In Quebec, the Arsonists Now Complain about the Heat
A Message to the CAQ and to Regime Academics on What Democracy Means
An election is underway in Quebec, where most people appear to exist under a form of self-imposed amnesia about events that happened as recently as three months ago (the end of most, not all, mask mandates). The deaths of their parents and grand-parents in long-term care homes is not significant enough for them to be a major election issue, a time for reckoning with the atrocities that have been committed in the name of “fighting” a disease with a 99.85% survival rate. Their parents and grand-parents died mostly from starvation, dehydration, neglect, and outright euthanasia. Their deaths were then blamed on Covid-19, and thus used to stoke fear across the society. Ordinary people were then blamed for jeopardizing granma’s life—not the state.
The ruling CAQ under Premier Legault appears set to escape from any accountability. Of course, there must be some humans left, with functional memories, who will be angry and want to express that anger. It’s those who cannot understand this, that are truly remarkable, that is, truly awful.
Having incited hatred, stoked divisions, and having intimidated and threatened nearly a million adult Quebeckers—with mandatory “vaccination,” “vaccine” passports, and even a threatened vax tax—those same ruling party parliamentarians are now complaining about...“intimidation and threats”.
Playing the innocent victim: the favourite pastime among North America’s criminal class.
And look at how quick they are to undermine their very own “democratic institutions”: bash the minority, and deny them representation. That same minority works and pays taxes—but is apparently denied the right of representation, and is to be denied a whole series of other fundamental human rights.
Here we have University of Ottawa political science professor Thomas Juneau defending the consensus among Quebec political parties in denying a voice and denying rights to those who asserted their right to bodily autonomy and informed consent:
“It was the right thing to do at the time because it was the worst public health crisis in a century. To say (a minority of voters) were not represented is not a problem because we shouldn’t have politicians in the legislature who are openly anti-vaccine, as significant elements in Duhaime’s party are”.
When you go about setting fires, please don’t complain when the flames reach your home. There is no democracy without accountability, none. And there can certainly be no democracy without representation.
(Remember to join us in Telegram.)
Thanks for reading Disaster X! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Everything in the Covid state, nothing outside the Covid state, nothing against the Covid state.
The professor's take was predictable. In fact, we at Fearless Canada had foreseen this would be the case way back in 2020. We knew they were going to pull the 'it was an emergency!' canard to weasel their way out of it. What's been shocking is how easily academia and the courts rolled over for the state. Not the media. We knew how they were going to play it.
This is why we kept names and receipts. There has to be a day of reckoning and accountability.
You can't ruin people's lives and say 'emergency!" You can't. It's amazing how these so-called intellectuals can't see this.
Maybe next time he will generously donate his paycheck to the people who lose their jobs in the name of public health.
Funny how this was the “worst public health crisis in a century” when it in fact wasn’t, and a public health crisis does not mean that human rights and a proper morality and ethics based in actual science can therefore be ignored, and when the “public health crisis” was really an indictment of how we treat the elderly in our society, or how decades of poor dietary habits or lack of exercise eventually has a negative health outcome when confronted by a relatively benign disease (especially if under 60 or having no comorbidities). The banality of the phrasing of reality, that only serves to construct a false reality to account for bad policy. Here is the expert. I would spit in his face if I could.