Regulatory capture is old news, something most activists have known about and observed in all western countries for decades. Connie is not telling us anything we don't already know. As she wrote, "𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘢...𝘪𝘵'𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘣𝘰𝘰𝘬".
Where Connie falls far short is in not addressing how this playbook became standard proceedure across all western countries and that this didn't happen by chance. There is a global power driving all of this and you will note Connie doesn't even hint about this global power in her article. There are people, such as Matthew Ehret, who talk about this global power. You know all about Matthew's work.
We have a glut of problem-talkers, they are a dime a dozen. What we lack are problem-solvers. For example, Connie's article talks about the long standing problem of regulatory capture but has nothing to say about a solution, that is, other than the glib meme "𝘓𝘦𝘵'𝘴 𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮". I've been following Connie for some time. She is stuck in an echo chamber, much like all our alternative news sources; they most certainly aren't reaching the general public. Given Connie has demonstrated she is more than capable of doing her own independent research on the many problems we face, the big question is why does she seem so unwilling or incapable of researching and discussing viable solutions?
We don't need more information. At this point, information without meaningful and EFFECTIVE action is useless. Take for example your point that the information in Connie's article "𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘺". As NCI has demonstrated, we don't know how to get our information and messaging out to the general public. Indeed, few people in Canada even know about NCI and even fewer know what it does. So what is the point of asking Connie to speak at NCI? So far, NCI reports have proven to be little more than dust collectors.
We are in a global war. You know this as a fact. The Cabal is waging it's global war of Technocracy and Transhumanism against us little people. The ONLY way we can win this war is if we eliminate the Cabal and it's global network. If we can't or don't eliminate the Cabal then we lose this global war. The ONLY way we can eliminate the Cabal is if we little people unite across Canada and the world, to fight as one with a vision and direction. If we can't or don't unite then we lose this global war. As you are fully aware, we are not united, we are not uniting and we are not even talking about uniting. We can't even agree who the enemy is we must defeat to win this war.
My advice to Connie about speaking at NCI is the same advice I gave her when she said she was going to (last year's) We Unify conference...don't.
Ian, I’m going to respond plainly and then move on. My article was not written for people who already believe they understand everything.
It was written for people who are just beginning to see how power actually operates, because that is where change starts.
Yes, regulatory capture has been discussed for decades. What has not been widely understood is how it operates in real time, on real people, through lawful-looking mechanisms, and how enforcement escalates even while legality remains unresolved. Universal Ostrich Farms exposed that process in a way theory never could.
I am not obligated to adopt any particular cosmology, name specific global actors, or route my analysis through personalities others prefer. My work focuses on demonstrable mechanisms, documented actions, and verifiable outcomes, because those are what the general public can recognize, test, and act upon.
As for “solutions”: mass action does not emerge from abstract enemy narratives. It emerges when people:
-Recognize the system they are inside
-See how it operates across domains
-Understand where consent is being extracted
-And realize they are not alone
That is not “problem talking.” That is precondition building.
Finally, discouraging people from testifying, from speaking publicly, or from participating in lawful forums does not weaken captured systems, it strengthens them. Silence has never dismantled power. Visibility does.
I will continue doing the work I am doing: exposing the machinery clearly, accessibly, and with evidence … so more people can see it, name it, and refuse it together.
You are not the first to think you are helping people "𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘦". Activists have been trying to do this for centuries. As you illustrate, you are starting from scratch and repeating the same mistakes of the past. For very obvious reasons, all of which I have explained in detail, you simply aren't reaching, and can't reach, your targeted audience.
You are not building and you are not creating the pre-conditions on which to build. Yes, silence has never dismantled power. But you, along with all our other alternative news sources in Canada have been silenced and this, to a large extend, is your and theirs own fault. None of you work together to get our messaging out. You compete against each other with the effect you drown each other out. If by chance someone from the general public stumbles across your message then they immediately discount it for the simple reason you are perceived as one person simply expressing your own opinion. As I keep repeating, everyone of you is talking but no one is listening...to any of you.
You can pretend to imagine you are making a difference but your view count and numbers prove otherwise. You need to stop problem-talking and start problem-solving. The first problem to be solved is how to get out of our echo chambers and to figure out how to reach the general public or, as you quaintly say, "𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴".
If you persist in what you are currently doing then you will find yourself doing the same thing in 10 years time.
Unelected administrative bodies become the primary decision-makers, enforcing policy objectives that no legislature openly debated, and no public meaningfully consented to.
Laws still exist.
Courts still function.
Elections still happen.
But real power moves elsewhere, into agencies, regulations, guidance documents, enforcement discretion, and “emergency authorities.”
This paper has been in the making for a long time. I first wrote about Reflexive Law in Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, Chapter 7. That was eleven years ago. Perhaps people couldn’t understand it then, but it should be clear now. I dedicate this to all the thousands of farmers and ranchers who have lost their properties and livelihoods because of Reflexive Law. ⁃ Patrick Wood, Editor.
