VIDEO: Michael Matt: Aren'tcha sick of "building back better"?

It's been a while since we heard from Michael MattMichael Matt, editor of The Remnant newspaper. In this just-released video, Mr Matt explains how the "Build Back Better" sabotage of America is directly impacting deliveries and construction work on their new Remnant TV studio project. Lumber, supplies, even food is in short supply all across the country, as some 70 cargo ships off the coast of California are not allowed to unload their cargo.

What's going on? What we're experiencing, Mr Matt argues, is the intentionally orchestrated collapse the American economy! That includes wrecking small business (because it provides independence from government), paying Americans not to work, opening the borders and -- last but not least -- putting a "total buffoon" in the Oval Office.

If they're going to "build back better", the globalist One-Worlders will first have to destroy everything in the US of A, including the once greatest healthcare system in the world. If you don't think this is intentional, you need to watch this video! Lots of good stuff here, including Mr Matt's contention that the greatest champion of the Unite the Clans movement in the world today is, incredibly, Pope Francis. Why? Watch and see.

 

Jorge Bergoglio, who some still call "Pope" Francis, provides the moral authority for the whole sick and twisted project, taking it upon himself to mandate vaccines, encourage the Great Reset, and now condemn Catholic media groups such as EWTN as the "work of the Devil". 

The good news is that Resistance is working! From Croatia to Mississippi and from Florida to Romania the real people are fighting back. Finally! Let us keep praying... 

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray. And do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all evil spirits who wander through the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen."

Biracial families (?)

 A reader who believes strongly in racial equity/equality -- "We're all the same under the skin" -- takes me to task for daring to suggest that many white women are desperate (for whatever reason) to hook up with black men, and for suggesting that biracial relationships are less to likely to succeed than those in which both parties share race and culture.

Those who know me will know that I am not prejudiced against people of other races, or against biracial/bicultural relationships. Everything depends on the people, and their motivation for being together.

On the first point, I will say that not all white women who get involved with black men are plain-looking and fat, desperate for a little (or a lot) of love. Ed. has found pictures of two white girls who could have gotten guys of any race, had they so wished. Which begs the question of why they chose these celebrity partners.

In the photo above you see the very white and very blonde Lindsey Vonn, who married hockey hot dog P.K. Subban, about whom Poor Len Canayen had many kind things to say in the daze when he (P.K.) played for the Montréal Canadiens. P.K. is no longer with les Glorieux, and Lindsey is no longer with him. They had no children.

This very white, very blonde lady is Sara Jeihooni, who (according to Ed.) was for three years the main squeeze of the famous rap artiste R. Kelly (no relation to Walt Kelly, creator of Pogo and inspiration to YVT). Turns out Mr Kelly had a number of other squeezes, some of whom were well under age, so he and Ms Jeihooni parted ways, again without bringing any mulatto children into the world.

"So what?", I hear you ask. So nothing. Lots of white-white and black-black couplese break up too. Make of it what you will. 

FOOTNOTE: To the reader who took me to task for what he called the "racist" [of course. Ed.] implications of my previous post about black and biracial families headed by single mothers, I reply with a quote from The Age of American Reason (Vintage Books, 2018) by Susan Jacoby, a very progressive American atheist and secularist. In the Chapter headed "Junk Thought", she writes:

Nationwide, more than half of African-American boys drop out of high school -- a statistic with deeply rooted social causes.... [N]one of the commentators focuses on genetics or the supposedly different learning styles of girls and boys. Instead, they examine a street culture that glorifies violence as proof of manhood and denigrates learning, as well as the absence of a father in so many poor African-American homes.

TV families in the Age of Woke

I don't watch TV much any more, except for news and politics, and (of course) hockey [and sometimes Judge Judy! Ed.]. I avoid dramas, soap operas and sitcoms like the plague, because I'm sick of the constant propagandizing for the liberal agenda, besides which the sitcoms just aren't funny any more. So also sketch comedy, like SNL, which I guess is funny if you're a Dumbocrat.

Although I restrict my TV diet, I can't escape commercials, which appear at intervals of 40 seconds or so during the hockey games and fake news broadcasts. Some of them are entertaining, and every now and then we at WWW give the good ones the coveted Wally award for creativity. But I've noticed lately a trend in the portrayal, in TV ads, of American families. That's our topic for today.

Here's the kind of American family we saw on the toob in TV's so-called "golden years".

Yes, folks, it's the Andersons, of Father Knows Best. They're often held up as examples of the happy, well-adjusted, fully functioning family who should be role models for those of us who aren't so happy, well-adjusted, etc. Of course they're white folks. But there were happy, well-adjusted black families too, like the Huxtables.

You remember the Huxtables, don't you? Wow, they were even better than the Andersons because both parents were hard-working professional people. No stay-at-homee mom there! Some people complained that the Huxtables were "too white" in their speech and lifestyle -- "Oreo cookies" or, dare we say it, "black Republicans". But there were other black families, such as the Evans Family, from Good Times.

More down-to-earth than the Huxtables, eh? Climbing back up the social ladder, we find the Banks family, of Bel Air, who were always coping with their home boy relative, the Fresh Prince.

Elsewhere in America, we were invited to laugh along with the Keatons of Family Ties, as Alex faced the challenge of being a Republican in a family of Democrats.

All of these families are uniracial -- white or black, period. SJWs have been complaining for years that blacks have been under-represented on American TV. When challenged to square that assertion with the existence of shows like Good Times, Fresh Prince and the Cosby Show, they say that those shows were "blacksploitation" or (more recently) failed "to accurately portray the Black lived experience". 

The result is this year's remake of The Wonder Years, which featured the all-white Arnold family, to portray the all-black Williams family. Is that better? Apparently not. In response to the "wokeness" fad, Corporate America and the MadMen have decreed an end to segregation. What we need to see... must see... now are biracial families, like this one.

Ah, there you are! A happy biracial family -- black father, white mother, two adorable mulatto children, apparently one each of the two leading genders. I haven't seen a family like that in a sitcom yet, but there are lots of them in commercials for "woke" corporations. That's the way America is spozed to be, in the Age of Woke.

If you want to know how it really is, look no further than the evening newscasts of the latest episodes of black crime in your community [especially Lori Lightfoot's Chicago. Ed.]. Both victims and perps will be described as "a future basketball star", "an aspiring rap artist", and/or "a good boy who was trying to turn his life around." 

That desccription will come from the boy's mother. There will be no father in sight, or anywhere around.  That's how it is, even in the many cases where the mother is white. For the sad fact is that there are 1000s of plain-looking, fat white women who will do anything, anything to  get a black guy to show them a little love. And that includes being a baby mama. 

It is a statistical fact -- evident from the welfare rolls, if nothing else -- that black and biracial families are more likely than white families to be broken -- headed by women whose partners have deserted them. The happy biracial family we see in TV ads is largely mythical, the creation of propagandists pushing the liberal, BLM agenda as a matter of "social justice" to make reparations for the second-class status to which black people have been supposedly consigned.

