weight — the cecum is a pouch at the start of the large intestine where gut bacteria ferment food — both signs that fermentation inside the gut had changed.

•Inflammation markers increased as the microbiome shifted — Blood tests revealed higher levels of inflammatory signals after SNAC exposure. Tumor necrosis factor-alpha rose about 70% in the SNAC group, and IL-6 increased in animals receiving the combined treatment.

These molecules act like alarm signals in the immune system and often rise in metabolic conditions such as obesity and insulin resistance. The same animals also showed an 85% drop in brain-derived neurotrophic factor, or BDNF, a molecule that supports brain cell health and nerve communication. Butyrate stimulates BDNF production through signaling pathways that connect your gut to your brain — so when butyrate collapses, BDNF falls with it.

These findings are from laboratory or animal research and may not directly apply to human health.

How to Restore Gut Signaling So Your Body Produces Its Own GLP-1

If you’re taking oral semaglutide, these findings deserve your attention — because the very ingredient that delivers the drug may be disrupting the microbial machinery your body uses to produce GLP-1 on its own. That means the pill could be quietly deepening your dependence on it. The good news is that the system it disrupts is also the system you can rebuild.

Your gut microbes produce SCFAs, especially butyrate, which act like metabolic messengers throughout your body. Butyrate serves as the primary fuel for colon cells, including L-cells that produce GLP-1. So, your body already contains its own system that helps regulate appetite and metabolic signaling — one that relies on butyrate-supported GLP-1 release, rather than injections or pills.

However, many people produce very little butyrate because modern diets contain far less fermentable fiber than traditional diets. As a result, your gut barrier weakens, inflammatory signals rise, and the metabolic signals that regulate appetite become less stable. Rebuilding the microbial community that produces these molecules restores your body’s own appetite-regulation system — the same one these drugs were designed to replace.

1.Rebuild butyrate production so your gut barrier strengthens again — Your gut bacteria produce SCFAs when they ferment certain carbohydrates and fibers. Butyrate stands out as the most important one. It fuels the cells lining your colon and tightens the microscopic junctions that keep toxins inside your digestive tract.

When butyrate levels drop, your gut barrier weakens and inflammatory compounds leak into circulation. Restoring butyrate production strengthens the intestinal lining and restores metabolic signaling that influences appetite and fat metabolism. Begin by eliminating seed oils high in linoleic acid (LA), which weaken your colon’s protective lining and suffocate beneficial bacteria.

These fragile fats may make it harder for your gut cells to burn butyrate. Higher oxygen levels in the gut can suppress the bacteria you rely on for metabolic balance, and higher seed oil intake has been associated with greater hunger and inflammatory signaling. The goal is to get your LA intake below 5 grams, and ideally closer to 2 grams, daily.

To track your intake, the Seed Oil Sleuth feature in the upcoming Pax health coach platform calculates LA exposure with precision.

2.Stabilize your gut environment before adding large amounts of fiber — If your digestion is unstable — bloating, unpredictable bowel habits, or discomfort after meals — start by calming the microbial environment. Simpler meals and temporarily lower fermentable fiber reduce excessive fermentation and the release of endotoxins — toxic fragments from bacterial cell walls that slip through the loosened tight junctions described earlier and enter your bloodstream.

Once there, they trigger the same inflammatory cascade the study detected in SNAC-treated animals. This phase allows your intestinal lining to rebuild and creates conditions where beneficial bacteria that produce butyrate can return.

3.Gradually expand plant diversity to rebuild beneficial microbes — Once your digestion becomes calmer — less bloating, predictable bowel habits, and better tolerance to meals — your gut is ready for more fiber. Most adults function best with roughly 250 grams of carbohydrates daily once metabolic stability improves. The key is introducing those carbohydrates in forms your gut can tolerate.

Whole fruits and well-cooked starches such as white rice provide glucose for mitochondrial energy production without overwhelming a compromised microbiome with heavy fermentation. From there, rebuild fiber gradually. Start with root vegetables — they’re easy to digest and provide moderate fiber. Then add non-starchy vegetables. Starchy vegetables like squash and sweet potatoes come next. Beans, legumes, and minimally processed whole grains come last, and only if you tolerate them well.

4.Feed the microbes that specialize in producing butyrate — Resistant starch foods play an important role during this stage. Cooked-and-cooled white potatoes and green bananas feed specific bacteria that specialize in producing butyrate.

As those microbes multiply, butyrate levels tend to rise, the intestinal barrier tightens, and inflammatory compounds remain better contained inside the digestive tract. This kind of metabolic shift may help support gut integrity, lower inflammatory signaling, and improve communication between your microbiome and the rest of your body.

5.Activate GLP-1 naturally by restoring the gut systems drugs attempt to mimic — Your intestine already produces GLP-1, the hormone that regulates appetite and blood sugar. Drug companies attempt to replicate that signal with injections such as Ozempic and Wegovy.

In my book “Weight Loss Cure: Melt Fat Naturally With Your Own GLP-1”, I outline how you can restore the natural version of this system through diet and metabolic support. When your gut microbiome consistently produces SCFAs — especially butyrate — your body’s own appetite and metabolic signaling tend to function more reliably.

Save This Article for Later - Get the PDF Now

Download PDF

FAQs About the Hidden Ingredient in Oral Ozempic and Wegovy

Q: What hidden ingredient in oral semaglutide tablets raised concerns in this study?

A: Researchers focused on SNAC, a chemical added to oral semaglutide tablets so the drug can cross the stomach lining and enter the bloodstream. Because only about 0.4% to 1% of the drug actually reaches circulation, most of the compound continues through the digestive tract, where it interacts with the gut microbiome — the community of microbes that helps regulate digestion, immunity, and metabolic health.

Q: What did researchers discover about SNAC’s effects on gut bacteria?

A: In a 21-day experiment using healthy rats, scientists found that repeated exposure to SNAC significantly altered the gut microbiome. Beneficial bacteria that normally ferment carbohydrates and support metabolic health declined sharply, while bacteria linked to inflammation increased. These changes occurred even in animals that were otherwise healthy.

Q: Why is the drop in butyrate important for gut health?

A: Butyrate is an SCFA produced when gut bacteria ferment certain carbohydrates and fibers. It serves as the primary fuel for colon cells and helps maintain the tight junctions that keep bacteria and toxins inside the intestine. When butyrate levels drop, the intestinal barrier weakens, making it easier for harmful substances to enter the bloodstream and trigger inflammation.

Q: What other health signals changed when the microbiome shifted?

A: The study found that animals exposed to SNAC showed clear signs of increased inflammation. One immune signal called tumor necrosis factor-alpha rose by about 70%, and another called IL-6 also increased when semaglutide and SNAC were given together. At the same time, levels of BDNF — a substance that helps brain cells grow, repair themselves, and stay healthy — dropped by about 85%.

Q: How can gut health be restored after microbiome disruption?

A: Improving gut health begins with rebuilding the microbial environment that produces beneficial compounds such as butyrate. Stabilizing digestion, gradually increasing fiber-rich foods, and including resistant starch sources like cooked-and-cooled potatoes or green bananas help nourish bacteria that support the gut barrier. As the microbiome recovers, metabolic signaling that helps regulate appetite and inflammation becomes more stable.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Consult a qualified health care provider before making changes to your health regimen.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

House votes to rebuke Trump over war with Iran

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Fri, 05 Jun 2026 13:19:22 GMT

by Scott Wong and Kyle Stewart

WASHINGTON — The House offered a rare rebuke to President Donald Trump on Wednesday, passing a Democratic-led measure to end his war with Iran over objections from Republican leadership.

It was one of two Democratic-led measures opposed by the White House that advanced in the GOP-led House. Lawmakers later passed a motion that would unlock a vote on sending aid to Ukraine.

The Iran war powers resolution, offered by Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, had been heading for a vote before the House left for its Memorial Day recess May 21. But it was abruptly pulled from the floor when it appeared too many Republicans were absent to defeat it.

On Wednesday, it passed 215-208, with four Republicans joining all Democrats in voting yes: Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Tom Barrett of Michigan and Warren Davidson of Ohio.

The resolution directs Trump to remove U.S. armed forces from hostilities with Iran, unless Congress votes to declare war or authorizes using military force against it. It would not force him to end the conflict, however; it is a symbolic expression of disapproval of the war with Iran.

Republicans had rejected three other attempts to pass a war powers resolution this year. The most recent vote ended in a 212-212 tie, and Democrats celebrated, saying that more Americans are turning against the war and that it was only a matter of time before they would be successful.

Wednesday’s vote gives momentum for the resolution in the Senate, which had already advanced its own war powers resolution on the floor last month but had not yet held a final vote. The Senate version has teeth, however, and it would require Trump to end the war without congressional approval. But it would need to pass the House, and then Trump could veto it.

A White House official responded to the House vote by noting that a handful of GOP lawmakers were absent for it and that previous efforts on similar resolutions were unsuccessful.

The House resolution was opposed by Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and most Republicans, who complained that it undermines Trump and his top negotiators when they are trying to secure a nuclear deal with Iran. Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, R-Fla., called Wednesday’s action “just a total BS vote.”

“I think there’s no Democrat, no Republican, that can tell you what forces they would want pulled from Iran. There’s really nothing they actually want pulled from there. They just want a stupid political vote, which is what this is,” Mast said Wednesday. That “weakens the president’s hands as he’s negotiating with Iran.”

In the same vote series Wednesday, the House voted 218-204 in favor of a motion to “discharge,” or bring forward, legislation that would provide aid to Ukraine. That vote took place after the so-called discharge petition reached 218 signatures — a simple majority of the chamber — on May 13, allowing supporters to bypass Johnson and GOP leadership and bring the measure directly to the floor.

Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, a Republican-turned-independent, joined all Democrats and two Republicans, Fitzpatrick and Don Bacon of Nebraska, in signing the Ukraine petition.

Kiley and six Republicans voted Wednesday to discharge the bill. That sets up a final vote Thursday.

“This vote is not a process vote,” said Meeks, who also led the discharge effort. “It’s a statement on whether this Congress and all of its members stand with and support Ukraine and the people of Ukraine and its fight for freedom, its fight for democracy and its fight for liberty.”

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

No, Trump's $1.776 billion slush fund isn't 'dead'

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Fri, 05 Jun 2026 10:01:25 GMT

By Rebecca Crosby and Noel Sims

President Trump’s “anti-weaponization fund” has faced bipartisan opposition. Multiple Republicans have argued that the $1.776 billion fund, which is part of a settlement agreement in Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), is a “slush fund” to reward Trump’s political allies, including rioters who participated in the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection.

Republican opposition to the fund delayed voting for a reconciliation bill to fund immigration enforcement agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol. To advance that legislation, the Trump administration wants Republican Senators and the public to believe that the fund is not moving forward.

This effort started Monday, when the Department of Justice (DOJ) posted a statement to X in response to a federal judge’s temporary order preventing the activation of the fund. In the statement, the DOJ wrote that it disagrees with the decision, but “will abide by the Court’s ruling.”

This was paired with a report from Axios citing “two senior administration officials” that said that the Trump administration would “drop its controversial $1.8 billion ‘weaponization’ fund.”