Introduction
Reflexive Law is no law at all, but it hides in plain sight in traditional courtrooms and masquerades behind black robes. Lawyers have succumbed to it, and defendants in lawsuits have been crushed by it. As we will see, this was a subterfuge from the beginning to replace the rule of law with a system of bullying, harassment, and tyranny. I have warned about this for over 15 years, but it has mostly fallen on deaf ears. It has forced countless farmers and ranchers out of business and stripped property rights from individuals and businesses.
<<Support farmers, workers, and families who say “show us the law” before they say “yes.”>>
Universal Ostrich has yet to say yes despite being shown the law multiple times.
May 13 - Federal Court of Canada judicial review
August 21 - Federal Court of Appeal dismissal
November 6 - Supreme Court of Canada dismissal of leave to appeal
In fact, on November 6, farm principals stood by while supporters launched fireworks to try for a stampede of the birds and wished for CFIA inspectors to get injuried. Katie stood at the highway demanding that "Someone run a truck through those f***king CFIA RVs"
So while you have helped Universal Ostrich find a technical out and avoid a fine, it is really a sideshow to the core legal question about the notice to dispose that went through three levels of court.
The warrant to search and the police presence all came months after the quarantine requirements were delivered in person and there was no prospect of a yes by consent.
No one disputes that the notice to dispose was upheld through judicial review and appeal. The courts examined whether the decision was reasonable within the statutory framework, and they concluded that it was.
But my article was not arguing that courts never ruled.
It was examining something else.
The regulatory capture issue arises from how enforcement power functions in real time, particularly when administrative agencies operate as investigator, rule-maker, interpreter, and enforcer simultaneously, and when escalation tools (including warrants and police presence) are deployed while legal disputes are still active.
That is not a “technical out.” Procedural safeguards are not loopholes , they are the boundary between authority and force.
As for comments allegedly made by individuals during heightened protest conditions, those should stand or fall on their own facts. I have consistently advocated lawful resistance and due process, not intimidation or harm.
The broader point remains:
The administrative architecture that governed this case exists across sectors. Courts can review reasonableness after the fact. But enforcement power, once mobilized, is rarely paused pending full resolution.
That structural dynamic is what I am analyzing.
People can disagree about the outcome of this specific case.
But the conversation about how administrative systems exercise power in Canada is legitimate, and necessary.
Connie, I invite you to testify at the NCI hearings in Kelowna on March 9 - 11. The information you shared here needs to be disseminated widely.
Regulatory capture is old news, something most activists have known about and observed in all western countries for decades. Connie is not telling us anything we don't already know. As she wrote, "𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘢...𝘪𝘵'𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘣𝘰𝘰𝘬".
Where Connie falls far short is in not addressing how this playbook became standard proceedure across all western countries and that this didn't happen by chance. There is a global power driving all of this and you will note Connie doesn't even hint about this global power in her article. There are people, such as Matthew Ehret, who talk about this global power. You know all about Matthew's work.
We have a glut of problem-talkers, they are a dime a dozen. What we lack are problem-solvers. For example, Connie's article talks about the long standing problem of regulatory capture but has nothing to say about a solution, that is, other than the glib meme "𝘓𝘦𝘵'𝘴 𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮". I've been following Connie for some time. She is stuck in an echo chamber, much like all our alternative news sources; they most certainly aren't reaching the general public. Given Connie has demonstrated she is more than capable of doing her own independent research on the many problems we face, the big question is why does she seem so unwilling or incapable of researching and discussing viable solutions?
We don't need more information. At this point, information without meaningful and EFFECTIVE action is useless. Take for example your point that the information in Connie's article "𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘺". As NCI has demonstrated, we don't know how to get our information and messaging out to the general public. Indeed, few people in Canada even know about NCI and even fewer know what it does. So what is the point of asking Connie to speak at NCI? So far, NCI reports have proven to be little more than dust collectors.
We are in a global war. You know this as a fact. The Cabal is waging it's global war of Technocracy and Transhumanism against us little people. The ONLY way we can win this war is if we eliminate the Cabal and it's global network. If we can't or don't eliminate the Cabal then we lose this global war. The ONLY way we can eliminate the Cabal is if we little people unite across Canada and the world, to fight as one with a vision and direction. If we can't or don't unite then we lose this global war. As you are fully aware, we are not united, we are not uniting and we are not even talking about uniting. We can't even agree who the enemy is we must defeat to win this war.
My advice to Connie about speaking at NCI is the same advice I gave her when she said she was going to (last year's) We Unify conference...don't.
Ian Bell
www.virusfraud.org
Ian, I’m going to respond plainly and then move on. My article was not written for people who already believe they understand everything.
It was written for people who are just beginning to see how power actually operates, because that is where change starts.
Yes, regulatory capture has been discussed for decades. What has not been widely understood is how it operates in real time, on real people, through lawful-looking mechanisms, and how enforcement escalates even while legality remains unresolved. Universal Ostrich Farms exposed that process in a way theory never could.
I am not obligated to adopt any particular cosmology, name specific global actors, or route my analysis through personalities others prefer. My work focuses on demonstrable mechanisms, documented actions, and verifiable outcomes, because those are what the general public can recognize, test, and act upon.