The funny thing is that black people no longer buy into the concepts of integration and multiculturalism. Just last week, two white Arizona State University students were harassed at the school's "multicultural center" over their race and their support for police. Video of the incident shows black students attempting to force two white male students to leave the area, claiming they were making the space "uncomfortable" with their whiteness and a pro-police sticker. 

That's  how things are, really, not in TVland but in America, in the Age of Woke.

Where's Walto?

Walt is on gardening leave and will return on Monday, D.V.

If you want to send a message to Joe, put it on your truck!

In "Don't sugar-coat it! Tell us what you really think!", I reposted a photo seen on People of Walmart of a pickup truck bearing a message which is now being shouted from the stands at numerous college football games across the USA. Here's another one.

[Clutches pearls] Dear oh dear! What happened to civility?!

Canadian election: Impact of the People's Party of Canada

In yesterday's analysis of the pointless and inconclusive Canadian election, I wrote (in the first footnote) that Maxime Bernier's People's Party of Canada had drawn enough votes away from the so-called Conservative Party to cause them to lost "seven or eight" ridings.

A former Conservative Member of Parliament with the improbable name of Inky Mark has done a more careful analysis, and finds that the actual number of seats the Cons could have won, had they had the votes cast for the PPC, is... wait for it... 22! Here's his list.

That should provide some food for thought for "Conservative" strategists when they conduct their review of leader pro tem  Erin O'Tool's clever (?) plan to make the CPC resemble the Gliberals in all but name (and party colour, of course).

Footnote: As of this morning, there are 17 ridings in which the result of in-person voting is close enough that the mail-in ballots could overturn the provisional result. I'll post the final seat count after the Liberal appointees at Elections Canada get through manipulating it, but if you bet Blackie McBlackface would lose... pay up!

Further reading: "The Problem With Canada", by David Solway on PJ Media, 22/9/21.

The pointless Canadian election - no clear winners, only one clear loser

Yesterday's Canadian federal election, which promised to be interesting, turned out to be a big fat nothing-burger. 36 days and $600,000,000 ($480 million in real money) later, Canuckistan will once again be governed by the Liberal Party of Canada and its super-woke leader, Blackie McBlackface, aka Justin Trudeau, pictured at right. [Should be on the left, shurely! Ed.]

The composition of the House of Commons (analogous to the US House of Representatives) remains virtually unchanged. When the last Parliament was dissolved, the Gliberals held 155 seats, the self-styled Conservatives (really the alt-Liberals) had 119, le Bloc Québécois 32, the New Democrats (celebrating their 60th anniversary) 24, and the Green Party 2. There were 5 independents and 1 seat was vacant.

When the sun rose over Parliament Hill this morning, the Liberals were elected or leading in 157 ridings (+2), the Red Tories 119 (unchanged), the BQ 34 (+2), NDP 25 (+1), and the Soylent Greens 2 (unchanged). One MP who was fired by the Liberals two days before the election under suspicion of sexual misconduct will have to sit as an independent.

The People's Party of Canada, led by Maxime Bernier and endorsed by YVT, had no seats in the last parliament and will have no seats in the new one, as "Mad Max" failed to win his home riding of Beauce.

Canadian Conservatives can make the same claim as they did in 2019 and the US Dumbocrats did in 2016, that they are the real winners because they won more of the popular vote -- 34% to the Liberals' 32.5% -- but too bad for them, the systems of both countries are similar in that you can win the popular vote and still lose the election. 

Now let's take a look at the party leaders, to see who were the winners and who the losers.

Justin Trudeau called the election, in the middle of the kung flu pandemic, for no reason other than his egomaniacal desire to win a third term with a majority. He didn't. So we can say he lost. But he's still Prime Minister of Canuckistan this morning, so he also won.

The leader of the alleged Conservatives, Erin O'Toole, lost an election that was his to win. Mr Socks is the most loathed prime minister in Canadian history -- and that's saying something! -- and could have been beaten, had the Cons offered a real alternative. That they didn't is on Mr O'Tool, who deliberately dragged his party from the centre to the left, in hopes of appealing to "progressive" voters. Mr O'Tool will likely face a fight to continue in his role as leader. Still, he can say that his party increased its share of the popular vote, so in that sense he's a "winner", just like Hellery Clinton.  

Yves-François Blanchet's Bloc Québécois gained two seats, which makes M Blanchet a winner, except that, in spite of finishing in third place, they don't hold the balance of power in the minority government, since Mr Socks can count on the support of the NDP to do whatever they like to Canada, including Québec, which is all M Blanchet cares about anyway. [Walt! What have I told you about run-on sentences?! Ed.]

The socialist NDP, led by Jagmeet Singh, is down one seat, which makes Mr Singh a loser, since they should have been able to do better with liberals fed up with M Trudeau. Still, they are the real holders of the balance of power and can bring down the Liberals if they choose. But that's Strike Two for Mr Singh and he won't be in any hurry to step up to the plate a third time.

Annamie Paul was the first black, Jewish woman to lead a "national Party", although to call the Green Party "national" is being charitable, since it ran candidates in only two-thirds of the ridings. She finished a distant fourth in her own riding of Toronto Centre, and her party was lucky to win two seats, the same total (but not the same seats) as last time. Even before the election, the Green Party brass was trying to oust her, and she will likely step down after a decent interval.

Finally, let us consider the fate of Maxime Bernier, erstwhile leader of the People's Party of Canada, which he founded just four years ago. He lost his own riding by a margin of more than 2 to 1. But under his leadership, and as a result of his tireless campaigning right across the huge empty country, the PPC's share of the vote increased from 1.6% in 2019 to nearly 6% at last count. 

The analysts, pundits, etc agree: The PPC is real, and here to stay! IMHO, that makes "Mad Max" a winner!

FOOTNOTE: Where the PPC did make a difference was in seven or eight ridings where the PPC drew just enough votes, mainly from the Conservatives, to let the Liberal candidate win. That should be a lesson for the Conservatives about the perils of alienating the real conservatives just to appease the "moderates".

ANOTHER FOOTNOTE: Early this morning, the Campaign Life Coalition issued a news release saying it was disappointed but not surprised by the election result. "The Conservatives would've done much better," they said, "if O'Toole had not alienated the party’s socially conservative base with his shameless support for abortion, LGBT ideology, oppressive lockdowns and liberty-destroying vaccine passports." [My emphasis. Walt]

UPDATED: Are Canadians being set up for a US-style fake election?

Ed. here. Walt is en route to what could be the scene of the crime. What crime? How about a fake election, with the winner already determined, and the machinery in place to ensure that the result is what the liberal one-worlders want, i.e. a win, close enough to be plausible, for Prime Minister Blackie McBlackface. In Canada? Surely not! 

But wait... Before he left, Walt told me to check a story posted on the CTV News website yesterday, September 17th, at 1029 EDT. Here's the headline. "Assuming current scenario holds, 'we're looking at a Liberal win,' Nanos says". "Nanos" is Nik Nanos, a "non-biased" (read: liberal) pollster currently selling his guesswork to CTV and the Globe and Mail. Such is Mr Nanos' lack of bias that for the first three weeks of the election campaign he wouldn't even ask people if they intended to vote for Max Bernier's People's Party of Canada. PPC support was just lumped in with "other". 