This proved insufficient for Senate Republicans. Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) said that Republicans would not be satisfied until the administration “shuts it down“ and makes it “very very clear.”

On Tuesday, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told a House committee that the DOJ was “not moving forward” with the fund. Many major media outlets, citing Blanche’s comments, quickly published headlines claiming that the fund was “dead” or had been “scrapped.”

Politico, for example, published an article with the headline, “‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’ is dead, acting AG says.” The Washington Post published an article entitled, “Trump administration abandons $1.8 billion payout fund after revolt by GOP.” The Wall Street Journal wrote that the Trump administration was “abandoning” the fund. The Associated Press, TIME, and the Guardian all published articles with headlines claiming the fund was scrapped, while Forbes, CNBC, and NOTUS all wrote headlines stating that Blanche said that the fund was “dead.”

This is not, however, what Blanche said.

The settlement agreement between Trump and the DOJ, which created the weaponization fund, states, “This Settlement Agreement may be modified only with the written agreement of the Parties.” During his testimony, Blanche repeatedly declined to reverse the settlement in writing.

Congresswoman Grace Meng (D-NY): You and Associate Attorney General Woodward signed earlier documents regarding the settlement and this fund. Would both of you now sign and release documents reversing the DOJ’s position on the fund?
Blanche: We’re not moving forward with the fund. I’m not sure what that means to sign documents reversing. There’s nothing to reverse. We’re not moving forward with the fund.

Later, Meng said, “You established it in writing. So it just makes sense to rescind it in writing.” Blanche responded, “I’m not committing to doing anything in writing.”

During his testimony, Blanche indicated the Trump administration would continue to defend the fund against legal challenges, saying the administration would be “defending our rights and making sure our rights are protected.”

Further, the future of the fund depends on the position of Trump, not Blanche. Trump can replace Blanche, who is only serving in an acting capacity, at any time. Without a written reversal, Blanche could also simply say that the DOJ’s position has changed and the fund will move forward.

In a podcast interview that was taped on Tuesday, Trump was asked by host Miranda Devine if the fund was dropped. “No, a court ruled against it,” Trump said. Trump defended the fund, arguing that “these are people that have been decimated” and “they should be reimbursed for a crooked government.”

When asked Wednesday by CNN’s Kaitlan Collins if the fund was dead or on hold, Trump said, “I don’t know” and said he would have to ask “the lawyers.” When Collins pressed for further clarification, Trump told her to “be quiet.”

“I love it,” Trump said of the anti-weaponization fund. “I think it’s so important.”

$100 million immunity

Another important part of Trump’s settlement with the IRS remains fully intact. Trump, his family members, and their businesses are shielded from any audits or punishments by the IRS related to tax returns that were filed before the settlement became effective last month.

Blanche confirmed that this part of the settlement is still in effect during his appearance in the House on Tuesday. He defended the provision, saying, “It’s nothing that gives any sort of immunity in the future to the president or his family or his organizations.”

The release from all audits of past tax returns, however, could generate massive savings for him and his family — potentially more than $100 million. (Further, like many wealthy people, Trump typically carries deductions forward multiple years. So preventing audits of prior tax returns would likely make auditing future tax returns extremely difficult, if not impossible.)

According to the New York Times, Trump has faced an ongoing audit by the IRS since 2010, when he received a $72.9 million tax refund. The IRS suspected that Trump had written off the same losses on a Chicago hotel tower twice. If the IRS had ruled against him, Trump could have owed more than $100 million.

It is unclear whether the audit was still ongoing when the settlement was reached this year. It is also unknown whether Trump or his family were facing any other audits.

Blanche’s $10 million conflict of interest

Blanche personally signed off on the settlement, even though he served as Trump’s personal defense attorney in the past. In the run-up to the 2024 election, Blanche was paid nearly $10 million by Trump’s Save America PAC to represent Trump in various legal battles.

Blanche represented Trump during the trial over Trump’s hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. Although this trial resulted in Trump being convicted of 34 felonies, Blanche successfully stalled two other cases brought by special counsel Jack Smith. Both cases, one over Trump’s interference in the 2020 election and the other alleging that Trump illegally stored classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, were delayed until after Trump won reelection. At that point, Smith was left with little choice but to drop the cases.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

House Defies Trump By Advancing $8BN New Ukraine Aid Package

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Fri, 05 Jun 2026 09:01:37 GMT

by Tyler Durden

Late Wednesday saw President Trump receive a rare and much belated rebuke from the House of Representatives as it voted to pass a war powers resolution related to Iran. The passed resolution directs the withdrawal of US troops from armed hostilities with Iran, in a closely divided 215–208 vote, aided by four Republicans.

But this wasn’t the only Trump-defying vote that took place Wednesday, as The Hill reports: “Six Republicans joined Democrats on Wednesday to push through a vote on military aid for Ukraine, a blow to President Trump’s handling of Russia’s war against the country and his withdrawal of U.S. support for Kyiv.”

via Politico

“The House voted 218-204 in a procedural motion that clears the way for a vote on the Ukraine Support Act, authored by Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee,” the report adds.

So interestingly, and in a bit of a blaring contradiction, the House has shown itself to be dovish on the Iran war but hawkish on Russia-Ukraine.

Or rather, they are ‘pro’ Ukraine war but ‘anti’ Iran war, strangely enough.

“This vote is not a process vote, it’s a statement on whether this Congress and all of its members stand with and support Ukraine and the people of Ukraine, and its fight for freedom, its fight for democracy, and its fight for liberty,” Meeks said on the floor after the vote.

There was no mention of using this massive funding for diplomacy, and to get Ukrainian and Russian negotiators back to the table:

It provides $8 billion in military financing loans to Ukraine, extends the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) through 2027, which allows for the U.S. to send Ukraine weapons directly from Pentagon stockpiles, additional sanctions against Russia, among other provisions.

Instead, there was the usual simplistic black-and-white moral posturing in a Bush-style “with us or against us” kind of way. “It’s between Ukraine or Putin, I choose Ukraine,” Republican Rep. Joe Wilson stated.

Late last month Ukraine and Russia moved on from a brief ceasefire and resumed blasting each other. Russia has continued to make gradual progress in taking control of both the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts which together comprise the Donbas region. Moscow is insisting that Ukraine’s ceding of the last parts of the Donbas is a precondition to resumed peace talks.

Not accounting for more billions in taxpayer dollars thrown into the Ukraine war -- to say nothing of the money pit that is the US-Israeli war on Iran -- the US government was in February projected to post a fiscal-year 2026 deficit of $1.9 trillion. Not that anyone in Washington cares.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Coffee's Hidden Opioid Secret: Why Your Morning Cup is More Addictive Than You Think

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Fri, 05 Jun 2026 07:01:10 GMT

Etienne Note: Our article: Planet Mind Control - Documentary on What Hollywood is Inserting Subliminally into Movies and TV, which covers how Hollywood subliminally product places coffee and alcohol into tell-a-vision and movies has popped to one of the top 10 articles on our Important News Substack!

by Sayer Ji

You think you know why you’re addicted to coffee. It’s the caffeine, right? That’s what everyone says. But what if I told you that your morning cup contains compounds that literally activate the same brain receptors as opium? What if the real reason coffee has such a vice-like grip on billions of people isn’t just about staying awake, but about a complex neurochemical dependence that goes far deeper than a simple stimulant effect?

This isn’t conspiracy theory. This is published science that’s been hiding in plain sight for decades.

The Discovery That Changed Everything (And Nobody Talked About)

In 1983, researchers published a bombshell finding in the journal Nature that should have revolutionized how we think about coffee¹. They discovered that coffee contains exorphins – opioid-like compounds that bind to the same receptors in your brain as morphine and heroin.

Here’s the kicker: both regular and decaffeinated coffee showed this opiate receptor activity. Let that sink in. The opioid effect has nothing to do with caffeine.

The researchers found that an average cup of coffee contains these opioid compounds at concentrations five times higher than the amount needed to have a biological effect¹. In other words, every time you drink coffee, you’re not just getting a caffeine buzz – you’re literally micro-dosing opioids.

Surprised by the uniquely addictive opioid-modulating properties of coffee? The problem of opioid modulating peptides in commonly consumed Western foods is ubiquitous. Learn more here: Do Hidden Opiates in Our Food Explain Food Addictions?

The Neurochemical Cocktail Nobody Talks About

Coffee isn’t just liquid caffeine. It’s a complex drug delivery system that hits multiple neurotransmitter pathways simultaneously:

1. The Opioid Hit: Those exorphins we mentioned? They’re peptides in the 1,000–3,500 molecular weight range that survive digestion and heat¹. They create that subtle sense of pleasure and comfort – that “all is right with the world” feeling coffee drinkers know so well.

2. The Dopamine Rush: Coffee contains compounds that stimulate dopamine release – the same neurotransmitter hijacked by cocaine². This is your brain’s reward chemical, the one that makes you think “I need to do that again.”

3. The Adenosine Block: This is the caffeine part everyone knows about – blocking your brain’s natural “time to rest” signals.

4. The Trigonelline Factor: This coffee compound doesn’t just stimulate dopamine—it actively promotes neurite outgrowth, a process linked to neural regeneration and brain plasticity.³ In other words, it might help rewire your brain, potentially reinforcing your desire for coffee. Paradoxically, while coffee can have a net “downer” effect for some—due to its impact on stress hormones or sleep—trigonelline may offer a neuroprotective upside, enhancing certain aspects of brain function in the long run.

Think about it: You’re simultaneously activating opioid receptors (pleasure/pain relief), flooding dopamine (reward/motivation), blocking adenosine (preventing fatigue signals), and potentially creating new neural pathways that reinforce the habit.

Is it any wonder that 90% of American adults consume caffeine daily, with coffee being the primary source?

Why This Matters More Than You Think

This multi-pathway action explains phenomena that caffeine alone never could:

Why decaf drinkers still feel “something” from their coffee
Why coffee withdrawal feels more like drug withdrawal than simply being tired
Why that first cup provides such profound psychological relief
Why coffee habits are so ritualistic and compulsive
Why switching to caffeine pills never quite satisfies coffee drinkers

As nutrition philosopher Rudolf Hauschka observed, coffee creates a unique body-mind awareness that goes beyond mere stimulation⁴. It’s not just waking you up – it’s fundamentally altering your neurochemistry and perception.

The Dark Side of Your Daily Dose

Here’s where it gets concerning. Regular activation of opioid and dopamine pathways leads to tolerance and dependence. Your brain downregulates these receptors, meaning you need more coffee to feel normal. Sound familiar?

The “harmless” morning ritual becomes a physiological requirement. Miss your dose, and you’re hit with:

Crushing headaches
Irritability and anxiety
Profound fatigue
Depression
Difficulty concentrating
Flu-like symptoms

These aren’t just “caffeine withdrawal” symptoms. They’re the result of a complex web of neurochemical dependencies — multiple neurotransmitter systems crying out for their accustomed daily drug cocktail, disrupted and unfulfilled. In fact, these can sometimes overlap with traditional opioid “detox” symptoms.

