More Articles From Our Amazing Writers
That Never Made It To Air!

Canada Was Warned, So Why Is Mark Carney Doing This Anyway?

What makes the current moment so disturbing isn’t just what Canada is doing now, it’s that we already lived through the consequences once.

This story didn’t start with electric vehicles. It didn’t start with canola tariffs. It started in December 2018, when Canada arrested Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou at the request of the United States.

Meng was not a minor figure. She was Huawei’s Chief Financial Officer and the daughter of the company’s founder. The U.S. alleged she helped mislead international banks about Huawei’s dealings with Iran, causing those banks to unknowingly violate U.S. sanctions. Under Canada’s extradition treaty, Ottawa had no legal choice but to detain her.

China’s response was immediate, and calculated.

Two Canadians were detained without due process. Canadian exports were suddenly “unsafe.” Canola, pork, and other goods were blocked. And behind the scenes, according to a classified CSIS assessment, China launched a coordinated pressure campaign using trade coercion, hostage diplomacy, and political interference to force Canada to back down.

Canadian intelligence concluded this wasn’t retaliation, it was strategy.

Trade was used as a weapon. Pressure was applied where it hurt most. And canola was deliberately chosen because it strikes Saskatchewan, a politically sensitive, economically exposed province, and because the companies involved had direct access to senior decision-makers.

CSIS even identified Richardson International as a specific target, concluding China “picked” it because the impact would be largest and the pressure would travel fastest into Ottawa.

At the same time, CSIS warned that China was interfering in Canada’s democratic process, moderating support across political parties ahead of the 2019 election, not to pick a winner, but to ensure leverage over whoever won.

Those warnings didn’t stay classified forever.

Since then, Canada has publicly acknowledged:

• Chinese interference in federal elections

• intimidation of Chinese-Canadian communities

• clandestine overseas police operations

• persistent economic coercion

• intellectual property theft concerns

And then there is Winnipeg.

In 2019, two scientists were quietly removed from Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory, one of the most sensitive labs in the country, after virus samples were sent to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The scientists were later fired. The RCMP investigated. Parliament demanded documents. The government resisted disclosure.

To this day, Canadians still don’t have full answers about what happened inside that lab, or why transparency was blocked.

These are not theories. These are documented events, acknowledged by government agencies, intelligence committees, and Parliament itself.

Which is why what’s happening now is so hard to reconcile.

Fast forward to today.

Mark Carney travels to Beijing. Suddenly, China eases canola tariffs. At the same time, Canada agrees to open its market to tens of thousands of Chinese electric vehicles at reduced tariffs, vehicles that function less like cars and more like rolling data platforms, loaded with sensors, cameras, software, and connectivity.

The United States reacts immediately.

Senior U.S. officials reportedly warn Canada that this decision is dangerous, that Chinese EVs will not be allowed into the U.S., and that Canada will “regret” the move. The concern isn’t economic, it’s national security.

So here is the question that refuses to go away:

Why is Mark Carney doing this?

Why would a prime minister, fully briefed on CSIS findings, foreign interference reports, and years of intelligence warnings, reopen the exact same pressure point China previously exploited?

Why ease access for Chinese technology platforms while Canada’s closest ally is actively shutting the door?

Why accept short-term trade relief on canola, the same lever used to coerce Canada during the Meng crisis. While pretending this time is somehow different?

Nothing about this lines up with what Canada already knows.

CSIS warned that China uses trade pressure patiently.

CSIS warned that canola is a coercion tool.

CSIS warned that politically connected business interests would be targeted.

CSIS warned that pressure would be calibrated, not explosive.

And now, under pressure once again, Canada appears to be adjusting its position, not through strength, but through accommodation.

This isn’t diplomacy as usual.

It’s not pragmatic trade.

It’s not even neutral.

It looks like capitulation after conditioning.

If China learned during the Meng crisis that economic pressure works, that Canada will eventually bend to relieve domestic pain. Then this moment sends a dangerous message: the tactic succeeded.

And that’s the part that should alarm everyone.

Because if the lesson Beijing takes from this is that Canada can be nudged, pressured, and peeled away from its allies through targeted economic leverage, then what we’re watching isn’t a single policy error.

It’s the quiet normalization of coercion.

Canada was warned.

The evidence accumulated.

The pattern was documented.

And yet, here we are again, acting as if none of it happened.

That’s not just confusing.

That’s dangerous.

The Engineered Chaos, How Global Crises Were Manipulated

I’m going to be very clear and grounded here, because this is where a lot of people get pulled into over‑simplified conspiracy stories that feel emotionally satisfying but actually miss what’s really happening.

There is no single group or hidden cabal that sat in a room and planned all of this like a movie plot. That idea is tempting because chaos feels easier to process when you can point to one villain. But reality is more unsettling than that: what you’re seeing is the result of many powerful actors, over decades, making self‑interested decisions inside a system that rewards instability, short‑term gain, and leverage.

This wasn’t centrally “designed.” It was engineered indirectly, piece by piece.

For decades, governments, corporations, financial institutions, and global bodies made choices that optimized for efficiency, profit, and control, not resilience. Supply chains were stretched thin to save money. Energy independence was sacrificed for cheap imports. Debt was normalized as a tool of growth. Financial markets were allowed to grow enormous and detached from real production. None of these decisions were secret. They were openly debated, legislated, and implemented, often with good intentions at the time.

At the same time, major powers planned for their own advantage, not global stability. Countries stockpiled resources, secured trade routes, positioned currencies, and prepared for conflict or leverage. Militaries planned contingencies. Energy producers planned for price volatility. Central banks planned for crisis management. Corporations planned for profit in disruption. All of this planning happened, but not in coordination, and not toward a shared outcome.

Then came shocks that exposed how fragile the system had become: COVID, wars, sanctions, climate stress, demographic shifts. These weren’t planned together, but once they happened, the people with power responded in ways that protected themselves first.

That response, printing money, weaponizing trade, restricting exports, speculating on commodities, accelerated the damage.

What makes it feel “planned” is that the same types of players benefit every time. Volatility rewards those with capital. Scarcity rewards those who control resources. Debt rewards lenders. Crisis expands government power. None of these actors need to conspire when the system already tilts in their favor. They just follow incentives.

So yes, there was long‑term thinking, but not a master plan. It was a slow buildup of risk, arrogance, and shortsighted decisions layered over one another until the system reached a breaking point. Once it cracked, everything started moving at once.

The uncomfortable truth is this:

The system wasn’t designed to collapse, it was designed to extract. Collapse is the side effect.

And now we’re living in the moment where decades of those choices are colliding.

World News Roundup, January 19, 2026

Trump Invites Putin to Gaza “Peace Board”, A Power Play in Plain Sight

Donald Trump just shook the world again.

He’s invited Vladimir Putin to join a “Gaza board of peace” while Ukraine is still burning. The mainstream media frames this as a humanitarian move, but that’s nonsense. This is strategic positioning. Think about it: the U.S. is actively trying to involve the same man it demonized as a “threat to democracy” in shaping Middle East policy. 

Why?

Because the elite in Washington and Davos are desperate to maintain influence over the region, and they know Putin has leverage. Trump, meanwhile, is using the optics to show that America can still play hardball, even while Europe flounders. The lesson here is simple: wars are not fought just on the battlefield; they’re fought through alliances, leverage, and controlling the narrative.

In Other News: Davos Opens Amid Rising Global Unease

The World Economic Forum kicked off this week, and yes, the talking points are all about inequality and housing. But let’s be real, Davos isn’t about solving problems. It’s about who controls the economy and who benefits from global crises. The elites gather to figure out how to protect their wealth, manage supply chains, and stay ahead of political backlash. And with Trump attending, it’s clear that the U.S. is sending a signal: the old Davos consensus isn’t untouchable. Publicly, they talk about fairness. Privately, they’re talking about consolidating power. And while they dine in Swiss luxury, the average citizen is left wondering why their wages stagnate and their cost of living skyrockets.

Tesla Wins as Canada Opens Door to Chinese EVs, The Global Supply Game

Canada’s sudden removal of tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles isn’t just a trade story, it’s a move in the global tech and energy power game. Tesla is set to benefit, yes, but the bigger picture is governments quietly shaping markets to favor certain players while allowing others to fail. Why Chinese EVs? Because controlling the supply chains for batteries, EV technology, and rare earth materials is the real prize. It’s not just cars; it’s influence over the energy transition itself. Pay attention, policies like this are rarely about fairness. They’re about who owns the future.

Greenland Tariffs Shake the EU, Power, Not Economics

Trump’s Greenland tariffs are being reported as a “trade spat,” but the real story is leverage. Greenland sits atop enormous natural resources, including rare minerals and strategic Arctic access. By threatening tariffs, Trump is sending a message: the U.S. sets the rules, and the EU better follow. This isn’t just economics; it’s geopolitics disguised as trade policy. Meanwhile, Europe scrambles to respond, billions hang in the balance, and the mainstream press barely scratches the surface. It’s a classic example of using economic pressure to achieve strategic goals, the kind of maneuvering most people never see.

Spain’s High-Speed Rail Disaster, Systemic Neglect Exposed

The Spanish high-speed train collision isn’t an “accident.” It’s the result of decades of government mismanagement, lax oversight, and priorities placed on appearances over safety. The media shows the wreckage and the emotional stories, but the deeper story is bureaucratic failure. Who funded maintenance? Who approved safety protocols?

This is how systemic failures happen in every country: citizens suffer, governments issue statements, and nothing changes until pressure forces real accountability. If you only watch the mainstream coverage, you miss the bigger picture: the failures are engineered into the system.

Middle East Unrest, More Than Meets the Eye

Iran is on fire again with widespread protests, and the mainstream media portrays it as “civil unrest.” But look closer. Foreign influence, propaganda campaigns, and economic manipulation are all at play. Powerful nations have been quietly funding and directing movements to weaken regimes or push agendas. The protesters are real, but the story you see is curated to fit a narrative that suits Western policymakers. The truth? Geopolitics doesn’t wait for elections or headlines, it’s engineered through influence operations, media control, and calculate economic pressure.

Japan Calls Snap Election, A Domino in Global Strategy

Finally, Japan calls a snap election amid economic stagnation. On the surface, it’s domestic politics. But Japan’s position in Asia, its trade relationships, and its military alliances mean the outcome is anything but local. Whoever wins will affect the U.S.-Japan relationship, influence China’s strategy, and impact global supply chains. Snap elections often happen when the elite want to reset policy quickly before public sentiment grows too strong. This is the kind of subtle manipulation the mainstream ignores, but it directly affects global stability and economic planning.

The Takeaway:

Every headline today hides a signal. Every policy, every “crisis,” every political move is about influence, leverage, and control. If you only read the mainstream media, you see chaos. If you look closer, you see strategy, the quiet shaping of power that affects your life, your economy, and your freedom. 2026 is already shaping up to be a year where only those paying attention understand what’s really happening.

Brookfield, Carney & Qatar: How Canadian Power Has Been Sold Out

The deeper you pull back the curtain on Mark Carney’s rise to prime minister, the uglier the picture gets. Carney didn’t just walk into office from outside politics, he stepped out of one of the largest private asset managers on Earth, Brookfield Asset Management, and since then, every major economic move his government makes seems to benefit Brookfield or its global partners.

Take Qatar. Brookfield is not just a passive investor there. In December 2025, Brookfield Asset Management and Qai, a subsidiary of Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, the Qatar Investment Authority, announced a US$20 billion joint venture to build AI infrastructure in Qatar and internationally, part of a massive build‑out aimed at making Doha a regional AI hub. The deal is central to Brookfield’s global AI strategy, which aims to mobilize up to US$100 billion in AI investments. 

This is the same Qatar that hosted Mark Carney on January 18, 2026, for a state visit where he secured Qatari investments in Canadian projects. Carney hailed this as a diversification win, but this wasn’t a coincidence. Qatar doesn’t operate in a vacuum. Its sovereign wealth fund has been a major backer of Brookfield and its global projects for years.

Let’s be clear: the investment is real. The question is why Canada’s government, under Carney, is so eager to welcome money from a state that shelters terrorist leadership and shields extremist political actors, while Canada itself struggles with inflation, housing crises, and rising debt.

And look at Brookfield’s footprint inside Canada: it’s massive. Brookfield manages around US$1 trillion in assets worldwide, including infrastructure and real estate that touches nearly every sector of the economy. Brookfield’s reach extends beyond Qatar, it’s deeply embedded in global infrastructure, energy, and data centre investment strategies. It’s an economic colossus that benefits from public policy, public funds, and regulatory environments shaped in part by those in power.

Which brings us to the core allegation: Mark Carney’s relationship with Brookfield raises fundamental questions about conflict of interest and public benefit.

Carney was Vice‑Chair and Head of ESG and impact investing at Brookfield before running for prime minister. During that period, Brookfield came under fire for extensive use of tax havens and aggressive corporate tax avoidance, maintaining subsidiaries in Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, and other low‑ or no‑tax jurisdictions.

Critics, including myself see Brookfield as one of Canada’s largest tax avoiders, a company that pays a tiny fraction of revenue in actual tax despite massive global profit.

Carney defended Brookfield as a “Canadian success story” during the 2025 federal campaign even as these controversies circulated.

Then there are the ethics concerns. Public records show Carney had to recuse himself from discussions involving more than 100 entities tied to Brookfield when he assumed office, a safeguard that tells us just how intertwined his political role and his corporate past really are. 

Parliamentary questions filed by MPs show growing concern about how often government officials meet with Brookfield and its affiliates, and whether public bodies like the Canada Growth Fund or Canada Infrastructure Bank might be steering projects toward private asset managers with deep political connections. Many of these questions have not yet been answered, leaving Canadians to wonder what conversations are happening behind closed doors.

House of Commons

Then there’s the public funding angle, the part every Canadian should be tracking:

Brookfield and its affiliates are ubiquitous in Canadian pension funds, infrastructure projects, and private capital vehicles, meaning public money, from CPP to provincial pension assets, indirectly flows into Brookfield’s hands. 

Brookfield has sought federal involvement in massive investment vehicles, including proposals for funds worth tens of billions that would blend public and private capital, highlighting how deeply the private investment world now overlaps with public policy. 

