For those new on the thread or normie lurkers: Ray Epps was a mysterious guy who was trying to incite people during January 6th and mysteriously the FBI took him off their person of interest list and never arrested him even though he did more illegal stuff (actually tried to incite violence) than most of the people they did arrest.
The argument can be made that in 2016, they drank their own cool-aid so hard, they couldn't see how unpopular the wicked witch was and didn't prepare a sufficient cheating apparatus. In 2020, they weren't going to take any chances. However, even in 2020, I think Trump surprised them by gaining support when thought he would lose some of it after they spent the last 4 years attacking him non-stop.
Having said that, Trump knew what was coming. He even hinted at it several times. And he's a fighter, but seemed to put up little resistance in what was an obvious election steal using fraud. So it would stand to reason that there is something happening behind the scenes. Would he just roll over and admit defeat the way he did if there wasn't a plan? Also, after the mid-terms, it became very obvious that unless the voter fraud is fixed, he can't win the 2024 election. So why is he even hinting that he is going to run in 2024 at that point?
I hope what is in this post will take place, but after 2 years it's getting harder to be sure. What I am sure of is that we will win. The only question is, when the fight for our freedom really starts, how many will need to give up their lives for victory.
Most environmental groups have been co-opted and weaponized by the deep state a long time ago. They show up to protest what the deep state orders them to protest.
If you think about it, the global warming (now climate change, soon to be "the weather") movement is the most anti-environment environmental movement ever. In Britain, they are opening up renewable wood-burning plants to reduce their emissions. They are also pushing for the reclaiming of wilderness so crops can be grown for use as renewable fuels (you either do that or you starve a portion of your population by using existing farmland, right now they want to do both). I remember when environmentalists wanted forests and wilderness preserved as habitat for wild animals. Whatever the new wave of environmentalists is, they sure don't care about what we tend to think of as the environment. I wonder when we start switching back to whale oil for our lubricant and indoor lighting needs instead of using that polluting crude oil.
Bonus fact: We sometimes joke that they ban plastic straws but switch to plastic cups instead. Well, in my areas, just that happened. Wendy's used to have their medium cups be made of waxxed paper. The last time I was there, a few months ago, those are plastic now. But the straws have been government mandated paper for several years. The waxxed paper cups worked perfectly fine. I had no issues with them. But the paper straws are horrible. Basically unusable. I think a lot of this pseudo-environmental garbage they push on us is more to show their power over us by making our lives worse than anything else.
The media helps this along as well. A lot of the more recent school shooters are trying to become infamous by emulating previous ones and trying to beat their body count. And while the media is super sensitive to hide the names and ethnicities of protected group criminals so the public doesn't identify them and develop a negative view of their communities, they do no such things for school shooters. They plaster them on the front page. It's almost like they're trying to give the school shooters what they want, notoriety. It's almost like they are challenge the next crazed individual to do better. If the media wanted to help reduce school shootings, they would stop publishing their names and photos, and downplay the story as not to give the next crazed individuals any ideas. But they do none of these things.
Unfortunately, the FBI has been around for a long long time (since 1908). Long enough to have been doing horrible things even in the prohibition era such as poisoning liquor to kill those who drank it. But they have changed their ways. They now help the cartels provide drugs to the public. So they did learn their lesson a little bit.
It doesn't matter where it was created. It matters who created it and who released it. US also funded the Wuhan lab so it is a US deep state creation either way.
Him and a few others such as Fauxi and Peter Daszak off the top of my head.
They should also be sued for their part in rigging the 2020 election (once the flood waters on it finally break). A lot of people's livelihood was destroyed in that travesty. They deserve compensation.
I think it might simply be that they have a limited amount of resources to sensor things, at the moment. And when normies see these stories they think "Oh, the government was bad back then, but thank goodness they are not that way now". It never pops into their mind that the government is worse now than it has ever been. However, if you run into a normie that starts questioning the government, point them to these stories and they might have an "Ah Ha!" moment realizing that the signs for the government being evil were always there, they just never put them together.