As for “solutions”: mass action does not emerge from abstract enemy narratives. It emerges when people:
-Recognize the system they are inside
-See how it operates across domains
-Understand where consent is being extracted
-And realize they are not alone
That is not “problem talking.” That is precondition building.
Finally, discouraging people from testifying, from speaking publicly, or from participating in lawful forums does not weaken captured systems, it strengthens them. Silence has never dismantled power. Visibility does.
I will continue doing the work I am doing: exposing the machinery clearly, accessibly, and with evidence … so more people can see it, name it, and refuse it together.
You are not the first to think you are helping people "𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘦". Activists have been trying to do this for centuries. As you illustrate, you are starting from scratch and repeating the same mistakes of the past. For very obvious reasons, all of which I have explained in detail, you simply aren't reaching, and can't reach, your targeted audience.
You are not building and you are not creating the pre-conditions on which to build. Yes, silence has never dismantled power. But you, along with all our other alternative news sources in Canada have been silenced and this, to a large extend, is your and theirs own fault. None of you work together to get our messaging out. You compete against each other with the effect you drown each other out. If by chance someone from the general public stumbles across your message then they immediately discount it for the simple reason you are perceived as one person simply expressing your own opinion. As I keep repeating, everyone of you is talking but no one is listening...to any of you.
You can pretend to imagine you are making a difference but your view count and numbers prove otherwise. You need to stop problem-talking and start problem-solving. The first problem to be solved is how to get out of our echo chambers and to figure out how to reach the general public or, as you quaintly say, "𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴".
If you persist in what you are currently doing then you will find yourself doing the same thing in 10 years time.
Ian Bell
www.virusfraud.org
So important:
REGULATORY CAPTURE:
Unelected administrative bodies become the primary decision-makers, enforcing policy objectives that no legislature openly debated, and no public meaningfully consented to.
Laws still exist.
Courts still function.
Elections still happen.
But real power moves elsewhere, into agencies, regulations, guidance documents, enforcement discretion, and “emergency authorities.”
you might find this relevant connie
This paper has been in the making for a long time. I first wrote about Reflexive Law in Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, Chapter 7. That was eleven years ago. Perhaps people couldn’t understand it then, but it should be clear now. I dedicate this to all the thousands of farmers and ranchers who have lost their properties and livelihoods because of Reflexive Law. ⁃ Patrick Wood, Editor.
Introduction
Reflexive Law is no law at all, but it hides in plain sight in traditional courtrooms and masquerades behind black robes. Lawyers have succumbed to it, and defendants in lawsuits have been crushed by it. As we will see, this was a subterfuge from the beginning to replace the rule of law with a system of bullying, harassment, and tyranny. I have warned about this for over 15 years, but it has mostly fallen on deaf ears. It has forced countless farmers and ranchers out of business and stripped property rights from individuals and businesses.
Yes, Others warned this shift was coming. Universal Ostrich Farms shows how it actually operates ... enforcement first, legality later.
im so glad that other people have started to talk about this. omg can we create a team?
Indeed , power corrupts and CFIA was absolutely corrupt
<<Support farmers, workers, and families who say “show us the law” before they say “yes.”>>
Universal Ostrich has yet to say yes despite being shown the law multiple times.
May 13 - Federal Court of Canada judicial review
August 21 - Federal Court of Appeal dismissal
November 6 - Supreme Court of Canada dismissal of leave to appeal
In fact, on November 6, farm principals stood by while supporters launched fireworks to try for a stampede of the birds and wished for CFIA inspectors to get injuried. Katie stood at the highway demanding that "Someone run a truck through those f***king CFIA RVs"
So while you have helped Universal Ostrich find a technical out and avoid a fine, it is really a sideshow to the core legal question about the notice to dispose that went through three levels of court.
The warrant to search and the police presence all came months after the quarantine requirements were delivered in person and there was no prospect of a yes by consent.
Thank you for laying out the timeline.
No one disputes that the notice to dispose was upheld through judicial review and appeal. The courts examined whether the decision was reasonable within the statutory framework, and they concluded that it was.
But my article was not arguing that courts never ruled.
It was examining something else.
The regulatory capture issue arises from how enforcement power functions in real time, particularly when administrative agencies operate as investigator, rule-maker, interpreter, and enforcer simultaneously, and when escalation tools (including warrants and police presence) are deployed while legal disputes are still active.
That is not a “technical out.” Procedural safeguards are not loopholes , they are the boundary between authority and force.
As for comments allegedly made by individuals during heightened protest conditions, those should stand or fall on their own facts. I have consistently advocated lawful resistance and due process, not intimidation or harm.
The broader point remains:
The administrative architecture that governed this case exists across sectors. Courts can review reasonableness after the fact. But enforcement power, once mobilized, is rarely paused pending full resolution.
That structural dynamic is what I am analyzing.
People can disagree about the outcome of this specific case.
But the conversation about how administrative systems exercise power in Canada is legitimate, and necessary.