Shiny Pony has released a new irrational set of travel restrictions to cover up for his failure to secure vaccine shipments, which nobody should really care about but for almost a year now he's been saying "vaccines are the cure for us all" ad nauseum. It's not true mind you, as most things the Shiny Pony says are lies. But we'll swing back to liberal dishonesty in a minute.
The new policies supplement the old policies, so you still need a negative test done 72 hours (but not 73!) before your airplane takes off, and if you got one 48 hours before your flight was delayed for 26 hours, tough cookies. Unless you travelled from Haiti, where a bunch of blacks are too busy spreading AIDS to worry about the Kung Flu, in which case you're exempted from the testing requirement. Confused? You aren't alone. What about your flight crew who arrived in Rio yesterday, you saw them at the cantina last night, and are back on the plane today? Nah, they coo'.
Not content to have the previous irrational restrictions, the new ones include...
- PCR testing (you know, the ones recently 'discovered' to be unreliable) when you arrive, on top of the one you had before you left.
- Mandatory paying to stay at a "designated hotel" for the three days you await your test
- "Extra surveillance" when you spend your
1411 day quarantine at home after testing negative - A visit to a "designated government facility" after testing positive
There's a lot of stupidity here to unpack, and it's a credit to the Shiny Pony that in one brief presser he can leave so many headscratchers.
The same experts whose models utterly failed assure us that PCR testing is reliable. But according to McGill's Jonathan Jarry, PCR testing is wonderful and everybody claiming otherwise is just "amplifying noise". So, uh, does that include the Prime Minister of Canada? After all, if you need not one but two PCR tests, and then still have to quarantine for the remainder of your two weeks if both tests come back negative, doesn't this speak to the unreliable nature of the test? To borrow Jarry's analogy from his article, if I discover the book I'm holding doesn't have "A Scandal in Bohemia" in it (after testing for it twice), why do I have to let it sit on my shelf two weeks before I can safely proclaim the story isn't in there?
If only there was some test that could be done in 15 minutes, was relatively cheap, and therefore could classify you as sick or well in less time than it takes the carousel to start spitting out your luggage. Oh wait, there is. So why are we using these tests? Who can say? The media doesn't seem to be asking either.
Also, what's the big deal about hotels [it was said in a near-perfect Seinfeld tone by the way, so please go re-read it with that cadence in mind. -ed] anyways? Why am I† spending three days at my own expense in...not only a hotel, but a government authorized hotel? Besides the obvious fact that I'm now put in a Diamond Princess-like environment that increases my risk of contracting the China Virus if I hadn't already been positive, I'm also potentially positive and infecting other people in the hotel...people who might work there and be going home every night to infect the rest of the planet. Or are we all getting dead-bolted inside our hotel rooms like the dictator that Rat Bastard 2.0 is such a fan of?
† The use of "I" throughout doesn't literally mean me. As a test revealed in August, sometime before then I already had been exposed to the Wuhan Flu: the antibodies are surging through my bloodstream, so theoretically I should have my immunity passport and be drinking a pint overlooking the University of Sussex right now.
Finally what's up with the government facilities for people who arrive in Canada and tested positive? What makes people who got the Wuhan Flu overseas different than people who got the Wuhan Flu at the Costco on 91st street? Is the plan for all people to be put in these quarantine camps, or only some people? One notices that the fake news presstitutes at CBC and Global never thought to ask this question...or really any questions of value, for that matter. I'm not sure it offhand would have mattered: ask Justin a question that requires a moment's thought that he hasn't been drama-taught beforehand and you'd get a meaningless word salad that even FakePresident Biden would be in awe of. Or he'd just lie. He is a Liberal after all, and Liberals (and liberals) are always lying about everything. If you recall, this is where we came in.
Not only, however, do liberals lie about themselves and their policies but they also lie about conservatives. The illustrative point about liberals lying about conservatives is that they always falsely accuse us of doing the exact thing they themselves are guilty of. Projection is their fundamental identity. So if you want to know what evils a leftist is secretly plotting, you need to look at what they recently have claimed conservatives have done. It's a reliable metric: it covers the Russiagate hoax, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, BLM riots versus the Capitol protest, you name it. So what have conservatives been accused of lately?
Well one of the big stories which I haven't really covered (but places like Blazing Cat Fur have) is the recent ouster of Derek Sloan from the CPC caucus. Far-left lying website PressProgress uncovered that Paul Fromm, who has committed no crime except for having the same view about his race as Sonequa Martin-Green has about hers, donated to Sloan's leadership bid using his first name that literally nobody knows. As a result, the Shiny Pony's criminal buddy Gerald Butts got on the mainstream media that he paid for and started baying for blood, possibly after directing his lap dogs at PP to the story. O'Toole capitulated, yadda yadda yadda, the details aren't really important. The key thing is that Sloan took money from somebody...and that's bad...somehow.
Presumably, the case that PressProgress thinks it's making (note it never actually made a case, just yelled "hey this is a thing") is that if you take money from Group X, you might end up doing Group X's bidding. Though this isn't even Group X, this is just Dude Y. Dude Y donated to you, and if you took his money it must mean you're going to enact public policy based on his agenda‡. It's unclear of course how this worked in the Sloan case: apparently nobody even connected the dots of who their donor was, so enacting his agenda wasn't really possible. However the general principle seems to be, it's bad to even think about taking money from these people as it might impact the laws and regulations you would enact while in government.
‡ That this rule doesn't seem to be particularly evenly enforced shouldn't surprise you either.
Trudeau is guilty of what his lapdogs in PressProgress falsely accused Sloan of
Well curiously enough, Rat Bastard 2.0 either doesn't have much experience with paying his own way in hotels (I believe it), was told a different number and forgot it and just said a random large number from his brain (I believe it), or is involved in a kickback scam to defraud citizens to his own benefit (nobody should not believe it).
Trudeau added that the cost for this is “expected to be more than $2,000.”
Wait, what? Two grand for three nights in a hotel? Where on earth are they sticking us? What hotels did you designate, the Banff Springs? Let's take a quick look at the hotels in the vicinity of the Pearson International Airport in Mississauga, Canada's main international travel hub (in the photo below I removed hotels under $64 as these almost always are actually hostels). Almost all of the hotels there are under $100 a night, many of them under $80 a night...almost like the hotel business is in trouble or something. In this environment where if I had to pay for my own three nights in a hotel I could pick a bill for under $250, how did the Shiny Pony ramp the cost up by a factor of eight?
For that answer, as you might guess, we turn back to L'Affaire Sloan. Just for fun I thought I'd take a look at hotels who donated to the Liberal Party of Canada. Uh...yeah...how much do you want to bet that more than a few of the names on this list will also turn out to be the designated hotels? The specific hotels by the way have not yet been publicly named, and if the Refugee Hotel saga (or the previous quarantine hotel saga) is any indication never will be.
The Toronto Radisson isn't on the list, you may note, but that may not say a lot. We can only look at the keyword "Radisson" or "Hotel", but the owners of these hotels could have donated on their own as well. Plus the "Greater Toronto Hotel Association" made several donations to the Liberals. All in all fifty hotel-named groups have donated to the Liberal Party of Canada, 16 of which are in Ontario (and therefore pretty close to Pearson, if that tiny province's geography has not completely escaped me). I've attached some screenshots of the search parameters below.
So will the Liberals who accepted hotel money in return for this blatant kickback be forced to resign? Don't hold your breath...though that apparently is the best way to escape these quarantine facilities if you can't arrange for an Uber.