Here is the key part of the article, explaining why Mr Nanos is so certain of the result -- 72 hours before voting commences! 

"Examining the share of seats in the House of Commons the Liberals could win, Nanos said it looks like history is shaping up to repeat itself in 2021.

"And what could aid that Liberal victory? Mail-in ballots.

"According to Nanos Research's nightly tracking data conducted for CTV News and the Globe and Mail, which was released on Friday, those Canadians who plan to vote by mail-in ballot are four times more likely to vote for the Liberals than the Conservatives." 

OK, that's Mr Nanos' guess, and he (and other pollsters) have been known to be wrong before. That's what Walt thought. But this morning the CBC -- owned and operated by the Canadian Ministry of Truth -- advised Canucks that they "might go to bed Monday night without knowing the final results of the federal election. They might not even know who won by Tuesday morning." 

Howcum? "That's because this year, Elections Canada isn't counting hundreds of thousands of local special ballots — votes from Canadians living in their ridings who opted to vote by mail — until Tuesday." 

Elections Canada is the "independent" agency of the Government of Canada (J. Trudeau, Prop.) charged with running federal elections. The people who work for Elections Canada -- even the temps -- is beholden to the Liberal government for their jobs and salaries. That includes the people who will count the mail-in ballots in the wee hours of Tuseday morning.

Theirs is a hard job. "The returning office has to go through a set of verifications before they even open a ballot envelope to put it in the box," said Elections Canada spokesperson Diane Benson. Those verifications include making sure those who voted by mail did not also vote in-person on election day. "Only after that will those ballots be counted," said Benson. "So it could be Wednesday, Thursday, Friday ... because it depends on the volume and it depends on how long it takes to do those verifications and then the count."

Can we be forgiven for mooting a resemblance to the way the job is done in places like Philadelphia, where (it is said) the folks counting the ballots call up Democratic Party HQ not to report on how many votes were cast, but to ask how many votes they need!

We cannot forget what happened in the darkness of the night of November 8th-9th. President Trump had a comfortable lead in Pennsylvania until around midnight, when counting (or at least reporting) suddenly was "paused". Then, a couple of hours later, there was an incredible surge of results from mail-in ballots, 99% of which were for Sleepy Joe Biden. 

Of course in Canada no-one would suspect fraud if the results changed dramatically at sunrise of The Day After... would they?

UPDATE ADDED 21/9/21: As it turned out, the mail-in ballots, which are being counted even as I write, were not a big factor in the Gliberal win. There were only a handful of ridings (electoral districts) in which the in-person count was so close that the number of mail-in ballots received (which was known, since, unlike the USA, only ballots received on election day would be counted) could make a difference. A couple of seats might change hands, but the same could happen as a result of a recount, so overall, no biggie.

American interference in Canadian election

 It never fails. Every time I announce that I'm going to be off for a couple of days, something happens to change my plans. Murphy's law. But I would be remiss if I unplugged the computer without pointing out the hypocrisy of American politicans, Democrat politicians, who whined endlessly about "foreign interference" in the Presidential elections of 2016 and 2020, but don't hesitate to tell Canadians who to vote for. 

Here is the list of last-minute, desperate-measures-called-for endorsements, published yesterday and today.

Barack Hussain Obama (aka the Prez) has endorsed his "friend" Justin Trudeau. That's the second time. He did that in the last week of the 2019 campaign and it had the desired effect of reassuring "progressives" that Mr Socks was more than the shallow puppet he seemed to be.

Hellery Clinton, former US Secretary of State and twice-failed presidential candidate, has endorsed her "friend" Justin Trudeau. That's because he's a champion of "reproductive rights" (i.e. baby-killing), affordable child care and other issues of importance to wimmin. And...

(((Bernie Sanders))), another failed presidential candidate, has endorsed... wait for it... Jagmeet Singh, leader of Canada's Few Democrats. Mr Sanders sits in the US senate as an Independent, so maybe we shouldn't call him a Democrat. How about "Social Democrat" or "Demoratic Socialist"?

One thing these three have in common with Mr Trudeau is that they are all part of the Soros plan for One World Government. 

Just today, another tool of the New World Order, Filippo Grandi [= "Philip the Great"? Ed.], the United Nations Commissar for Refugees, reminded Canucks that their new government "must" [sic] honour the Liberals' promise to accommodate 20,000 Afghan refugees!

Dear Canadian friends, how do you like the prospect of the United Nations and the Democratic rulers of the Entitled States of America telling you (no matter which variety of liberals you elect) what to do? Not thrilled about it?  

VIDEO: Canadian election: Dr Jordan Peterson talks with Max Bernier

Right from the day Prime Minister Blackie McBlackface called the totally unnecessary general election to be held on September 20th, the Canadian media -- bought and paid for by the Liberal government -- have pretended that Maxime Bernier and his People's Party of Canada don't exist. So also with the pollsters and, as reported here, the "non-partisan" (HA!) Leaders' Debate Commission. 

There was, and still is, a rather obvious conspiracy to silence any voices not subscribing to the liberal orthodoxy. It has become impossible, just this week, for the elites and their controlled media to ignore "Mad Max" and the PPC any longer. Just today a poll by the liberal Nick Nanos showed the PPC with over 7% support nationwide, compared with the 2% of the popular vote which they garnered in the 2019 election. 

The so-called (but not really) Conservatives, and their leader Erin O'Toole, are quaking in their boots, fearing that the PPC will bleed off just enough of their support to ensure a win for the loathsome Liberals. 

Dr Jordan Peterson, well known as a voice of conservative reason in a loony liberal world, invited both M Bernier and Mr O'Tool to discuss their positions, and the future of conservatism in Canada. Mr O'Tool declined. So now we have Dr Peterson's wide-ranging interview with M Bernier, recorded yesterday. If you have yet to hear M Bernier explain himself and his aims, here's your chance.

 

Further viewing: "The Great Non-Debate - Part 3", WWW 10/9/21 -- Lauren Chen debriefs Max Bernier and David Freiheit, the PPC candidate in the riding of Montréal-Westmount.

Now, for the last time: Walt's advice for conservative Canucks, and everyone else who's sick of Just In Trudeau and all his pomps and wokeness: 

If you live in a riding where the Conservative candidate is in a close race with the Liberals or NDP, hold your nose and vote for him/her. 

If you're in a Québec riding where the Cons have little chance, vote for the PPC if they have a decent chance of winning, otherwise for the Bloc. 

In all other circumstances, cast your ballot for the only party that offers a real conservative alternative -- Maxime Bernier's People's Party of Canada.

Unless something really astounding happens this weekend, this will likely be my last post until Tuesday. I am planning to be somewhere north of the World's Longest Undefended Border to watch the returns come in on Monday. It promises to be a long and interesting night.

The difference between politicians and people like you and me

A big vote of thanks to Agent 6 for passing along this little gem. Very à propos to Canadians, with polling day just four days off.

When voting remember the difference between the politicians and the general public. 