Benefits and Pensions Monitor

Independent watchdogs and pension advocates have repeatedly raised concerns about transparency, how these vehicles are governed, and whether ordinary citizens understand where their retirement money and tax dollars are ultimately going.

If you add that up, you get a situation where:

A mega‑investment firm with global reach, Brookfield, is deeply connected to a foreign state (Qatar) with controversial political relationships; That same firm’s former executive is now prime minister; Public pension funds and federal projects increasingly intersect with private capital platforms tied to that firm.

And critics on both left and right are raising the alarm that public funds may be indirectly enriching private interests instead of the public good.

That’s not just “conflicted”, that’s a structural problem.

Yet in mainstream coverage, there is almost no scrutiny of how Canadian policy decisions, from Doha to Ottawa, benefit a small cadre of global capital managers at the expense of broader public accountability.

If Carney truly believes in diversification and Canadian autonomy, he ought to explain why Qatar and Brookfield appear to be inseparable from his economic agenda. Why has Canada’s government not been upfront about the scale of Brookfield’s involvement in federally backed initiatives? And why do taxpayers rarely see transparency around where their money goes and who benefits?

Because Canadians aren’t stupid anymore, we’re watching. And what we see isn’t just politics as usual. It’s a new model of governance that blends public office with private gain, and the public deserves answers, not platitudes.

Mark Carney, China, and Canada’s Quiet EV Takeover

Listen closely, because almost nobody is paying attention to what’s really happening. In China, Mark Carney made a comment that barely registered with the media. He mentioned Chinese investment in Canada and partnerships with Canadian firms, almost as an afterthought, a mumble at the end of a statement. But that mumble is everything. That’s the opening move in a strategy almost nobody sees.

Think about it strategically. If you’re China, you know Carney doesn’t have a majority government supporting him. You know Canadian governments can change policies overnight. You also know the RCMP won’t even use Chinese-made drones for security reasons. So why would a company like BYD risk billions of dollars building factories in Canada when they could be shut down the moment a new government takes power? 

They wouldn’t. That’s too risky.

Instead, they’ll license their technology. They won’t sell the vehicles themselves. They won’t build factories. They won’t take the political or financial risk. They’ll license EV platforms, battery technology, software, and manufacturing processes to Canadian companies. They collect high-margin profits while staying completely removed from the risk. It’s smart, quiet, and almost invisible.

Now think about who in Canada can actually take that technology. GM, Chevrolet, Ford, Stellantis, Tesla. They won’t touch Chinese technology. The political risk, the regulatory hurdles, and national security concerns make it impossible. Toyota doesn’t need it anyway, they’re not fully committed to full EVs.

That leaves Hyundai. Hyundai already sells the most fully electric, zero-emission vehicles in Canada. They’re positioned perfectly to license Chinese technology, open a plant here, and serve as the conduit for Chinese EVs into North America without China ever touching a factory.

Here’s the catch. Canada looks like the winner. Jobs, factories, EV production. It looks positive on the surface. But almost none of it is Canadian-controlled. The technology is Chinese, the strategy is Chinese, and the profits mostly flow to China. Doug Ford and Ontario’s auto sector aren’t happy, but this isn’t about Chinese-branded vehicles flooding Canada. It’s about Chinese technology quietly embedding itself into Canadian production.

And the United States? They’re likely to block these vehicles at the border because of the Chinese content. That means Canadians could be buying EVs that can’t cross into North America’s largest automotive market. Canada risks being left with factories and assembly lines that have limited export potential, while the real margins and strategic advantages remain in foreign hands.

Over time, China gains influence, profits, and insight into Canadian supply chains and industrial practices without ever putting itself at risk. Canadians get the labor, infrastructure, and political exposure. If governments shift or tensions rise, Canada could be pressured or limited because so much of its EV infrastructure depends on licensed Chinese technology. Canadians aren’t in control, and our ability to innovate independently could be restricted.

This isn’t just EV production. This is a strategic foothold in Canada for China, facilitated quietly by signals like Carney’s comments. It’s a way for China to profit, gain influence, and expand its technology into North America while keeping all risk off its own books.

Canada looks like it’s benefiting, but in reality, almost all of the leverage, profit, and control lies with China. This is just the beginning, and almost nobody is paying attention.

They Knew It Was Illegal,  And They Did It Anyway:

Let’s stop pretending this was a mistake.

The federal government of Canada invoked the Emergencies Act illegally, and they knew it didn’t meet the legal threshold when they did it. Courts have now confirmed what Canadians were told not to believe at the time: this was not a national emergency, not an insurrection, not a last resort. It was a political decision, and it was unlawful.

And what followed was not “law enforcement.”

It was state force turned inward on its own citizens.

People were tear‑gassed.

People were shot with so‑called “less‑lethal” rounds.

People were beaten, dragged, trampled, arrested, and terrorized.

Horses were driven into crowds.

Chemical irritants were deployed.

Sound cannons, batons, riot shields, armored lines, all against civilians.

And while boots were on necks in the streets, bank accounts were being frozen behind closed doors.

This wasn’t chaos.

This was coordination.

THE PEOPLE WHO DID THIS, BY NAME

This did not come from “the system.”

It came from specific people, holding specific offices, making specific decisions.

Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, led Cabinet, approved the invocation, signed the proclamation, and repeatedly defended it.

Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, ordered the financial crackdowns, directed banks to freeze accounts without warrants, and publicly celebrated the power to do so.

Marco Mendicino, Minister of Public Safety, oversaw policing, defended the violence, denied facts Canadians watched with their own eyes, and ran interference for enforcement agencies.

Bill Blair, Minister of Emergency Preparedness, coordinated federal emergency operations and helped legitimize mass force.

David Lametti, Minister of Justice and Attorney General, the government’s top legal officer, whose job was to say no if the law didn’t allow this. It didn’t. It happened anyway.

Dominic LeBlanc, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, coordinated provincial alignment and Cabinet consensus.

Omar Alghabra, Minister of Transport, helped frame infrastructure disruption as justification for emergency powers.

Janice Charette, Clerk of the Privy Council, the most powerful unelected official in Canada, coordinating the machinery of government that enabled this.

Nathalie Drouin, Deputy Clerk, supporting the process.

Jody Thomas, National Security and Intelligence Advisor, whose assessments were used to sell the emergency.

Brenda Lucki, RCMP Commissioner, oversaw federal police actions carried out under illegal authority.

Peter Sloly and Steve Bell, Ottawa police leadership, executed enforcement on the ground.

Jim Watson, Mayor of Ottawa, declared emergencies, demanded federal intervention, and supported the crackdown.

And yes:

Mark Carney, not elected, not accountable, but publicly advising and endorsing the use of emergency financial powers, helping normalize freezing citizens out of their own lives.

No one gets to hide behind “collective responsibility” anymore.

WHAT WAS DONE TO CANADIANS

Let’s say it plainly.

Canadians were:

Tear‑gassed.

Shot with rubber and impact rounds.

Beaten with batons.

Arrested under extraordinary powers.

De‑banked without court orders.

Cut off from food, rent, mortgages, and medical access.

Punished retroactively for donating money.

Labeled extremists for dissent.

All of it flowed from an illegal declaration.

This wasn’t about safety.

It was about control.

AND NOW? NOTHING.

No arrests of decision‑makers.

No charges.

No jail.

No real consequences.

The same people who approved the illegal act will tell you:

“Police were independent.”

“We acted in good faith.”

“The courts will handle it.”

The courts have handled it, by confirming the government broke the law.

And still, no one pays.

If an ordinary Canadian did even a fraction of this, froze accounts illegally, assaulted someone under false authority, coordinated mass force without legal grounds, they would be charged instantly.

But when the state does it? The state protects itself.

THIS IS THE PRECEDENT

Canada now lives under a confirmed precedent where:

The federal government can break the law.

Use police and financial systems against citizens.

Be ruled illegal after the fact.

And walk away untouched.

The victims get lawsuits.

The government gets excuses.

The taxpayers get the bill.

And the people who ordered it all get promotions, board seats, and book deals.

That should make every Canadian furious, whether you supported the protest or not.

Because if this stands, rights are not rights.

They are permissions.

And they can be revoked,  illegally, with zero consequences at the top.

That is not democracy.

That is power without accountability.

And Canadians should be absolutely enraged.

Canada’s Banking “Reforms” in 2026: 

What the Government Isn’t Telling Canadians.

Your banks and the government are rolling out a set of changes in 2026 that look good on paper, but in reality, they put more control in the hands of the system and less power in the hands of everyday people. These new rules aren’t about helping you; they’re about consolidating control, tracking your money, and limiting your options while creating the illusion of protection.

Take the changes around cheque deposits. The government claims Canadians will now be able to withdraw $150 immediately from a deposited cheque, up from $100, and that the distinction between in-person and mobile deposits has been eliminated. But what they don’t emphasize is that these rules normalize a system where you are increasingly forced into digital transactions, tracked and monitored, while the traditional safety nets of cash and privacy slowly disappear. Faster access is sold as convenience, but it’s part of a larger push to make Canadians dependent on banks and digital platforms that track every dollar.

Then there’s the so-called “anti-fraud” protections. Banks are now required to have procedures, staff training, and consent rules, and report fraud data to the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada. Sounds good, right? The reality is more insidious. These rules put Canadians’ personal data directly into government databases and corporate systems, expanding surveillance under the guise of protection. Consumers can disable features or set limits, but the banks control the frameworks, the consent forms, and the reporting. In other words, they decide how much freedom you really have.

Overdraft fees have been capped at $10, and interest rates lowered to 35 percent APR. On the surface, this seems like relief, but these are symbolic gestures. They don’t address the larger trend of banks creating digital dependency, incentivizing automated fees, and making it easier to push Canadians into high-cost financial services when needed. It’s a small concession to mask a much bigger power shift.

The rollout of Consumer-Driven Banking, or open banking, is presented as a tool for empowerment, letting Canadians safely share financial data with apps. But the truth is that these programs are a controlled way to funnel your data into centralized systems.

Your financial behaviour, spending habits, and personal details become part of an ecosystem monitored by banks, regulators, and, indirectly, global financial organizations that push these programs worldwide. The narrative of “consumer control” is just a cover for the growing digital surveillance and influence over your money.

Even account switching, clearer product information, and complaint-handling processes, while framed as improvements, are mostly cosmetic. The deeper changes, digital dependency, centralized control, and mandatory reporting, show that Canadians are losing real freedom over their money. These rules are being passed quietly, framed as modernization and protection, while the average Canadian is left trusting a system that increasingly decides for them what they can do with their own finances.

It’s also worth noting the global context.

Organizations like the World Economic Forum promote ideas like financial modernization and digital identity systems. Canada’s reforms align neatly with those global trends, but that alignment is not coincidental. It shows that these banking changes are not just domestic policy, they are part of a broader agenda to normalize central oversight, data collection, and financial control. Canadians may think they’re benefiting from convenience, but what’s really happening is the consolidation of power in banks, regulators, and the state, under the guise of modernization.

2026 is not the year Canadians finally get better banking. It’s the year they are quietly nudged further into a system that monitors, restricts, and controls. If you rely on cheques, worry about fraud, or just want to manage your money freely, these changes are a warning: the government and the banks are presenting this as protection and convenience, but in reality, it’s control dressed up as reform.

Canadians Must Stand With the United States

Let’s be clear about what’s happening here, because this isn’t just some hockey fight at the United Nations.

When the UN starts floating ideas about “isolating” the United States, that doesn’t just affect Americans. It affects the entire planet, and Canadians most of all.

The United States isn’t just another country in the UN lineup. It’s the backbone of the global system. Its economy, its military, its energy production, its trade routes, all of it stabilizes the world whether people like to admit it or not. When the UN clashes with the U.S., the world doesn’t get safer or fairer. It gets more unstable.

And here’s the part Canadians need to wake up to.

Canada does not benefit from a weakened United States. We benefit from a strong, sovereign, confident America that can stand on its own two feet and keep global order from sliding into chaos. When the U.S. pulls back from funding or obeying unelected global bureaucracies, it doesn’t create “isolation.” It exposes how dependent those institutions are, and how fragile they really are.

This affects every single person on the planet. Fragmented global leadership means higher food prices, unstable energy markets, disrupted supply chains, weaker responses to conflict, and less accountability overall. Ordinary people pay the price, not diplomats.

For Canadians, the impact is immediate. Our economy is tied directly to the U.S. Our jobs, exports, energy markets, and security depend on a strong American partner. If the UN tries to sideline the U.S., Canada gets squeezed, expected to contribute more money, more resources, and more political cover for institutions we don’t control and can’t fix.

That’s not leadership. That’s dependency.

Trump represents something the global elite can’t stand: a country that refuses to be managed, pressured, or guilted into submission. Whether people love him or hate him, his approach forces a hard truth into the open, sovereignty still matters.

Canadians should not cheer attacks on American independence. We should stand with the United States when it asserts its right to govern itself. A strong America is not a threat to Canada. A weakened America is.

This isn’t about partisanship. It’s about reality.

When the world’s most powerful democracy is strong, independent, and confident, the global system is more stable, and Canada is safer, freer, and more prosperous because of it.

Canadians must stand with the United States. And yes, Canadians must stand with Trump.

Because when America stands strong, the world doesn’t fall apart. And when America is targeted, we’re next.

Something big just happened in Canada:

Bonnie Crombie is gone from the Ontario Liberals.

Pablo Rodriguez is gone from the Quebec Liberals.

And now François Legault, the premier of Quebec, is stepping down too.

That’s not normal. That’s not coincidence. And it sure as hell isn’t “just politics.”

Ontario and Quebec aren’t side provinces. They are Canada. Together they hold the majority of the population, the majority of the economy, and the majority of Liberal support at both the provincial and federal levels. When leadership collapses in both at the same time, that’s not a routine reshuffle, that’s a pressure release.

Here’s what really stands out: this isn’t voters throwing them out. These leaders are walking away. Quietly. Quickly. Almost like they know something’s coming.

The Ontario Liberals couldn’t recover. The Quebec Liberals are imploding under internal chaos. And Legault, who once positioned himself as the stable alternative, exits just as Quebec politics start shifting hard again. You don’t see three power centres weaken at once unless the ground underneath them is moving.

