top of page

Monday 9-19-22

Summary as I am able:

9-19-22 Monday

💥 💥

💥💥 💥

💥God’s WORD for TODAY!

Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms.

James 5:13 KJV

Wait on the LORD: Be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart: wait, I say, on the LORD.

Psalm 27:14 KJV

The LORD thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy; he will rest in his love, he will joy over thee with singing.

Zephaniah 3:17 KJV

Today’s thought:


“You Raise Me Up”

At His Feet:

“…and there, a woman was lying at his feet.” Ruth 3:8

This verse sounds a little suggestive at first glance. Ruth had been instructed to draw near to the man Boaz and assume a close, but respectful position. Little did she know that he was to become her husband. Boaz was a man of influence, a man whom people loved and looked up to. But Ruth knew only of his gentle kindness and favor shown by him in her new country. Ruth approached Boaz in the night hours under the cover of darkness as others were fast asleep. As she lay down at his feet, Ruth understood that in doing so, she was dedicating herself to this man.

But there is more here than meets the eye. In the account of Ruth and Boaz, we see a beautiful picture of Christ and those who come to Him. Jesus calls us to meet Him at His feet. He delights in all those who position themselves in such a humbling manner. It is there that our love begins and where that love continues to grow. At the feet of Jesus, He takes possession of our lives, gently guiding our steps. So strong is His desire to bless rather than discipline, that He no longer allows us to walk in places of temptation that bring pain. His ways are those of peace and safety. Today, may you humble yourself at Jesus’ feet, as Ruth before her beloved Boaz, and enjoy the peace that comes from being where you belong. Awaiting His Return, [Pastor – Jack Hibbs]

Trump: 'Thugs, Tyrants' Awakened a 'Sleeping Giant':

The "thugs and tyrants" attacking the MAGA movement have awakened a "sleeping giant," former President Donald Trump said during his Save America rally in Youngstown, Ohio, on Saturday night.

"They have no idea of the sleeping giant that they have awoken," Trump told the rally, which aired live on Newsmax. "The American people will never accept the corruption and the ruination of our beloved country, and that's what they want to do."

The Democrats' policies are "mad," he added, but come Nov. 8, "we are going to vote in record numbers, and we are going to send these left-wing lunatics a message: They cannot cancel, silence, or ignore ... all the abuse, all the smears, and all the attacks will not dissuade us. They will only make us stronger, much stronger. Much much stronger."

He pointed out that Democrats spied on his first campaign, but "nobody wants to do anything about it."

Trump said: "No matter what our sick and deranged political establishment throw at me, no matter what they do to me, I will endure their torment and oppression, and I will do it very willingly.

"They will never get me to stop fighting for you, the American people. And I will never quit because the fate of our country is at stake."

He further attacked President Joe Biden for his speech in Philadelphia and the red backdrop that was used while he was talking.

"That was terrible," said Trump, "but that's where they're coming from. But you know what? We're strong and we're smart. We're smarter than them. We're stronger than them."

Further, Democrats "view 75 million Americans as enemies to be canceled and suppressed," said Trump. "They want to censor you from the internet, banish you from the public square, get you fired from your jobs, target you for destruction with 87,000 new IRS agents."

He added, "There's more enthusiasm right now than there has ever been for the rallies and for everything, because you've seen what a horrible job they've done."

Additional Reading:

💥💥💥Jean-Pierre and Fauci Accused in New Lawsuit: 💥💥💥

The Biden Administration is facing another lawsuit on top of the one filed in May. The suit has been filed by Missouri and Louisiana against the White House in the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.

It names a number of Biden Administration officials and agencies as defendants, and it alleges that they colluded with social media companies to both suppress and censor free speech on several issues. One of the issues is Hunter Biden’s laptop, and another is the Wuhan lab leak theory concerning the origins of COVID-19.

In place of the previous White House Press Secretary, Jen Psaki, Karine Jean-Pierre is now named as a defendant. And Dr. Anthony Fauci is now a named defendant.

Missouri and Louisiana have come together with a joint statement revealing what has been uncovered in the suit so far, and it does not look good for Biden’s team. Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said, “We have already received a number of documents that clearly prove that the federal government has an incestuous relationship with social media companies and clearly coordinated to censor freedom of speech, but we’re not done,” Schmitt said. “The Department of Justice is cowering behind executive privilege and has refused to turn over communications between the highest-ranking Biden Administration officials and social media companies. That’s why, yesterday, we asked the Court to compel the Department of Justice to produce those records. We’re just getting started – stay tuned.”