Worst of all is what you don’t get when you default to coffee for energy: the far more profound, sustainable high that comes from your own biology — specifically, from exercise. That clean, vibrant rush following a morning HIIT session or brisk fasted walk? It’s neurochemical gold — a naturally produced elixir of endorphins, dopamine, anandamide, BDNF, and more.

But here’s the cruel irony: once you’ve had your first or second cup of coffee,* that path is often closed. The crash in motivation and energy that follows can feel like gravity. The body, sensing it’s already been “stimulated,” downregulates your internal drive to move. So instead of hitting the gym, you find yourself too tired, too flat — unable to access the very state that would most powerfully reset your nervous system and elevate your mood.

This is the hidden cost of outsourcing your neurobiology to a cup of coffee rather than earning it through activation of the body’s most potent pharmacopoeia — a symphony of hormones, neurotransmitters, and sensations available only through effort, breath, sweat, and care. That exquisite afterglow — the one no latte can touch — comes not from consumption, but from connection to your own living force.

*pro tip: exchange a matcha for your ‘second cup’ and see how profoundly it levels out your blood sugar, stress, and reduces fatigue.

But Let’s Face It: Coffee Is a Profoundly Aesthetic Experience

Before we throw our beloved brew entirely under the biochemical bus, we need to acknowledge something equally powerful – and less measurable.

Coffee is an aesthetic ritual. The aroma alone – rich, earthy, toasted, floral, sometimes chocolatey – triggers a cascade of pleasure long before a single drop hits your tongue. This is part of the cephalic phase of digestion: the anticipatory neurological and hormonal response your body initiates from smell, sight, and memory. In this way, coffee becomes its own kind of nourishment – not through calories or alkaloids, but through olfactory ecstasy, atmosphere, and what we might call Vitamin P – pleasure.

The bouquet of a freshly brewed cup, the texture of crema, the warmth of the mug in your hands – none of this can be reduced to neurotransmitter charts or metabolic impact. Coffee rituals are emotionally charged, psychologically anchoring, and deeply sensory. To reduce coffee to its physiochemical payload is to miss its soul.

And yet – it comes at a price.

As we’ve explored above, the physiological consequences of habitual coffee use extend well beyond the momentary uplift. The emotional comfort may be masking deeper cycles of dependency. So yes, coffee deserves reverence as a sensorial masterpiece – but also discernment as a daily pharmacological act.

Moderation Is Key

There’s an old Hungarian proverb that captures the essence of coffee’s duality: “Coffee before noon is medicine, after noon is poison.” And there’s real wisdom in that. Our biology is tuned to metabolize caffeine best in the morning, when cortisol levels naturally spike and the body is primed for stimulation. After midday, the same cup that once awakened you may disrupt circadian rhythm, stress hormones, and sleep cycles.

But let’s not go full orthorexic about it. The principle of moderation must itself be applied moderately. As paradoxical as it sounds, to truly honor balance, we sometimes have to allow for its opposite. That means periodic episodes of excess – the spontaneous double espresso on a night out, or the luxurious indulgence of a slow afternoon cappuccino in a sunlit café. These moments matter too.

So while matcha may be the smarter daily driver for your brain and body, coffee still has a role to play — as an aesthetic medicine, a sensual ritual, and an occasional, conscious indulgence. Just know what you’re drinking — and how it’s drinking you.

Enter Matcha: The Intelligent Alternative

This is where matcha enters the conversation not as just another caffeinated beverage, but as a fundamentally different neurochemical experience.

Matcha contains caffeine, yes – actually more per gram than coffee⁵. But here’s the crucial difference: matcha delivers its stimulation wrapped in a protective package of compounds that prevent the neurochemical rollercoaster:

L-Theanine: The Game Changer This amino acid, found almost exclusively in tea, crosses the blood-brain barrier and:

Increases alpha brain waves (the relaxation frequency)
Modulates dopamine and serotonin
Reduces cortisol and stress response
Prevents the caffeine “crash”

A 2023 study found that matcha improved cognitive performance under stress better than pure caffeine, precisely because of this synergistic effect⁶.

EGCG and Catechins: The Protectors These polyphenols don’t just fight cancer and inflammation⁷. They also:

Protect neurons from oxidative stress
Support healthy dopamine levels
Reduce anxiety
Improve insulin sensitivity (preventing blood sugar crashes)

In fact, the therapeutic potential of green tea catechins is so vast that over 50,000 studies have been published on PubMed examining their effects. GreenMedInfo’s database alone contains over 1,300 studies showing benefits across more than 500 different health conditions¹⁰ – from cardiovascular disease to cancer prevention, from weight management to cognitive enhancement.

The Chlorophyll Effect: Green Light for Mitochondria

Unlike coffee’s acidifying effect, matcha’s chlorophyll-rich nature alkalizes your system and provides:

Gentle detoxification
Sustained energy without jitters
Better mineral absorption

This vibrant green pigment doesn’t just detoxify; it powerfully upgrades your mitochondria.

Ground-breaking research suggests chlorophyll enables cells to capture and utilize light energy in ways once thought impossible for non-plant life — a kind of photonic metabolism that supports cellular ATP production and mitochondrial resilience(source).

In essence, matcha may help your cells run not just on glucose and fat, but on light itself. That’s a radically different energy paradigm — one that uplifts rather than depletes.

Coffee’s Double-Edged Sword: The Trigonelline Factor

Before we dismiss coffee entirely, there’s an important nuance to consider. Because coffee also contains trigonelline, a compound that promotes neurite outgrowth – essentially helping neurons grow new connections. Research by Tohda et al. found that trigonelline enhanced axonal extension and could potentially help repair damaged neural networks⁹.

This presents coffee’s fundamental paradox: it simultaneously contains compounds that create dependence (cafestol’s opioid effects) AND compounds that support brain health (trigonelline’s neuritogenic properties). It’s both poison and medicine in the same cup.

But here’s the critical point: while coffee offers this mixed bag of effects, the scientific evidence for green tea and matcha is overwhelmingly positive – and on a completely different scale.

View the remarkable density of research on green tea’s profound therapeutic benefits on the Greenmedinfo.com Green Tea database.

The Neuroscience of Switching: Why Matcha Wins by Orders of Magnitude

When you switch from coffee to matcha, you’re not just avoiding coffee’s opioid trap – you’re accessing a therapeutic powerhouse backed by extraordinary scientific evidence. Consider this: while coffee has a handful of studies showing mixed benefits and risks, green tea has over 50,000 studies on PubMed alone.

GreenMedInfo’s database has catalogued over 1,300 peer-reviewed studies on green tea demonstrating therapeutic effects across more than 500 different health conditions¹⁰. This isn’t just slightly better than coffee – it’s orders of magnitude more beneficial, with research showing green tea can help with everything from cancer prevention to cardiovascular disease, from neurodegenerative conditions to metabolic disorders.

A 2019 clinical trial found that matcha consumption significantly reduced anxiety and stress markers⁸. Participants reported feeling energized but centered, focused but calm. This isn’t just subjective – it showed up in their cortisol levels and brain wave patterns.

Breaking Free: Why It’s Harder Than You Think

If coffee really does activate opioid receptors, then quitting involves more than just pushing through caffeine withdrawal. You’re potentially dealing with a mild version of opioid withdrawal – which explains why so many people fail when they try to quit cold turkey.

This is where matcha becomes not just an alternative, but a strategic tool. Its gentler caffeine delivery and stress-modulating compounds can ease the transition. Many ex-coffee drinkers report that switching to matcha helped them avoid the worst withdrawal symptoms while still maintaining productivity. In my personal experience, I have gone “cold turkey” from coffee on multiple occasions while switching to matcha with ZERO withdrawal symptoms - all the more reason why I wanted to share my research and experience on the topic. Improving your health and lifestyle does not need to be painful.

The Bottom Line: Choose Your Chemistry Wisely

Coffee isn’t just a beverage – it’s a drug delivery system that hits multiple addiction pathways in your brain. Every cup reinforces a complex web of dependencies that go far beyond simple caffeine addiction. Yes, it contains some beneficial compounds like trigonelline, but this is like saying cigarettes contain some antioxidants – the harm far outweighs any marginal benefits.

The scientific evidence is overwhelming: while coffee has mixed research showing both benefits and significant risks, green tea and matcha operate in a completely different league. With over 50,000 studies on PubMed and therapeutic benefits documented across 500+ health conditions on Greenmedinfo.com alone, green tea isn’t just a better choice – it’s in an entirely different category of health-promoting substances.

Matcha offers a different path: clean energy without the neurochemical chaos, focus without the inevitable crash, and a sustainable relationship with caffeine that doesn’t hijack your brain’s reward systems. Plus, you’re getting a concentrated dose of compounds that actively fight disease, reduce inflammation, and protect your brain.

The choice isn’t just about which drink gives you more energy. It’s about which relationship with stimulants you want to have:

Coffee: A multi-pathway drug that creates dependence through opioid and dopamine activation, leading to tolerance, withdrawal, and the familiar cycle of highs and crashes.

Matcha: A balanced botanical that provides sustained energy while actually reducing stress and supporting long-term brain health.

Your morning ritual shapes your entire day – and potentially your long-term neurological health. Maybe it’s time to question whether that coffee addiction is really as harmless as we’ve been led to believe.

Because once you understand what coffee is really doing to your brain, that morning cup might not taste quite as innocent anymore.

Ready to make the switch? Start with one cup of matcha in place of your morning coffee. Your brain – and your future self – will thank you.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

This Trump-linked startup plans to put humanoid robots in the military

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Thu, 04 Jun 2026 14:01:15 GMT

by Dylan Butts

Key Points

Foundation Future Industries, a start-up founded in 2024, aims to leverage humanoid robots for military and industrial work, rather than household tasks and the service sector.
The start-up has already tested its humanoid robots in Ukraine and is aiming to soon bring its technology to the U.S. military.
The robotics company recently brought on Eric Trump, the son of the sitting president, as a chief strategy advisor.

Foundation Future Industries, a start-up founded in 2024, aims to leverage humanoid robots for military and industrial work, rather than household tasks and the service sector. Foundation Future Industries

As Silicon Valley races to build humanoid robots that can fold laundry and pour a latte, at least one start-up sees a very different use for the technology: war or other potentially hazardous and deadly jobs.

Meet Foundation Future Industries, a San Francisco-based robotics company with ties to the Trump family, developing ‘dual-use’ autonomous humanoid robots for both heavy industrial environments and military applications.

While the robots sound like something out of a Terminator-esque science fiction movie, they are nearing reality, with early iterations undergoing tests in Ukraine for potential use in Kyiv’s war against Russia.

Core to the company’s mission is the belief that humanoid robotics should be put towards humanity’s greatest challenges rather than household chores and service roles, Foundation CEO Sankaet Pathak told CNBC.

“I’m convinced the technology is reaching a level where it can replace jobs that are dangerous for humans to perform, and if you can do that, it’s the highest net good you can create out of all applications of robotics,” Pathak said.

Sankaet Pathak, CEO and founder of Foundation, a company that builds a humanoid robot Phantom-01, poses for a photo during an interview with Reuters at his company’s factory in San Francisco, California, U.S., February 4, 2026. Aleksandra Michalska | Reuters

Though Foundation operates in an increasingly crowded humanoid field, its explicit embrace of potential military uses for its technology has set it apart.