Meanwhile, Canadians are being crushed. Housing is broken. Immigration is out of control with no infrastructure to support it. Provinces are strapped for cash. Federal, provincial relations are tense. Trust in institutions is collapsing. And suddenly the people at the top are saying, “Yeah… I’m done.”

That’s not leadership fatigue. That’s anticipation.

Political parties don’t abandon ship unless they know the next phase is going to be ugly, or unwinnable. Leadership changes aren’t just about personalities; they’re about distancing. About not being the one holding the bag when things finally snap.

Watch what happens next. Interim leaders. Delayed elections. Narrative resets. New faces saying “this isn’t our fault” while continuing the same policies under a different logo. That’s the cycle.

But here’s the uncomfortable question no one in mainstream media wants to ask:

If everything is supposedly under control… why are the people in charge leaving all at once?

Because something is brewing.

And when political exits line up this cleanly across Canada’s biggest provinces, history says it’s not random, it’s preparation.

The storm doesn’t start when the thunder hits.

It starts when the animals go quiet.

From Idealism to Influence: How the UN Became a Global Power Machine

The UN started as this shiny ideal, countries agreeing, at least on paper, to stop killing each other, protect human rights, and rebuild the world after two wars. It was supposed to be about peace, about people. And for a while, it did some good. They kept the peace in small conflicts, fed refugees, and wrote the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. You could almost believe in it.

But over time, the UN got swallowed by the same thing it was supposed to fight against: power. Big countries realized they could use it as a stage to push their agendas. The Security Council gave five nations veto power, and suddenly, the “voice of the world” really just meant the voice of the richest and most militarized. Peace became optional if it conflicted with those interests. Humanitarian aid became a tool for influence, not just help.

Then came the era of globalization and the corporations. The UN didn’t just deal with governments anymore; it opened its doors to private “partners” with billions of dollars and a global reach. And that’s where the World Economic Forum influence creeps in.

The WEF didn’t take over the UN outright, they never needed to. They just began steering the conversation: climate, tech, AI, energy, trade. They told governments what “progress” should look like, and the UN became the perfect platform to make it seem legitimate. It’s the same stage, same speeches, but now the lines between governments, billionaires, and international organizations are blurred.

So what you’re left with today is something very different from the 1945 UN: it’s a global network where economic elites, international bureaucrats, and a few major nations get to call the shots under the banner of “peace, cooperation, and sustainable development.”

The common people, the citizens it was supposed to protect, are just the audience. Sometimes they benefit, sometimes they don’t, but mostly, they fund it. And that’s how the UN went from idealistic world saviour to part of what feels like a global war machine for economic and political control.

The Taxpayer Funnel: How Our Money Flows Out While Canadians Struggle

Canadians hand over their hard-earned taxes, and the government tells us it’s for healthcare, schools, housing, and helping people abroad.

Sounds good, right? 

Except here’s the fun part: the money doesn’t go straight to anyone who actually needs it. No, no, it takes a scenic tour through an endless maze of government departments, NGOs, consulting firms, contractors, and foundations. Every stop along the way, someone takes a slice. Salaries? Check. Admin costs? Check. Conferences, travel, endless paperwork? Check, check, check. By the time anything actually happens on the ground, the money that’s left barely covers a fraction of what was promised.

Meanwhile, the rich and connected? They’re laughing all the way to the bank. Big consulting firms, international NGOs, contractors with insider connections, they all get paid first, legally, while the rest of us watch the leftovers trickle down like a slow leak in a busted pipe. 

And the government?

Oh, they love a good headline. “Canada funds LGBTQI+ programs globally!” Sure, technically true, if you ignore the $3 million that went to administration, $2 million to travel, $1 million to reports, and the rest lost in a bureaucratic black hole.

Meanwhile, Canadian families decide between rent or groceries, people sleep in tents, and hospitals are overflowing. But hey, we look like a global hero, right?

And just when you think it can’t get worse, here come the new laws, fast-track projects, “in the national interest” declarations, bypassing oversight, public input, and environmental protections. How, wonderful! Now the insiders don’t just get a slice, they get the whole cake delivered straight to their door. More conveyor belts, more money, more opportunities to glide past anyone who isn’t in the inner circle.

Let’s walk through the grand finale: taxes are collected. Money enters the machine. It flows through NGOs, contractors, consultants, and fast-tracked projects.

Large chunks vanish into administration, salaries, travel, and reporting. Politically favoured insiders scoop up profits legally and often massively. And Canadians? The very people paying for it all? Underfunded, overworked, and watching as the government’s PR machine tells them we’re “helping the world.”

Even programs that look good, 2SLGBTQI+ International Assistance, aid to build schools, emergency support, follow the same pattern. The money travels through layers and layers of organizations before it reaches anyone. The programs exist, yes, but most of the cash is eaten up before it ever sees a classroom, a clinic, or a family in need.

This, my friends, is the taxpayer funnel in action: a massive, complicated machine with multiple stops, a little help trickling out, most of it lost or redirected, and shiny new conveyor belts making it even easier for insiders to take the smoothest ride.

And the average Canadian? They don’t just watch from the sidelines, they get screwed, over and over again, while the system pretends it’s all for a good cause.

It’s legal. It’s “noble” on paper. But let’s not kid ourselves, it’s a scam. And it’s been running the same way for decades. The rich get richer, the insiders get fatter, and the rest of us? We’re left bankrupted, while still paying the bill.

This Is What It Looks Like When a Country Is Being Sold

People keep asking why so many Canadians are using the word treasonous. They act like it came out of nowhere, like it’s just anger or exaggeration. It didn’t. It came from watching the same pattern repeat while life in this country gets harder and leadership drifts further away from the people it claims to serve.

This is not complicated. When you take power in Canada, you owe loyalty to Canada. Not to foreign governments. Not to global financial networks. Not to elite conferences behind closed doors. Canada first. That’s the job.

Now look at what’s actually happening.

While Parliament is sidelined and Canadians are drowning under debt, housing collapse, energy chaos, and rising costs, the Prime Minister leaves the country. Not to help Canadians. Not to fix the economy. He flies to China, a one‑party authoritarian state that has already been identified by Canada itself as a national security risk. Then he continues on to Davos, to the World Economic Forum, the private club where unelected elites decide what countries should look like without asking the people who live in them.

That is not optics. That is priority.

China does not praise Western leaders by accident. It does not extend warmth without strategy. It uses access, flattery, and financial ties to influence decision‑makers. This is openly discussed in foreign policy circles. It is not a secret. So when a Canadian leader is praised by China and cannot explain why, and then continues to travel there anyway, Canadians are right to feel uneasy. When that same leader seeks to rebuild ties that were deliberately cut for security reasons, people are right to ask who this benefits.

And it isn’t Canadians.

Back home, nothing improves. Energy is strangled. Growth is blocked. Investment leaves. Canada’s closest ally and largest trading partner is ignored while Beijing is courted. People who did everything right are falling behind while those closest to power are rewarded. Loyalty inside Ottawa is traded like currency, while voters are treated like an inconvenience.

This is where the anger comes from. Not from ignorance. From recognition.

People recognize what it looks like when leaders stop governing for a country and start managing it for others. When decisions are made to please foreign powers and global institutions instead of citizens. When accountability disappears and status replaces responsibility.

This is not about emotion. It is about sovereignty.

If Canada is still a sovereign nation, then no one gets a free pass. Not because they are powerful. Not because they are connected. Not because they speak the language of global finance. When conduct repeatedly raises questions about foreign influence, conflicts of interest, and alignment with outside agendas, the response is not silence. It is investigation. It is transparency. It is accountability under Canadian law.

Anything less tells Canadians the truth they already fear: that the system protects itself, not the country.

A nation that refuses to question its leaders when the evidence piles up is not stable. It is hollow. A government that answers upward to global elites and outward to foreign powers instead of downward to its people is not representative. It is captured.

That is why people are using harsh words. Not because they want chaos, but because they can feel something slipping away. Trust. Control. Ownership of their own country.

Call it treasonous behaviour or call it something softer if it helps you sleep. But don’t pretend Canadians are imagining it. They see the trips. They see the alliances. They see who gets protected and who gets crushed. They see a country being treated like an asset instead of a home.

And once people see that, they don’t unsee it.

Not anymore.

The Quiet Coup: How Carney’s Budget Bill Gives Ministers the Power to Suspend the Law

This isn’t policy.

This isn’t reform.

This is a power grab.

Hidden deep inside Mark Carney’s 700-page budget bill is a provision so extreme it should have triggered national outrage the moment it was discovered. Instead, it was buried. Quietly, deliberately, where governments hide things they don’t want Canadians to see.

The clause gives cabinet ministers the authority to exempt any individual or corporation from virtually any federal law, every law except the Criminal Code.

For up to six years.

Not Parliament.

Not the courts.

A minister.

Six years where the law simply doesn’t apply, because someone in cabinet says so.

The standard for granting these exemptions is intentionally meaningless. A minister only has to claim the exemption would promote “innovation,” “competitiveness,” “economic growth,” or that it serves the “public interest.” These are empty words, elastic enough to justify anything, broad enough to excuse everything.

Under this power, a minister could decide that a major corporation bidding on a federal project would create jobs or stimulate growth and simply exempt it from federal procurement and contracting rules. No bidding. No safeguards. No fairness. A sole-source contract handed out by political favor.

Law suspended. Process erased.

And it doesn’t stop there.

Lobbying rules could be waived. Reporting requirements ignored. Conflict-of-interest safeguards sidestepped. A politically connected corporation, say one with deep ties to government insiders, could be exempted from disclosing who it lobbies, how often, and for what purpose.

The public would never know.

Because secrecy is built into the scheme.

Ministers wouldn’t just have the power to grant exemptions, they’d have the power to hide them. They could conceal the existence of an exemption, its scope, and even the identity of the individual or corporation receiving it, simply by claiming disclosure might compromise “confidential” or “personal” information.

No public notice.

No registry.

No oversight.

No accountability.

This is the executive branch giving itself the power to secretly decide who follows the law, and who doesn’t.

And Canadians weren’t told. There was no press release. No announcement. No explanation. Not a single public defense of these extraordinary powers. They were buried inside a massive budget bill, clearly counting on the fact that most Canadians wouldn’t read hundreds of pages of legislative fine print.

That’s not transparency.

That’s concealment.

We’ve seen this play before.

In 2018, the Liberal government buried the deferred prosecution agreement regime inside a budget bill. Weeks later, Justin Trudeau was pressuring Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould to use it to make the criminal charges against SNC-Lavalin disappear.

That provision wasn’t an accident, it was designed to protect a politically connected corporation with deep Liberal ties.

Now the same tactic is back, only this time the powers are broader, quieter, and far more dangerous.

So the question writes itself:

Why does Mark Carney want his ministers to have the power to suspend federal law for selected individuals and corporations, in secret, without oversight?

We’re given no explanation. No justification. Just silence.

But governments don’t ask for secret powers to override the law unless they intend to use them. And when the law becomes optional for the connected and enforced only on everyone else, what you’re left with isn’t democracy.

It’s rule by discretion.

It’s government by favour.

It’s corruption wearing a suit and hiding in the footnotes.

And Canadians were never supposed to notice.

So help share this with every Canadian, and let’s dash those hopes of keeping this hidden.

If the United States falls, Canada does not stand untouched in the rubble—we fall with it. This is not alarmism; it is geography, history, and power politics. Canada exists in the protective shadow of the world’s most powerful military and economic force, and pretending otherwise is a dangerous fantasy. Strip that shield away and the illusion of Canadian security collapses almost overnight.

Canada does not merely benefit from the United States; it depends on it. Without U.S. power anchoring North America, Canada would immediately become a target—its vast landmass, freshwater, energy, and mineral wealth too valuable to ignore in a world where superpowers are increasingly aggressive. To refuse support for U.S. actions, such as in Venezuela, is not moral posturing—it is strategic self-harm. The U.S. will tolerate disagreement up to a point, but history shows there is a line, and when it is crossed, action follows. That reality does not disappear because it makes us uncomfortable.

And let’s be honest about defense. Russian military aircraft routinely probe Arctic airspace, and it is U.S. F-22s scrambling out of Alaska that respond. Does Canada have the capability to secure its northern borders alone? No. At best, we can show up and hope not to be challenged. Without American protection, Canada has no meaningful deterrent against hostile superpowers. None. This isn’t complicated—it’s survival. Ignoring it doesn’t make us principled; it makes us exposed.

— Credit to Greig Marshall

The End of the Illusion: Russia’s Missile Strike and the Collapse of Western Fantasy

What we are witnessing right now in Washington and Brussels is nothing short of a tragic comedy, one orchestrated by people who seem completely detached from physical reality.

From European capitals we hear hysterical statements, empty condemnations, and ritual warnings about “escalation” and “brutality.”

But let’s strip away the diplomatic theater and look at the military map. Let’s talk about physics.

What Russia just did was not a “warning,” despite how Western media stenographers are desperately trying to spin it. It was a lesson. Brutal, cold, and unmistakable, in velocity, kinetic energy, and power. The Russians launched a hypersonic ballistic missile traveling at an estimated 13,000 miles per hour, roughly Mach 10. Let that sink in. There is no air-defense system on Earth, neither Patriot nor IRIS-T, that can stop it.

The missile leaves the atmosphere, separates its warheads, and descends vertically like flaming meteors. The result: silence. Impact. And devastation, right on NATO’s doorstep in western Ukraine, a region the alliance believed was a safe logistics sanctuary.

That illusion is now gone.

The message was simple: Russia can reach anything, anywhere, at any time, and the West cannot stop it.

The real stupidity of Western elites, particularly the neocon ideologues embedded in the State Department and Pentagon, is their belief that they can play games with a nuclear superpower without consequences. They tore up the INF Treaty in 2019, convinced it would benefit the United States. Now that Russia responds with advanced weapons, likely an evolution of the RS-26 Rubezh, Western officials act shocked. It would be laughable if it weren’t so dangerous.

President Putin, a leader I’ve always described as cautious and patient, waited. He waited until the Biden administration made the strategic blunder of authorizing Ukraine to fire U.S.-supplied weapons deep into Russian territory. Only then did Moscow respond, using the Oreshnik missile. “Hazel tree” sounds gentle. It is not.