A cop comes in for a haircut, and when he tries to pay his bill, the barber replies, "I cannot accept money from you, I'm doing community service this week." The cop was happy and left the shop. 

When the barber went to open up the next morning, he found a thank-you card and a dozen Tim Horton donuts waiting for him at his door. Then an MP came in for a haircut, and when he went to pay his bill, the barber again replied, "I cannot accept money from you. I'm doing community service this week." The MP was very happy and left the shop. 

When the barber went to open up the next morning, he found a dozen MP's lined up at the frontdoor, waiting for a free haircut! 

That, my friends, illustrates the fundamental difference between the citizens of our country and the politicians who run it. 

As Ronald Reagan said, "Both politicians and diapers need to be changed often and for the same reason." In Canada, it's waaaaay past time for a change!

And now... AUKUS, but no CAN?

Regular readers will know that Walt often refers to "the AABC countries" -- America, Australian, Britain and Canada -- which are (or should be) the major English-speaking countries, who have (or should have) common interests and should therefore support each other against common interests. Sometimes things work out. Sometimes not.

I left New Zealand out of that list because "AABCNZ" is rather unwieldy, and, let's be frank, New Zealand isn't much more than an appendage of Australia. [Some would say Canada isn't much more than an appendage of othe USA! Ed.] But in recent years all five countries have joined together in an "intelligence alliance" called the Five Eyes.

The United Kingdom - United States of America Agreement, to give the Five Eyes its formal name, has now been superseded (or modified or strengthened -- depends how you look at it), by AUKUS -- a new security pact beweetn America, Australia and Britain... but not Canada.

Here's Senile Joe, flanked virtually by Aussie Prime Minister Scott Morrison and British PM Boris Johnson (see footnote), announcing the trilateral security partnership, aimed at countering the increasing dominance of Communist China in Asia and the Pacific. None of the three leaders mentioned China, but there can be no doubt that the initiative was a response to China’s expansionist drive in the South China Sea and increasing belligerence towards Taiwan.

The plan includes building a nuclear-powered submarine fleet, along with wide-ranging projects on cyber warfare, artificial intelligence and quantum computing. Over the next 18 months, teams from the AAB countries are to draw up a plan for assembling a new Australian nuclear-powered submarine fleet. Australia will become only the seventh country in the world to have submarines propelled by nuclear reactors. 

Speaking from London, BoJo said the three countries were "natural allies" even though "we may be separated geographically," He added that the alliance would create "a new defence partnership and driving jobs and prosperity." Of course. Pouring massive amounts of money into the military-industrial complex (a phrase coined as a warning by the late President Eisenhower) always results in jobs and prosperity, if not peace.

BoJo neglected to mention that since the Brits handed Hong Kong (on a silver platter) to China in 1997, they have had virtually no territories in the Pacific. "Separated georgraphically" was something of an understatement! How is it, one wonders, that a country with a very long Pacific coastline, was left out of the agreement. I refer to Canada, and the question is a good one.

Could it be that the AAB countries don't trust Canada, now that it's under the proprietorship of the very Liberal Just In Trudeau, who has openly expressed his admiration for Communist China and their ways of "getting things done"?

The Globe and Mail quotes Eric Miller, a political and business consultant specializing in Canada-U.S. affairs, as saying AUKUS represents an alliance between countries "more willing than Canada to take on China... Those who are in the world of 'we need to directly confront China, and use all of our assets and resources to do that' – they are essentially moving forward."

Canada is clearly not in the "world" to which Mr Miller refers. It is the only one of the Five Eyes not to have banned Huawei Technologies from its 5G network. Intelligence experts fear that the Chinese firm could use such access to collect sensitive information and turn it over to Beijing's spy agencies.

The Canadian government has been dithering for three years over what to do about Huawei, and its position is more than awkward because of its continued detention of Meng Wanzhou, aka "The Princess of Huawei". The CFO of the telecoms giant has for some three years been under house arrest ["mansion arrest", shurely! Ed.] awaiting extradition to the USA on a warrant issued by the Trump administration.

The arrest of Ms Meng angered the Chicomms, who retaliated by arresting "the two Michaels" -- Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor -- Canadian citizens who have now spent well over 1000 days in Chinese prisons, as hostages for the release of Ms Meng. Sleepy Joe could solve that problem for Mr Socks by giving the OK to let Ms Meng go, but this is the one action of the Trump administration which he apparently doesn't want to undo.

Canada is also reluctant to jeopardize business interests in China, which include export markets for canola, pork and seafood. "Canada has not really made a choice about where it stands on China. For a long time, the attitude has been, 'We'll focus on the economic relationship with China, and the security relationship with the U.S. will be unaffected'" Mr. Miller said. "Canada now has to choose between its economic interests and security interests." 

The office of the Prime Minister of Canuckistan would not answer questions about AUKUS, including about whether it had been involved in discussions over the pact, or whether it had asked to join or wanted to join in the future. A spokesthing for Blackie McBlackface referred questions to the government's  "Global Affairs" [sic] department, but answer came there none.

Footnote: You think I'm disrespectful to keep referring to the freely and fairly elected President of the Excited States of America as "Sleepy Joe"? In its report on AUKUS, Breitbart News says that Mr Biden appeared to forget who he was talking to when he looked away from his prepared notes for just a few seconds and addressed Australia’s Prime Minister Scott Morrison as "that fella down under."

Another footnote (added 17/9/21): Canada's alleged foreign policy was, in the first years of Mr Socks' government, led by Chrystia Freeland, "Diplomat of the Year" in 2018. She was known as "The Lady in Red" -- colour-coordinated with the Communist Chinese flag?!

Biden's tough response to Afghanistan defeat: Kill some kids

In a futile attempt to appear something less than weak and incompetent in the aftermath of the killing of 13 Americans troops just before the tail-betwee-the-legs withdrawal of US forces at the end of August, "President" Biden promised those responsible for the dastardly attack in Kabul, "We will hunt you down. We will make you pay." Watch the video, from 0:51 to the end.

   

Of course Sleepy Joe didn't name those responsible, but most of us wanted to believe that he (or those who pull his strings) had in mind the Islamic State in Khorasan Province (ISKP - aka ISIS-K), named by AlJazeera as IS's affiliate in Afghanistan. Many of us, knowing Mr Biden's track record of saying much and delivering little, and knowing that US forces would be out of Afcrapistan in a matter of days, said, "Good luck!" 

Thus the Americans responsible for the debacle came immediately under the pressure of public opinion to Do Something, Fast. And so they did. We were told that although the US military was pulling out of the shithole, it still had "over-the-horizon" capability, meaning that it could blow up things animate and inanimate from the safety of a bunker in a neighbouring friendly country, such as... errr... 

On August 29th, the Pentagon announced that a drone strike, controlled from an undisclosed location, had succeeded in killing an ISIS-K militant loading his car with explosives in preparation for yet another attack on retreating Americans and their Afghan collaborators. The New York Times has extensive video coverage here. 

Sadly, the NYT videos are now he3adlines "Did a U.S. Drone Strike in Afghanistan Kill the Wrong Person?" The answer to their question is YES. Ten Afghan civilians, including seven children, died in the carnage shown in this picture. 