The joint statement from the two states referred to what took place as a vast “Censorship Enterprise.” It details how the DOJ provided them with information that identified 45 federal officials who have connected with social media companies with misinformation. Meta, the company over Facebook, also identified 32 more federal officials that included White House officials.

Judge Terry A. Doughty issued an order that called on Dr. Fauci and Jean-Pierre to respond to discovery requests and gave them 21 days to comply.

Previously, Judge Doughty granted the plaintiff’s request for expedited discovery. But several issues made it necessary for the judge to require an additional ruling. One of those issues was whether or not government defendants should be required to identify federal officialsand agencies they know of that engaged in communications with social media platforms about misinformation, disinformation, or misinformation, and/or censorship or suppression of speech or social media. The question was if that official had to produce evidence of these communications that were in their possession.

There was also an issue of whether the White House defendants, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and Chief Medical Advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci should be compelled to respond to Plaintiffsinterrogatories and document requests. The answer from the court was “yes” on both issues, and the defendants had 21 days to respond accordingly.

Attorney General Schmitt recently said that up until this point, the Department of Justice has refused to cooperate with the requests of the lawsuit, and the White House was claiming “executive privilege.”

“The American people deserve answers on how the federal government has colluded with social media companies to censor free speech on these major platforms. We will continue to fight to uncover more of this vast censorship enterprise,” Schmitt said.

There will be added pressure on the Biden Administration now that Jean-Pierre and Dr. Fauci are under the spotlight. The attorneys for Missouri and Louisiana are pressuring the federal District Court to compel the Department of Justice to turn over communications between high-ranking Biden Administration officials from the White House, HHS, and others, and major social media companies.

Ultimately, what is being discovered is likely going to be even more damaging to the White House.

As the Grid Strains to Full Capacity, California Forced to Activate Emergency Gas-Powered Generators gopixa/ No matter how hard California tries to be on the cutting edge of electric vehicle use or on getting into green energy, they keep tripping over their own two feet.

[The Patriotic Voice]

💥 💥 Pierre Trudeau's Plan to Assimilate First Nation Peoples:

You have not likely heard of this…

There is almost exactly a century separating the governments of Sir John A. Macdonald and Pierre E. Trudeau, but not much difference in their approach to Indigenous issues.

💥 Article content

Trudeau’s “Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy, 1969” didn’t propose separating Indigenous children from their parents and isolating them in schools where they could be abused by nuns and priests, but the strategy was the same: the best way to handle the Indian “problem” was to get rid of the idea of being “Indian” in the first place. Better to turn them into regular old Canadians like the rest of us. As Trudeau saw it, assimilation as a strategy was far from dead, it just needed updating.

The proposal, known as the 1969 White Paper, was launched by one of Trudeau’s ambitious young cabinet up-and-comers, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Jean Chrétien. It was a monumental disaster. You can date today’s activism to the backlash generated by Trudeau and Chrétien. It makes educational reading for anyone wondering why so little progress was made between 1867 and 1969 — or today for that matter — or who thinks carting off a few statues and renaming some schools is a solution to anything.

The view taken by Trudeau, he of the “Just Society” and later the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was that “equality” meant everyone should be governed by the same laws. Canada was no place for one set of rules for some people, and another set for others. That concept might have fit well enough with Trudeau’s own ideas of Canada as a unified country of English and French, but it was anathema to an Indigenous population whose separate identity was fundamental to their concept of themselves.

In the ringing tones favoured by governments then and now, the document declared: “The policies proposed (by the White Paper) recognize the simple reality that the separate legal status of Indians and the policies which have flowed from it have kept the Indian people apart from and behind other Canadians. The Indian people have not been full citizens of the communities and provinces in which they live and have not enjoyed the equality and benefits that such participation offers.

“The treatment resulting from their different status has been often worse, sometimes equal and occasionally better than that accorded to their fellow citizens. What matters is that it has been different.”

Trudeau’s remedy was far-reaching. Indigenous people would lose their special status and be treated no different than other Canadians. Chrétien’s ministry would disappear, along with the Indian Act. Treaties would be eliminated and responsibility for Indian affairs would be shifted to the provinces, along with temporary financing that would eventually decline “as a matter of principle.”

💥 Article content

Control of Indian lands would move to Indigenous communities, along with help and advice in seeing it was “properly developed.” Indigenous people would be brought into a closer working relationship with the business community, while Ottawa would

“encourage private employers to provide opportunities for the Indian people.”

The response was immediate, and beyond anything Trudeau and Chrétien could have imagined. Far from welcoming the elimination of special status, Indigenous leaders saw Ottawa’s plan as yet another attempt to destroy their culture. Harold Cardinal, then a young Cree leader from Alberta, condemned it as another in the injustices meted on Indigenous people by generations of federal leaders.