This weapon carries multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles. We saw an early demonstration in November. Now we see clusters of light ripping through the sky, separating into six warheads, each carrying conventional munitions. For missile defense commanders, this is a nightmare scenario.

The West calls this escalation. In reality, it marks the end of the illusion of invulnerability.

And this strike did not happen in isolation. It was part of a coordinated storm: 242 drones, 13 ballistic missiles, and 22 cruise missiles launched in a combined assault on Ukraine’s energy and civilian infrastructure. The results speak for themselves.

More than half a million households are without power. Kyiv’s mayor, Vitali Klitschko, is urging residents to leave the city. Without electricity, there is no water, no heat, and no way to run electric locomotives to move supplies and ammunition. Temperatures are dropping to –20°C. Entire apartment blocks are freezing.

This is classic attrition warfare.

It’s what Sherman did to Atlanta. It’s what Allied bombers did to Germany in 1944. You destroy the enemy’s ability to sustain life and production. You turn the rear into a liability. Ukraine today is an economic corpse kept alive by Western life support. When Russia flips the switch, the system shuts down. The math is unforgiving.

And yet listen to Western leaders, Starmer, Macron, and German chancellor candidate Friedrich Merz, huddled together calling this “unacceptable” and a “war crime.” The hypocrisy is staggering. When NATO bombed Serbia in 1999 and destroyed its power grid, it was called “degrading command and control.” Now the same tactic is suddenly criminal.

Ukrainian officials are collecting missile debris for international courts. It’s absurd. Debris doesn’t keep people warm. Evidence doesn’t heat apartments.

Ukraine’s foreign minister warns this is a grave threat to Europe. For once, he’s right. These missiles are designed to carry nuclear payloads. Today they carry conventional warheads. Tomorrow, they could bring annihilation to Berlin, Paris, London and Washington.

Russia notified the United States before the launch to prevent nuclear miscalculation. That is professionalism. That is escalation control. Something sorely lacking among the children currently running policy in Washington.

Say no to war. Let’s not fight each other and concentrate on fighting the Zionist trying to destroy our lives.

Trump Just Cut the U.S. Out of Global Bureaucracy, And It Changes Everything:

Donald Trump just made a move that the world should take seriously. Yesterday, he signed an executive order withdrawing the United States from 66 international organizations, including dozens of United Nations bodies. This isn’t a small maneuver, it’s a bold declaration that the U.S. will no longer fund or prop up global institutions that don’t serve its interests.

For decades, the U.S. has carried an enormous portion of the global load, funding programs, committees, and agencies that often achieve little and push agendas not aligned with its priorities. UN Women, the Population Fund, labor commissions, environmental programs, all of these have long relied on American support. Now, Trump has cut it off. This is a statement: America is putting its own interests first, and it’s no longer bending to international bureaucracy.

Critics will cry about lost influence and abandoned leadership. But let’s be honest, much of that influence was already diminishing. Billions were spent on programs with little accountability or measurable results. By stepping back, the U.S. regains control over its resources and decision-making. Other countries will feel the shift immediately, and the global order is going to adjust.

From a Canadian perspective, this is huge. Our southern neighbour has just reset its role in the world. The ripple effects will be felt in trade, diplomacy, and international negotiations. Programs that Canada once collaborated on with the U.S. may now face funding gaps, but this is also an opportunity to rethink global priorities and assert national interests more clearly.

Trump framed it simply: stop wasting time and money on organizations that don’t produce results. For Canada and the rest of the world, this is a wake-up call. It’s decisive, unapologetic, and unmistakably America putting itself first, and for better or worse, it will change how the entire global system operates.

Canada Is Being Sold, And Nobody Is Safe

Mark Carney is not negotiating policies, he’s selling our nation. Brick by brick, law by law, Canadian freedom is being dismantled, handed over to a global authority that sees citizens as nothing more than data points.

Digital IDs. Carbon tracking. Climate mandates. These aren’t abstract ideas, they are tools of control. Tools that can monitor your every move, punish your every choice, and decide whether you deserve to live, work, or travel. Privacy? Dead. Independence? Gone. Every Canadian, from the newborn to the oldest elder, could become a cog in a system designed to obey foreign masters.

Energy, food, travel, money, every decision you make could be measured, rationed, taxed, or denied. Families will lose their livelihoods. Communities will lose their independence. Children may inherit a life where freedom is a memory and compliance is a requirement.

Sovereignty no longer exists. Parliament no longer matters. Courts no longer protect you. Decisions about your life are made far away, by unelected officials who answer to global power, not Canadian citizens.

And we are sleepwalking into it. Canadians will look back and realize too late that we traded liberty for illusion. The Canada we knew, the country built on courage, independence, and rights, is dying quietly, under the guise of “progress.”

This isn’t politics. This is a slow, deliberate erasure of a nation. And if we don’t wake up now, our children will inherit a Canada where freedom is forbidden, and submission is mandatory.

We Can’t Vote Out of the System We’re Voting Into!

I want you to really hear this, because it matters. I know so many of us have spent time, energy, and money on campaigns, donating, making calls, knocking on doors, hoping the next election will make things better. I know the hope you’ve put into it. I know what it feels like to give your heart and believe in something bigger than yourself.

But here’s the truth: the system itself is built in a way that keeps power at the top, not in our hands. It doesn’t matter if it’s Liberal, Conservative, NDP, or Bloc, the system doesn’t change. MPs are bound by strict party discipline. Step out of line, and they are ignored or punished.

Decisions about spending, foreign aid, and laws that affect your life are often made before you even show up to vote. Every election just keeps the same system running.

That’s why putting all your hope into one party or one leader is pointless. Voting alone will never fix this. We cannot vote our way out of a system that centralizes power, forces MPs to serve the party instead of their constituents, and ignores the people it’s supposed to represent.

I know this can feel like a punch in the chest. You may feel hurt, frustrated, even angry. You may ask yourself, “Did I waste all my time? All my energy? All the doors I knocked on?” But none of that effort was wasted, it shows you cared. The problem isn’t you. The problem is that the system was never built for your voice to truly matter.

Once you see this, it can be hard to accept. But that clarity is also the start of something new. It’s the moment when you stop putting all your hope into something that was never meant to serve you. And from that understanding, we can start to do what really matters: build a system where MPs are accountable to their constituents, where your vote and your effort actually count, and where the people hold the real power, not the party.

Because until we see the system for what it really is, (rigged against us), we keep putting our hope into elections that doesn’t serve us. And when we finally understand that truth, we can finally stop blaming ourselves for being frustrated or disappointed. Instead, we can start thinking differently. We can start building something better, something that actually works for the people.

The bottom line is this: voting within this system will never give us our power back. No party, no leader, no election can fix it, because the system itself is built to keep the people powerless and the party in control. All the time, effort, and hope we’ve put in, donating, volunteering, knocking on doors, can’t change a structure that was never designed to serve us. If we want real change, we have to stop relying on a system that doesn’t work and start building one that does, where MPs answer to their constituents, where our voices matter, and where the people, not the party, hold the power. Until we do that, everything else is just an illusion.

The party system must go.

“Street-Level Warning” for Canadians living under this legislation.

Canada’s Digital Guillotine: How Your Words Are About to Be Policed

The first Monday of 2026 has come and gone, and Ottawa is already sending a clear message: your voice online is no longer yours.

Prime Minister Mark Carney and his Liberals are moving faster than most Canadians realize, reviving the Online Harms Act, the same bill that died last year, but now armed with even bigger budgets, bigger bureaucracies, and bigger ambitions.

This is not about child safety. That’s the story they tell to make it seem harmless. The truth is far darker. This law gives a government commission the power to decide what is “harmful” and what isn’t. It gives platforms the choice to remove anything that might offend regulators or risk fines. In practice, this means anything you post, share, or even joke about could vanish. Your opinion, your commentary, your criticism, your religion, your art, all under the shadow of a $200 million bureaucracy designed to watch, judge, and silence.

It doesn’t matter if you’re careful, if you follow the rules, if you never break a law. This law is vague on purpose. It’s not meant to catch criminals. It’s meant to catch thinkers, questioners, people who challenge the narrative, people who refuse to stay silent. Ordinary Canadians like you and me could be flagged simply for sharing something a bureaucrat doesn’t like. A political cartoon could disappear. A video questioning government policy could be taken down. Even a private discussion could be scrutinized.

And the platforms will comply, because the fines are massive, and the government isn’t joking. They want control, and the easiest way to get it is to make everyone self-censor. 

You post, you hesitate, you delete before anyone sees it, just to be safe. That’s the plan. That’s the real effect. This is how freedom dies quietly, without headlines, without drama, with people convinced they are just “being careful.”

Carney’s government is fast-tracking this. They are not waiting, not debating, not listening to the alarm bells that have been ringing since the first iteration of this bill in 2024. Consultations have been quiet, conversations behind closed doors, decisions made in rooms Canadians cannot enter.

The machinery is being built now, the rules written in shadow, the system designed to sweep every word, every post, every thought under the watchful eye of the state.

And make no mistake, this is just the beginning. The law is part of a larger plan. Expanded surveillance powers, AI monitoring, digital oversight, platforms acting as extensions of government judgment, it is all connected. Canada is on the edge of a digital panopticon, where the things you say, think, and share are never private, never safe, and never yours alone.

The first Monday of 2026 is more than a date. It’s a warning. The government is ready to take action, and if Canadians do not act, we will wake up one day in a country where free expression is conditional, where speaking out is risky, where silence is survival. This is the Canada Carney is building. Watch your words. Question everything my friends. Share this everywhere. If you do not, you may find your voice erased, and the freedoms you took for granted gone forever. This is not joke.

Mark Carney: Canada’s Wrecking Ball

We were handed a demolition expert and told it was “stability.”

Yes, Mark Carney ran the Bank of Canada.

Yes, he ran the Bank of England.

Yes, he stacked elite titles at the United Nations, in climate finance, and across the global financial aristocracy.

Those facts are not in question.

What is never honestly confronted is this:

Wherever Mark Carney has led, institutions have not been reformed, strengthened, or stabilised. They have been hollowed out, distorted, politicised, and left structurally broken.

He is not a builder.

He is not a steward.

He is a wrecking ball, and he has been allowed to swing freely from country to country, institution to institution, leaving destruction in slow motion behind him.

Bank of Canada: The Quiet Detonation

Carney’s time at the Bank of Canada is often mythologised as “steady.” It wasn’t. It was deceptively destructive.

Under his watch, the Canadian economy was pushed deeper into:

debt dependency

asset inflation

housing speculation

financialisation over productivity

The appearance of calm was bought by loading explosives into the future. Household debt surged. Housing detached from reality. Productive investment was sacrificed for cheap credit and balance-sheet illusions.

Nothing was solved.

Everything was delayed.

That delay is now strangling Canadians.

This was not accidental.

It was Carney’s method.

Bank of England: Turning a Global Pillar Into a Fragile Shell

If Canada was the warm-up, the UK was the main blast.

When Carney took over the Bank of England, it was one of the most respected financial institutions on earth. When he left, it was politicised, destabilised, and blind to the risks it was supposed to control.

He could not hold a line.

Interest-rate guidance changed constantly.

Forward guidance became a joke. Markets stopped believing the Bank’s own words. The City of London labelled him “the unreliable boyfriend”, a devastating verdict for a central banker.

Then came Brexit.

Instead of restraint, Carney panicked, or pretended to. He unleashed emergency-level money printing in response to a political vote, not a financial collapse. Asset bubbles swelled. Yield discipline evaporated. Risk was driven underground into pensions and derivatives.

Years later, the truth exploded into public view.

The LDI pension crisis nearly collapsed the UK government bond market. Pension funds were leveraged to the hilt. The system was fragile. The Bank of England had lost touch with the machinery it was meant to understand.

That failure did not happen after Carney.

It was built by him.

The Ultimate Sin:

Politicising the Central Bank

Carney didn’t just mismanage economics. He poisoned institutional neutrality.

He inserted himself into the Brexit campaign. He used unelected authority to amplify political narratives. He later openly endorsed politicians and fiscal agendas, confirming what critics had warned all along: the line between technocracy and politics had already been erased.

A central bank without neutrality is not a stabiliser.

It is a weapon.

Carney turned one of the world’s most important institutions into a political instrument, and then walked away.

UN and Climate Finance: Global Scale, Same Destruction

After central banking, Carney reinvented himself as a global climate saviour.

The language was apocalyptic.

The promises were enormous.

The applause was guaranteed.

The results were familiar.

The Net Zero Banking Alliance, his flagship creation, began to collapse under its own contradictions. Major banks quietly exited. Commitments evaporated when faced with economic reality. The structure proved unserious, unenforceable, and unsustainable.

Once again:

grand rhetoric

elite validation

structural failure

zero accountability

Carney didn’t fix the mess.

He simply moved on.

That is the pattern.

Canada: The Wrecking Ball Comes Home

Now the wrecking ball is here.

Since Mark Carney became Prime Minister, Canadians have watched destruction accelerate, not slow.

GDP per capita continues to fall.

Cost of living keeps rising.

Housing remains unreachable.

Crime and disorder worsen in major cities.

Institutions lose legitimacy.

Public trust collapses.

The economy is not being rebuilt.

It is being managed into decline.

Crime is answered with announcements.

Inflation with excuses.

Public anger with technocratic reassurance.

Policy lurches from one extreme to another, carbon taxes scrapped, immigration reversed, trade relationships strained, without coherence, without vision, without stability.

This is not leadership.

This is institutional vandalism.

Everything Carney touches becomes:

more fragile

more centralized

less accountable

and further removed from the people forced to live with the consequences.

The Through-Line Canadians Must Finally Acknowledge

This is not bad luck.

It is not circumstance.

It is not misunderstanding.

It is who Mark Carney is as a leader.

He enters systems with prestige.

He leaves them structurally destroyed.

Others pay the price, he does not care.

He collects another title.

From central banks to global finance to national government, the story never changes.

Mark Carney does not build nations.

He hollows them out.

He replaces resilience with leverage.

Accountability with optics.

Stability with control.

And now Canada is expected to absorb the blast. 

Final Truth

Leadership is not a résumé.  It is what survives after the dust settles.