The drone strike sent a 20-pound Hellfire missile into the car of Zemari Ahmade, an aid worker. Military intelligence -- an oxymoron if ever there was one -- called the threat posed by the car "imminent", and defended the drone attack as a "righteous strike." 

Officials said the military believed the car was being packed with explosives for an attack. But footage obtained by the Times suggests Mr Ahmadi was actually loading the car with water containers for his home, where the water supply had been cut off. 

Mr Ahmadi was a 14-year employee of Nutrition & Education International, an American NGO that fights malnutrition. He helped start up soy factories, repair machinery, transport his colleagues and distribute food from his Corolla to displaced Afghans. 

The use of drones in counterterrorism operations has consistently been among the most controversial aspects of America's global war on terror, particularly due to their association with civilian casualties. 

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and General Mark Milley have yet to appear before any Congressional committee to defend their roles in the Middle East mess. But it doesn't appear that they have any plans to stop raining down fire and brimstone from over the horizon. 

After all, children have been used as suicide bombers before, right? So the Pentagon may have been right after all. Who ya gonna believe -- the US military or the New York Times?

UPDATED: Reaction to result of CA recall election

UPDATE ADDED 17/9/21: The original headline for this post was: "Californians! Just for once, cast your vote for a reasonable alternative". As the last sentence suggests, I didn't really expect that the drive to get Gavin Newsom recalled would succeed... and it didn't. 

I have been thinking about what to say by way of comment, but have been spared the necessity of further thought by the posting on the Babylon Bee of the following: "Californians Desperate To Escape Cling To Landing Gear Of Last Jet Leaving LAX". Thank you, BB. 

I don't write much about California, its leftist politicians and loony left policies because, frankly,I wish the whole state, or the lower coastal part of it at least, could be sawed off and left to drift forever in the Pacific. I do recognize that there are some sensible people in California -- the kind who read WWW! -- and I urge you to vote today (if you haven't already done so) in the election to recall Gavin Newsom.

The effort to get rid of the one of the wokest governors in the nation comes to a conclusion today. If you haven't voted by mail, you can still vote in person. Polls close at 2000 PDT.

The recall is opposed by all the Dumbocrat heavyweights, from President Biteme and Nancy Pelosi down to AOC and Mad Maxine Waters, and let's not forget Kamala Harris. [Who she? Ed.] The Hollywood elites also want to keep Mr Newsom in the state house, and are trying to discredit the main challenger, Larry Elder, as "the black face of white supremacy." You couldn't make this stuff up, but that's California!

Walt urges you to vote YES on the recall and for Larry Elder as Governor. 

Please, dear people of California, just this once, do the right thing and vote for sanity. Go ahead and make my day! 

Dr. Ron Paul: Twenty years on, we’ve learned nothing from 9/11

Ed. here. What follows is Dr Ron Paul's column from the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prospertity, reposted with permission. Thank you, Dr Paul, for your clear and constant warning abouot the dangers of big government and the folly of meddling in foreign affairs which are none of our business.

Nothing upset the Washington Beltway elites more than when in a 2007 presidential debate I pointed out the truth about the 9/11 attacks: they attacked us because we’ve been in the Middle East, sanctioning and bombing the civilian population, for decades. The 9/11 attackers were not motivated to commit suicide terrorism on the Twin Towers and Pentagon because they dislike our freedoms, as then-President Bush claimed. That was a self-serving lie.

They hated – and hate – us because we kill them for no reason. Day after day. Year after year. Right up until just a few days ago, when President Biden slaughtered Zemari Ahmadi and nine members of his family - including seven children - in Afghanistan. The Administration bragged about taking out a top ISIS target. But they lied. Ahmadi was just an aid worker, working for a California-based organization, bringing water to suffering Afghan village residents.

This horror has been repeated thousands of times, over and over, for decades. Does Washington believe these people are subhuman? That they somehow don’t care about their relatives being killed? That they don’t react as we would react if a foreign power slaughtered our families?

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright famously suggested in an interview that killing half a million Iraqi children with sanctions designed to remove Saddam Hussein from power was “worth it.” It was an admission that the lives of innocents mean nothing to the Washington elite, even as they paint their murderous interventions as some kind of “humanitarian liberation.” The slogan of the US foreign policy establishment really should be, “No Lives Matter.”

The Washington foreign policy elites – Republicans and Democrats – are deeply corrupt and act contrary to US national interests. They pretend that decades of indiscriminate bombing overseas are beneficial to the victims and keep us safer as well. That is how they are able, year after year, to convince Congress to hand over a trillion dollars – money taken directly and indirectly from average Americans. They use fear and lies for their own profit. And they call themselves patriots.

The Washington establishment lied to us because they did not want us to stop for a second and try to understand the motive for the 9/11 attacks. Police detectives are not apologists for killers when they try to look for a motive for the crime. But the Washington elite did not want us to think about why people might be motivated to suicide attack. That might endanger their 100-year gravy train.

What was the real message of 9/11 to Americans? Give up your freedoms for the false promise of security. It’s OK for the government to spy on all of us. It’s OK for the TSA to abuse us for the “privilege” of traveling in our own country. We must continue to bomb people overseas. Don’t worry it’s only temporary.

So, twenty years on what have we learned from 9/11? Absolutely nothing. And we all know what the philosopher George Santayana said about those incapable of learning from history. I desperately hope that somehow the United States will adopt a non-interventionist foreign policy, which would actually protect us from another attack. I truly wish Americans would demand that their leaders learn from history. The only way to make us safe is to end the reign of the Washington killing machine.

Copyright © 2021 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

"What's a trillion"?

Too much? Let's start with "What's a million?" That's a paraphrase of comments made by C.D. Howe, the Canadian "Minister of Everything" in the post-war Liberal government. During debate over estimates for the War Appropriation Bill in 1945,  Mr Howe told an opposition member, "I daresay my honourable friend could cut a million dollars from that amount, but a million dollars from the War Appropriations Bill (of more than $1.35 billion) would not be a very important matter."

John Diefenbaker, a Conservative MP, quickly rephrased Mr Howe’s words as "What's a million?" It is used even today to portray liberal governments' arrogance and looseness with the public purse.

Three-quarters of a century ago, a million dollars was a considerable sum of money. Half a century ago politicians went from talking of "millions" to "billions". Now even 000,000,000 (nine zeros) isn't enough, and another three zeros have been added to appropriations bills in Biden's US of A.

Last month, the Senate passed an infrastructure bill backed by Sleepy Joe, costed at roughly $1,000,000,000,000 -- a million million or trillion dollars. All of the Senate Dumbocrats and 19 Republicans (?) voted for it. It now needs to be approved by the House before being sent to Mr Biden's desk.

But wait... Apparently a trillion dollars isn't enough for the "progressive Democrats" in the House of Representative, who have vowed not to advance it unless and until the Senate passes an accompanying "reconciliation" bill which will cost... wait for it... $3.5 trillion!

