DC

Nine years later, in 2009, Same year Carney became governor of the Bank of Canada, two men created an organization to put this into practice for Canada. Dominic Barton — the Global Managing Director of **McKinsey & Company** (the most powerful consulting firm in the world). Mark Wiseman — the head of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, managing the retirement savings of every working Canadian. Together they co-founded the "Laurier Project" which was later renamed to "Century Initiative." The goal: grow Canada's population to 100 million people by the year 2100. That means more than doubling the population.

This didn't start last week. It started in the year 2000. At the United Nations. In March 2000, the UN Population Division published a report called "Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations?" The conclusion: "Population decline is inevitable in the absence of replacement migration." The report calculated exactly how many immigrants developed nations would need to prevent their working-age populations from shrinking. It covered France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Russia, the UK, and the United States. The message to every developed nation was clear: your populations are aging, your birth rates are falling below replacement, and without immigration, your economies will shrink. Someone in Canada was paying very close attention...

At the same time, the Committee found "inadequate consultation with Indigenous peoples on economic development projects affecting their territories" and flagged "human rights abuses and environmental harm linked to companies domiciled in Canada, particularly in the mining sector." The watchdog is empty. The abuses are documented. And the government is considering getting rid of the office altogether. Not one Canadian outlet connected what comes next.

Last week, the United Nations published its review of Canada's human rights record. Here's what they found: The Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise (CORE) (The ONE office in the country which investigates human rights abuse tied to Canadian corporate activity abroad in the mining, oil & gas, and garment sectors.) has been vacant since 2025. Cases can no longer be processed. And the Carney government is considering eliminating it entirely.

There is slave labour happening in Canada right now. TODAY. Right now. In 2026. On Canadian farms and factories. Workers sleeping 8 to a room, with no locks on the doors., and peeing in bottles because they can't leave their work stations. Passports are being confiscated and cameras installed in their sleeping quarters. Physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. A woman from Cameroon who came to Canada to work on a farm said at a press conference in Montreal: "I lived two years under slavery. An animal had more value than me." The United Nations investigated. Amnesty International investigated. Both reached the same conclusion: This isn't the case of a few bad employers. The system was designed this way. This thread will show you who designed it, why, and who profits. Every single claim is sourced to official documents. Links and screenshots at the end of each post.

Preuve de citoyenneté canadienne-française. 🇨🇦 Pour ceux qui viennent d'arriver — bienvenue. Vous êtes nombreux, et vous méritez de savoir pourquoi cette page existe. Je suis une Canadienne française du Québec. Je vis à l'étranger depuis plus de six ans. J'ai regardé mon pays de loin — et parfois, c'est la distance qui donne la clarté. Je ne me suis jamais intéressée à la politique. J'ai jamais voté. J'ai jamais porté attention. Je pense qu'on était presque tous comme ça. On faisait confiance au système parce qu'on nous disait qu'il marchait. Puis j'ai commencé à lire. Pas les manchettes — les documents. Dépôts à la SEC. Votes parlementaires. Divulgations d'éthique. Rapports de l'ONU. Et ce que j'ai trouvé ne correspondait pas à ce qu'on nous racontait. J'ai pas créé cette page parce que j'appuie les Conservateurs. J'ai pas créé cette page parce que je déteste les Libéraux. Je l'ai créée parce que j'ai réalisé qu'on nous avait montés les uns contre les autres — Libéraux contre Conservateurs, anglophones contre francophones, l'Est contre l'Ouest, baby-boomers contre milléniaux — pendant que les mêmes personnes déplaçaient l'argent, écrivaient les règles, et en profitaient. Chaque fil sur cette page renvoie à une source que vous pouvez vérifier vous-même. Chaque affirmation est documentée. Pas d'opinions déguisées en faits. Pas de rage bait. Juste le dossier public — présenté clairement pour que tout le monde, peu importe son allégeance politique, puisse le voir et décider par lui-même. Cette page est passée de 4 500 abonnés à plus de 26 000 en deux semaines. Pas grâce à l'algorithme. Pas grâce aux médias traditionnels. Parce que les Canadiens en ont assez d'être divisés et regardent enfin le dossier ensemble. Si vous venez d'arriver — commencez par le post épinglé. Lisez les fils dans la section Highlights. Vérifiez chaque source. Et si ça tient la route, partagez-le avec quelqu'un qui ne l'a pas encore vu. C'est juste ça. Les reçus. Pour nous tous. Ont n'a pas fini. 🍁 #StandOnGuard #StandOnGuardCanada