Everywhere Mark Carney has led, the dust has been thick, the wreckage devestating, and the consequences borne by ordinary people, while he makes himself rich beyond measure.

Canada did not choose a builder.

It chose a wrecking ball in a tailored suit.

And the longer we pretend otherwise, the deeper the damage will go.

We are living in dangerous times:

What makes this moment so dangerous is not external threat, it is Carney’s leadership that does not value our closest friendship.

Mark Carney has shown no instinct for dealing kindly, carefully, or respectfully with the United States, the one true ally Canada cannot afford to alienate.

Instead of working with our closest friends, he appears determined to antagonize them. Instead of stabilizing the relationship, he aggravates it. Instead of building trust, he erodes it.

This is not how serious leaders behave.

Canada does not need a Prime Minister who treats the United States as a problem to be managed, lectured, or provoked. We need a leader who understands that Americans are not “the other.” They are our family, our neighbours, our partners, and the foundation of our security.

You do not strengthen Canada by creating friction with Washington. You weaken it.

What is so alarming is the pattern. The posture. The tone. The refusal to engage constructively. The willingness to create tension with the elected leadership of the United States, regardless of who that leadership is, rather than doing the hard, necessary work of cooperation. Whether the president is Donald Trump or anyone else is irrelevant. Canada does not get to choose America’s voters. We only get to choose whether we act like a trusted ally or a difficult liability.

And right now, we are drifting toward the latter.

A leader who openly damages the Canada–U.S. relationship, through hostility, indifference, or ideological arrogance, is not protecting Canadian sovereignty. He is undermining it. Sovereignty without security is a slogan. Rights and freedoms without deterrence are temporary.

Canada survives because we are aligned with the United States, not because we oppose it.

This is not the leadership Canada needs in a dangerous world. We need someone who understands restraint, diplomacy, humility, and reality. Someone who knows that alliances are not disposable, and that trust, once broken, does not easily return.

To knowingly weaken our most important relationship is to gamble with Canada’s future. And no leader has the moral authority to make that gamble on behalf of an entire nation.

Mark Carney = Traitor

Credit: Sanda Gwynne

The green area on the map is Cuba.

The red is Venezuela.

Venezuela sits roughly 1,360 miles from the United States.

In 1962, under JFK, Fidel Castro allowed the Soviet Union to place ballistic missiles in Cuba aimed at America. The result was the Cuban Missile Crisis—the closest the world has come to nuclear war.

Fast-forward to today.

In Venezuela, Maduro has opened the door to Iran and its America-hating proxies—Hezbollah and Hamas—allowing them to operate freely. They are reportedly funded by oil revenues that belong to the Venezuelan people, not the regime. Iran possesses long-range missiles (thankfully no nukes—credit to Israel) capable of reaching U.S. soil.

Meanwhile, China’s PRC/CCP, whose stated ambition is to dethrone America as the world’s leading superpower, is deeply embedded in Venezuela. China has rockets and missiles with ranges exceeding 2,000 miles.

Reports indicate Hezbollah may have as many as 30,000 troops on the ground in Venezuela.

Trump made the right call to black-bag Maduro. Unfortunately, he’s only one head of the Venezuelan Medusa. The military is just as corrupt and dangerous as Maduro’s inner circle. Add Hezbollah, Hamas, the CCP, and now an angry Putin—after U.S. forces intercepted Venezuelan oil tankers headed for Russia—and things are about to get very spicy.

Trump isn’t stirring chaos.

He’s walking into a hornet’s nest.

What’s truly disgusting and irresponsible is that the Democrats, the UN, and left-wing ideologues in Canada aren’t backing him 100%.

Unless, of course, their real objective is to see America fall—so WEF globalists can step in and take control.

Chrystia Freeland: The Architect of Influence in the Shadows

Chrystia Freeland’s rise in Canadian and global politics has always been less about public acclaim than strategic positioning. From journalism and economics to Canada’s highest offices, she has built a career in the corridors of power where influence outweighs transparency. Her latest role as a non-staff economic adviser to Ukraine demonstrates how she operates at the intersection of politics, finance, and elite global networks.

A Career Built on Alignment

Freeland’s path has always been deliberate. From Deputy Prime Minister to Finance Minister and Foreign Minister, each position allowed her to consolidate power in spaces that are largely invisible to the public. Her Board of Trustees membership at the World Economic Forum (WEF) places her at the heart of global economic dialogue, connecting governments, corporations, and multilateral institutions.

These positions grant access, credibility, and influence, though they do not equate to public accountability or direct electoral mandate.

Her career reflects a consistent strategy: align with institutions, build trust in elite networks, and leverage visibility to secure future influence. In other words, she moves in spaces where decisions are made by insiders, not voters.

Ukraine: Influence Cloaked as Service

Freeland’s Ukraine advisory role is officially unpaid and non-staff, yet it puts her in the center of one of the most consequential reconstruction efforts in modern history. Billions of dollars, critical infrastructure projects, and economic policy frameworks will be shaped in ways most Canadians will never see.

Publicly, she appears as a generous adviser lending expertise. Behind the scenes, she gains strategic positioning, access to global networks, and reputational authority.

Influence here is currency: who gets contracts, which investment flows are prioritized, and how reconstruction frameworks are shaped are all impacted by people in these corridors, and she is one of them.

Her WEF affiliation amplifies this influence. While critics have questioned whether elite institutions like WEF could benefit indirectly from reconstruction decisions, the reality is more subtle: Freeland functions as a trusted intermediary, connecting governments, financiers, and institutions. She is not necessarily their “puppet,” but her role benefits from the same global networks that the WEF represents.

Controversies and Public Criticism

Freeland’s career is not without scrutiny. Some of the top public controversies and criticisms include:

WEF Conflict of Interest Concerns, her WEF role raises questions about overlapping interests.

Canada’s Fiscal Deficits, As Finance Minister, she signed off on expanded deficits, drawing criticism from economists and opposition.

Pandemic Spending Programs, Critics cite ArriveCAN and other spending initiatives as examples of fiscal mismanagement.

SNC-Lavalin Affair, Her alignment with the government’s controversial handling drew ethical scrutiny.

Targeted Foreign Disinformation, Malicious campaigns against her highlighted her polarizing presence.

Public Backlash on Policies, Climate, economic, and trade policies have made her a focal point for opposition criticism.

Constituent Confrontations, Public verbal harassment at events underscored polarizing opinions of her leadership.

Immigration and Economic Policy Debate Support for high immigration has drawn criticism from groups concerned about housing and employment.

Handling U.S. Trade Tensions. Some argue her actions escalated trade disputes with the U.S.

/Internal Liberal Party Tensions – Cabinet resignations and leadership ambitions exposed factional dynamics.

While none of these items are criminal or proven illegal, they collectively paint a picture of a highly controversial, polarizing, and strategically positioned political figure.

The Dark Reality of Influence

Freeland’s career is defined by power without visibility. The rooms she occupies, reconstruction planning, investment roundtables, multilateral policy forums, operate beyond public scrutiny. She thrives on perception and strategy: influence accrues indirectly, through networks, reputation, and alignment with elite institutions.

Her Ukraine role is emblematic: unpaid, invisible to voters, but central to decisions that will shape reconstruction and economic flows.

Influence, not salary, is her reward. Public narratives frame her as altruistic; the reality suggests a calculated exercise in long-term positioning.

What Comes Next

Her next moves appear to follow a clear strategic logic:

Short-term (1–3 years):

She will lead in reconstruction efforts, consolidate influence in global economic and multilateral networks, maintain domestic visibility as an MP.

Medium to Long-term (3–10 years): 

She will return to Cabinet or pursue Liberal leadership, or pivot to global institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, or UN economic agencies, where influence and legacy potential are maximized.

In every scenario, Freeland’s power is subtle, networked, and far-reaching. She operates where decisions are made before headlines appear, where influence flows unseen, and where opportunities are reserved for those fluent in the language of global power.

Chrystia Freeland is not merely a politician. She is an operator of systems: a figure who leverages visibility, networks, and strategic alignment to consolidate influence. The corridors she moves through are opaque, the consequences of her decisions are far-reaching, and the rewards are measured not in paychecks but in access, authority, and legacy.

She is emblematic of modern politics at its most calculating: public-facing, elite-connected, and strategically indispensable, a master of influence in the shadows.

Before the weekend ends and America moves on to the next headline, we need to pause and look at a story that matters more than almost any other—the collapse of Venezuela, and what it warns us about if the last democratic superpower ever falls the same way.

This didn’t happen overnight. It happened step by step, over one generation.

VENEZUELA: HOW A PROSPEROUS NATION COLLAPSED

1992

Venezuela is the 3rd richest country in the Western Hemisphere, powered by oil and a growing middle class.

1997

Venezuelans become the 2nd largest buyers of Ford F-150s—a sign of widespread prosperity.

1998

Hugo Chávez is elected, promising to “redistribute wealth” and fix inequality.

2001

The country votes again for socialism, framed as compassion and fairness.

2003

The government imposes price controls and currency controls.

Black markets appear. Shortages begin.

2004

Private healthcare is fully socialized.

2006

Inflation rises sharply as massive welfare programs expand without real economic backing.

2007

All higher education becomes “free.”

2008

Key industries—oil services, steel, cement, telecom—are nationalized.

Production drops almost immediately.

2009

Private gun ownership is banned.

2010

The currency is devalued by 50%, crushing savings and accelerating inflation.

2011

Oil production begins a steady decline due to mismanagement and lack of investment.

2012

American politicians, like Bernie Sanders, publicly praise Venezuela’s model.

2013

Chávez dies. Nicolás Maduro takes power and tightens state control.

2014

Opposition leaders are arrested or silenced.

2015

GDP collapses. Hyperinflation begins.

2016

Severe food and medical shortages spread nationwide.

2017

The constitution is suspended. Elections are no longer meaningful.

2018

Inflation exceeds 1,000,000%. Maduro “wins” a widely fraudulent election.

2019

Unarmed civilians are killed by their own government.

2020

More than 8 million people flee the country to escape hunger and repression.

2023

Minor economic improvements fail to relieve mass poverty.

2024

Disputed elections trigger protests and global isolation.

2026

Maduro is removed by force. Venezuela is liberated after decades of ruin.

THE HARD TRUTH

It took one generation of “progressive” leadership to turn one of the richest countries on Earth into a nation defined by hunger, fear, mass graves, and mass migration.

This is the lesson history keeps teaching:

You can vote your way into socialism.

But history shows people only escape it through collapse, violence, or foreign intervention.

And here is the part Americans must understand clearly:

If this happens in the United States, there will be nobody coming to save us.

No outside superpower.

No rescue force.

No second chance.

Freedom is fragile. Prosperity is not guaranteed.

And once lost, they are brutally hard to recover.

Venezuela’s people paid the price.

America cannot afford to learn this lesson the same way.

OTTAWA — Canada’s “Economic Independence” Experiment Is Looking Like Self-Sabotage

Canada’s Liberal government has doubled down on its controversial push for “economic independence,” a move they describe as courageous and visionary. Economists call it reckless and unsustainable. Canadians, meanwhile, are beginning to see it for what it really is: being told to clap while their own house burns down.

Mark Carney stands at the center of it all, less a leader, more a monarch of financial chaos. Under his direction, the nation’s trade ties with the United States, its largest partner, are being deliberately destroyed, seemingly for symbolic defiance. Prices are soaring. Jobs are evaporating. Capital is fleeing the country. And yet, Carney smiles on, orchestrating what many see as a full-scale economic demolition, on purpose. Every policy, every move, seems designed to concentrate wealth at the top while Canadians are left scrambling for survival.

While Russian President Vladimir Putin has never said Canada’s name, observers say his words might as well have been aimed directly at Ottawa. From Moscow, he reportedly watches Canada’s self-inflicted economic spiral with a mix of bemusement and grim acknowledgment. “At this rate,” he mused, “they will achieve third-world status not from sanctions, but from sheer confidence in their own destruction.” In other words, Canada is tearing itself apart, cheerfully, and from the inside.

For ordinary Canadians, the consequences are no joke. Families are forced to tighten belts that have no more slack. Farmers, truckers, and small business owners struggle to survive under policies that punish production and reward speculation. The nation’s economic foundations are cracking while Carney presides over it all, unchallenged, as if the entire country were his personal economic laboratory.

In the end, what is being celebrated as moral clarity and independence is, in reality, a deliberate descent into economic despair. And at the heart of it? Mark Carney, the king of this disaster, smiling from the throne of a collapsing empire, seemingly indifferent to the lives and futures of Canadians. The applause is obligatory, the devastation unavoidable, and the joke is on the very people who built this country.

Wake up Canada, before it’s too late.

A World Preparing for an America That Chooses to Stand Alone:

If the United States is willing to treat its closest ally, Canada, this way, publicly mocking its leaders, threatening its economy with tariffs, questioning long-standing agreements, and speaking about the country as if it were expendable or subordinate, then the rest of the world is watching and taking notes.

Canada isn’t just another country. It is America’s safest border, its most trusted partner, and one of the nations most deeply integrated into U.S. defence, energy, and trade. If Canada can be spoken to like this, dismissed or pressured as though it doesn’t matter, then no ally anywhere can feel secure. That message is immediate, and other countries understand it instantly.

Trust is the foundation of global politics. Once it’s gone, raw power doesn’t carry the same weight. Under Trump, American promises are temporary. Agreements are conditional. Words are meaningless. What the United States says today may be reversed tomorrow, undermined by a speech, a post, or a joke.

If America can treat  Canada this way, why would Europe fully believe U.S. guarantees? Why would Asian allies risk their futures on American protection? Why would any country take U.S. “red lines” seriously when they can disappear overnight?

This isn’t about hating America. It’s about facing reality. America frienship is no longer an asset, but a weakness.

Trump’s behaviour has forced all allied nations to protect themselves. They now have to plan for a United States that is unpredictable and unreliable, a country that can no longer be taken at its word. These plans aren’t theoretical. They’re already underway.

Governments across the world are quietly building contingencies that do not depend on Washington.

The United States still has a powerful military. But power without trust doesn’t lead, it intimidates. And intimidated countries don’t follow. They pull back. They hedge their bets. They search for alternatives.