But the start-up has set ambitious targets for itself, with Pathak planning to scale production to thousands of units this year, and to begin frontline testing with the U.S. military within the next 18 months.

The plans and the firm’s growing ties to Washington represent yet another example of how artificial intelligence and robotics are beginning to transform modern warfare and become a focus of national security.

From Silicon Valley to Ukraine

Pathak is best known for previously leading Synapse, a controversial fintech platform that declared bankruptcy in 2024. Soon after, he started Foundation with Arjun Sethi, former CEO of Tribe Capital and Mike LeBlanc, a co-founder of Cobalt Robotics.

Pathak’s latest venture has also attracted some scrutiny after the company suggested it had close ties to General Motors and could receive investment from the automaker, claims GM later rejected.

Foundation would eventually gain more global recognition earlier this year when it sent two of its Phantom MK-1 units to Ukraine for a pilot demonstration, marking what the company described as the first known deployment of humanoid robots in a combat theater.

The ongoing tests, backed by the U.S. government and conducted with Ukrainian officials, focused on logistics in hazardous areas.

Ukraine was a natural debut, as its ongoing conflict with Russia has already emerged as a major test bed for robotics and AI in combat. The war, now in its fifth year, has seen the use of ground robots to deliver supplies to the front line, and autonomous and AI-augmented drones for precision strikes and reconnaissance.

According to Pathak, the MK-1 testing in Ukraine has already proved the robot’s potential to perform supply pickups, which often expose soldiers to danger.

But while the MK-1s help demonstrate the utility of the core technology, they are far from super soldiers, carrying only about a 44-pound payload, and lacking waterproofing and sufficient battery life to be deployed at scale.

Foundation aims to send new and improved robots to Ukraine this year in the form of its Phantom 2, which Pathak says will come with “superhuman abilities” and double the payload capacity of Phantom 1.

The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine declined to comment on the matter, while the U.S. Department of Defense did not respond to an inquiry.

Alignment with Washington

Foundation expects its tests in Ukraine to inform future work with the U.S. military. The start-up has already received government research contracts totaling $24 million for feasibility testing in inspection, logistics, and weapons handling across the Army, Navy and Air Force.

Pathak said conversations with government officials had shifted from research to how to scale the use of the robots. The CEO is aiming for Foundation to deploy its technology with the U.S. military and, if needed, on the front lines of conflicts within the next 12 to 18 months.

Notably, that goal will be carried out with Eric Trump, the second son of the sitting president, who recently joined the company as its chief strategy advisor — a move that has drawn scrutiny from Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren, who alleged the firm’s government contracts were “corruption in plain sight.”

A Foundation spokesperson told CNBC that Eric Trump had been an investor in the firm before stepping in as an adviser, with the two parties having a shared vision of bringing manufacturing back to the U.S.

Phantom-01, a humanoid robot developed by San Francisco-based startup Foundation for military purposes, sits at the company’s factory in San Francisco, California, U.S., February 4, 2026. Aleksandra Michalska | Reuters

Foundation has heavily leaned into its alignment with Washington’s interests, framing the importance of its tech in the broader geopolitical competition between the U.S. and China. The goal is to deliver “the best robots we can build” to the U.S. military — better than anything China has,” Pathak said.

While several American companies are working with the U.S. government to deploy autonomous robots for military applications, the Pentagon has yet to disclose the deployment of a humanoid robot for such purposes.

China, which has a number of leading humanoid robot companies, has also publicly funded and supported initiatives for the technology, primarily focused on industrial and economic applications. While Chinese military researchers have released reports on the potential of humanoid robots in the military, the extent of their trials remains unclear.

China’s military has previously showcased early iterations of AI-powered robotic dogs for combat, as well as motion-controlled humanoid robot soldiers.

The age of autonomous war

Proponents of humanoid technology in military and industrial fields argue that human-like robots are generally better suited than other forms of robotics to navigate real-world construction sites, logistics centers and war zones.

Kateryna Bondar, a senior fellow with the Wadhwani AI Center at CSIS, told CNBC that humanoid robots could theoretically provide certain upsides on the battlefield due to their autonomy and human-like dexterity.

“Modern urban combat spaces — where there are stairwells, ladders, basements and narrow corridors — were created for human movement, which could give humanoid systems an advantage over tracked or quadruped robots in certain scenarios,” Bondar said.

Still, there remain questions about the complexity and costs of manufacturing humanoids compared to other systems.

As humanoid robots move towards the battlefield, the technology has raised ethical concerns, particularly around the use of autonomous decision-making in combat when human lives are at stake.

Though most weaponized uses of the Phantom robots will retain some human confirmation in the decision loop, Pathak said Foundation’s robots will need to make fully autonomous decisions in certain time-critical scenarios.

Still, the U.S. military has already shown a willingness to adopt AI models, with the technology reportedly used to inform strikes and decision-making in its ongoing conflict with Iran.

A bigger hurdle for companies such as Foundation could be proving that their human-like robots can be more practical and cost-effective for military applications than other alternatives on the market — something many experts doubt.

“Making robots look like humans is a complex and expensive engineering challenge, and what Ukraine has taught us is the opposite — that we need the ability to adapt rapidly and manufacture quickly and cheaply,” said Melanie Sisson, a senior fellow with the Brookings Foreign Policy program.

What experts seem to agree on is that, regardless of shape or size, the age of AI robots in war is near.

“I expect tracked, flying and underwater robots to replace human forces,” said Toby Walsh, chief scientist at The University of New South Wales’s AI Institute.

However, it might be a “science fiction trope to expect humanoid terminator-style robots,” he said.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Trump Officials Held Millions of Dollars of SpaceX Ahead of IPO

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Thu, 04 Jun 2026 13:03:40 GMT

Etienne Note: This article also appears in “Government”, Media and Academia Criminality Exposed, A digest of HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of articles exposing and suggesting inter-generational organized crime’s control of the “Government,” Media and Academia by the Art of Liberty Foundation. You can view the other articles or subscribe on Telegram: https://t.me/Government_Scams

Trump Officials Held Millions of Dollars of SpaceX Ahead of IPO

by Annie Massa, Sophie Alexander and Bill Allison

(Bloomberg) -- SpaceX’s initial public offering will likely make President Donald Trump’s already wealthy administration even richer.

Ten officials ranging from special envoy Steve Witkoff to Small Business Administration head Kelly Loeffler reported financial interests in Elon Musk’s rocket company or in xAI, the artificial intelligence and social media firm it merged with in February, according to their most recent public financial disclosures.

In total, the federal staffers held SpaceX or xAI stock worth at least $9.9 million and as much as $43.8 million, according to the disclosures, which were made last year and list the value of assets in broad ranges. These officials could have sold all or part of their holdings since then without triggering additional disclosure requirements.

SpaceX stands out for the unprecedented size of its planned IPO, and for its close ties to government and members of the administration. The IPO, expected to happen as soon as next week, is set to make Musk the world’s first trillionaire if it achieves its targeted valuation of at least $1.8 trillion. It’s also expected to make billionaires of several company insiders and investors, while minting millions in wealth for employees.

The company is a major government contractor, with $4 billion in federal transactions in fiscal 2025. Last month, it was awarded an additional $6.5 billion in two contracts from the US Space Force to provide satellites for communications and monitoring airborne threats.

Musk, meanwhile, helped select dozens of people to fill contract-slashing and data-gathering roles throughout the federal government in his time running the Department of Government Efficiency. Many of them were his own employees, from SpaceX or other corners of his empire.

In Musk’s final month in Washington, Paul McInerny, a former SpaceX engineer, was named chief information officer of the Department of the Interior. McInerny reported the largest SpaceX stake of any official, holding between $5 million and $25 million. He didn’t have to divest, and instead received an ethics waiver to work on broad issues that could affect the company, filings show.

A spokesperson for the Department of the Interior said McInerny recuses himself from all matters involving his financial interests.

“Paul McInerny made the decision to serve our great country because he believes in the mission of the Trump administration and knows all of government can operate more efficiently for the American taxpayer,” the spokesperson said. “Mr. McInerny takes his ethical obligations seriously.”

Another high-profile SpaceX holder was Witkoff, who has worked on peace negotiations over Ukraine, Gaza and Iran. He disclosed assets of $1 million to $5 million in 3G Investors LLC, a vehicle whose only reported holding in the filing was SpaceX. A spokesperson for the White House didn’t comment on Witkoff’s disclosure.

In most cases, it’s unclear whether the officials have made changes to their holdings since they were reported. Though they’re legally required to report sales of certain assets no more than 45 days after the transaction — including stocks and bonds — private company holdings are exempt. New financial disclosures filed in May are slated to become public by mid-June.

‘No Analogs’

SpaceX is seeking to raise as much as $75 billion, which would make it the biggest public stock offering of all time. But government ethics attorneys said it’s more than the size of the IPO that makes it abnormal.

“This is just such a unicorn event,” said Caleb Burns, co-chair of law firm Wiley Rein LLP’s election law and government ethics practice. “It’s the biggest public offering ever, helmed by a onetime close ally of the president, who with his DOGE efforts had involvement with virtually every administrative agency in the federal government.”

“Historically, there are no analogs,” he added.

In at least one case, an appointee was required to divest from a position in SpaceX to meet ethics requirements. Kevin Warsh, who replaced Jerome Powell as chair of the Federal Reserve last month, held exposure to SpaceX through a fund affiliated with the Duquesne Family Office, led by billionaire investor Stan Druckenmiller. Warsh said in an ethics filing that he would divest from that fund before assuming his role at the central bank.

The Fed declined to comment beyond the ethics filing.

Elsewhere in Trump’s administration, officials revealed smaller holdings in Musk’s companies.

Loeffler, the former senator and current administrator of the Small Business Administration, disclosed an investment in xAI worth between $1 million and $5 million. Listed as an asset of the family office that invests for Loeffler and her husband, Intercontinental Exchange Inc. founder Jeffrey Sprecher, it was held in a UBS Group AG account through a Valor Equity Partners fund whose sole investment was xAI, according to the filing. Valor was founded by longtime Musk associate Antonio Gracias, and is one of the largest holders of SpaceX after Musk.

The SBA didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Michael Lynch, a former SpaceX employee who’s now deputy administrator of the General Services Administration — a hub managing contracting and properties that the federal government owns — held between $500,000 and $1 million worth of SpaceX, filings show.

“All appropriate ethics policies and processes were followed regarding this matter,” a spokesperson for the GSA said in an emailed statement. “Deputy Administrator Lynch is leveraging his industry leadership experience to help federal agencies buy and use smart technology solutions at the best value for American taxpayers.”

Stacey Feinberg, ambassador to Luxembourg, reported a financial interest in xAI through a fund run by 1789 Capital, where Donald Trump Jr. is a partner. Her interest in the fund was worth between $500,000 and $1 million. Like McInerny, she received approval to retain her stake, with the government determining the likelihood of any overlap between her duties and the company’s interests was “remote.”

US ambassadors to Ireland, the Czech Republic and Portugal also reported stakes in SpaceX and xAI.

A spokesperson for the State Department said all government officials, including ambassadors, must comply with ethics disclosure requirements and legal obligations.

