Afghanistan and What Ties it To International Terror.

I've posted in the past about Afghanistan and the start of Operation "Enduring Freedom" and UK/US Special Forces aligning with the Afghan Northern Alliance.  Also the night of the televised set-piece air-drop invasion of Afghanistan and the actions that night that were not televised.

I've posted about an assault by special forces on a compound that same night and the surprisingly stiff resistance that Western Troops came across that night. A compound that intelligence had suggested had a large group of Afghan leaders in situ. All in the same place at the same time.

I've also hinted previously that that assault was a major contribution to the problems we endured in Afghanistan itself and the Muslim Terror threat we have here at home.

I've posted how the names of the countries involved in Op-EF almost exactly correlates with the countries that have endured terror attacks at home. It's also interesting that after I pointed that out, there have been fewer attacks. To the threat analysts out there: you're welcome.

Anyhoo, why do you think, some wind-blown compound in Afghanistan has such an impact on our war with terror.

It involves the people that were there that night. I believe there were Gulf-State nationals in that compound, from Saudi Arabia, Dubai and the UAE. Those nationals were at the compound for whatever reason, but you can bet your bottom dollar it wasn't for anything beneficial to the West. I assume they were there to discuss funding more extremist Taliban activity in the face of the Northern Alliance successes at the time and possibly buying property in Pakistan to allow the movement of senior Taliban officials across the border. 

Now, I further assume that the families of those people have sought revenge against the West ever since that night. The people we're talking about have almost limitless pockets and are able to transfer money around the world in furtherance of their terrorist activities.

Because you have to ask how the people that commit these acts are getting their money. Where, for example does a man get enough money for air fare to America in order to take hostages? I'll also just mention that how does a man referred to prevent and with a criminal record get a plane ticket without triggering the intelligence authorities in the UK and then how does he get through US immigration?

As with all of these cases, there are so many coincidences and  unanswered questions. I'm sure the intelligence services have the answers.

But there remains several questions. For instance, if we know of the existence of these funding networks from countries in the Gulf, why do we class these countries as allies if they haven't closed down these funding networks? 

I'm also convinced the reason the West pulled out of Afghanistan so hastily was connected with the Gulf State conduit. America is once again dependent of Gulf State energy products after being self-sufficient for a number of years. 

Yet another legacy of the Biden administration.

Canada on the Brink of Tyranny.

So in response to a bunch of Canadian truckers parking up in various inconvenient places around the country, Justin Trudeau has called for the enablement of the Emergencies Act. An act usually only used in times of War, or other serious National Emergency.

I don't think a bunch of truckers blocking roads is enough to allow enablement of the Act.

If I were an opposition MP, I would be asking Justin Trudeau some difficult questions:

What reasoning is there for Requesting Enablement of the Emergencies Act?

If the Government cite violence, what proof do the Government have of widespread violent acts?

Request the Government to supply such proof to Parliament.

Ask Trudeau how long the Act will be in Force for. Is it truly time limited, or is this as limited as the Covid-19 measures that have lasted two years?

To be blunt, the opposition in the Canadian Parliament should vote en masse to refuse the enablement of the act. At least they will have clear consciences when the government-sponsored violence against the protesters occurs. Because it will occur unless Trudeau excessive use of government force is checked. 

And be under no illusion: closing the bank accounts of supporters, denying them the basics of life itself IS violence. Impounding trucks and removing insurance IS violence. If Trudeau says that words are violence, then these direct acts are even more violent than the nasty words his snowflake mind gets hung up about.

So, to the Trudeau government: What justifies these violent acts against Canadian Citizens?

What crimes have they committed that are so heinous that they have their assets seized by the government? Even murderers and rapists, the worst crimes imaginable don't have their bank accounts seized. 

So to Trudeau directly: Is this just petty revenge? Is this just childish lashing out against someone that won't listen to you? Is this like the parent striking a child that is naughty and will not listen?

Because if it is, then you are not a leader. A leader acts like an adult and responsible adults do not strike children.

To ordinary Citizens of Canada, I would ask: Why is the Prime Minister invoking an act that affects the whole of Canada for less than 100 trucks parked in Ottawa? Why is he bringing in a law that affects you to deal with a small protest? Why can't the protest be dealt with locally?

Ordinary Citizens need to be writing to their MPs, rejecting the implementation of the act. Trudeau has for for instigating supposed temporary measures and keeping them in place indefinitely. He has form for brining in supposedly limited, targeted legislation but then broadening the scope of such legislation. 

Just look at vaccine mandates: initially for health workers where you could see a legitimate (if unscientifically proven) reason, which was then applied to truckers with absolutely no scientific or immediately obvious reason. There was no outbreak related to truckers that required extra measures. So why did Trudeau's government instigate vaccine mandates for truckers and start all of this? 

Do Canadians think that Trudeau won't widen the remit of the act once he has dealt with the truckers? Will he start to go for political opponents? Will he freeze their bank accounts?

The Left are the New Fascists

 I think I posted a few years ago how I thought that the left were not Socialists as they wanted to be portrayed, but are actually totalitarian fascists, requiring everyone to adhere to their viewpoint otherwise they are regarded as the enemy.

Well, I think there is more evidence to back this up. The latest being the trucker convoy and protest in Canada. 

The left want the government to go in and smash the protest. The left have already successfully got the convoy's funds deleted from a big corporate tech website, GoFundMe. 

Hmm, government and a political allies working big big corporations in order to stifle dissent. If that doesn't smell like fascism I don't know what does.

Without a hint of irony the counter-protesters to the Canadian protest are now flying Communist flags. But they are not Communists. They are fascists. There's a subtle line between the two totalitarian ideologies, but there is difference. 

In Communism the government own all the companies. They are owned by the state, work for the state and the workers work for the state. 

With Fascism, the Government doesn't own the corporations, they do however have close links to Government and enjoy preferential treatment and protected status as long as they do the bidding of Government. 

I'd say what we have at the moment what we have is the latter. The supposed "Leftists" that think they are Socialists and even Communists have been co-opted into the Fascistic system of global governance that is in play at the moment. The people of Antifa, the people piling-on to cancel dissenting voices: they are the equivalent of Hitler's Brown Shirts of the 1930's. They are the foot soldiers of Fascism.