💥 Article content

“Generations of Indians have grown up behind a buckskin curtain of indifference, ignorance and, all too often, plain bigotry,” he wrote. “Now, at a time when our fellow Canadians consider the promise of a Just Society, once more the Indians are betrayed by a programme which offers nothing better than cultural genocide.”

Far from atoning for the injustices of the past, he said, Trudeau’s plan represented a “thinly disguised programme of extermination through assimilation.”

Cardinal swiftly rose to a position of importance in an increasingly organized program of resistance. In an extended rebuttal — titled Citizens Plus but popularly known as The Red Paper in terminology language police would certainly denounce today hechallenged its basic notions. Rather than scrapping treaties, they should be recognized and honoured; instead of terminating the Indian Act it should be reformed, and Indigenous representation in cabinet made as permanent as that accorded Quebec or Atlantic Canada; the idea that Ottawa could unilaterally alter ownership of Indigenous lands fundamentally violated the view that the land already belonged to natives and was merely held in trust by federal authorities.

💥 Article content

The proposals suffered as well from sharp internal contradictions. While its opening paragraphs declared that “To be an Indian is also to be different. It is to speak different languages, draw different pictures, tell different tales and to rely on a set of values,” it then proposed to eradicate that difference. Likewise, it seemed more than a little strange — and demeaning, that the prime minister — the great champion of a strong central government with a unified vision of Canada — was content to relegate native matters to 10 provinces with 10 ministers and 10 varying approaches.

Trudeau’s document was withdrawn a year later. Far from contrite, he delivered one of his patented insults: “We’ll keep them in the ghetto as long as they want,” he shrugged. If Sir John A. Macdonald is to be condemned, certainly Trudeau and Chrétien deserve no less, given they had an additional century of history and experience to draw on, and the knowledge, learning and insight that presumably entailed. Macdonald acted on the best advice available at the time, as did those who followed him. His thinking was rooted in 19th century cultural mores. What was Trudeau’s excuse?

[National Post]

The single best newsletter I ever sent you?

… or as Patrick puts it… "Grow underground".

I didn't really write it. The freedom-loving People of London did. Now, maybe you missed it, but just recently I broke the news that I will be taking a 'breather' from writing this newsletter.

Why? Because I've decided — after many months of near-non-stop contemplation — I will no longer 'fight against' the system. As I said in the newsletter prior: "It's better to be FOR something than AGAINST something." And the reason for this is very simple: It's a choice between being in a POSITIVE mindset rather than a NEGATIVE mindset. And when you're constantly fighting against something, it's pretty damn negative. And it's draining.

But, on the other hand... When you're FOR something, it spins the entire dynamic right around. Try it out. I dare you. So, rather than fighting AGAINST the corrupt system, I'm going to be FOR exiting the corrupt system. As it feels much, MUCH better taking this approach. Now, with that in mind, I want to assure you and every reader on this list one thing: My 'breather' and break from this marks the beginning of something better. And based on the overwhelming amount of responses I've received, it seems as if many other Londoners feel this way too. And so, I thought I'd share some of the comments I received in response to my prior newsletter. Starting with these gems: " ... this email finally nailed what I have been feeling all along. The system won’t change - we have to!" — Joe O. "I love the idea of being FOR something rather than a fight against something." — Jaime G. "I too believe that fighting against something actually empowers it to be stronger. Whatever we put our focus on, strengthens..... and so yes!, focusing on exiting the system is the way to go!!" — Marian K. I couldn't agree more with Marian — whatever YOU put your focus on, strengthens. Next: "When a tool or piece of equipment no longer functions or delivers the required results, one could spend countless hours at significant cost attempting to repair or modify, however, it is often more prudent to simply replace. Our current system is beyond repair, it simply needs to be replaced." — Jeffrey B. Jeffrey is 'hit the nail on the head' — our current system is a broken tool beyond repair and needs replacing. Next: "We get so caught up in fighting the corrupt system and focusing on it only gives it more energy. I think visualizing a new system and working towards that is the way to go. The old corrupt system is like a plant, when it has no water (energy) it dies." — Karine R. Karine is also 'right on the money' and echoes what Marian K. said above. More gems: "Our dependence on a system which was supposed to support us is our bain. We depend on it to get around and do what we have to, but we can do a great reset too which would confound them?" — Vera B. Imagine that: a 'great reset' to confound them. Love it! More: "Let's get out from under the BS, one possible solution is to start our own culture and start to function independently and away from the madness and create peace." — Michelle P. Michelle gets it. Next: "Yess!! We can only focus so much on doom and gloom. It’s a challenge to truly take ownership responsibility and power of our lives away from the system and create the new that we want to see. My life has felt much better since I’ve stepped away." — Katrina M. My life too has felt much better as I step away from the 'fight' and step towards creating 'the new'. Moving on: "And that my friend is the very best way to "fight" the system ... bow out, exit, or at least reduce our reliance on it as much as possible." — Jenn K. "I understand how draining it can be, but I like the way you are shifting, we need to give people options and see how we can exit, especially when mostly going at this alone as many close to us don’t see what we see." — DJ B.