Even I find myself jolted awake to how long the FBI has been really corrupt and evil. I thought it was outrageous that they lied to get warrants to spy on Trump and ended up getting away with it. It seemed that they were getting worse and more political. But then you look at the 1993 Waco, Texas incident, and you see that the FBI has been doing the same exact thing for years (lying to get warrants and much worse in that case). While the ATF rightfully gets a lot of blame for that incident, we should not forget that the FBI was the driving force behind it as well.
In this case it absolutely is. There is no other good explanation. They've been told to downplay the disaster so the media can claim there is nothing to see there and continue to not report on it. They only question is, what is so significant about this specific event that they are putting so much effort into burying it.
Basically, the scenario I'm seeing right now is:
-
Some entity needed massive amounts of Vinyl Chloride for some secret project. If the project is secret, it is almost certainly evil. So they go the CDC to update the chemical's toxicological profile so in case there was a spill, they could easily bury it.
-
And a spill happens. I would say more than a coincidence. In fact, I would argue it could have been an insider who was to scared to become a whistle blower (whistle blowers get suicided) but still wanted to shed light on what was happening.
-
FEMA doesn't want to sent aid to the region. If they do they would be admitting something happened and this would shed light on the incident. When Trump shows up, they realize that their refusal to send aid could actually shed more light on this story, so change their mind and agree to send aid. But only after they had no choice.
-
EPA lies by downplaying the severity of the disaster so the media doesn't have to cover it and to help make the story go away.
So the deep state want this sorry buried and they even took pre-emptive action to make sure if something happened with Vinyl Chloride, it would be easier to burry per 1 above. The question is, what is being covered up. I haven't seen anything severe enough to merit the response they gave it. If it was just about destroying that town, they have much better ways at their disposal that are much more subtle.
Something is definitely going on but I don't think we know what yet.
If not taken care of, they will usually fail pretty quickly. A car burring oil is a disaster waiting to happen for a driver who doesn't pay attention to the oil level. And in the long run, will fail anyways as the oil sludges up its internals.
There are some people that do take really good care of their old cars. In fact, to own an old car for an extended period of time, you generally have to pay attention to it. I'd rather some bad apples slip through the cracks than the government getting involved and cracking down on everyone.
Also, new cars, with their aluminum blocks and heads, very precise engineering, and planned obsolescence, will fail much more quickly and easily than older cars as they age. And even fi they don't, they will become un-economical to maintain with the sophisticated and expensive parts required to keep them running. This issue is resolving itself it if ever was an issue.
My argument would be for the EPA to back off and not get involved unless something is actually a problem. A small number of people messing with the emissions systems of their own cars is not going to cause a measurable problem. Also, once car emissions get good enough, there should be no reason to come up with better ones as you will be spending a ton of money for miniscule gains per the law of diminishing returns. However, the EPA and other governing bodies have become bent on constantly pushing the envelope even when it does not need to be pushed anymore. Modern cars and even 10 year old ones are actually very clean. So clean in fact that jurisdictions that had programs to check if cars emission control systems were still working (every 2 or so years for older cars) could not use their emission measuring devices (which worked on older cars) on the newer cars because their emissions had become too low for them to detect. Note that these programs checked that cars complied with the emissions they were manufactured to meet when they were brand new, not new standards. As a result, the emissions checks for those cars became a matter of plugging them in and seeing if they had any "Check Engine" fault codes active.
Grandfathering makes sense because when you bought the item (let's say car) it met all the government regulations (was legal). For the government to then pass laws and instantly make thousands of law abiding citizens no longer compliant is a can of worms that almost no government has fortunately been dumb/evil enough to open in this specific way. Although I'm seeing it start to happen in California and London, England. The problem is even worse if you consider that it's poor people that generally own old items (such cars) and who can least afford to either retrofit them to meet new regulations or to throw them away and buy a new one.
However, this isn't that much of a problem as most items (especially cars) do wear out as they age and get used. And this is especially true with planned obsolescence where things break down intentionally after a certain amount of use so you will be forced to waste money on a new item.
In general, there just aren't enough old cars on the road in most places (especially where they salt the road in the winter which results in cars rusting like crazy) for them to actually contribute much to pollution. And the older the cars, the less of them there is and the less they contribute overall, even if individually they might pollute more.