The “Squad,” which includes Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), have joined Burnie Sanders (I-VT), the chairman of the Senate budget committee, in refusing to budge on the linking of the two bills, as a package deal. 

They say moderate Democrats, like Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Kristen Sinema (D-AZ), are standing in their way by opposing the gargantuan price tag of the social safety net expansion, which includes funding for healthcare, climate change, childcare, affordable housing, and education, all for the benefit of "marginalized communities" suffereing from centuries of "systemic racism" yada yada yada.

Sen. Manchin, along with many Republicans argue that the national debt is too large for this type of spending, and that it could contribute to already higher-than-normal rates of inflation. He told the Clinton News Network today that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer "will not have my vote on $3.5 (trillion) and Chuck knows that, and we’ve talked about this."

All this talk of billions and trillions reminded me of something I read in Bill Bryson's commendable Notes From a Big Country (Doubleday, 1998). The entire national debt, at the time Mr Bryson was writing, stood at $4.5 million, the total of the two bills now proposed by the Democraps. Mr Bryson puts millions, billions and trillions in terms than even I can understand. 

Big numbers are simply beyond what we are capable of grasping.... What does $4.5 trillion actually mean?

Let's just try for a trillion. Imagine that you were in a vault with the whole of America's national debt and you were told you could keep each dollar bill you initialled. Say, too, for the sake of argument, that you could initial one dollar bill each second and that you worked straight through without stopping. How long do you think it would take to count a trillion dollars?...

If you initialled one dollar per second, you would make $1000 every 17 minutes. After twelve days of non-stop effort you would acquire your first $1 million. Thus it would take you 120 days to accumulate $10 million and 1200 days -- something over three years -- to reach $100 million.

After 31.7 years, you would become a billionaire, and after almost a thousand years you would be as wealthy as Bill Gates.... But not until after 31,709.8 years would you count your trillionth dollar, and then you would be less than one-fourth of the way through the pile of money representing America's national debt.

That is what $1 trillion is.

VIDEOS: Biden and Bush warn: Real enemies aren't Muslims, but "extremists at home"

Ed. here. The anniversary of 9/11 saw lots of speeches, including those made by ex-President Dubya, who started America's meddling in the Muslim civil war, and the incumbent, who ended it (or so we are to believe). 

Although Mr Biden is a Dumbocrat, and Mr Bush a RINO [Is he still registered as a Republican? Ed.], they found a common theme. The dastardly attack, perpetrated by devout followers of the Prophet, abetted by Saudi citizens residing in the US of A, shouldn't be blamed on Islamic extremists or Muslims generally. On no. They are all followers of the Religion of Peace, dontcha know.

Here's a clip, excerpted (but not manipulated) from the official video released by the White House today. Listen to this, Americans, so you'll know where your freely and fairly elected President stands.

   

Former President Bushleague doesn't speak directly of Islamophobia or of the Religion of Peace. Instead, he warns us against "violent extremists at home", who (he says) are different from "violent extremists abroad" -- not  really the same as the crazed Muslims who took those jets for a one-way ride with a sudden stop. 

 

What sort of "extremists at home" do you suppose Dubya has in mind? Antifa? BLM? Surely not the peaceful protesters who occupied the Capitol on January 6th, one of whom was killed by police -- the only one who died in an event which the Democraps and lickspittle media keep telling us was worse than 9/11.

Elsewhere in his speech, Mr Bush made his views clear. He reaffirmed his belief that Americans should continue to welcome refugees and immigrants into the United States. "At a time when nativism could have stirred hatred and violence against people perceived as outsiders, I saw Americans reaffirm their welcome to immigrants and refugees. that is the nation I know," is what he said.

But let's be charitable to the two presidents. They are both in their seventies, and obviously cognitively challenged. One is suffereing from senile dementia. The other is an imbecile. If you find anything wrong with what these two men are saying, don't complain to us. You know what to do, next time you get the chance.

VIDEO: Canadian Election: The Great Non-Debate - Part 3

Further to Walt's two earlier posts, here's a discussion of last night's debate farce. Lauren Chen talks with David Freiheit, creator of the Viva PPC YouTube channel, and Maxime Bernier, leader of the People's Party of Canada.

 

Max was lucky, IMHO, to have been excluded from this week's gong show. And now he's doubly lucky to have this opportunity to answer, without interruption, the arguments, calumnies and outright lies of the lickspittle media. Thanks to all those involved.

Canadian election: The Great Non-Debate - Part 2

We begin our commentary on last night's English-language Leaders' Debate with this quote from the Globe and Mail's TV critic, John Doyle. "What happened across multiple Canadian TV channels was the worst of the worst, an example of utter failure in Canadian television, and a disgraceful insult to the intelligence of viewers and voters. That was not a debate, it was a farce. The fact that the political leaders even agreed to participate in the format is an indictment of their collective intelligence."

Indeed. Maxime Bernier, leader of the People’s Party of Canada, should consider himself fortunate that he didn't meet the Leaders' Debates Commission's blatantly rigged criteria for participating. What was supposed to be a debate between the leaders of Canada's "main" political parties -- including the Greens, currently polling at about 3% -- turned into a shouting match between the leaders and a roster of female (and feminist) "journalists" determined to prove that they could be even tougher and nastier than any man.

To quote Mr Doyle again, "Moderator Shachi Kurl took the view that her job was to stop the leaders from talking." The result was something like a Canadian version of The View, or maybe Family Feud, since all of the leaders were part of the great liberal extended family. That includes Erin O'Toole (the leftmost one in the picture), who is only pretending to be a conservative.

Apparently (says Mr Doyle) the format was to sometimes allow a leader to answer a direct question but also allow hectoring interruptions from another speaker and, at that point, the original speaker was told to shut up. Mr Doyle says the only winner was the moderator's attitude.  

It's hard to pick any highlights from the debate that never was, because the constant interruptions and arguments from the Ladeez destroyed what hockey commentators call "the flow of the game". As the topics moved through climate change, the inevitable and unending indigenous reconciliation, affordability and the kung flu pandemic, all five leaders defended their records and plans. But M Trudeau, who is seeking a third term as prime minister, faced the harshest scrutiny. 

He suffered most from the strange format -- individual questions, than A vs B, then C vs D vs Ed, with which one is which changing every round -- left Mr Socks the target of the other four, with the ability to answer directly only part of the time. He tried to make up for that by interrupting anyway, even if he wasn't in the group of two or three who were supposed to be talking.

Thus, although as on the previous night he wound up with the most air time, Mr McBlackface once again declined to directly answer why he called an election amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, telling voters they must "make a choice" about which leader's plan is best for the future. 

He was also forced to defend his record on sexual misconduct in the military, with Ms Kurly asking why he hadn't done anything about the "misogynist culture" that caused such incidents. Green leader Annamie Paul (who checks three boxes on the "victims" list) contended that M Trudeau is "not a real feminist", two high profile female ministers who left his cabinet. M Trudeau told Ms Pall that he "won't take any lessons on caucus management from you."

After Mr O'Tool accused the Liberal leader of failing to secure the release of "the two Michaels" who have been languishing in Chinese prisons for over 1000 days, Mr Socks said taking a more aggressive approach will not yield results. He delivered his best zinger of the evening, "You do not simply lob tomatoes across the Pacific." 