A lot of the people who oppose Alberta independence do not actually want to argue the issue on its merits. Their first instinct is often not to persuade, but to shut the conversation down. They say things like, “just leave then,” or “you shouldn’t even be allowed to talk about this,” as though Alberta belongs only to people who agree with the current arrangement. But that is not how democracy works. In a free society, people are allowed to question political structures. They are allowed to advocate for change. They are allowed to peacefully organize, persuade their fellow citizens, and if support is strong enough, put the matter to a vote. That is not extremism. That is democracy. What I find revealing is that some people seem perfectly comfortable with democracy right up until the moment it might produce an answer they do not like. They say they believe in freedom, pluralism, and open debate, but when Albertans begin seriously discussing self determination, suddenly the tone changes. Suddenly we are told to go away. Suddenly we are told the subject itself is unacceptable. Why? Because democracy is only easy when you are confident you control the outcome. It becomes frightening when ordinary people start asking real questions, building real momentum, and demanding a real say. And that is the heart of it. If Alberta independence is such a terrible idea, then make the case against it. Debate it. Challenge it. Expose its weaknesses. Trust the people. But do not pretend that telling Albertans to shut up, get out, or lose the right to even hold a referendum is some kind of principled democratic position. It is not. It is insecurity dressed up as certainty. We Albertans have the right to discuss our political future and we have the right to settle that question democratically. You do not protect democracy by forbidding people from using it. You protect democracy by letting the people decide.

This is huge. Glenn Beck’s audience is in the millions.

@IConcedeToNoOne Very typical of your kind.. no backbone, resort to name calling. I am a true Albertan before you even existed. Now.. go away and have your pity party elsewhere, and let the adults deal with real life

@JonFromAlberta @holupche You all need mental help. You have no idea what you're doing or what the ramifications are. AND QUIT CALLING YOURSELVES ALBERTANS. ALBERTA IS CANADA'S PROVINCE. YOU ARE TREASONOUS TRAITORS.

One of the most encouraging conversations I had in Red Deer was with the Alberta snowbirds from Yuma. These are Albertans who spend part of the winter in places like Arizona, and instead of checking out politically while they were away, they helped turn Yuma into one of the most unexpectedly inspiring little hubs of the independence movement. In this conversation, they explain that their Yuma team held six pop-up signing events, and at one of the bigger turnouts they saw roughly 350 people show up, with only a handful of canvassers trying to keep up. That is not a gimmick. That is real support showing up in the middle of another country because Albertans abroad still care deeply about what happens back home. That is why this matters. A lot of people saw the Yuma story as a funny social media moment. But it is actually much more than that. It is a sign that this movement has reached a level of mainstream visibility where ordinary Albertans are no longer waiting for permission, no longer hiding their support, and no longer treating independence as some fringe theory that only gets discussed in private. They are carrying it with them wherever they go. Arizona, Mexico, Hawaii, even farther afield. That tells you something important: this idea is alive in people now. It travels with them. It is becoming part of their identity. The Yuma team also makes another point that matters. They were not calling themselves heroes. They said they were just tough Albertans who were not going to put up with any more nonsense. That is exactly the spirit behind a lot of this movement. Not celebrity. Not performance. Not paid activism. Just regular Albertans deciding to do something real because they believe this can actually happen. And in the conversation I say exactly that: the reason so many people are out there, whether in Arizona heat or Alberta wind, is because we genuinely believe this can happen. That is a big part of why the Yuma story hit so hard online. It gave people a visible example of momentum. It showed that support is not confined to one town, one rally, or one demographic. It showed that even when Albertans are temporarily outside the province, they are still emotionally and politically invested enough to organize, collect signatures, and encourage others. That kind of behavior only happens when a movement starts to feel real. People do not go to that kind of effort for something they think is doomed. And yes, a few naysayers tried to mock it or imply there was something improper about collecting signatures outside Canada. But that criticism mostly reveals how weak and short-sighted the opposition is. An Albertan with Alberta identification is still an Albertan wherever he or she happens to be standing. There is nothing absurd about that. In fact, it would be absurd to suggest that Albertans somehow lose their political rights the moment they cross a border for a holiday. The mockery never really landed because it was rooted more in reflexive sneering than in serious thought. What the Yuma story really symbolizes is critical mass. When people start setting up pop-up canvassing events not just in Alberta but around the world, it means the movement is no longer surviving on theory alone. It means people feel momentum. It means they want to be part of it. It means they can picture success. And that encouragement matters, because political movements grow when ordinary people start seeing visible signs that victory is possible. That is why this was such an important little segment. It was not just about Yuma. It was about proof that Alberta independence is spreading, normalizing, and becoming something more and more people believe can actually be done.

A veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces stopped me in Red Deer and shared a perspective that I think a lot of people need to hear in full, not reduced to a slogan. He told me his father fought in World War II. He told me his sons served in Afghanistan. This is not somebody speaking casually about loyalty, sacrifice, or duty. This is somebody from a family that has given real service across generations. And his message was blunt: in his view, Canada is no longer being loyal to people like him, and nothing meaningful is going to change in Ottawa. That is why he believes Alberta independence is now the only way forward. Whether someone agrees with that conclusion or not, people should at least understand the depth behind it. For many soldiers, veterans, and military families, loyalty is not an abstract idea. It is tied to duty, sacrifice, service, loss, and trust. The basic belief is that if you give yourself to a country, that country should still reflect the values you served to protect. When people who spent their lives serving begin to feel alienated from the direction of the country, that is not a small thing. I think the concern here is bigger than party politics. It is about the feeling that the institutions of Canada are no longer listening, no longer correcting course, and no longer representing the people who built, defended, and sustained this country. For some veterans, the frustration is not just with one bad policy or one bad government. It is the belief that the system itself is no longer responsive. That is the nuance people miss. When a veteran says Alberta independence is the only way forward, he is not necessarily saying he stopped caring about the country overnight. He may be saying the opposite. He may be saying he cared so much, for so long, that it means something when he finally concludes the relationship is broken beyond repair. A lot of soldiers and veterans may have concerns about even entertaining that idea. They may value unity, continuity, tradition, and the memory of what they served under. They may worry that supporting Alberta independence feels like turning their back on their service, their oath, or the people they served beside. That is a real emotional and moral tension. But the other side of that tension is this: what if loyalty is not supposed to be one-way? What if there comes a point where citizens, including veterans, have the right to say that the political system has become unworthy of their continued trust? What if defending freedom sometimes means being honest about when a government or a national project has drifted too far from the people it claims to represent? That is why this moment mattered. This was not just a random political opinion shouted from the roadside. It was a serious statement from someone whose family has lived service, sacrifice, and national duty. And when people like that start saying Ottawa will not change, others should pay attention. You do not have to agree with him to recognize the weight of what he is saying. Watch this and listen to his words for yourself.

So beyond ridiculous

This is one of the clearest cases for Alberta independence you’ll hear. It’s a long video, but it’s worth the watch. Keith Wilson breaks down, in practical and objective terms, why an independent Alberta would be stronger, freer, and better off.

the Epstein files were so bad, they started WW3 and faked another moon mission

You can tell whos vaxxed by how excited they are about the fake moon mission artemis Lmfao

I was born and raised in China and lived there for over 20 years. China is a communist totalitarian state under the absolute control of one man — first Mao Zedong, then Deng Xiaoping and his successors, and now Xi Jinping. There is no real freedom — not in speech, not in thought, not in daily life. The majority of Chinese people support the government because they have been fed a nonstop diet of lies and propaganda since the age of three. They defend the CCP with absolute certainty, never questioning, never challenging — they simply swallow the official narrative and memorize it. That is why China produces so few genuine inventions of its own and instead relies on stealing technology from the United States and the West. Under this system, ordinary Chinese people have neither the freedom nor the ability to think independently. Everything glamorous you see about China — the glittering cities, the high-speed trains, the perfectly staged spectacles — is carefully fabricated propaganda for foreign consumption. Behind that facade lies the real China: the everyday lives of ordinary people, especially those in the countryside and villages, which most Westerners cannot even begin to imagine. The poverty, the surveillance, the fear, the grinding control — that is the truth the CCP desperately hides from the world. This is not exaggeration. This is lived experience. The Western world needs to stop believing the China regime’s lies. China is the biggest external enemy to the West. China sends spies to the West to corrupt your politicians such as Democratic Party and Labor Party and to cause turmoils and chaos from within.