Reilly Steel, associate professor of law at Columbia University, said he’s “unaware of another IPO in recent years in which so many top government officials have a financial interest.”

Interior Department

Ethics officials must weigh federal appointees’ financial interests carefully when it comes to holdings that do business with the government.

“There are recusal obligations that can apply to address any perceived conflicts of interest,” said Burns at Wiley Rein, “but it’s not an easy assessment.”

McInerny, who made between $1 million and $5 million selling some of his SpaceX stock in 2024 and 2025, worked in software at SpaceX supporting early Dragon and Falcon-9 missions, according to the Department of the Interior’s website. He now stewards all data and technology at the department, which manages hundreds of millions of acres of federal lands, environmental permitting and other responsibilities.

SpaceX interacts with the DOI on several fronts, including as a minor contractor. The National Park Service uses its Starlink satellites. SpaceX has also sought approvals for projects: In Texas, it asked the US Fish and Wildlife Service, an agency of the DOI, for permission to install utility lines and a road near a wildlife refuge.

McInerny underscored to ethics officials that offloading his SpaceX shares would be complex. As long as it’s a private company, SpaceX controls when shareholders can sell and how much of their holdings they can offload, according to his ethics waiver. The government gave him clearance to weigh in on matters of “general applicability” that could potentially affect his own financial interests in SpaceX, in order to continue carrying out his role, according to filings.

The arrangement merits close attention, according to Scott Amey, general counsel for the Project on Government Oversight.

“It may be legal, but it’s not a best practice,” he said. “This requires daily oversight. The best practice would be to get out of it to remove even the appearance of a conflict of interest.”

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Winning Hearts, Not Arguments

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Thu, 04 Jun 2026 13:03:40 GMT

by Marc Friedman

Self-government, at its deepest level, is the belief that people and communities possess the wisdom and capacity to govern their own lives without coercion, centralized control, or force imposed by others.

It’s an idea rooted in sovereignty, voluntary cooperation, personal responsibility, and the conviction that human beings often solve problems more intelligently, compassionately, and creatively when solutions emerge organically from the ground up rather than being mandated from afar.

The greatest obstacle to this philosophy of freedom is not that its principles are flawed, but that the language surrounding them often feels abstract, ideological, and disconnected from everyday life. Too often, as advocates of self-government, we speak in theories, policy jargon, and intellectual frameworks, while failing to recognize that ordinary people are struggling with mortgages, family challenges, rising costs, and communities that no longer feel connected.

I believe that if we want people to truly understand the living heartbeat of self-government, we must move beyond abstractions and speak in human realities. This means sharing concrete examples of how freedom has long operated in neighborhoods, friendships, families, churches, businesses, and local communities, well before distant institutions imposed one-size-fits-all solutions.

To understand why this message so often fails, and how we can make it resonate again, we need only look across the backyard fence.

An Analogy From Across the Fence

John leaned against the wooden fence that separated his yard from Mary’s. The evening air was cool, and his neighbor Mary was busy potting geraniums. John had been reading extensively about decentralized authority and individual liberty, and he felt an urgent need to share his thoughts about a new municipal proposal to heavily regulate home-based businesses in their town.

“Mary,” John began, “did you see the new city council agenda? They want to mandate expensive permits for anyone running a business from their house. Personally, I believe the city has no right to control this, as it violates our natural rights and pushes us down a slippery slope toward total collectivism. We need to stand up and defend our absolute property rights.”

Mary paused, holding her garden spade in midair, and looked at John with a mixture of confusion and mild defensiveness. “I hear you, John. My sister across town runs a small accounting firm from her spare bedroom. But my neighbor down the street runs an unpermitted car repair operation out of his driveway. There are loud power tools running at all hours of the day and night, oil spilling into the storm drains, and customers blocking my driveway. The city needs to do something to keep our neighborhood orderly and clean. Some rules are necessary for the common good.”

John shook his head, frustrated. “You’re missing the forest for the trees, Mary. The common good is a myth used to justify tyranny. If a neighbor causes actual damage, that is an issue for civil courts. But preemptive regulation destroys the market process and violates individual autonomy. We must oppose the regulation on principle, or we lose our freedom.”

Mary sighed, turned back to her flowers, and muttered something about needing to finish her gardening before dark. The conversation was over.

The Righteousness Trap

John walked away frustrated, certain he had defended the cause of liberty with passion and precision, yet somehow feeling as though he had lost ground. The reality struck him that Mary seemed even more entrenched in her position than when the conversation began.

As he made his way back toward his porch, an uncomfortable realization settled over him: He had spoken for nearly five straight minutes without asking Mary a single question. In his effort to defend freedom, he had completely bypassed her lived experience, her fears, and the realities shaping her point of view.

What he thought had sounded principled and persuasive had likely come across as something else entirely. He appeared less like a concerned neighbor having a conversation and more like a lecturer delivering a monologue.

Many advocates of liberty fall into this “righteousness trap” without realizing it. We become so focused on being factually and intellectually correct that we forget persuasion is emotional before it is intellectual. We mistake winning debates for building trust. Over time, this creates a movement filled with brilliant intellectual arguments but very few converts.

When we lead with rigid ideology, people instinctively put up their defenses. They are no longer hearing a conversation or even a policy proposal. What they often take in is an unspoken demand to abandon the worldview, experiences, and values that help them make sense of their lives.

Most people do not move through the world thinking in political theories or abstract philosophical frameworks. They live through relationships, responsibilities, fears, hopes, and deeply held human values. If we fail to speak to those realities first, even the most principled ideas can come across as cold, distant, or threatening.

Speaking in Human Terms

I believe breakthroughs come when personal freedom is explained through concerns people already carry in their daily lives. Instead of demanding that someone adopt a new philosophical framework, this values-based approach identifies the values they already hold and demonstrates how self-government best fulfills them.

Most people are not secretly longing for ideological purity. They are trying to protect something tangible: their safety, their dignity, their family, their sense of fairness and decency, and the people they care about.

There is, therefore, a deep emotional resonance when the focus is on widely shared values. The most potent of these values are safety, fairness, and compassion. By grounding freedom in everyday human concerns, philosophy becomes accessible and the argument becomes persuasive and deeply appealing.

Reframing Safety at a Human Scale

Safety is often viewed as the primary justification for state intervention. This messaging approach, however, ignores a citizen’s legitimate fear of disruption, like Mary’s concern over midnight power tools and hazardous oil spills. To reframe safety, we must communicate through shared values and show that top-down government solutions often create centralized points of failure.

Government bureaucracies often treat every situation as if it were identical because standardized rules are easier to administer than nuanced judgments. But human beings do not live standardized lives. Thus, the more distant the decision maker becomes, the less responsive the solution feels.

Self-government works best on a human scale, where people can actually see the consequences of their actions and where accountability is personal rather than bureaucratic. True safety comes from mutual responsibility, targeted rule enforcement, and community cooperation.

Leveling the Playing Field of Fairness

Fairness is one of the deepest values people carry, yet advocates of freedom often undermine their own message by speaking about inequality in cold, abstract terms. Telling people that life is unfair and that the market will sort everything out may be philosophically consistent, but it rarely connects with the lived experiences of ordinary people trying to build stable lives.

A far more human approach is to show how bureaucratic systems frequently tilt the playing field against the very people they claim to protect. Large corporations can absorb layers of regulations because they can afford teams of lawyers, accountants, and compliance officers. The ordinary small business cannot.

The single mother trying to open a small bookkeeping business, the neighborhood food vendor, or the one-person independent contractor often finds themselves buried under rules, fees, permits, and paperwork that quietly price them out before they even begin.

That is where the conversation about fairness becomes real. It is fundamentally unfair to create sweeping compliance laws that punish thousands of honest people simply to catch a handful of bad actors. In practice, those systems often protect the powerful while making it harder for everyday people to pursue independence, ownership, and self-determination.

Reclaiming the Monopoly on Compassion

Compassion is perhaps the most misaligned value in political discourse. Proponents of state expansion often claim a monopoly on caring for the vulnerable. The response should not be a cold dismissal of social safety nets, but rather a translation of principles into lived experience to demonstrate how true compassion requires human connection.

State programs are mechanical and transactional. Self-government enables communities, charities, and neighbors to provide personalized, dignified support. It recognizes that the best way to help a struggling neighbor is to remove the costly bureaucratic barriers that prevent them from earning an honest living.

The Power of Everyday Cooperation

Most people already participate in forms of self-government every day without calling it that. Parents coordinate carpools without state supervision. Neighbors shovel each other’s sidewalks after snowstorms. Churches organize meal deliveries for sick families. Open-source programmers scattered across the globe collaborate voluntarily to build software used by millions. Human beings are far more capable of peaceful cooperation than modern politics often assumes.

Alexis de Tocqueville famously observed that early Americans formed voluntary associations for nearly every social need imaginable. If a problem emerged, people gathered, organized, contributed, and worked together to solve it. Long before sprawling bureaucracies inserted themselves into everyday life, communities relied on cooperation, mutual responsibility, and local initiative to meet challenges directly.

That spirit has never fully disappeared. Across the nation today, people still step in to help neighbors after disasters, organize food drives, mentor children, support local businesses, build community organizations, and care for one another without waiting for distant institutions to intervene. The instinct toward voluntary cooperation remains deeply woven into the American character.

The Breakthrough

Equipped with a better understanding of how to speak in human terms, John resolved to try a completely different approach the following evening when he saw Mary tending her garden.

“Mary,” John said gently, “I was thinking about what you said yesterday about the neighbor with the car repair setup. You’re completely right that it is unfair when someone blocks your driveway and leaves oil everywhere. Everyone deserves to feel safe and comfortable in their own home.”

Mary looked up, surprised and pleased by his acknowledgment. “Exactly, John. It’s just stressful dealing with the noise and the mess.”

“I completely understand,” John replied. “That is actually why I am so concerned about this new city council permit proposal. I worry it is going to hurt the wrong people and fail to fix the real problem. My main concern is fairness. If the city passes this, your sister will have to pay hundreds of dollars and fill out mountains of paperwork just to do accounting in her spare bedroom. Meanwhile, the guy causing the actual disruption will probably just ignore the law anyway. It punishes the innocent while doing nothing to stop the bad actor.”

Mary frowned, processing this. “I had not thought about how it would affect my sister. She is barely scraping by as it is. It does seem unfair to penalize her.”

“Right,” John continued. “And true safety and peace in our neighborhood does not come from a city inspector who lives miles away. It comes from us. What if, instead of a sweeping new law that harms local families, we used existing nuisance ordinances to target the specific issues of noise and pollution? That way, we protect our neighborhood’s safety and cleanliness without destroying the livelihoods of honest people who just want to work from home.”

Mary smiled and nodded. “You know, John, that makes a lot of sense. Focus on the actual problem instead of making everyone pay the price. I think I’ll write an email to the council about that.”

Cultivating Capable Citizens

By changing his approach and rethinking his language, John was finally able to break through and capture Mary’s attention. He did not abandon his principles or water them down. He simply learned how to translate them into terms that connected with Mary’s existing values and lived experiences.