Trump says he wants America to go it alone. He treats cooperation as weakness and insults allies as liabilities. Fine. The world is listening, and the world is adjusting.

Countries are slowly reducing their reliance on the United States, not out of spite, but out of necessity. American credibility on the world stage is eroding fast. When a nation behaves like a bully, others eventually stop complying and start pushing back.

Trade routes are shifting. Defence strategies are being rewritten. New partnerships are forming. Not loudly. Not dramatically. But carefully, deliberately, and faster than many realize.

This is how influence is lost. Piece by piece.

And one day, sooner than many expect, the United States may look around and realize that no countries care what it says. Not because the world turned on America, but because trust was broken and never repaired.

If Trump wants isolation, he may get exactly that. Not through war. Not through chaos. But through quiet decisions made by countries that no longer believe the United States can be trusted.

This isn’t the world turning against America. It’s the world preparing for an America that chose to stand alone.

Europe’s Winter of Shadows: A Continent at the Mercy of Policy and Energy Shortages:

Across Europe, the winter of 2025–2026 has transformed from a season of quiet comfort into a grinding struggle against cold, cost, and scarcity. In homes once warm, the air now bites with a chill that blankets cannot fully mask. Citizens huddle under layers of clothing and heavy blankets, often sleeping fully dressed just to survive the night. Thermostats are dialed down to 16°C or lower, not by choice, but by government decree.

The Energy Collapse

The harsh reality stems from years of strategic and political decisions, compounded by global pressures and the reduction of Russian gas flows:

The vital transit pipeline through Ukraine ceased at the start of 2025, cutting off a major supply route to Europe.

Remaining gas now comes only through TurkStream via Turkey, a trickle compared with historic volumes.

LNG imports provide some relief, but prices have skyrocketed, leaving families forced to ration heat.

Europe is no longer merely cold; it is a continent wrestling with scarcity, where the warmth of a home has become a luxury rather than a given.

Thermostats, Blankets, and Daily Hardship For countless Europeans, winter life has become a daily exercise in endurance. Rooms are kept just above freezing. Kitchens, living rooms, and bedrooms, once havens, now double as strategic heating zones, where only a single area may be heated at a time. Children bundle under coats and blankets at night. The elderly sit in layers of clothing, hands clasped around mugs of lukewarm tea, shivering despite all measures. Families gather in small spaces, attempting to share body heat, knowing that every additional degree costs money many cannot spare.

The psychological toll is profound. Sleep is interrupted by cold. Even basic movements around the house become acts of calculation: how long to spend in one room, which windows can be opened, when to risk turning on a heater. The very act of living feels rationed.

Policy Choices and Political Consequences

All of this suffering can be traced to political decisions. Europe’s leaders, including the European Commission under Ursula von der Leyen, have prioritized foreign policy commitments over immediate domestic comfort, pressing sanctions on Russia and maintaining high levels of support for Ukraine. While these decisions are strategic and rooted in values, the immediate consequences have landed squarely on ordinary households:

Price spikes in energy have outpaced wage growth for many.

Social safety nets struggle to cover every vulnerable family.

Short-term pain has become a stark daily reality in ways that once seemed unimaginable.

Critics argue that the EU’s leadership miscalculated the human cost of a rapid pivot away from Russian energy, leaving citizens to pay with cold, discomfort, and anxiety.

A Dark Winter Across the Continent. This winter is not just about snow or temperature. It is a social and economic freeze, a shadow cast over millions of homes. The cold seeps into bones, homes, and budgets alike. In countries across Central and Western Europe, citizens report:

Heating only one room while the rest of the house is left bitterly cold.

Sleeping in multiple layers of clothing to retain body heat.

Worrying constantly about the next electricity or gas bill.

The human cost is tangible, immediate, and relentless. Every degree dialed down is a degree felt, in discomfort, in sleepless nights, in the slow gnawing anxiety of households unsure if they can survive the season without debt or deprivation.

The Long Shadow Ahead

Europe faces a stark winter, and not just of weather. The energy crisis is a test of endurance, planning, and governance. Leaders continue to balance geopolitics, climate strategy, and domestic need, but for many citizens, that balance is invisible: they feel only the cold, the cost, and the weight of choices made far from their homes.

This winter has exposed vulnerabilities long ignored: the fragility of supply, the cost of political ambitions, and the reality that warmth is no longer guaranteed. Europe is learning that security and comfort are not automatic, they are maintained by infrastructure, foresight, and decisions that ripple through the daily lives of millions.

2025 Year-End Review for Wake Up Canada News: A Year of Political Upheaval, Sovereignty Struggles, and Waking Up to Liberal Failures

As we close the books on 2025, it’s clear this was the year the nation began to shake off the shackles of weak Liberal leadership and rediscover its strength—much like Ronald Reagan’s America rising against big government overreach. Justin Trudeau’s resignation in January marked the end of an era of apologies, deficits, and division, paving the way for Mark Carney’s ascension as Liberal leader and Prime Minister. Carney rode in on promises of “Canada Strong” amid U.S. tariff threats from President Trump, but his fast-tracking of pipelines and projects sparked growing opposition, reminding us that true strength comes from conservative principles of fiscal responsibility and energy independence, not banker promises. [1]

Political Shifts and Border Chaos
The year opened with Trudeau’s exit amid plummeting polls and internal revolt, handing the reins to Carney in an election fueled by anti-Trump rhetoric and fears of annexation as America’s 51st state. Meanwhile, irregular border-crossers flooded in—encouraged by past Liberal policies—leading to cases like terror suspect Osman Azizov plotting kidnappings after entering illegally. This underscores the urgent need for secure borders and law-and-order policies that Conservatives have long championed. [8] In Alberta, labor strikes hit record levels, including the province’s largest teacher walkout, while Edmonton saw a new mayor and council amid Oilers heartbreak in the Stanley Cup Final. [3]

Indigenous Issues and Government Shortfalls
Tragedies persisted with remains identified at Prairie Green landfill from serial killer Jeremy Skibicki targeting Indigenous women, and another suspect released early, igniting protests and a new Brady Landfill search. Auditor General Karen Hogan blasted the feds for “persistent barriers” in clean water, emergency services, and siloed support for First Nations—proof that Liberal promises ring hollow without accountable, results-driven governance. [1] Icons like activist Marion Meadmore and actor Graham Greene passed, leaving legacies of resilience.

Broader Canadian Struggles: Wildfires, Separatism, and Economic Warnings
Jasper reeled from 2024 wildfires into 2025 with slow rebuilding, as 250 promised housing units lagged. Quebec’s notwithstanding clause debates flared, alongside Alberta separatism whispers and no clear Liberal strategy—signs of a federation fraying under centralized control. An Ipsos poll highlighted U.S. influence shaping Canadian worries, from tariffs to global tensions. [7]

Wake Up Canada News chronicled these events as a call to action: reject Liberal hubris, embrace conservative values of self-reliance, secure borders, and resource development. 2025 wasn’t just change—it was a wake-up call.

OTTAWA — Canada’s “Economic Independence” Experiment Is Looking Like Self-Sabotage

Canada’s Liberal government has doubled down on its controversial push for “economic independence,” a move they describe as courageous and visionary. Economists call it reckless and unsustainable. Canadians, meanwhile, are beginning to see it for what it really is: being told to clap while their own house burns down.

Mark Carney stands at the center of it all, less a leader, more a monarch of financial chaos. Under his direction, the nation’s trade ties with the United States, its largest partner, are being deliberately destroyed, seemingly for symbolic defiance. Prices are soaring. Jobs are evaporating. Capital is fleeing the country. And yet, Carney smiles on, orchestrating what many see as a full-scale economic demolition, on purpose. Every policy, every move, seems designed to concentrate wealth at the top while Canadians are left scrambling for survival.

While Russian President Vladimir Putin has never said Canada’s name, observers say his words might as well have been aimed directly at Ottawa. From Moscow, he reportedly watches Canada’s self-inflicted economic spiral with a mix of bemusement and grim acknowledgment. “At this rate,” he mused, “they will achieve third-world status not from sanctions, but from sheer confidence in their own destruction.” In other words, Canada is tearing itself apart, cheerfully, and from the inside.

For ordinary Canadians, the consequences are no joke. Families are forced to tighten belts that have no more slack. Farmers, truckers, and small business owners struggle to survive under policies that punish production and reward speculation. The nation’s economic foundations are cracking while Carney presides over it all, unchallenged, as if the entire country were his personal economic laboratory.

In the end, what is being celebrated as moral clarity and independence is, in reality, a deliberate descent into economic despair. And at the heart of it? Mark Carney, the king of this disaster, smiling from the throne of a collapsing empire, seemingly indifferent to the lives and futures of Canadians. The applause is obligatory, the devastation unavoidable, and the joke is on the very people who built this country.

Wake up Canada, before it’s too late.

As a survivor of a communist regime, I can confirm:
Yes, Canada has become a communist nation—a TOTALITARIAN STATE.
In 2019, my article titled “I Survived Communism—Are You Ready for Your Turn?” was published by Spencer Fernando. Unfortunately, it was taken down, and it would need updating anyway.

The parts of the country with the highest voter turnout are hopelessly indoctrinated and brainwashed. As Yuri Bezmenov, the former KGB defector, said in his interview: The tragedy is that indoctrinated people will not believe the truth until reality crashes down on them. But then it is too late.

Canada must go through the entire cycle—plunging into poverty and complete government control—just as we in the Eastern Bloc did. Only then, perhaps, can it break free, as we eventually did.

REMEMBER: You can vote a dictator into office, but you have to fight to get a dictator out.
The subversion of a democratic society into a totalitarian state doesn’t happen through foreign invasion. It occurs from within, often with significant internal support. All the following stages have been completed in Canada:

– Polarization: Turning one group against another through movements like Me Too, Black Lives Matter, climate change activism, Indigenous rights, etc.

– Demoralization: Sexualizing children, cancelling women in sports, eliminating traditional family values, and attacking masculine energy.

– Destabilization: Creating crises such as energy crisis, inflation, illegal immigration, food shortages, drugs, and rising crime.

– Normalization: We are now in the final stage—normalization—where things that would have been absolutely unacceptable just ten years ago are becoming everyday norms.

I have two questions for Albertans:

Do you realize that Alberta is financing this totalitarianism?
Do you want to go down with the rest of the country?

The Myth of the Perfect Parent and the Collapse of Family Resilience:

There’s a dangerous idea quietly spreading through modern culture: that discomfort equals abuse, that disappointment equals toxicity, and that if parents fail to meet our emotional needs perfectly, cutting them out is justified.
This is not only false, it is destructive.
Human relationships are never frictionless. Families, in particular, are built on proximity, difference, and endurance. Conflict is not abuse, it is life in close quarters.

There’s a proverb that sums it up better than any therapy slogan:

“Where there are no oxen, the manger is clean, but much increase comes by the strength of the ox.”
Growth, productivity, and family continuity come with mess. Noise. Misunderstandings. Clean stalls mean nothing is being built.

Yet, too many now believe that any emotional discomfort is “toxic.”
The Fantasy of the Mind-Reading Parent
Many adult children expect their parents to always:
Say the right thing
Say it the right way
Say it at the right time
Say it for the right reason
Forever.

This is not emotional intelligence. It’s fantasy.
Parents are not therapists. They are not mind readers. They are human beings juggling work, aging, worry, and their own unresolved histories. Demanding perfection, and exiling them for failing, is relational absolutism, not empowerment.
Discomfort ≠ Abuse
Abuse exists. It is real, devastating, and must be taken seriously.
But disagreement, criticism, awkwardness, unsolicited advice, generational differences, and emotional clumsiness? Not abuse. Normal human friction.

Today’s culture isn’t more emotionally intelligent. It is less tolerant of relational discomfort.

The Cultural Overcorrection
We are seeing a profound overcorrection:
Fear of conflict replacing skill at repair
Discomfort mistaken for danger
Emotional literacy replaced by avoidance
Boundaries confused with withdrawal
Therapy language used without depth
This is not a conspiracy. It’s a cultural swing gone too far. Overcorrections always swing back.

The Cost of the “Cut Them Off” Culture
When separation becomes the default:
Families fracture
Grandparents vanish from children’s lives
Wisdom is lost
Loneliness rises
Social trust erodes
Reconciliation becomes rare

Accountability disappears
Most tragically, people lose the chance to grow through relationship rather than flee from it. A society cannot survive if every disagreement is treated as grounds for exile.
Boundaries Are Not Banishment
Healthy boundaries regulate, not destroy.

They sound like:

“I need you to speak to me respectfully.”
“That topic is off-limits.”
“I need some space right now.”
They do not sound like:
“You are dead to me.”
“You’ll never see your grandchildren again.”
“You made me uncomfortable, so you’re toxic.”

That is not boundary-setting. That is relational annihilation.
The Quiet Truth
Most families are imperfect, not abusive. Most parents are human, not narcissists. Most conflicts are communication failures, not trauma. Most estrangements contain pain on both sides, rarely villains and victims.

A Culture That Forgets How to Repair Will Collapse
Civilizations last on:
Forgiveness
Endurance
Humility
Intergenerational connection
Replace these with:
Hyper-individualism
Emotional absolutism
Moral superiority
And families fail first. Societies follow.

A Final Word
Love is not the absence of conflict. Love is the choice to stay present when conflict arises. Growth does not come from perfect conditions. It comes from learning to live with imperfect people, including our parents, our children, and ourselves.
Forget this, and we do not grow healthier. We grow alone. Sad times indeed.

Mark Carney is meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky in Halifax, Nova Scotia. The official line will call it a show of solidarity, a coordination of peace efforts, and a reaffirmation of Canada’s unwavering support for Ukraine. But anyone paying attention knows this is theater. Canada is financing a war that Ukraine is losing badly, funding a government that is riddled with corruption, and subsidizing a regime that is not even legitimately in power. The Halifax meeting is another carefully staged photo op, designed to give the impression of progress while the ground reality tells a completely different story.

Ukraine is struggling to hold its own territory. Cities like Kyiv continue to be struck by missiles and drones, leaving civilians dead, buildings destroyed, and power and heating systems knocked out in the freezing winter. Mariupol, once touted as a symbol of Ukrainian resilience, now stands as a monument to Russian occupation. Ukrainian forces are depleted, their logistics strained, and the front lines are crumbling despite billions of dollars in Western aid. The war is not just prolonged; it is unwinnable in its current state, and Canada, under Mark Carney, continues to fund it as if the problems on the ground don’t exist.