The federalists and leftists are wildly, rabidly angry today. They're ferally pissed, and they're lashing out. I've recieved more death threats and hate today alone than I have in the last six weeks. No arguments, no facts- just outlandish claims, obvious lies and slander. This is how we win. Every time one of them freaks out and calls us "ditchbillies", "MAGAts", "Nazis" or "traitors", they de-legitimize the federalist position further, while lending credibility to the Independence movement. Let them screech. Not only do we see their true colors, but it puts the depth of their hatred and unfettered anger on display to the entire world. Their nonsense only serves to make us look like the calm, rational adults in the discussion. It shows that the arguments and facts are on our side, while they are only equipped with unregulated emotion and the petulant rage of an arrogant teenager. Keep seething, federalists. Thanks for the free press, and thanks for making yourselves look even worse than you already did. It'll go a long way for us at the polls.

Everyone keeps hearing the same thing: “Alberta can’t leave.” You hear it on the news, from politicians, and repeated like it’s a settled fact. But here’s the question almost nobody asks: Have you actually checked for yourself? Because when you look at the arguments, a pattern shows up. Not certainty. Not settled law. Just assumptions and worst-case scenarios presented as facts. Let’s go through them. ⸻ 1. “Indigenous groups would veto it” This is presented as a simple stop sign. Reality: Indigenous rights are protected and they must be part of negotiations. But there is no clear legal rule that gives a single group an automatic veto over a democratic decision by an entire province. Rebuttal: This argument fails because it confuses “must be consulted” with “absolute veto.” Independence would require negotiation, not permission from one party. ⸻ 2. “The federal government has the final say” This gets repeated constantly. Reality: Canada operates under constitutional law. A clear democratic vote creates pressure and obligation to negotiate. Ottawa cannot simply ignore it without triggering a major constitutional crisis. Rebuttal: This argument fails because it assumes total federal control where none exists. A strong mandate forces negotiations. It does not get dismissed. ⸻ 3. “The economy would collapse” This is the fear argument. Reality: There would be disruption, but Alberta has vast natural resources, strong exports, and a productive economy. Many countries with fewer advantages operate successfully. Rebuttal: This argument fails because it replaces analysis with fear. Economic transition is not economic collapse, and Alberta has the fundamentals to stand on its own. ⸻ 4. “Alberta is landlocked and couldn’t trade” This sounds convincing until you look closer. Reality: Many landlocked regions trade globally. Trade is governed by agreements, not just geography. Alberta already exports to global markets. Rebuttal: This argument fails because it ignores how global trade actually works. Access is negotiated, and Alberta already participates in that system. ⸻ 5. “Alberta couldn’t manage a currency” This is framed as an impossible barrier. Reality: Countries choose from multiple models. They can use an existing currency, create their own, or peg to another system. Rebuttal: This argument fails because it treats a policy decision as a limitation. Currency is a choice, not a roadblock. ⸻ 6. “Alberta would lose federal services and couldn’t replace them” This assumes Alberta starts from nothing. Reality: Albertans already fund these services through taxes. Independence would mean reallocating that money, not losing it. Rebuttal: This argument fails because it ignores who pays for these services in the first place. Alberta already has the resources. The question is control, not capability. ⸻ Now look at the pattern. You’re told it’s impossible. You’re told it would collapse. You’re told it can’t be done. But when you actually examine the claims, they fall apart under scrutiny. This isn’t about whether independence is easy. It isn’t. It’s about whether it’s possible. And clearly, it is. So the real question is simple: If even one of these arguments is incomplete or wrong, would you want to know? Or are people just repeating what they’ve been told without ever checking? At some point, Albertans need to stop accepting headlines as truth and start thinking this through for themselves.

@TruthWarriorDad 🙌🏻 yes sir!

Give me a 🙌 if you know who this man is and what he told us.

YES