As the topic moved to climate change, the leaders contended that their various plans to lower greenhouse gas emissions by various percentages were the right ones for Canada's future. None of them denied the premise of the topic -- that there is some kind of climate "crisis" -- or asked whether any human action can change the course of nature. Ms Paul and Mr Singh blamed M Trudeau for the forest fires in British Columbia, without explaining how their nebulous plans would prevent further fires, floods or other acts of God (or nature).

Asked by an indigenous voter why he should trust any of the leaders after "150-plus years of lies and abuse of my people," Mr McBlackface said his government has made progress, but the other leaders quickly pounced on his admission (on this and other issues) that there's "still a lot to be done."

That led  the pretend-conservative leader to accuse the (please God) soon-to-be-former prime minister of pretending to prioritize issues instead of following up with action. "He announces things, and never delivers," said Mr O'Tool. "A prime minister has to deliver on the words."

Indeed. It's not likely that Mr O'Tool, if he should prevail on September 20th, will be any better at delivering on his promises than was Mr Socks, but let's face it, he's the only one with a real chance of becoming the next Prime Minister of Canuckistan. 

Dear Canadian friends! If you live in a riding where the Conservative candidate is in a close race, hold your nose and vote for him/her. If you're in a Québec riding where the Cons have little chance, vote for the PPC if they have a decent chance of winning, otherwise for the Bloc. In all other circumstances, cast your ballot for the only party that offers a real conservative alternative -- Maxime Bernier's People's Party of Canada. 

Canadian election: Rigged Leaders' Debates over, now what? - Part 1

Subhead seen on the CBC News website report on Wednesday night's "Débat des Chefs": "The five main party leaders will meet again on Thursday for the English debate." Did you catch that? "five main party leaders"! Ha ha! It is to laugh! The Liberal (and liberal) bias of the so-called "non-partisan" Leaders' Debate Commission was on full display, along with blatant rigging to silence any conservative voices, as Walt's question of August 28th was answered in the negative. 

In spite of polling ahead of both the Bloc Québécois and the ultrawoke Green Party, People's Party of Canada leader Maxime Bernier -- the man without the mask -- was excluded. Thus the "debates" amounted to nothing more than a liberal love-in, as the four leaders who aren't Just In Trudeau tripped all over themselves to say that they agreed with his "progressive" policies -- including "vaccine mandates" and carbon taxes -- the only issue being who should be Prime Minister come September 21st. 

What did voters want to hear about? A poll conducted exclusively for True North revealed that the two most important issues for hapless Canucks were getting through the kung flu pandemic (36%) and climate change (30%). High-profile issues like foreign affairs and terrorism (read: China and Afghanistan) and "indigenous reconciliation" (read: hand out more money to the victims industry) were the least of respondents' concerns, at 2% and 7% respectively.

So which issues did the alleged journalists and pundits asking the questions focus on? You guessed it. Reconciliation got about 18% of the airtime on Thursday night, and the proceedings both nights started with the now obligatory "land acknowledgment ceremony" in which the emcee said how grateful everyone was that the People Formerly Known As Indians were allowing the debates to be held on land that had been stolen from them.

The official topics for Wednesday night's French-language debate were climate change, the cost of living, "cultural identity" (which skirted the reconciliation non-issue), the pandemic and mandatory vaccines, justice and foreign policy. All five of the participants were pretty much in agreement on those things, so the four who aim to replace Blackie McBlackface threw in "trust and integrity", and whether this election is even necessary. 

In his first exchange with M Trudeau, Erin O'Tool, leader of the Mildly Conservative Party, asked, "Why did you call an election in the middle of a pandemic?... This isn't the time to be dividing people." Jugmeat Singh, leader of the Few Democrats chimed in, "The only reason to call an election is a selfish one. To gain more power. That was not the right thing to do." 

Mr Socks' lame response was that Canadians deserve a say on how the country gets out of the pandemic. Mr Singh countered that there was no real choice, since the two main parties -- and there are only those two -- were like Tweedledumb and Tweedledumber. (He didn't use that phrase. It's mine!)

With no real disagreements on the issues, what amounted to a liberal love-in droned on for two house, the only sparks coming when M Trudeau engaged his drama queen gear. When Yves-François Blanchet (leader of the Bloc Québécois) said he was the only one standing up for the rights of Québec and Québécois, M Trudeau got all huffy and said he was just as much a Québecker as M Blanchet. In fact thatès not true, as Just In's mother, née Margaret Sinclair, was from the western province of Saskatchewan, and never bothered to learn French or otherwise become part of the "Québec nation".

That reminds me of a story I heard recently about the wife of Emperor Trudeau I. She was always something of an airhead, an earlier version of Princess Di, who married a much older man for reasons known only to her. She may also have had a problem with, errr, substance abuse. (It was all the rage in the disco era.) Anyhoo, she took to hanging out with the celebs at New York's Studio 54, and was photographed "going commando", showing a type of Canadian beaver not seen on the nickel. When asked to comment, Pierre (le père de Just In) allegedly said, "I hope Teddy Kennedy drives her home!" 

But I digress. [Indeed. Can you just wrap up Wednesday night and we'll leave Thursday for the next post? Ed.] OK! Election debates always come with high expectations, to which they rarely live up. Wednesday night's debate was no exception. It did, however, signal that the languid pace of this summer campaign is over now. 

 The leaders' messaging, their efforts to stand apart from their opponents, the occasional lame barbs they traded back and forth, all amounted to an acknowledgement by the party leaders that the public opinion polls they profess to ignore are right. This race is close. A majority government appears out of reach for the two frontrunners. That means it's time for strategic voting.

Walt's advice for conservative Canucks, and everyone else who's sick of Just In Trudeau and all his pomps and wokeness: If you live in a riding where the Conservative candidate is in a close race, hold your nose and vote for him/her. If you're in a Québec riding where the Cons have little chance, vote for the PPC if they have a decent chance of winning, otherwise for the Bloc.

In all other circumstances, cast your ballot for the only party that offers a real conservative alternative -- Maxime Bernier's People's Party of Canada. The PPC is sitting at around 8%, nation-wide, in the latest polls. It would be wonderful, and good for Canada, to see them win not just Mad Max's seat (Beauce) but one or two besides.

Note from Ed.: Once Walt gets the bit between it's teeth, it's hard to stop him. Part 2 of his report on the Leaders' Debates follows momentarily.

VIDEO: Update on the disappearance of Malaysian flight MH370

Longtime readers will remember that Walt took a deep interest in the disappearance on 8 March 2014 of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370. The Boeing 777 vanished without a trace while flying from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. Click here to see our complete file on this topic, the most recent post having been written almost 18 months ago. 

To be frank [But you're Walt! Ed.], no new information has emerged since then. But it's hard to forget entirely one of the greatest aviation mysteries of all time. We're happy to repost this calm and clear recap of the events of that fateful day, and the subsequent unsuccessful search for the wreckage.