Corruption in Ukraine has been rampant for years.

Investigations by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and other agencies have revealed countless schemes where billions of dollars intended for defense, infrastructure, and humanitarian aid were siphoned off or misappropriated. Contracts for food, military equipment, and construction were inflated so that officials and connected suppliers could pocket enormous sums, often funneling the money into private accounts abroad. 

Even after these scandals became public, Canada did not demand accountability. Instead, it continued to send billions more, throwing money at a failing war without real oversight. Canadian taxpayers are financing a corrupt regime, and there is no evidence that the billions actually help the Ukrainian people.

The corruption doesn’t stop at financial mismanagement. Ukraine has become heavily involved in human trafficking, including black-market baby operations. Children are sold and trafficked illegally, networks operate across borders, and the profits from these operations further fuel the government’s corruption and the ongoing war effort.

This is not fringe speculation; these networks have been documented and investigated, yet Western governments continue to fund the very regime profiting from these atrocities.

And then there is the question of legitimacy. Zelensky has been running Ukraine without a proper, recognized presidential election for years. His rule is effectively illegal under his own country’s laws and is not recognized by Russia. No genuine peace negotiations can happen with a leader who lacks democratic legitimacy, yet Carney and the Canadian government continue to treat him as the rightful authority. They prop up his regime with political cover and billions in dollars, creating the illusion of progress while funding a war that cannot truly end as long as Zelensky remains in power.

Mark Carney has been central to all of this. Ottawa has pumped billions into Ukraine while presenting it as a moral obligation, a stand for freedom and democracy.

The reality is starkly different. Canada is financing a losing war, paying for infrastructure and military efforts that are repeatedly destroyed, funding a government that steals aid, traffics in human lives, and holds power without legitimacy. Peace, stability, and a real resolution are impossible under these conditions, yet Carney continues to prioritize appearances over results, throwing more money into a void, and asking Canadians to foot the bill for a conflict that has no endgame without legitimate leadership and accountability.

The Halifax meeting today is part of the same pattern: symbolic gestures and photo ops to cover up the truth. Canada has not been helping Ukraine; it has been propping up a corrupt, illegitimate ruler, subsidizing human trafficking, and sustaining a war that is failing in real time. Canadian taxpayers are left with wasted billions, no clear end in sight, and the knowledge that their government is complicit in funding a regime that exploits innocent lives while losing a war it cannot win.

Massive Power Grab Buried in Bill C-15:

Buried deep inside PM Mark Carney’s budget bill is a provision that should alarm anyone who still believes in the rule of law.

Section 12 of Bill C-15 would allow cabinet ministers to exempt specific individuals or companies from large portions of federal law, for up to six years, with virtually no meaningful oversight. The Criminal Code is excluded, but almost everything else is fair game.

That is not regulation.

That is rule by exemption.

Instead of laws applying equally to all Canadians, this creates a system where ministers decide who the law applies to and who gets a pass.

This power would allow cabinet to:

Pick winners and losers in the economy

Waive inconvenient laws for favoured corporations or insiders, Shield allies from regulatory consequences,

Punish opponents not by prosecution, but by simply denying them exemptions others receive

No court process.

No transparent criteria.

No real parliamentary control.

No meaningful time limit in political terms.

This isn’t how a constitutional democracy is supposed to function. The rule of law means laws are general, predictable, and equally applied. Once politicians can selectively suspend laws for chosen parties, the law ceases to be law, it becomes a political weapon.

As lawyer Josh Dehaas put it:

“That’s really not much different than being ruled by a king or a dictator.”

He’s right. History is clear on this point: arbitrary exemptions are how democracies slide into soft authoritarianism. You don’t need tanks in the streets, you just need discretionary power behind closed doors.

If Parliament allows this precedent to stand, it will not matter who is in power next. The mechanism will exist for abuse by anyone.

Parliament must shut this down, completely.

Because in a free country, laws apply to everyone, or they mean nothing at all.

Merry Christmas from Wake Up Canada News!

As we gather to celebrate this festive season, we reflect on the unique journey Canada has faced over the past five years. From economic uncertainties to social challenges, our nation has navigated complex times. Yet, through it all, our resilience shines, reminding us of our strength and unity.

At Wake Up Canada News, we believe in the power of community and communication. A special thank you goes out to our dedicated journalist writers across the country, whose hard work and commitment bring vital stories to light. Your efforts help us address these challenges head-on and keep our community informed.

As we move into a new year, let’s aspire to foster understanding, compassion, and collaboration to build a better future for all Canadians. May this Christmas bring you and your loved ones joy, peace, and hope for brighter days ahead. We appreciate your support and look forward to continuing this journey together in 2026.

Warm regards,
The Team at Wake Up Canada News

This also isn’t chaos—but it isn’t economic warfare against Canada either. It’s leverage, and it’s aimed squarely at Ottawa’s refusal to deal seriously with border security, drugs, and illegal migration.

Trump’s approach has always been transactional and pressure-based. He applies stress to force movement. The message to Carney isn’t “Canada is expendable,” it’s “you don’t get a free pass while ignoring shared obligations.”

The U.S. is laying groundwork so Canada understands something very clearly: access to the American market is conditional. Conditional on cooperation. Conditional on enforcement. Conditional on acting like a sovereign partner instead of a bystander.

Border flows, fentanyl precursors, human smuggling, and asylum shopping are not abstract policy debates in the U.S.—they’re political flashpoints. And Washington knows Ottawa has dragged its feet while enjoying guaranteed market access and diplomatic goodwill.

Diversifying supply chains isn’t a declaration of war. It’s a negotiating position. By showing Canada it has alternatives, the U.S. removes complacency and forces engagement. That’s how Trump negotiated NAFTA into USMCA the first time—pressure first, deal second.

This isn’t about preferring adversaries over allies. It’s about results. The U.S. will deal with anyone if it protects American interests—and Canada should take that as a warning, not a betrayal.

Canada isn’t being sidelined because it’s an obstacle.

It’s being pressured because it’s avoiding responsibility.

The real question isn’t whether the U.S. is exerting leverage.

It’s whether Carney is willing to sit down, secure the border, crack down on trafficking, and negotiate like an adult—or keep pretending moral posturing counts as policy.

Because this ends the same way it always does:

Pressure → Negotiation → Deal.

Canada still has a seat at the table.
But it won’t be handed to us—we have to earn it.

BREAKING: 

Three Men Charged with Attempted Kidnappings, Terrorism, and Hate Crimes, One Already Out on Bail:

Canada is staring down a disturbing reality. Three men in the Greater Toronto Area have been arrested and charged with a staggering 79 offences,  including attempted kidnappings, firearms violations, hate crimes, and terrorism-related offences. What makes this even more shocking is that one of these individuals was already out on bail, free to roam our streets, despite the severity of his alleged crimes.

These arrests, involving Waleed Khan (26), Osman Azizov (18), and Fahad Sadaat (19), reveal a terrifying pattern. They allegedly targeted women and members of the Jewish community, attempted armed kidnappings, and stockpiled weapons and ammunition.

 In addition, Waleed Khan faces terrorism-related charges linked to supporting ISIS. This isn’t just criminal behavior, pthis is extremist ideology spilling into violent action on our streets.

What is particularly alarming is the role of Canada’s bail and “catch-and-release” policies in this case. When someone accused of armed kidnappings and terrorism-related crimes can walk free pending trial, it exposes a system that puts ideology and procedure above public safety. 

Ordinary Canadians, going about their lives, are left vulnerable. And the public is asking: why are dangerous individuals allowed back into the community before their cases are resolved?

The arrests highlight not only the failure of our current justice policies but also the urgent need for action to protect Canadians. Public safety cannot be negotiable. When armed kidnappings, terrorism offences, and hate crimes are on the table, the law must ensure that these individuals remain behind bars until their guilt or innocence is determined.

This case also raises pressing questions about deportation and immigration enforcement. While details about the accused’s status remain limited, Canadians are rightfully concerned about whether individuals posing a clear threat to society can and should be removed from the country once convicted.

The reality is clear: Canadians deserve a justice system that puts public safety first, not a system that prioritizes leniency for dangerous offenders. The Liberals’ approach to bail and release has shown cracks, and now it has resulted in a scenario that could have ended in tragedy.

We must demand accountability. We must demand reform. And above all, we must ensure that violent extremists cannot walk free while Canadians live in fear.

Public safety is not optional. It is the most basic duty of our government, and their failing.

You Need to Read This:

Some of the biggest changes in our country don’t happen in elections or debates, they happen quietly in budgets. Budget 2025 is one of those moments.

For decades, when we said “infrastructure,” we meant things we could see: roads, bridges, water systems, public buildings. Now, the government is calling digital systems and artificial intelligence “infrastructure.” And they’re pouring billions of your tax dollars into it.

The Canada Infrastructure Bank now manages $45 billion, with a focus on AI projects.

Almost a billion dollars is going toward a Canadian AI computing system and a “sovereign” cloud.

AI is being rolled out across government to handle services, compliance, and more.

Here’s the real issue: hidden in Bill C-15, the government is giving ministers new powers to override existing laws when it comes to how AI systems operate. This is not just about technology, it’s about centralizing control and taking human judgment out of decisions that affect your life.

This matters to every Canadian. AI could soon decide how your applications are approved, how your eligibility is checked, and how your actions are interpreted, without human compassion, discretion, or fairness. Efficiency cannot replace empathy. Convenience cannot replace due process or personal freedom.

Technology can help, but we must remain in control. Canadians deserve to know who runs these systems, how they’re monitored, and what protections exist for our rights.

The future of our public institutions is being rewritten right now. Don’t let these changes happen quietly. Share this. Talk about it. Canada’s digital future affects all of us.

They’re not passing Bill C‑3 out of kindness. Don’t be fooled by the sugar‑coating, this isn’t about “helping families” or “fixing mistakes.” This is about power, leverage, and control. This is about Ottawa quietly building a bigger, softer net to scoop up more people, more taxes, more votes, more labour, and more global influence, and doing it without anyone paying attention.

Think about it. Why would a government want to hand out citizenship to people who have never lived here, never built anything here, maybe don’t even plan to come? Why would it want to restore citizenship to thousands who’ve been gone for decades? On paper, it looks noble. In reality, it gives Ottawa a hidden army of names and numbers, a bigger population base they can count when justifying budgets, funding, or new programs. Every new “Canadian” abroad is another potential taxpayer, another potential vote, another way to say “look how big and diverse our country is” when they go to the UN or negotiate trade deals. It’s about clout.

But it’s also about labour. Canada’s birth rate is falling. We don’t have enough young workers. Ottawa knows this. By expanding citizenship by descent, it quietly builds a pipeline of people overseas with a legal claim to Canada. When a megaproject or national program needs workers, those new citizens can be fast‑tracked. They already have the paperwork. It’s a cheap way to plug labour shortages without explaining to the public why immigration numbers keep rising.

And then there’s the money. More citizens means more people who can be taxed, more people who can be told they “owe” Canada something. If Ottawa ever needs to impose global taxation rules, more citizens abroad means more revenue. Even now, Canada doesn’t tax worldwide income the way the U.S. does, but opening the citizenship door creates the potential. It’s a hidden option sitting there in the fine print for future governments to use.

It’s also about votes. Citizens abroad can vote in Canadian elections. By expanding citizenship beyond our borders, Ottawa can tilt the electorate in its favour. If a party thinks it’s popular with the diaspora or wants to reshape the voting map, this is the easiest way, quietly give citizenship to more people who aren’t living here, then let them vote on policies that affect those who are.

This is why they rushed it under a court deadline. They frame it as a legal fix, but the timing is perfect to get it through before anyone notices. This is how the state expands: not in one giant move, but in dozens of tiny, “administrative” bills that most people never read. Bill C‑3 looks like a tweak to citizenship law. In reality, it’s a Trojan horse, a way to grow Canada’s population on paper, extend its reach across the globe, build a future labour force, and tilt the voting system all under the guise of compassion.

That’s the real “why.” It’s not about the Lost Canadians. It’s about building a bigger base of control, people who owe Canada something, people who can be pulled in when needed, people who can be counted but don’t live here. It’s quiet empire‑building done through paperwork, and they’re doing it while you’re not looking.

Now let’s look how Bill C‑5 is the kind of bill they sell as “economic growth” and “national efficiency,” but if you read between the lines, it’s a power play disguised as progress. On the surface, it’s about creating a “One Canadian Economy”, removing barriers between provinces, making it easier for people and businesses to move around, and fast-tracking projects deemed “of national interest.” That sounds harmless, even patriotic. Who wouldn’t want a smoother economy? But hidden in the legal language is a blueprint for centralizing control over infrastructure, labour, and money, and this is where Bill C‑3 slips in, almost unnoticed.

Under C‑5, ministers get extraordinary powers to designate projects of national interest and push them through without the usual environmental reviews, local approvals, or Indigenous consent. Pipelines, mining operations, energy corridors, mega-highway projects, all can be fast-tracked. On paper, it’s about efficiency. In reality, it’s about Ottawa saying, “We decide what moves, who moves, and how it happens,” and bypassing any public or local scrutiny. It’s the perfect mechanism to consolidate power and push through initiatives that would normally spark debate.

Now, here’s where Bill C‑3 fits in. C‑3 quietly expands citizenship by descent and restores Lost Canadians, creating a larger pool of legal Canadians scattered across the globe. Why does that matter? Because C‑5 relies on mobility. Projects of national interest require workers. Mega infrastructure, energy development, and national programs need people, lots of them, willing and able to relocate. By giving citizenship to children born abroad, Canada now has a reserve workforce with legal rights to come and work anywhere in the country. These new citizens aren’t just abstract numbers; they’re a ready-to-deploy labour force for Ottawa’s priorities.

Think of a hypothetical scenario: a pipeline is designated a project of national interest under C‑5. It requires thousands of workers. Domestic labour isn’t enough, or the government doesn’t want to pay the market rate. That’s where the C‑3 population comes in. Canadians born abroad, previously disconnected, suddenly have the legal claim to work in Canada. They can move in, join the workforce, and fill positions the government needs, all while staying within the law. It’s not just efficiency,  it’s population engineering.