However, this does create an interesting paradox of sorts. Making new cars too clean and safe and therefore expensive would actually cause more deaths and more pollution because people would stop being able to afford these very clean and safe but also expensive new cars and would just continue using their old less safe and clean cars. Therefore, ironically, there are times where making a car less efficient or safe but therefore cheaper will result in more lives saved as people will be more able to migrate to the new improved product.
Who would have thought that the EPA would be so completely corrupted that it can't even do it's only job, accurately report pollution.
However, no worries. If you dare to make any modification to your car's emission system, rest assured that they will be on you like Xiden on a child.
They should have a new slogan: When it doesn't matter, we're there (negligible extra emissions for a car). When it does matters (like toxic air burning people's lungs and skin from a chemical spill), we don't care.
Let's let the "experts" handle this. If they decide that packing the crash site with tons of dynamite and detonating it in order to prevent the propane from accidentally exploding and hurting someone, then who are we to argue?
Yup. On this episode of King of the Hill, Bobby joins antifa and derails a train. Lesson of the episode is: Don't join antifa so you don't inadvertently become a government operative bent on collapsing the economy by attacking critical infrastructure.
Christ does not send anyone to hell. Unrepentant sinners send themselves there.
The US government has been running experiments on its own people for years. And in Canada too. No reason to believe they have toned it down recently. The only question is what are they doing that we don't know about.
Some examples:
A list of 15 US examples: https://www.theclever.com/15-illegal-experiments-the-us-government-has-done-on-its-own-citizens/
And an example of one that blead into Canada: https://meaww.com/cia-mk-ultra-victims-canada-demand-apology
The weird thing is that the search engines aren't even censoring any of these. Most of the time I try to use search engines to find something that remotely challenges trust in the narrative, the search results are clearly censored as the results are almost all bogus. Have to cycle through a few search engines and terms to find what I am looking for. But in this case, lots of results where the US government ran illegal and harmful experiments on its own citizens. And I don't doubt that many normies have seen these lists. And yet they can't put it together that maybe they shouldn't trust the government so much. Or they honestly think that the government from the time of those experiments is actually more corrupt and more evil than the current one. If anything, it's become pretty clear that the opposite is true.
I think that is what the government is trying to do. Partly because they want to deflect blame from themselves and partly because the current Canadian government is very anti-Christian.
What a lot of the reporting doesn't make clear is that the federal government of Canada was the only governing body that had the legal authority to go into the reserves and take these children. It was their plan. The religious organizations naively though they could help these children by taking them in, but in retrospect, they should have never agreed to help for their own sake. Now they are being used as scapegoats for the whole thing.
And then unfounded lies are being pilled on on top of it all like the mass graves lie for which there is actually no credible evidence. It has to be taken into account that the government's own commission found that "Reliable death records exist and report no mass graves" and yet they are promoting the idea of something that not only doesn't exist, it is not even expected to exist. You can look at the link below to see some details on the whole mass grave hoax if you're interested in knowing a bit more about it:
My argument is not that the residential schools were a good thing. It is that the media in Canada has co-opted it and skewed the entire narrative for their own political purposes. There is no doubt that some children have had really bad experiences in those schools and some passed away (some potentially from neglect but others from natural causes, childhood mortality was much higher the further back you go) and it should be acknowledged as it has been. However, there are children who had fond memories of those school. It does not mean that the program was good as a whole or should ever be repeated (it should not) but to misrepresent it to such as degree by silencing some voices and promoting others does a disservice to everyone.
And the lesson from it is missed by almost all the politicians who exploit this issue for their political purposes, especially Trudeau. That lesson is that the government should be given less power over the people, not more. Any time it does anything, it screws it up. Furthermore, taking away the native's guns (which Trudeau wants to do, along with the rest of Canadians) is only going to open the door for things like this to happen into the future.
I wish your grandmother and you well.
Maybe they can pull off a "Weekend at Bernie's" situation.