In doing so, he helped her see that self-government is not an anarchic void where chaos reigns unchecked, but a voluntary and cooperative social arrangement where people, families, and communities retain the freedom and responsibility to handle many of their own affairs fairly, peacefully, and effectively.

At its best, self-government fosters a culture where people no longer wait for permission to improve their lives, strengthen their neighborhoods, or solve problems within their communities. It cultivates capable, self-directed citizens rather than passive dependents conditioned to look outward for every solution.

Instead of automatically handing every disagreement, hardship, or social challenge over to distant bureaucracies and institutions, self-government encourages neighbors, families, and local communities to work together directly, voluntarily, and responsibly. In doing so, it strengthens not only individual freedom but also the bonds of trust, cooperation, and shared responsibility that hold healthy societies together.

Most importantly, self-government replaces a culture dominated by compliance, dependency, and coercion with one rooted in dignity, trust, initiative, creativity, personal agency, mutual respect, and shared responsibility. It calls people to become active participants in shaping their communities rather than passive recipients of directives handed down from afar.

If we truly want to build a society grounded in liberty and mutual respect, we must stop approaching every disagreement as a debate to be won. Instead, we must learn how to speak to the human heart, not just the political mind.

The next morning, the fence between John and Mary still stood physically, but something far more important had begun to disappear: the suspicion, the defensiveness, and the quiet instinct to see one another not as neighbors with shared concerns, but as ideological enemies living on opposite sides of the divide.

I believe this is how self-government actually begins, not in think tanks or comment sections, but in ordinary conversations where people feel heard instead of cornered.

The future of liberty will not be won through viral outrage or ideological purity tests. Victory will instead be won neighbor by neighbor, conversation by conversation, through people who demonstrate that freedom is not chaos, but mutual responsibility rooted in trust, dignity, and human cooperation.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Study linking vaccines to SIDS deleted

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Thu, 04 Jun 2026 13:03:39 GMT

by Rebekah Barnett

If a scientific paper offers a counter-narrative conclusion, should it be deleted from the record?

Science publisher Elsevier says yes, if the topic is vaccines, because allowing doctors and parents to read it would pose a risk to public health.

This raises the question: Is censorship of science really the best way to ensure public health and safety?

The paper under scrutiny is a peer-reviewed analysis of three decades of vaccine adverse event reporting data which found that 75 percent of sudden infant deaths occurred within seven days of a vaccination, a statistically significant finding.

Author Neil Z. Miller reviewed the medical literature linking SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) to vaccines and proposed several pathogenic mechanisms, concluding that, “While the findings in this paper are not proof of an association between infant vaccines and infant deaths, they are highly suggestive of a causal relationship.”

The main finding from the paper, titled ‘Vaccines and sudden infant death: An analysis of the VAERS database 1990–2019 and review of the medical literature,’ is represented in the below image, which was widely shared on social media since its publication in the journal Toxicology Reports, in June 2021.

Fig. 2. Clustering of SIDS cases and all infant mortality post-vaccination. Source: VAERS 1990–2019; Miller 2021.

Nearly five years later, the paper has been removed, a highly unusual step reserved only for papers that may present legal risks to the publisher, Elsevier, or that could pose a serious health risk. Usually, serious concerns are dealt with either through the publication of a correction, an expression of concern or, in the most egregious cases, a retraction. Removal differs in that it essentially deletes the paper from the scientific record.¹

According to a 9 April notice, the removal was triggered by reader complaints over “potential research errors and methodological flaws,” leading an investigation by the journal. The main sticking point was the use of data from VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System), a passive reporting system to which anyone can make a report, to infer a correlation between vaccination and SIDS.

The notice states that Miller’s response during the investigation “did not satisfactorily address” concerns raised. “In light of these concerns, and given the potential implications for medical practice, the Editor-in-Chief has decided that the article should be removed. The author disagrees with this decision and disputes the grounds for removal.”

In a further comment to Retraction Watch, an Elsevier spokesperson confirmed that the paper was removed because “the recommendations and conclusions presented in the paper may pose potential risks to public health and could potentially be applied in clinical practice resulting in harm to patients.”

This is striking given that paper explicitly states that “this paper does not prove an association between infant vaccines and sudden infant deaths.”

Miller qualified that because the article “reveals unusual patterns and safety signals highly suggestive of a causal relationship,” “additional investigation is warranted,” as well as “finding ways to increase vaccine safety, reduce inaccurate or inconsistent cause-of-death certification practices, and support families in their quest to make genuinely informed healthcare decisions.”

It is hard to see how any of these recommendations could do anything other than improve public health and clinical practice.

In an email, Miller told me that he “strongly opposed the removal of my paper,” calling the decision “unjustified.”

Medical researcher Neil Z. Miller.

The problem with VAERS data

VAERS is the US national passive vaccine surveillance system, the purpose of which is to “detect possible signals of adverse events associated with vaccines,” according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

Anyone can submit a report to VAERS — patients, caregivers, doctors, pharmacists, even lawyers. On the other hand, if a patient experiences a post-vaccine side effect and a report is not voluntarily submitted to VAERS, it is a proverbial tree falling in the forest with no witness.

Thus, VAERS captures reports of adverse events that occurred after vaccination, but it does not capture all adverse events and it cannot establish that the vaccine caused the event.²

The CDC states that correlation alone does not constitute a signal, and regarding SIDS specifically, that clustering deaths close to infant vaccinations is likely coincidental because, “At this age, infants are at greatest risk for certain medical events, including high fevers, seizures, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).”

The fact is that public health agencies and their defenders want to highlight the limitations of VAERS when it benefits them, but gloss over them when it doesn’t:

VAERS data is unreliable, coincidental, and cannot constitute any meaningful signals.

At the same time, the existence of VAERS proves that vaccines are safe because authorities are monitoring it and would act on any meaningful signals.

Authorities and their sanctioned researchers are allowed to “investigate” correlations between VAERS reports and vaccines and produce findings that the vaccines had nothing to do with anything, but independent researchers are not to use the data at all.

As noted by Retraction Watch, Miller’s article is just one of a number of vaccine-critical studies featuring VAERS data that has come under scrutiny in recent years. These include one retracted by Cureus which called for a moratorium on mRNA Covid vaccines, and another retracted by Toxicology Reports which questioned, “Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?”

A third under investigation by publisher Taylor & Francis, was incorrectly described by Retraction Watch as “claiming to find DNA contamination in COVID-19 vaccines that was based on VAERS data.” In fact, the DNA contamination finding was based on lab work, however VAERS data provides specific lot information along with reports of medical incidents after vaccination, allowing the scientists to correlate batches with high DNA contamination reads with potential real-world impacts as reported to VAERS.

Cynics might speculate that it benefits the vaccine industry and public health agencies promoting vaccine uptake to keep VAERS exactly as is, limitations and all.

A 2007-2010 investigation into VAERS conducted by Harvard for the US Government which found that fewer than one percent of post-vaccine adverse events were reported to VAERS recommended that “proactive, spontaneous, automated adverse event reporting” linked with electronic health records and other information systems could improve the speed and accuracy of identifying the risks of pharmaceutical drugs.

Conspicuously, the researchers claimed that the CDC was “no longer responsive” to their “multiple requests” to continue the investigation, and a planned randomised trial comparing an improved surveillance system to the existing VAERS never happened.

No one in the US Government has since shown serious interest in improving VAERS until US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jnr. identified implementing recommendations from the Harvard investigation as a priority.

VAERS and SIDS

While VAERS data cannot prove a causal relationship between vaccination and SIDS deaths, Miller argues that temporal associations should be considered alongside potential biological explanations for any correlations that are apparent.

“The reason infants are at greatest risk for medical events at this age is precisely because they receive multiple vaccinations — that have never been tested in combination — at a time when their immune, neurological, and respiratory systems are still immature,” he told me (emphasis Miller’s).

Miller said that he acknowledged the potential of reporting bias — where parents and doctors may be more likely to report SIDS deaths closer to vaccination than weeks later — in the limitations section of his paper.

But that potential reporting bias should be taken alongside the biological plausibility of an “an incubation period,” whereby vaccinations can, according to various experts referenced in the paper, trigger a cascade of physiological responses that peak within 24-48 hours after vaccination.

Miller said that the smaller proportion of infant deaths reported on Day 1 and Day 3 post-vaccination compared to the peak on Day 2 was statistically significant and “strongly suggests that reporting bias cannot fully explain the clustering of infant deaths and SIDS cases in the early post-vaccination period.” If parents were simply reporting deaths near vaccination opportunistically, you would expect Day 1 to have the most reports, not Day 2.

Fig. 5. Elevated risk of sudden infant deaths on Day 2 post-vaccination. Source: VAERS 1990–2019; Miller 2021.

Moreover, Miller references seven studies and two confidential reports which display similar distribution of sudden infant death reports following vaccination, highlighting that this finding is not unique to his analysis of VAERS data. These studies comprise of passive data collection and case reports across multiple countries in relation to a range of different vaccines.

Table 5. Seven studies and two confidential reports confirm that sudden infant deaths in vaccinated babies tend to cluster in the early post-vaccination period. Source: VAERS 1990–2019; Miller 2021.

The GSK (formerly GlaxoSmithKline) confidential post-marketing surveillance data relating to the Infanrix hexa vaccine, from 2011 and 2015, is the most damning. Miller attests that the manufacturer’s own internal reports showed that 97 percent and 98 percent, respectively, of sudden infant deaths occurred in the first 10 days post-vaccination.

According to a critique published in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics (Puliyel & Sathyamala, 2018) and cited by Miller, GSK in a sleight of hand calculated the comparative ‘expected’ rate of SIDS deaths according to doses distributed, not administered, thus likely inflating the expected rate of deaths. Also, no active surveillance was conducted, and deaths acknowledged in an earlier report were eliminated from a later one. GSK concluded that SIDS deaths did not exceed the expected rate and that its vaccine was safe: regulators accepted this at face value.³

On the subject of expected background rates, Miller acknowledges that population-level SIDS rates would be a useful comparative metric, but notes that with immunisation coverage above 90 percent in the US, a meaningful unvaccinated baseline is challenging to quantify.

Miller also acknowledges that while some studies have found a correlation between vaccination and SIDS, other studies have not. One wonders if any papers in the latter category have been subject to campaigns for their deletion from the scientific record.

Timing suggests social media popularity was a factor in removal

According to Miller, whose LinkedIn page says he is a psychology graduate who has been researching and publishing on vaccine safety for some forty years, the complaints he was asked to respond to were brought from a single person soon after publication.

However, Miller was not notified of the complaints until December 2025. During that year, high-profile vaccine-skeptics Dr Peter McCullough and Dr Pierre Kory shared posts about Miller’s paper on their Substacks and discussed its findings on social media. The image at the top of this post showing the clustering of SIDS deaths within days of vaccination in particular was shared widely on social media sites.

In February 2026, Miller was informed by the publisher, Elsevier, that despite his thorough responses to concerns raised, Editor-in-Chief Professor Lawrence Lash had decided that the findings of the article “constitute potentially unsafe research for medical practice,” warranting a removal rather than a correction.

Toxicology Reports Editor-in-Chief Professor Lawrence Lash.