C‑5 also allows money and projects to flow without scrutiny, and C‑3 ensures the population exists to utilize, populate, or justify those projects. Together, the two bills form a quiet network: C‑5 is the skeleton,  projects, authority, money, and C‑3 is the flesh, the people, citizens who can be moved, counted, and used. On the surface, it looks like good governance. Look closer, and you see a system designed to consolidate Ottawa’s reach into both the physical and human landscape of Canada.

The genius of it is that it’s all legal. No one has to lie. The media reports that C‑5 is about economic efficiency, that C‑3 is about fixing citizenship. But combine them, and you have a blueprint for centralized power: money flowing freely, projects being fast-tracked, and people, legal citizens, quietly brought into the orbit of Ottawa whenever and wherever they’re needed. The legislation is subtle, but the effects are enormous.

In other words, C‑5 lays the tracks, and C‑3 fills the train cars. Together, they quietly build a system where the government can decide not just what Canada builds, but who gets to live and work in it, all framed as efficiency and fairness, all buried in technical language most people never read.

Mark Carney’s Liberals are Bragging About a Big Win:

Canada’s so-called “overdose crisis” is seeing a drop, and the media wants you to cheer. Opioid deaths down 22%, stimulant deaths down 38%, hospitalizations down 17%, great numbers on paper. But let’s not kid ourselves: this isn’t some miraculous success of naloxone kits or “changing attitudes” among youth. Look closer.

What’s really happening is simple and brutal: the system keeps legal, government-sanctioned death at its fingertips. With 30,000 or so Canadians ending their lives each year through MAID, the ones who are most vulnerable, people struggling with addiction, are disappearing from the statistics. It’s not prevention, education, or a safer drug supply that’s driving this decline. It’s the cold reality of a society that quietly eliminates the sick, the addicted, the weak. That’s the liberal approach to “solving” problems like addiction: don’t fix the system, just remove the people who expose its failures.

So before anyone hails this as progress, remember what the numbers actually mean. Fewer overdoses don’t automatically equal fewer crises. They may just equal fewer people left to overdose.

NATO Members Romania and Hungary are Left to Freeze This Winter: 

The official position states that Ukraine did not attack the NATO territories of Romania or Hungary. This is the conclusion presented to the public, without elaboration and without supporting detail.

Yet any proper investigation must begin not with the conclusion, but with the immutable facts.

1. Fixed Points of the Case

Two incidents occurred:

20 October 2025 – Explosion at a Romanian oil refinery. Hours later, a similar incident at a Hungarian refinery.

21 October 2025 – Certain accounts place the Hungarian event on this date.

These dates are undisputed.

What followed them, however, is a void of transparency.

2. The Overlooked Common Denominator

Both refineries were processing Russian-origin crude oil.

This is more than a detail, it is the central axis of the entire case. These facilities served as critical nodes through which Russian oil continued to reach NATO consumers during winter, due to existing pipeline arrangements and energy exceptions.

Thus, the targets were not random industrial sites. They were:

Strategically significant

Economically meaningful

Politically sensitive

Directly tied to Russia’s energy influence in Europe

Any serious inquiry must recognize that their destruction carries far-reaching implications.

3. Motive Analysis

One must then ask: Who benefits? Who stands to gain from the disruption of Russian oil flowing into NATO territory?

Only one nation at that time was engaged in active war with Russia. Only one nation had a demonstrated pattern of targeting Russian energy infrastructure as part of wartime strategy.

The narrowing of motive is not an allegation, it is a logical step.

When the strategic objective aligns so precisely with the outcome, the pool of potential actors diminishes sharply.

4. Capability and Historical Pattern

A proper report assesses not only motive but capability.

The timing

The precision

The nature of the infrastructure affected, all align with the type of operations conducted repeatedly against Russian energy assets in other regions.

While this does not prove responsibility, it establishes a consistent pattern of capability.

5. The Most Suspicious Element: Institutional Silence

What stands out most in this case is not what was said, but what was not.

No public cause determination

No release of investigative findings

No attribution

No discussion of Article 5 implications

No pressure from any NATO capital for clarity

No concern expressed for NATO civilians suddenly deprived of winter energy infrastructure

The silence was uniform, immediate, and persistent.

In an investigative context, such silence is not absence, it is a signal.

A coordinated withholding of information often indicates that the truth, if spoken aloud, would create political consequences no government wishes to confront.

6. Impact on NATO Civilians

The destruction of these facilities threatened winter heating, fuel access, and essential supply lines for civilians in NATO countries.

Had any adversarial nation carried out acts with such consequences, it would have triggered:

Outrage

Emergency sessions

Demands for accountability

Article 5 consultations

Instead, the matter disappeared as though the needs of NATO’s own citizens were an afterthought.

7. The Logical Deduction

There is no verified public evidence identifying the perpetrator of the refinery explosions.

However, when examining:

The specific targets (Russian-linked refineries)

The strategic outcome (disruption of Russian energy flows)

The global context (active war with Russia)

The alignment of motive and capability

The synchronized political silence

The absence of any alternative explanation

…a single line of reasoning emerges.

One need not declare guilt to observe that the deductions point consistently in one direction.

Conclusion

This case remains officially unresolved.

But the investigative trail is remarkably straight, and the refusal of institutions to walk it only intensifies suspicion.

The public may never receive an official explanation.

Yet the elements that are known, analyzed with precision and without emotion, form a pattern so distinct that ignoring it requires willful blindness.

This is the nature of the evidence.

This is the structure of the deduction.

Nothing more, and nothing less.

Food Banks Canada is changing policy that food banks need to decide if they will become accredited with Food Banks Canada by March 2026 in order to receive grant funding. 

Some people are worried the policy change will force some food banks to close as it is a long process to become accredited, they have to choose between funding and food donations, and the rules that come with accreditation may negatively affect local food banks. 

Food Banks Canada’s food safety standards for accreditation say a food bank cannot accept community garden produce unless the food bank can establish itself as equipped for high-risk control. In order to achieve that level, rural Westman food banks would need facilities like a commercial kitchen should it do any rinsing, thawing, cooking, processing, etc.

Local food banks will be put in an either-or situation by the new standards, where food banks wont be able to accept food donations from their communities in order to gain access to grant funding.

Rural food banks are often volunteer- run, using whatever available facilities the community can offer, he said. Few have access to facilities that would be required to accept produce. Cutting off produce would cut off a major source of support in Westman.

For example, Hutterite colonies contribute significantly to local food banks. One colony said that they plant extra potatoes, onions and carrots to donate every year with the value donated around $20,000 every year.

Some local food banks do not plan to get accredited because the rules are too prohibitive.

“CPP Is Changing: Here’s What They’re Not Telling You.” 

Everyone needs to read and understand the information I’m about to share.

Over the next little while, some things are ending and some things are changing, and I’m going to walk you through exactly what they are and what they actually mean for you. I’m breaking this down by age group so everyone can see how these Canada Pension Plan changes hit differently depending on where you are in life. Then I’ll give you a couple of examples, and that’s where your comments come in again. Like and share this video, drop your comments below, and go off like you always do. You guys always light up the CPP threads, so let’s see if you do it again. I love reading them. Alright, let’s get into what’s going on with the Canada Pension Plan and the changes kicking in for 2026.

The first change is the basic one: the annual inflation increase. CPP goes up every single year based on inflation. This year, it’s only going up 2%. We saw higher increases a couple years back because inflation was out of control. Inflation is down now, so the increase is down too. Simple.

Next is the YMPE adjustment. YMPE is the Year’s Maximum Pensionable Earnings. That’s the salary cap the government uses to decide how much of your T4 income they’re going to tax for CPP contributions. Yes, I’m calling it a tax, because let’s be honest, that’s what it is. Some people like to pretend it’s “an investment,” but ask yourself: could you grow that money better somewhere else? Probably. But anyway, the government has set the maximum pensionable earnings at $74,600. That’s the income they base your CPP contributions on, and it’s gone up again this year.

Now we’ve got CPP2. That’s the new layer of the CPP. The government gave it another long acronym, the Year’s Additional Maximum Pensionable Earnings. This is the new band of income between $74,600 and $85,000, and it comes with an extra 4% tax if you’re still working. That money also gets taken and funneled into CPP.

Then there’s the wage-growth enhancement period, and this is what’s ending. From 2019 to the end of 2025, CPP has been going through a multi-year upgrade. The old CPP was designed to replace about a quarter of your working-year average income. The enhanced CPP is targeting one-third. That’s a meaningful bump, but not everyone is going to feel that bump equally. I’ll get into who gets what in a minute.

That same enhancement period also pushed the YMPE higher every year, and by the time it ends, it will have gone up by about 14%. But that whole upgrade program ends December 31st. No more enhancements for now. Going forward, CPP pretty much grows in two ways: the inflation adjustment every January and the annual increase to the YMPE.

So what does all this actually mean for you? Let’s go by age, because this hits people very differently. If you were already 65 and retired in 2019, none of these enhancements matter to you. You’re only getting the yearly inflation increase. So someone like Robert is just seeing that 2% bump and that’s it.

Now take Steve, still working and planning to retire in 2030. He’s been paying the higher CPP contribution rates, and if he earns above $75,000, he’s also paying into CPP2. But because he hasn’t been in the enhancement window long enough, he’s barely going to feel it. When he retires, he’ll get maybe $500 more a year from all those extra contributions.

Then there’s John, age 34. He’s been inside this enhancement period long enough to see a bit of a payoff. When he retires in 2050, he’s looking at maybe $2,500 more a year because he’s contributed more over more years, especially if he earns over that $75,000 band.

But the real winner is Connor, someone just stepping out of university today. He will get the full force of every enhancement because he’ll have contributed under the new rules for essentially his entire working life. When he retires around 2065, he’ll get around 50% more CPP than someone like Robert from the old system.

Here’s the part that freaks me out,

1. The CPPIB manages almost $600+ billion.

A fund that massive moves markets. Whoever controls its flow has leverage.

2. CPP contributions are mandatory. You can’t opt out.

That means guaranteed inflow, billions every month.

3. CPP2 creates a NEW pool of money from higher earners.

This is a brand-new tier that will balloon quickly because it taxes income up to $85,000.

4. The CPPIB invests globally in massive infrastructure, ESG, green energy, and private sector projects.

These are the same sectors globalist investors love because they allow control over:

• energy

• real estate

• digital infrastructure

• utilities

• transportation

So whether intentional or not, CPP is already acting like a national mega-fund steering Canada’s future economy.

That’s where I started asking myself: Who benefits? Who influences this? Politicians? Bankers? Global boards? Corporate networks?

“BREAKING: The Sky is Falling, Again! H5N1 Mutates, Humanity Trembles”

When you step back and look at the way they’re talking about H5N1 right now, the whole thing feels like déjà vu. They’re using the same language, the same warnings, the same dramatic tone we’ve all heard before, except this time they’ve added a new twist. Now they’re saying the virus is mutating “faster than ever,” that it’s spreading across the globe in ways “scientists have never seen,” that it’s creating “a family of strains” instead of one single identifiable threat. When you run that through my conspiracy mind, I start to see the outline of the narrative they’re building long before they even finish their sentences.

Every time the public gets louder, more skeptical, harder to manage, and less willing to obey, suddenly there’s a new global health alert. It’s uncanny. Trust in government is collapsing, people are pushing back against digital ID programs, people are questioning everything from food policies to emergency powers, and magically, here comes another massive worldwide threat, this time supposedly even more unpredictable than the last one. And right away, you notice the way the media talks about it. Not calm. Not measured. Dramatic. Apocalyptic. Designed to grab attention and keep people nervous.

Then they bring in the science. Not the clear science that answers questions, the vague science that creates more. They talk about mutations, cross‑species jumps, receptor binding, pandemic potential, and “viruses adapting in ways we don’t fully understand.” They talk about how it’s been found in birds, cattle, wild animals, dairy farms, and how it’s marching across continents. They talk about strains showing up with new mutations that “concern” researchers. They talk about one mutation that helped the virus bind more easily to human receptors, and another that made it replicate faster in human cells. They talk about these things like they’re delivering bad news, but just as conveniently, it’s always bad news they can’t fully explain yet.

And this is where the conspiracy mind kicks in, because this isn’t a one‑off pattern. This is the same pattern that shows up every time. A virus appears. Scientists warn about its “pandemic potential.” Governments push for surveillance, biosecurity, new vaccine development, global coordination, emergency funding. Then the media amplifies every word as if we’re seconds away from disaster. And the public, who has lived through this cycle before, doesn’t hear science, they hear a setup.

People notice how convenient it is that this virus is hitting the food chain at the exact same time governments are tightening rules on farmers and pushing new “sustainable food” agendas. They see cattle getting infected and remember the push to reduce livestock emissions. They see poultry outbreaks and remember how quickly entire farms get culled over the slightest suspicion. They see the virus jumping into mammals and think, “Here we go, another reason to regulate agriculture even more.” Whether that’s fair or not doesn’t matter. It’s how people are interpreting it.

And then there’s the messaging. Scientists say human cases are rare, human-to-human spread isn’t happening, but the risk “can’t be ignored.” They say existing antivirals work, except maybe not as well on certain strains. They say vaccines are being updated, but mutations make it complicated. Everything is framed as almost dangerous, almost urgent, almost out of control. It’s this suspended state of fear that creates the perfect psychological environment for “precautionary measures,” “temporary restrictions,” “enhanced monitoring,” and “emergency responses.”

From the conspiracy perspective, that’s the entire plan. Not to lie outright, but to keep the public in a constant state of waiting for the next shoe to drop. And the more uncertainty they push, the more people mentally prepare for another global event, another round of rules, another reason to tighten their grip.

None of this means the virus isn’t real. It is. None of this means the scientists aren’t studying it seriously. They are. But it also doesn’t change the reality that trust has been wiped out. So when people hear about a rapidly mutating virus, spreading globally, affecting livestock, showing “concerning” genetic changes, and possibly threatening humans, they don’t hear a public health update. They hear a familiar script.

And once people hear the script, they fill in the rest themselves.

Look up my news feed for Part 2.