Except no specific person is even alleged to have been buried there. If you read the article, it goes into this. No one pointed and said my relative is buried there. They listened to some unsubstantiated rumours and started scanning the ground in the area for bodies. The only thing they found was abnormalities in an apple orchard where you would expect them due to the tree roots. There are no un-accounted-for bodies. Even if there are remains there (unlikely but possible), no ownership of them can be established so no one actually can object to the exhumation at this point. Here is the relevant quote from the article:
Reliable death records exist and report no mass graves. The government of Canada did an in-depth analysis of the goings on at Indian Residential Schools as part of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission which took place between June 2008 and mid-December 2015. The most reliable information was collected from all over the country at that time, and all deaths at the Kamloops school were accounted for.
You should not blindly believe what you see in the Canadian press. I'm not sure what evidence would be required to convince you that they are dishonest. I have tried to point out their lies to you, but that is all I can do.
Turdeau (the current PM) always says sorry for what OTHER people did and no doubt he has apologized many times for the wrong doings of others on this topic. And the government of Canada did set aside money for compensation for abuses resulting from the residential schools and did officially apologize. I don't disagree with that.
As for the second point, the residential school narrative is used to promote critical race theory and bolster it. That is a problem. The fact that there are a lot of lies and exaggerations in the narrative makes it worse because it means the media is using inaccuracies and lies to manufacture outrage and getting away with it.
As for the buried bodies, there were no buried bodies discovered. That is a MSM hoax. Basically, they pointed ground penetrating radar at an orchard and found objects in the ground, which you would expect (tree roots, rocks). They then claimed they were bodies even though ground penetrating radar does not have the resolution to identify objects. They never dug up one body. That is my main points about the residential schools story. The push so many lies about it and supress any counter-points. Counter points such as that many of students had a good experience in these schools (doesn't mean the were a good thing overall, but the truth matters). Here is a link that goes a bit more into the buried bodies hoax:
I have to disagree. This isn't actually studying history, this is tuning into the Canadian media network which has been promoting their version of the residential school history for years. No one in Canada is unaware of it. And most in Canada only know about it what they have been told by the government controlled media, which is a carefully crafted political narrative which is being used to divide the country. It is also used to enhance the victim points of the native population and to further promote the idea of white people bad.
It would be a step in the right direction if she actually knew this was propaganda and what the counter-points where to the mainstream narrative on this.
For example, these videos contain some counter points to the mainstream narrative on the residential schools:
https://rumble.com/v1dlrfx-residential-school-survivor-speaks-out.html
The painting itself has one main inaccuracy that is omitted and not historical. The government of Canada (referred to as the crown) has legal stewardship of the natives on reservations to this very day (sounds like slavery to me, but few know about this or care). They are the only ones who ever had the right to separate the native children from their parent. It is the government that took the children from their parents and gave them to various religious groups (not just the ones depicted here).
Here are the following additional omissions and inaccuracies about the residential school narrative as it is presented in the media in Canada:
- The schools were not just Catholic run. Other groups such as the Anglicans and Methodists had schools.
- Several prominent native writers have publicly said they had great experiences at these schools and it helped to set the framer work for their successful writing careers.
- Many non-native parents tried to get their children into some of these schools as some of them actually had very good reputations.
- Many of the children that were put into these schools were taken out of broken families where the parents has serious issues such as alcoholism. The government had spent many years trying to destroy native communities and it did eventually start to take effect, especially when they started to provide them with free money. Keep in mind, until this very day, the natives on reservation are under the stewardship of the crown (Canadian federal government). That's who controls what goes on in these communities.
- The new thing with residential schools is the mass grave hoaxes where ground penetrating radar (which has a very low resolution and CANNOT definitively identify any object) is used as proof for hundreds of unmarked graves. The first article link above goes a bit into this.
The residential schools are promoted by the mainstream media in Canada for their political purposes. This is as mainstream a leftist political talking point as anything. And with that, comes a lot of lies that surround it which are promoted in the media. All counter-points are supressed (counter points to the narrative, not arguments that the residential schools were a bad idea). And the blame is shifted wherever they want it and away from who they don't want blamed (the government).
Furthermore, the truly dangerous arguments on residential schools is that because they happened, natives should become a protected class who should not be held responsible for any crimes and be allowed to rob other citizens with impunity. That is what they are really pushing with residential schools. And that whites are bad.
That's why I would say it's something to investigate. Definitely unconfirmed right now and seems too good to be true.