Let's keep 'em rolling: "I'm with you on your new path/journey, as I've always been on said path, and only went out to different events/protests/gatherings/pot lucks/meetings or otherwise, to scope out the mental/emotional/spiritual progress of different freedom groups. Specifically i'm doing up the paperwork for exiting the systems of licenses across the proverbial spectrum, and as such, i believe i almost got it down." — J. "My attitude is and I'm in, the midst of exiting the system. It seems like a slow journey as it's easy to quit but then to substitute an alternative way takes so much time as it's new and we have to make the new end result instead of the convenience of having it done for us." — John G. Last but not least, however most appropriate to end with: "This has been a very challenging time for so many of us standing up for our rights and freedoms. However, I have learned that we already do have those rights and freedoms and leaving the corrupt systems will help us grow in a more positive way." — Jo-ann H. "I admire and respect everything you have done for this cause but people need to see that the system will not change. We must exit the system and start our own. When enough people exit, the corrupt system will eventually fall." — Fil B. "Exit the system.. sounds like it’s time to shift focus." — Jody G. And on that note, it's time for me to shift focus because the system, as it seems, will not change. It's time for me to be FOR something new. And if you'd like to join me on this journey, simply reply, EXIT THE SYSTEM.

[Paul Nielsen] United We Stand, Divided We Fall

This is no joke!

Live Frog in the Lettuce Bag at Sobey's in London:

Chantel Scott, 26, was on the phone with her mom when she spotted a frog inside a sealed lettuce container at the Sobeys on Adelaide in North London, Ont., on Saturday.

"It was directly at my eye level and I'm like, 'What the heck? Is that a sticker?'"said Scott.

Scott assumed the frog was dead when she started recording a video, but when she picked up the Sobeys-brand container, she saw the frog move.

"I was like, 'Oh my gosh, it's still alive.'"

Scott continued recording and about 20 minutes later, she posted a video to Tik Tok. It's since been viewed thousands of times.

[Patrick Bestall]

Guns Save Live:

This is why Canadian police chiefs will not support Trudeau's gun ban legislation.

If there’s one issue where the mainstream media and Democratic Party establishment are truly out of touch with the average American, it’s the Second Amendment. Journalists and elected officials alike routinely write off the idea of a good guy with a gun” as a “myth” and otherwise dismiss self-defense as a valid justification for firearm ownership. But a new comprehensive survey shows once again that defensive gun use is far more common than violent gun crime.

From polling firm Centiment, the new survey finds that more than 81 million American adults own guns. Of these Americans, more than 31% report having used their firearm in self-defense, including many who report having done so more than once. Extrapolating from this representative sample, the survey finds that guns are used in self-defense roughly 1.67 million times annually in the US.

[Patrick Bestall]

This survey once again proves that the right to bear arms in self-defense is a clear net positive for society.

David YEO:

HOW HOT is Space? (3 Min)

Doc CHARLES: Medical Disaster (10 Min)

America**Egypt of West**Mystery Babylon (17 Min)

Germ Theory Fraud (2 Min)

Kriss SKII; in London UK**Germans (2 Min)

Symbols of the Economist Magazine in 2019 (1 Min)



The following information is found on the internet and is usually not referenced by the Mainstream media [MSM]. It is my intention to present this information so that one has a better knowledgebase from which to make judgements. These are not necessarily my views; however, they need to be considered if one is not to become biased as only one side of a discussion is presented. Much of the content of this BLOG is re-printed Material. Consider, do your own research, and make up your own mind.


Disclaimer: All articles, videos, and images posted on here were submitted by readers and/or handpicked by the site itself for informational and/or entertainment purposes. All statements, claims, views, and opinions that appear on this site are always presented as unverified and should be discerned by the reader. We do not endorse any opinions expressed on this website and we do not support, represent or guarantee the completeness, truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any content posted on this website.

Here is what is circulating on the Inter-Net:

A quick Summary:

I have decided to not include the RUMOURS that are floating about… at least until some of them start to be realized.







32 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page