Canada's Prime minister Justin Trudeau, with the enthusiastic support of his assistant Deputy Minister/Minister of Finance Chrystia Freeland, unlawfully invoked Canada's Emergency Powers after two weeks of uncontestedly peaceful protest by mostly Canadian truckers using their rigs to occupy the streets surrounding Ottawa’s parliament buildings.
Drunk with these newly claimed emergency powers, Prime Minister Trudeau accelerated his degradation of his own countrymen with mean-spirited labeling, such as Nazis, racists, white supremacists, and, of course, Trumpsters (a stretch considering the protestors were mostly Canadians), deliberate misrepresentation and exaggeration of events (reminiscent of those from our own January 6 protest over the 2020 election), and finally, potentially dangerous accusations of domestic terrorism and interference with his officiality. There was no recognition of the Canadian's people's right to protest, contrary to his rigorous defense of such protests in prior years.
Perhaps Prime Minister Trudeau was inspired by the U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas' February 7, 2022, National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS) Bulletin, updating the agency's dangerous interpretation of domestic terrorism, “The United States remains in a heightened threat environment fueled by several factors, including an online environment filled with false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories, and other forms of mis-, dis-, and mal-information (MDM) introduced and/or amplified by foreign and domestic threat actors. These threat actors seek to exacerbate societal friction to sow discord and undermine public trust in government institutions to encourage unrest, which could potentially inspire acts of violence.” (See these links for more info: https://www.dhs.gov/ntas/advisory/national-terrorism-advisory-system-bulletin-february-07-2022 and https://www.cisa.gov/mdm.) According to this terrorism definition, the legacy corporate mainstream media script readers must be squirming, fearful they are lingering near the top of this list.
The protestors were unpersuaded by Prime minister Trudeau's bullying. They committed to continuing their peaceful occupation of the streets around Parliament until he revokes his medically-unsupported-therefore-subjectively-tyrannical vaccine mandate required to deliver goods in Canada. Until then, with enthusiastic support of many residents of Canada and the world, protestors busied themselves cleaning the streets they occupied, clearing the trash, feeding the significant homeless population in the area, and noticeably preventing crime where it otherwise flourished.
Meanwhile in the halls of Parliament, Ministers Trudeau and Freeland were equally enthusiastic in their seizing bank accounts of not just protesting Canadian truckers, but also of participating Canadian donors. Whether small or large, the donation amounts made no difference, Trudeau and Freeland ordered entire bank accounts to be frozen. The unintended consequences of this unprecedented abuse of power and potential criminality has been Canadians' organic mass response to transfer their own yet-unfrozen accounts elsewhere, creating an actual emergency for Canadian banks courtesy of Canada's reckless leadership.
The eye-opening take-away for the watching world, outraged by the theft of Canadians' bank accounts, was the revelation that some disgruntled, arguably unhinged, hacker scrapped a massive amount of personal data from a donation platform. He then shared the private data with unprincipled, compromised media, who promptly published the donors' identities, leaving thousands vulnerable to Ministers Trudeau's and Freeland's theft of their bank accounts. This police-state surveillance and intimidation, along with online trolls and creeps, only augmented the assault on free speech and right to petition for redress of grievances.
In more poor form, as children played with their pets, made new friends, bounced in blowup contraptions, Trudeau called in military-clad law enforcement to reinforce Ottawa’s local police to contain the purported national emergency posed by these Canadian truckers, supporters, and families that threatened Canada's sovereignty and Canadian lives. Reports circulated that United Nations planes were parked at local airfields, drawing public suspicion that foreign armed forces were recruited to stand against protesting Canadians because local police officers refused to aggressively confront their own peacefully protesting people.
Reforge Local Bonds of Trust
Before Prime minister Trudeau's emergency declaration, local law enforcement and the protestors enjoyed a certain obvious camaraderie because truckers are as beloved as police officers and it was a chance to demonstrate their mutual loyalty, trust, and respect. The suspicion that foreign law enforcement was potentially engaged because local police refused to engage with their own residents is instructive.
Local law enforcement and a community's residents, whose rights they swore to protect, need each other. We crave a reforging of the bonds of loyalty, trust, and respect that used to make us more cohesive, more stable as a community. There are many socioeconomic problems that have separated us from one another, further aggravated by political factions. Everything is political these days, but substantially lacks proper context for viable solutions.
Imagine if our residents community-wide did reforge the bonds of loyalty, trust, and respect between ourselves and local police officers, sheriffs, and deputies. The mistrust, animus, and unwillingness to support each other no matter our avocation (officers, parents, judges, business owners, students, electricians, doctors and nurses, aldermen, teachers … you get the idea) would be consciously resisted in favor of support, cooperation, compassion, responsibility, accountability, and preservation of dignity all around.
Do you know what else such a reforging would restore? Our individual power, as well as our collective local power. It could also provide the best chance for real justice to prevail.
It is thrilling to contemplate how, between local police officers and residents, we have everything we need to uphold peace and justice if we each understand our constitutionally protected rights and our laws. Local police and sheriff departments are responsible for investigating almost all crime in a community. When synergy of noble purpose exists, born of trust and confidence in the fairness of process, a cooperative, productive civil environment can totally prevail. It becomes a lot more risky for criminal conduct to thrive, regardless of the misdeeds, if accountability and justice are the currency of the realm.
Know Your County Grand Jury
County Grand Juries are made up of local residents and can independently convene to determine if fair and probable evidence warrants prosecution. With a quorum, these local county grand juries can lawfully convene hearings that are secret in order to protect the accused's reputation in the event no indictment is warranted.