Is the Editor seriously suggesting that medical practitioners are too stupid to understand what VAERS is, and how the data should be weighed alongside other scientific data and in the broader context of the scientific discourse around vaccines and SIDS?

Lash, the Founding Editor of the journal, is a highly-cited Professor of Pharmacology at Wayne State University. It is unlikely that he genuinely believes his peers are so dumb.

More likely, this was a political retraction. Prior to its removal, Miller’s paper had been cited only 12 times in the scientific literature, according to Semantic Scholar. Its primary impact was clearly in the public sphere, not the scientific.

If this is the case — and we have seen journals remove valid peer-reviewed articles before due to social media virality, as I have previously reported — then this is yet another instance of politics dictating the bounds of scientific discourse.

EXCLUSIVE REPORT: Forced retraction of Covid vaccine cancer-risk study, scientist alleges

Rebekah Barnett

1 de junio de 2024

Read full story

It’s worth noting that the Editor-in-Chief of the journal at the time of the article’s peer-review and publication was not Professor Lash, but the extraordinarily highly-cited Greek Professor of Toxicology Aristidis Tsatsakis, senior author on the aforementioned and now retracted article, “Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?”

Professor Tsatsakis said in an email that he believed his paper had been “retracted unjustifiably” due to “the policy [of] that period.” He noted that he has published several books with Elsevier which is a “huge publisher” and that “people representing Elsevier at various times can do mistakes.” He characterised Professor Lash as reputable scientist who acted as a “kind of yes Sir” Editor-in-Chief under these circumstances.

Former Editor-in-Chief of Toxicology Reports, Professor Aristidis Tsatsakis.

The Streisand effect strikes again

Obviously, the purpose of removing or retracting a scientific paper is to delegitimise it. The fact that trust in science, public health, medicine, and the media is in decline suggests that the target audience for this kind of tactic is shrinking.

In fact, striking a paper from the scientific record can have the opposite effect, said Dr McCullough, who has himself been subject to apparently political retractions.

“We have found that retraction of valid papers results in greater awareness of the manuscript, more reads, downloads and citations, and intensified concern over bias and bio-pharmaceutical capture of the peer-review publication process,” Dr McCullough told me over email.

Cardiologist Dr Peter McCullough.

It is certainly the case that retracted papers can become internet lore, with the effort to suppress them creating a Streisand effect and sometimes propelling the authors into the social media influencer-sphere.

Dr McCullough is case in point: Several Covid vaccine-critical papers on which the prolifically cited Dr McCullough was a contributing author have been withdrawn or retracted. His board certifications in internal medicine and cardiovascular disease were recommended to be revoked by the American Board of Internal Medicine for “casting doubt on the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines,” though Dr McCullough says he resigned before any revocation took effect.⁴ Yet, his social media popularity continues to increase. He now boasts a following of 1.2 million on X and 137,000 subscribers on Substack

Nevertheless, not all authors are so naturally able to turn to social media to communicate their message to a more receptive audience. It is frustrating to authors who labor to contribute to the scientific discourse to have their work excluded. Papers citing articles that have been retracted or withdrawn must update their references accordingly, and the authors’ records are stained.

Most importantly, science cannot progress when inconvenient findings are deleted from the record.

Scientists, medical professionals and parents should be able to read about what VAERS data show, and Neil Z. Miller’s analysis of what this means for vaccination and SIDS. They should also be able to read rebuttals of Miller’s work in the peer-reviewed literature.

Unless science is a religion with unquestionable dogma, in which case Miller’s paper should be deleted and the catechism “we believe in vaccines” published in its place.

Miller is now turning his attention to a book, which will include the study removed from Toxicology Reports, and will give insight into the removal process with the publication of Miller’s correspondence with the Editor-in-Chief and a representative of Elsevier’s ethics committee.

Miller has previously published the books Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective? and Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers.

The paper ‘Vaccines and sudden infant death: An analysis of the VAERS database 1990–2019 and review of the medical literature’ by Neil Z. Miller (2021) is embedded in PDF form below. Feel free to download and share.

Children’s Health Defense did a good summary of the paper which you can read here.

Vaccinesandsuddeninfantdeathmillernzjune2021

1.36MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Amendment Tuesday 2 June 2026: This article has been amended to note that Dr McCullough disputes that his certifications in internal medicine and cardiovascular disease have been revoked by ABIM.

Elsevier’s article withdrawal policy states that “Elsevier’s official archives at the National Library of the Netherlands will retain all article versions, including retracted or otherwise removed articles.” However, this archive is not accessible to the public and so in effect, an article that has been removed from an Elsevier journal is deleted from the scientific record.

Australia’s Database of Adverse Event Notifications (DAEN) functions in more or less the same way, but for all medicines, not just vaccines. Most developed countries rely on passive surveillance systems of this nature for ongoing safety monitoring once a medical treatment goes to market.

Data from the DAEN combined with data from the TGA’s internal database, the Adverse Event Management System (AEMS), shows that at least 43 infant deaths have been reported to the Australian regulator following vaccination with Infanrix hexa as at October 2024, since its approval by the TGA in 2006. The AEMS data is not visible to the public, but was released under Freedom of Information (FOI 1345-01). Independent journalist Maryanne Demasi reports that the TGA refused to answer media questions about whether it had investigated the deaths.

Dr McCullough says that he maintained certification through November 11, 2024, when he voluntarily resigned with all rights reserved by legal notification and signed certified letter to ABIM. His resignation letter was accepted by ABIM CEO Dr Furman McDonald c/o Ganae Powell certified article #70221670000174699230. ABIM bylaws do not allow revocation of certification after resignation. As of April 30, 2026, the US Health and Human Services National Practitioner Databank indicated no action has been taken against certification. Dr McCullough holds the National Board of Physicians and Surgeons Certification NBPAS ID: N57647 in Internal Medicine and Cardiovascular Diseases, March 1, 2024 valid through March 31, 2028. He is licensed to practice medicine in Texas, Michigan, Missouri, Colorado, Florida, and Washington.
Continue reading…

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

The Average Monthly Mortgage Payment Is Up 44 Percent To $2,005, But American Families Are Paying Even More For Health Insurance

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Thu, 04 Jun 2026 13:03:38 GMT

Etienne Note: See our investigation THE GREATEST THEFT IN HUMAN HISTORY! How the Banks and "Government" Will Steal At Least $2.73 Million From Every Working American… “Legally” at ArtOfLiberty.org/inflation

by Michael

U.S. households are being financially squeezed at a level that we have never seen before. I have often said that we are in a long-term cost of living crisis that never seems to end, and that is not an exaggeration at all. Just about everything has been getting more expensive in recent years, and as a result our standard of living has been going down. In many areas of the country, you now have to earn six figures just to live a basic middle class lifestyle. The numbers that I am going to share with you in this article may be hard to believe, but they are very real. Inflation has been out of control for many years, and hard working American families are being absolutely crushed.

For the first time in U.S. history, the average monthly mortgage payment now exceeds $2,000…

Homeowners faced a sticker shock at the end of 2025 as the average monthly mortgage payment topped $2,000 for the first time—a historic milestone reflecting the combined pressure of high home prices and elevated interest rates.
In the fourth quarter of last year, the average payment for existing mortgage holders climbed to $2,005, representing a striking 44% surge compared to 2021, according to the latest quarterly outstanding mortgage report from the Realtor.com® economic research team.
In other words, the typical homeowner saw their monthly mortgage payment jump by more than $600 in just three years, an eye-watering surge.

Take another look at those figures.

All along, federal bureaucrats have been feeding us numbers that show that the inflation rate is very low, but the average monthly mortgage payment has risen by 44 percent just since 2021.

Needless to say, someone is not telling us the truth.

But that isn’t even the worst part.

Today, what the average American family is paying for health insurance each month is even higher than the average monthly mortgage payment…

The numbers don’t lie. The average American family now pays over $2,200 a month for health insurance; surprisingly, that’s more than the average monthly mortgage payment of $2,000. Let that sink in. Keeping a roof over your head costs less than keeping your family covered.
That is not a market failure. That is a system rigged by liberals and government bureaucrats designed to benefit corporate giants at the expense of everyday Americans. Premiums are soaring, and insurers are cashing in. It needs to stop.
Americans are noticing. A recent poll found that a staggering 90 percent of Americans say health insurance companies have too much control and should be broken up, with 74 percent strongly agreeing. The overwhelming majority of Americans know there is a problem. They are screaming for justice.

That is outrageous.

Is there anyone out there that wants to attempt to defend how expensive health insurance has become?

Our system is so broken, and the politicians in Washington have given up on trying to fix it.

Meanwhile, pretty much everything else is becoming more expensive too.

And thanks to the war in Iran, American households have had to shell out an extra 100 billion dollars in just three months…

The war in Iran has cost US households $100 billion in three months, Moody’s Analytics says.
Now in its fourth month, the conflict has cost nearly $750 per household. The increased cost to consumers has mostly been felt in energy prices, but the inflation picture continues to deteriorate the longer the war drags on without a resolution in sight. What’s more, Moody’s says that tailwinds for household like Donald Trump’s tax cuts have been offset by war-fueled cost increased.

This is money that is coming directly out of your pockets.

The rising cost of gasoline alone has sucked an extra 400 dollars out of the typical U.S. household…

According to researchers at Brown University’s Watson School of International and Public Affairs, Americans have paid an additional $51.7 billion in gasoline and diesel costs since the conflict began on February 28, equivalent to nearly $400 per household. And Moody’s Analytics, in findings shared with CNBC, puts this figure even higher, at $450.

There is no end in sight for the crisis in the Middle East, and that means gasoline prices are likely to go significantly higher.

Commercial oil inventories are being rapidly depleted, and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is “dropping toward levels not seen since the 1980s”…

America’s emergency oil reserve is dropping toward levels not seen since the 1980s, as the United States rapidly drains its supplies to stabilize global energy markets rattled by the war with Iran.

According to the latest report from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. has 365.1 million barrels of oil sitting in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) in the week ending May 22, compared to 374.2 million a week prior and down by over 50 million barrels since the conflict began on February 28.

The price of oil has a direct impact on prices for just about everything else, and so that is really bad news.

As ordinary Americans are being squeezed harder and harder, household debt has been rising and the credit card delinquency rate has spiked to a very alarming level…

According to data released by the New York Fed in May, total U.S. household debt climbed to an all-time high of $18.8 trillion in the first quarter of 2026. Much of this is housing debt, and credit card balances dropped slightly over the period, but the rising total has coincided with an increase in late payments.
The percentage of credit card balances at least 90 days delinquent reached 13.1 percent in the first quarter, up 0.4 percent from the previous one and reaching its highest rate in 15 years.

Millions upon millions of Americans are working as hard as they can and it still isn’t enough.

To many people, it just seems like there is no way that they can win, and so many are choosing to simply drop out of the game.

In fact, one out of every three American men are no longer in the workforce at all…

The number of American men participating in the workforce has fallen to one of its lowest levels in nearly two decades, according to new federal labor statistics.
Just 66 percent of men age 20 and older were employed or actively seeking work as of April, according to data released earlier this month by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. That figure has dropped sharply from 73 percent in 2006 and now sits near levels last seen during the fallout from the 2008 financial crisis.
The numbers mean roughly one in three American men are no longer in the workforce.

This is what a crumbling economy looks like.

Only 66 percent of American men that are at least 20 years old are working.

How low does that number have to drop for us to admit that we have a historic crisis on our hands?

I have heard from so many readers that are feeling more financial stress right now than they ever have in their entire lives.

That isn’t a coincidence.

Decades of incredibly foolish decisions have resulted in a sl0w-motion economic decline that has really started to pick up speed in recent years.

Now the pain is beginning to feel like it is unbearable, but the truth is that our problems are only going to intensify from here.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Thanks largely to robots, Ukraine is now talking about winning, not just surviving

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Thu, 04 Jun 2026 13:02:29 GMT

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy inspects a drone with German Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz at an exhibition of German-Ukrainian products in the Federal Chancellery on April 14, 2026. Michael Kappeler/picture alliance via Getty Images

by Patrick Tucker

PRAGUE, Czech Republic–A small but growing number of European officials and analysts are saying what four years ago was unthinkable: Ukraine isn’t just surviving its grueling war with Russia, it is in some ways thriving and may even be on a path to victory.

This isn’t yet captured in headlines—for example, about last weekend’s barrage of Russian drones and missiles around Ukraine—but in the details, like how some 90 percent were intercepted.

Several long-term trends have shifted in Ukraine’s favor, and the core reason is its fierce focus on AI and robotics.

In the crucible of war, Ukraine has developed drones and ground robots that can hold territory—even take it back. Some are fully controlled by humans, like supply robots and medical-evacuation vehicles. But an increasing number are controlled in at least some aspects by dozens of AI products, from guidance packages on aerial drones to decision aids at the highest levels. Take the TFL-1 module, which can enable a one-way drone to function autonomously after a human has selected its target, reducing its susceptibility to jamming and other defenses. Its manufacturer, a Ukrainian company called The Fourth Law, says TFL-1 makes a drone four times more likely to hit its target.

Just as important as the tech are the new tactics. Given unusual latitude to experiment, Ukrainian fighters began to develop robot-forward infantry concepts, like combined-arms attacks by airborne and ground systems, “more than a year ago. Right now, we’re massively starting to implement this,” said Davyd Aloian, deputy secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine, the coordinating body on domestic and international security, in an interview.

Ukraine and its partners are also steaming ahead on new concepts for highly autonomous defenses against Russian drones, combining ISR sensors and AI to detect and identify enemy drones in less time and with more certainty.

“All of the systems are being linked with each other and with people” to create a distributed network with interceptor drones at various locations to be activated when needed, Aloian said. “One day we will have only like 10 guys who are just going to be responsible for approving interception. And it will automatically go direct to the target.”

The human operators will be dispersed as well. “Everything can be controlled from Kyiv, Lviv, from cities in other countries,” he said.

Ukraine’s advantages go beyond weapons and tactics. It is more willing than Russia—or even Kyiv’s Western backers—to rebuild its doctrine, acquisition, and resupply systems around autonomous warfare.

Countries that fail to follow suit risk disaster, one of Ukraine’s top dronemakers warned attendees at the GLOBSEC conference here.

“It’s not what happened to Ukraine”—meaning Russia’s barrage of Shahed drones—that “should scare us in Europe,” said Swarmer CEO Serhii Kupriienko.

Instead, Kupriienko said, people should be scared by how quickly a middling military—in this case, Ukraine’s—developed the ability to inflict precise, devastating, and long-range damage.

“We are behind by literally 10 years or 20 years” in some defense-technology areas, such as satellite imagery, Kupriienko said, and yet his country has climbed a capability curve that just two years ago seemed insurmountable. So could others, he said.

“The answer is always AI solutions and integrating the AI into even the daily routine work within the bureaucracy,” he said.

Ukraine has also developed a defense industry that can keep up with the Russian threat. Its success is reflected not only on the battlefield, but in the growing number of foreign investors who see potential in defense products developed in and with Ukraine.

“We have evolved since 2022, the industry has and our defense has as well. Right now we are able to provide not only [large quantities of drone] assets but everything what is needed to build out the ecosystem,” including parts and production, training, modification, etc. Aloian said.

Strike drones FTW

Ukraine’s strike drones, more than any other factor, have helped counter a key Russian advantage: a large population of economically desperate young men and a comparative willingness to discount the cost of their deaths. Vladimir Putin has drawn hundreds of thousands into service with upfront bonuses and insurance benefits, which has provided numerical superiority on Ukrainian battlefields along with “considerable stimulus for the ailing Russian economy,” writes expatriate economist Vladislav Inozemtsev, who calls the system “deathonomics.”

But human waves are ineffective if drones kill soldiers faster than they can be replaced at the front—and that has become the case, analysts at the Institute for the Study of War wrote this week.

“Ukraine’s successful mid-range and frontline drone strike campaigns are limiting Russia’s ability to transport personnel to the frontline and to supply and sustain frontline positions,” they wrote.

Putin must now “convince an increasingly tired Russian populace not only to support a fifth year of war but also to accept involuntary mobilization for a war that has already cost Russia well over a million casualties.”

Ukraine’s deep-strike capabilities have changed the game in other ways as well. Oil infrastructure deep in Russian territory is no longer safe, giving Kyiv leverage over Moscow’s export revenues no matter what the White House does with sanctions relief. Even more humiliating, the drone threat forced Putin to hold his annual Victory Day parade this month without Soviet-esque ranks of tanks and missiles.

“Believe us. We were in the occupation of the Soviet Union for 50 years, and we know how important” the Victory Day parade is,” Estonian foreign minister Margus Tsahkna told the GLOBSEC audience. “For the first time, Putin was not able to wage this parade. This is the facade actually collapsing. And Putin is losing face among the Russian people, not only among us.”

“Putin thought that Ukraine was a question of five days. And, let’s be frank, we, too, we said, ‘Five days, and then it’s finished,’” said Xavier Bettel, Luxembourg’s deputy prime minister. “In fact, the resilience of the Ukrainians was a big surprise for all of us.”

Changing fortunes

To understand how dramatically Ukraine’s prospects have changed, consider that in March, then-ODNI director Tulsi Gabbard, testified that the U.S. intelligence community believed that Russia had the “upper hand” in the conflict.

Now Ukrainian officials and other observers have begun to worry about a premature sense of victory among Ukraine’s foreign backers. Kyiv still depends on aid and imported weapons. Last week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the government continues to be “very persistent” in its efforts to secure advanced Patriot missiles from the United States. “I believe [the U.S.] must act quicker,” he told reporters during a visit to Sweden.

Some European governments, however, are ever more eager to forge deeper ties with their continent’s new defense leader—not just for Ukraine’s sake but for their own.

“It means enlargement processes for the European Union, for NATO in the future,” Estonia’s Tsahkna said. It means security guarantees not only to Ukraine and for Ukraine, but the other way around, because actually Ukraine is the largest military power in Europe at the moment, and increasing as well its industrial base.”

As for the Ukrainian government, declaring victory will require more than the cessation of hostilities. The invading country must be left “much weaker,” so that it can’t re-arm as it did after its 2014 invasion of Crimea, Aloian said.

“If there’s going to be a ceasefire, there will be very harsh conditions and difficult negotiations for the taking off of the sanctions, and when it will be,” he said. Otherwise, Russia will “renew all of those processes [of military buildup] before the full-scale invasion.”

“Right now, they’re aiming like about 30 percent of their economy for the defense industry,” which is too much, he said.

Even the downfall of Putin, who has led Russia since the end of the 20th century, would be insufficient.

“The change of the regime shouldn’t just be only external. It should be also internal,” he said.

If it happens, much of the credit will go to the makers and operators of Ukraine’s drones.

The Best “Go Paid” Deal on Substack! You Get REAL Stuff!!

Euro Area Inflation Tops 3.0% For First Time Since 2023, Cementing ECB Rate Hike

Etienne de la Boetie2 — Wed, 03 Jun 2026 14:01:08 GMT

Etienne Note: The Central Banks are coordinating their inflation to keep the tax slaves from jumping ship into a safer boat

by Tyler Durden

Euro Area inflation topped 3% for the first time since September 2023, further cementing expectations for a rate hike when the ECB meets next week.

Consumer prices rose 3.2% from a year ago in May, and up from 3% the previous month, in line expectations. But core inflation, which excludes volatile items like food and energy, jumped more than anticipated to 2.5% (technically 2.55%), while the closely watched services gauge jumped to 3.5%, the highest since last November, and non-energy industrial goods inflation printing at 0.87%YoY.

Energy inflation increased to 10.9%YoY, while food, alcohol and tobacco inflation fell to 1.97%YoY, notably below the weak 2.2%YoY Goldman was expecting.

“The acceleration of headline and core inflation in May cements the case for a 25 basis-point rate increase from the ECB next week. Those moves have been driven by services prices, which have probably been pushed up by pass-through from oil prices. That may be used by the hawks on the Governing Council to argue broad-based inflation requires a follow-up move in September” said Bloomberg economist David Powell.

Incorporating the May flash release into the Euro area inflation path, but also accounting for the potential Easter-related nature of the outsized move in services which should not be fully persistent, Goldman’s medium-term path continues to show core inflation at a weak 2.5%yoy in 2026, peaking at 2.7%yoy in 2027Q2 before gradually declining to 2.0%yoy in 2028Q4, above the ECB staff March projections. As for headline inflation, Goldman expects it to peak at 3.4%YoY in Q4, using the bank’s latest baseline path for gas and oil prices.

The latest hot inflation print has cemented the ECB’s first rate hike since September 2023 on June 11, with officials appearing to conclude that they can no longer wait to respond to the fallout from the Middle East conflict. ECB rate hike odds are now at 98% on Polymarket. They’re worried chiefly about workers demanding steep pay rises and firms boosting selling prices, viewing such consequences as probably now inevitable as the war drags on.

Source: Polymarket

Most policymakers, however, remain cautious on the path beyond June according to Bloomberg, as growth in the region’s 21-nation economy also takes a hit. Business activity shrank in May at the quickest pace since 2023.

ECB Executive Board member Isabel Schnabel, viewed as the most hawkish Governing Council member, suggested Monday that it’s too early to specify how many rate increases may be needed. Lithuania’s Gediminas Simkus has said a second move after June “is more likely than not,” though it’s unclear when.

“It’s quite important to react in a timely manner to this emerging inflationary environment so we can prevent a possible acceleration of inflation and the inflationary spiral, prevent it at its very beginning with the least possible impact on the economy,” Simkus said Tuesday in Vilnius.

His Finnish counterpart Olli Rehn described inflation expectations as still anchored so far, but said action is needed this month to keep prices under control. “While inflation risks have increased, a rate increase in June would be an insurance one, but not due to entrenched inflationary pressures,” he said in a speech.

Today’s CPI print should not have been a major surprise: data last week showed inflation gathering pace in three of the bloc’s biggest member states, and remaining well above the ECB’s 2% target in all of them. Propelled by the war-induced surge in energy costs, May readings for France, Italy and Spain quickened to 2.8%, 3.3% and 3.6%, while the headline number for Germany moderated to 2.7%.