   

The theory first advanced by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, which for some reason led the investigation, was that the most likely cause was a "hypoxia event" -- lack of oxygen resulting in the unconsciousness of the pilot and co-pilot. Investigators never reached any consensus on this theory.

Consideration was given to a number of more sinister explanations, including possible hijacking, a fire (accidental or otherwise) in the plane's cargo, and the intentional shooting down of the aircraft by a military plane based somewhere near south Asia... say at Diego Garcia. The last is my theory and I'm sticking to it!

The Malaysian Ministry of Transport's final report, published in July of 2018, was inconclusive but highlighted Malaysian air traffic controllers' failures to attempt to communicate with the aircraft shortly after its disappearance. 

Absent a definitive cause for the disappearance of MH370, air transport industry safety recommendations and regulations have been intended mostly to prevent a repetition of the circumstances. Corrective measures proposed include increased battery life on underwater locator beacons, lengthening of recording times on flight data recorders and cockpit voice recorders, and new standards for aircraft position reporting over the open ocean.

[Ed., can you come up with a snappier conclusion than "Stay tuned."? Walt.] [No. Ed.]

President Trump decries removal of statue of Robert E. Lee

In his prescient novel 1984, George Orwell describes the "woke" society which the liberals and loony left have created for us in this century. A quote: "Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute." 

The endless process of trying to make the past conform to the liberal vision of the present and future continued this week, as the great monument to General Robert E. Lee, hero of the Glorious War of the Secessrion and (some would say) the Greatest Virginian of All Time, was lifted off its plinth in Richmond VA.

You can erase the images of history. You can obliterate the images and statues that commemorate great events and great people. But, try as you might to pretend that these things -- people and events -- didn't exist, you can't change history. They did exist, and until you can lobotomize the entire population [Don't think they wouldn't do it, if they could! Ed.], some people will remember, and will pass on their memories to others.

President Donald Trump remembers who General Lee was, and what he stood for, and has issued a statement denouncing the removal of the biggest Confederate statue in the US of A. He called General Lee a "unifying force" who was "ardent in his resolve to bring the North and South together through many means of reconciliation and imploring his soldiers to do their duty in becoming good citizens of this Country." 

He went on to say the US would have benefitted from having Lee leading the war in Afghanistan. Could be. General Lee's orderly withdrawal from Richmond saved the city from further destruction, and saved the lives of 1000s of his men. More important, it brought the war to a close without one final bloodbath. 

"If only we had Robert E. Lee to command our troops in Afghanistan, that disaster would have ended in a complete and total victory many years ago," wrote President Trump. "What an embarrassment we are suffering because we don't have the genius of a Robert. E. Lee."

Well, the ultra-woke iconoclasts encourage by the Democraps and their Antifa and BLM allies have succeeded in hauling General Lee from his pedestal. In other cities, statues of Washington and Lincoln have had the same shameful treatment. But it's a long road that has no turnings. What has been torn down can be erected again, once Americans recover from their temporary insanity. Selah!

VIDEO: Canadian election: the natives are restless!

A few days ago the government of Canuckistan (J. Trudeau, Prop.) opened its side of the World's Longest Undefended Border (TM) to American visitors, as long as they've had the kung flu jabs. (Frostbacks are still barred from non-essential travel to the US side.) Border crossings [including the one at Roxham Rd, Québec? Ed.] have been festooned with welcome signs -- "Keep Canada green! Bring American money!"

Walt spent the Labour Day weekend in the Niagara Region of southern Ontario, on the pretty and peaceful side of the river, to see firsthand how Mr Socks' campaign for re-election is unfolding. 

As noted here a week ago, native Canadians -- meaning "old stock Canadians" (read: those of European descent), not the "First Nations" who used to be called Indians and Eskimos -- are angry about a costly and unnecessary election, called in the middle of the Covid "crisis" merely to satisfy the Trudeau ego. And -- surprise, surprise! -- they're actually taking to the streets in "mostly peaceful protests"!

Yesterday, as luck would have it, Walt was in the neighbourhood when Blackie McBlackface visited a steel plant in Welland ON, in the heart of Niagara, for what was supposed to be a photo op in which Hisself would appear doing fistbumps with happy smiling peasants [workers, shurely! Ed.]

As it turned out, he (and the short lady in black -- Canada's "Diplomat of the Year" for 2018 -- you can look it up) were surrounded by more cops and security guards than workers. The rent-a-cops were in turn surrounded by angry protesters. Here's the video, from CHCH-TV in nearby Hamilton ON.  

 

How about that, EH?! As you heard in the video, Mr Socks claims the protesters were just a bunch of anti-vaxxers. But did you see the sign? Not the one that said "Trudeau is a little shit!", but the other one which read "Fear tyranny, not the virus!" That, dear friends, is what so many Canucks are upset about -- loss of freedom! 

Forced vaccination, "vaccine passports", lockdowns, and the campaign by the nanny state to control every aspect of people's lives -- that's why people are up in arms, not just in Canada and the USA, but in the UK and Europe as well. 

Still, it's surprising to see the normally polite and sheeplike Canadians getting so incensed (about something other than hockey) that they'd turn up on a holiday Monday when the weather was perfect for golf or sailing or whatever they usually do up there.

After the unpleasantness in Welland, Blackie McBlackface and the Lady in Black (it was actually the Hon. Chrystia Freeland, who usually wears a red dress, or sometimes a white one that shows off her nips) were bussed to London ON, where things actually got worse!

An even bigger crowd of protesters met the bus, heckling and jeering continually as M Trudeau made yet another little show of defiance, saying he would not stop "standing up for Canadians." He might better have said "standing up to Canadians", since the latest polls show the majority of voters are going ABT.

But wait (as Vince Offer used to say), there's more! While boarding the bus to get out of Dodge, the Little Emperor was hit by gravel or some such small objects [popcorn? sheep shit? Ed.] thrown in his direction. The Masked Male Feminist looked startled as he ducked inside the vehicle. He later confirmed to reporters on the campaign plane that he was hit by gravel, but said he was OK.

What will happen today? Will M Trudeau be able to make any public appearances, anywhere, without attracting angry protesters, just as flies are attracted to... well, you know.... Walt thinks the Diplomat of the Year [You've beaten that gag to death. Ed.] may have been wearing a black dress as a signal that she knows the Campaign to Re-elect Canada's Prettiest Prime Minister is doomed. Doomed, I tell you!

Polling day (the proper name, in Canada and the UK, for the day on which people vote) is September 20th. Stay tuned. Agent 3 will make the popcorn; Poor Len Canayen will make poutine.

Further reading: "FDR was right about one thing...", WWW 11/8/21. For Canadians, this election really is about freedom from slavery to the Almighty State. 

If you're in any doubt, search for news from Australia, where there is a 2100 to 0500 curfew in effect, and folks who choose not to get vaccinated are being told (by their prime minister, no less!) that henceforth they will not be able to participate in the economy!

More reading: "How Trudeau is losing the support of voters", by Candice Malcolm, in the Toronto Sun, 7/9/21. "...a smug, entitled, self-righteous, and condescending politician who doesn’t practice what he preaches."