It's True Covid Was The Template For The Suspension of Western Values

What has been the hallmark of Western democratic societies? They are freedom of speech, self-expression, fairness before a court of law and freedom of association. These went out the window with the tyranny we experienced with Covid.

We also know that many involved in the January 6 protest and riot received years of jail time for merely trespassing. We also understand that Donald Trump has been hunted down by his opponents using a weaponized justice department and totally biased juries to prosecute him. It's something you expect from dictators like Putin, but in America?

Yes, in America. Today, a journalist by the name of Steve Baker from The Blaze was instructed to appear at the FBI office in Dallas, where he was handcuffed and then taken to the courthouse, where he was put in leg chains.

What was his crime? Baker was charged with entering restricted grounds, disorderly conduct, parading, and picketing in the Capitol. The only thing remotely true was that he entered the Capital to report on the unrest. He has, in fact, been critical of those who engaged in violence on the day. His charges are misdemeanours, not felonies, so why need handcuffs and leg irons? We know why; it's to humiliate him since he works for a conservative network.

Such oppressive behaviour is not limited to America. We saw what was done north of the border in Canada with the truckers who protested COVID policies. Now, from Canada comes a proposed bill, which, if it passes, I will seriously look to revoke my Canadian citizenship. I have to be in Toronto for a few days on a family matter later this month, but after that, I no longer have a need to travel to my former home country.

The proposed Bill is Bill C63-D, also titled The Online Harms Act. They state that the intent is to stamp out child pornography, which is a laudable goal. Will that also apply to the promotion of transgenderism online, which children can access or images of drag queens in front of kids?

The dangerous aspect of this Act is that it also targets "hate" crimes. These can be pretty subjective.

Words are being criminalized. For instance, if you say anything against transgender men competing in women's sports because they identify as or express themselves as women, you could be prosecuted under the new law for criticizing in a manner that would likely lead to hate. Those filing complaints can do so against you, yet they can retain their secrecy.

One of the most shocking things is preemptive restraining orders with extraordinary powers.

"Fear of hate propaganda offence or hate crime

810.‍012 (1) A person may, with the Attorney General's consent, lay an information before a provincial court judge if the person fears on reasonable grounds that another person will commit"

So, preemptively, you can be put under house arrest on the mere suspicion that you may say something hateful. You can have an ankle brace used as a monitor and be forced to give blood or urine. It's shades of the movie Minority Report with Tom Cruise some years ago, in which a pre-crime could be stopped before the crime happened.

The Bill still needs to be passed; if it does, Canada will spiral further down the authoritarian road.

Australia has been no stranger to tyrannical behaviour in the past few years.

In a recent adjudicated case, the plaintiff, Dr Julian Fidge, alleged that Pfizer and Moderna's mRNA COVID-19 vaccine products contain genetically modified organisms––which is true––and that Pfizer and Moderna did not obtain a licence in Australia to distribute the products.

The judge ruled the following:

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

"1. Pursuant to s 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) and r 26.01(1)(a), (c) and (d) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the proceedings against the first respondent and second respondent be dismissed on the grounds that the applicant has no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting the proceedings against the respondents because the applicant is not an "aggrieved person" within the meaning of s 147(1) of the Gene Technology Act 2001 (Cth), and otherwise has no standing to bring the proceeding.

2. The applicant pay the first respondent's and second respondent's costs of, and incidental to, the proceeding."

So the judge sided with Big Pharma and, to add insult to injury, made Dr Fidge pay court costs.

Until I see evidence to the contrary, I can only conclude that democratic principles that we cherish are slowly but surely being eroded. There is no place to hide from the tyranny.