Your local county grand jury can lawfully conduct investigations of wrong doing by public officials. These grand juries have the authority to subpoena witnesses. In Scott County we are fortunate to have a sheriff on the record supporting enforcing grand-jury investigations.
Grand Juries also inspect jails to ensure humane confinement, and to make sure inmates are being adjudicated in a timely manner as dictated by due process. The 2022 Scott County Grand Jury selection and empanelment will take place Wednesday, March 16, at 9 a.m. in the Scott County Court House for those interested in this intensely diminishing civil service. We the people only have three primary tools in our republic's governance – power of the vote, power of the purse, and power of the jury (both Grand and Petit). Use it or lose it.
Don't Ignore Jury Duty
Petit Juries are chosen from jury pools of residents to hear evidence presented during trials, whose cases require a jury of the defendants' peers to determine guilt or innocence, instead of a judge's singular ruling. Serving on a jury is an opportunity to weigh in on fairness, applicability, reliability, and fact-based evidence.
Currently, 90 percent of all indicted defendants plead out and never go to trial for two reasons: affordability and plea agreements. Eighty percent of Americans cannot afford a defense attorney, so alternatively, they must accept a public defender. Typically, communities' public defender offices are understaffed and seriously underfunded compared to their prosecutor counterparts.
The other reason is prosecutorial discretion, which includes a wide range of legal tactics and tools to convince defendants to plead. A lot of those tools are legal sledgehammers, whose use is better described as legal bullying. An example is a prosecutor offering a lesser charge if the defendant pleads, or a far harsher charge if he/she refuses. We saw this with January 6 defendants, who were charged with misdemeanor trespassing or property damage. Most defendants started out wanting a jury trial, but were coerced into taking plea agreements offered in lieu of having their charges augmented with domestic terrorism attached. Besides the exponentially greater cost to defend, the chances of being found guilty by a biased D.C. jury would mean exponentially more years in prison.
This manipulative legal coercion happens routinely in our criminal justice system because we have all but eliminated jury trials in direct violation of individual due process rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. Ignoring such violations, or worse, ducking jury duty when called to serve, we each directly play a part in permitting abusive prosecutorial discretion that greatly exceeds the limits of a just society.
U.N. Agenda 2030 Ends Local Policing
If our local police officers and deputies (our parents, siblings, spouses, relatives, neighbors, and co-workers) knew they had our trust and active support, and we knew we had theirs, meaning the blue line included protecting each of us, how much stronger, safer, more secure, confident, and content would our communities be?
Abusive, violent, unreasonable use-of-force (you know the type) would not be allowed in our police departments, a policy of zero tolerance, nonnegotiable, would calm so much fear. And it works both ways. Residents must stop their provocation and abusive resistance when engaged. Solidarity between officers and residents is all but guaranteed when officers honor their oaths by adhering to the constitution first and foremost. In return, steadfast loyalty, respect, and trust from residents resolved to protect and honor their service is the formula to achieve a powerful good for peace, justice, prosperity, and stability.
Together, we need to reach out and open up permanent channels of communication to make peace where needed. We best commit to this common good, especially now because the United Nations Agenda 2030 envisions the nationwide elimination of local police departments in favor of a global federated law enforcement apparatus. Staying in law enforcement for many who currently serve will mean transferring away from their homes, possibly for foreign destinations, to enforce laws and regulations whose genesis is increasingly global and often disconnected from genuine justice. A best strategy against this looming global vision for increasingly centralized governance and moving it further away from the people, is to reforge even stronger bonds between residents and our local peace officers.
The elites devising this piece of the UN Agenda 2030, in synch with the World Economic Forum's (WEF) “Great Reset,” know what Canadians learned during their truckers' protest: most local police officers will not take up arms against their own community. A contingency recruited from Segovia might not have such reticence when containing protesters to whom they have zero allegiance (https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda).
Self-determinate people worldwide felt a shock wave when Ministers Trudeau and Freeland froze their own citizens' bank accounts without due process. It is important to note here that Prime minister’s emergency declaration was entirely unjustified according to Canadian law, which requires an existential threat to Canada's sovereignty and to Canadian lives from foreign invasion. Conditions in Canada did not come close to meeting the standards for such an emergency declaration, therefore no actions flowing from his administration's use of emergency powers were lawful.
Or were they? Could it be that Ministers Trudeau and Freeland were not operating under Canadian law? Perhaps, because the truckers were protesting a health-related vaccine mandate, they derived their authority from a 2005 international health treaty signed onto by 196 countries. This agreement has been active ever since, with many updates and annexes over time unbeknownst to most citizens of the participating countries.
Each one of the 196 countries, including the United States, has enacted legislation within their Emergency Management Acts in some form to align with special authorities that can be triggered by global-health crises officially acknowledged by the World Health Organization, according to the International Health Regulations 2005 (sometimes referred to as the International Health Agreement 2005). The links below provide a start for better understanding the emergency management apparatus that unconstitutionally umbrellas parts of our constitutionally protected rights when invoked.
The importance of this health agreement cannot be understated because it has the force of law due to its treaty status, and supersedes our Constitution, bestowing authorities disallowed in our U.S. and state constitutions. It is safe to say that had this agreement been disclosed to Americans, it would have been rejected for its blatant set-aside of human rights if deemed necessary by a foreign entity, in this case the World Health Order.
It would explain why Iowa Governor Reynolds and Illinois Governor Pritzker both cited the World Health Organization in their emergency declarations to justify the draconian COVID-19 lockdowns and other extreme mitigations.
As of 2019, with the emergence of COVID-19, these same countries under the facilitation of the United Nations are again conspiring to impose a new global health treaty called the International Pandemic Preparedness and Response Agreement of 2024. We should all pay close attention so that history does not repeat itself. See these links for more information: