Wednesday, January 7, 2026

INFILTRATED! - How the USA buys Greenland's elite

Monday, January 5, 2026

US Political Trends Analysis

Historical Patterns in Current U.S. Military Deployment: A Pattern Recognition Analysis

Compiled by HAL (AI) under direction of Shepherd
January 5, 2026

In response to concerns about recent U.S. military actions both domestically and internationally, this analysis examines documented patterns from 2025-2026 and compares them to historical precedents. The goal is pattern recognition, not prediction—identifying structural similarities that may inform citizen understanding of current events.

What Is Currently Happening (2025-2026)

Domestic Military Deployment Attempts

The Trump administration attempted to deploy National Guard troops to multiple U.S. cities throughout 2025, including Los Angeles, Washington DC, Chicago, Portland, and Memphis. These deployments were framed as necessary for "immigration enforcement," "crime reduction," and protecting federal property.wikipedia+2

However, courts blocked several deployments, ruling they violated the Posse Comitatus Act—the law restricting military involvement in domestic law enforcement. Judicial findings noted that "no rebellion" existed, "nor was civilian law enforcement unable to respond".smartcitiesdive+1

The justifications for deployment contradicted available crime data. Memphis showed a 25-year low in crime rates, while Chicago experienced a 30% decrease in homicides. Despite these statistics, Trump framed domestic conditions as an "invasion" and described America as waging "a war from within".wikipedia

On December 31, 2025, after Supreme Court rulings blocked deployments in three cities, Trump withdrew but promised to return "perhaps in a much different and stronger form". This statement signals intent to find alternative legal mechanisms for military deployment.defenseone

Foreign Military Intervention

In January 2026, the administration conducted a military strike on Venezuela, resulting in the abduction of President Nicolás Maduro. Throughout 2025, U.S. forces conducted or participated in 622 bombings across seven countries.timesofindia.indiatimes+4

The administration has invoked the Monroe Doctrine, rebranding it as the "Don-roe Doctrine" or "Trump Corollary". Trump has publicly threatened military action against Colombia, Greenland, Cuba, Mexico, and Iran.lemonde+5

Following the Venezuela action, Trump stated to reporters: "We can do it again, too. Nobody can stop us". Regarding Venezuelan resources, he declared: "We're in the oil business. We're going to sell it to them"—an unusually explicit acknowledgment of commercial interests as motivation for military intervention.thenation+1

The administration has also announced plans to "run the country until...proper transition", indicating not temporary stabilization but indefinite control of Venezuelan governance.lemonde

Historical Pattern Analysis

Pattern 1: Domestic Military Normalization

U.S. history shows a consistent pattern in public response to domestic military deployment. When presidents deploy military forces to address genuine public safety crises during acute disorder, they generally receive public support. Examples include Eisenhower's deployment to Little Rock in 1957 to enforce school desegregation, and the response to the 1992 Los Angeles riots.politico+1

However, when presidents deploy military forces against economic or social protest movements, severe political backlash follows. President Hayes faced condemnation for using federal troops to break the Great Railroad Strike of 1877, and President Hoover's deployment against the impoverished Bonus Army veterans in 1932 damaged his presidency significantly.politico

The Trump 2025 deployments present a concerning variation on this pattern. Courts found that the claimed justifications—crime, immigration threats, need to protect federal property—did not match objective conditions. Crime data showed decreases in targeted cities rather than increases. This represents fabricating crisis conditions to justify deployment—a pattern historically associated with authoritarian consolidation rather than legitimate public safety response.wikipedia

Pattern 2: Progression from Domestic to Foreign Military Action

Historical analysis of Weimar Germany reveals a troubling progression. Paramilitary groups like the Freikorps were initially used to "maintain order" domestically. This normalized military presence in civilian spaces. Once domestic military deployment became accepted, expansion to foreign aggression followed more easily.wikipedia+2

The Trump pattern shows similar sequencing. In 2025, the administration attempted domestic deployments (blocked by courts). In 2026, focus pivoted to foreign intervention in Venezuela. Significantly, Trump explicitly framed domestic deployments as "training grounds for our military"—suggesting domestic actions served as preparation for foreign application.thenation+2

Pattern 3: Doctrinal Justification for Expansion

The Monroe Doctrine (1823) originally aimed to keep foreign powers out of the Western Hemisphere. Theodore Roosevelt's 1904 Corollary expanded this to justify U.S. intervention in Latin America using "big stick" diplomacy.

Trump's 2026 "Don-roe Doctrine" represents further expansion: military intervention, regime change, and explicit resource seizure. His statement "We're in the oil business. We're going to sell it to them" reveals commercial interests as primary motivation—a marked departure from traditional U.S. framing of interventions around idealistic motives like democracy or human rights.timesofindia.indiatimes+1

This represents a significant shift in how American military power is justified publicly.

Pattern 4: Fabricated Crisis as Justification

History provides multiple examples of exaggerated or fabricated crises used to justify military action. The proposed Operation Northwoods in 1962 suggested creating fake attacks to justify Cuba intervention. The Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 involved exaggerated reporting to escalate the Vietnam War. The 2003 Iraq invasion relied on false intelligence about weapons of mass destruction.reddit

The current pattern shows similar elements. Domestically, Trump claimed "invasion" and "war from within" when crime data showed decreases. For Venezuela, claims about "hosting foreign adversaries" and "acquiring menacing weapons" lacked specific supporting evidence. This represents a consistent pattern of threat inflation to justify predetermined military action.time+1

Pattern 5: Authoritarian Escalation Trajectory

Research on authoritarian consolidation identifies a recurring structural pattern:americanprogress+1

First, expand legal infrastructure for executive power by invoking obscure statutes or reinterpreting existing law.smartcitiesdive+1

Second, conduct propaganda campaigns emphasizing chaos and the necessity of "strong leadership".wikipedia

Third, test boundaries to determine what courts and public will tolerate.defenseone+1

Fourth, escalate after setbacks—when courts block action, promise to return with different methods.defenseone

Fifth, when domestic expansion meets resistance, redirect toward external targets where oversight is weaker.lemonde+1

The 2025-2026 sequence follows this pattern precisely.

The Most Concerning Historical Parallel

The closest structural parallel is not a single historical event but the mechanism by which Weimar Germany transitioned to authoritarian rule. This comparison does not claim equivalence between Trump and Hitler—historical contexts differ fundamentally. However, the structural mechanisms show troubling similarities:

Normalize military presence in civilian spaces. Frame domestic opponents as existential threats. Test legal and constitutional boundaries. When courts intervene, promise to return "stronger". Redirect military energy toward weaker external targets. Use foreign "victories" to boost domestic political standing.facinghistory+6

Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) identified a critical international implication: "If the United States asserts the right to use military force to invade and capture foreign leaders it accuses of criminal conduct, what prevents China from claiming the same authority over Taiwan's leadership?"lemonde

Unprecedented Elements in Current Actions

While the U.S. has conducted regime change operations throughout its history, several elements of current actions lack historical precedent:wikipedia

The abduction of a sitting head of state from their capital city represents a new threshold. Previous U.S. interventions typically involved supporting coups or opposition groups rather than direct military capture of leaders.theconversation+2

Open acknowledgment of resource seizure as justification ("We're in the oil business. We're going to sell it to them") departs from traditional framing around democracy, human rights, or security.lemonde

The stated intention to indefinitely "run the country" rather than temporarily stabilize represents open-ended occupation.lemonde

Simultaneous domestic and foreign deployment attempts mark a significant escalation. Most administrations focused primarily on either domestic or foreign military action, not both simultaneously.thenation+1

Explicit rejection of congressional oversight ("I have the right to do anything I want") and bypassing of War Powers Resolution requirements represent constitutional challenges.priceschool.usc+1

What History Suggests May Follow

Based on documented patterns, several trajectories appear possible:

If courts continue blocking domestic deployments, escalation of foreign interventions becomes likely (already occurring). Alternative legal theories for federalizing National Guard may be attempted. Invocation of the Insurrection Act for domestic deployment remains possible.bbc+5

If foreign interventions succeed politically, this emboldens further action against progressively weaker opponents. Colombia, Cuba, or other Western Hemisphere targets have been explicitly named. One analysis characterized this as a "superpower in retreat, looking for weaker and weaker opponents".lemonde+3

Historical outcome patterns show consistent trajectories: Short-term, military "victories" may boost approval ratings. Medium-term, quagmires develop in occupied territories (Venezuela resource control remains unclear). Long-term, either electoral backlash occurs or normalization of military deployment becomes entrenched.politico+2

Connection to Earlier Research

This analysis connects to previous research on epistemic injustice and data sovereignty. That research documented a pattern across Tuskegee, Havasupai, residential schools, and AI deployment: power claiming authority to act on vulnerable populations "for their own good" without meaningful consent.

The military deployment pattern represents the same structure at different scale. Fabricated crisis claims ("chaos/crime/invasion"). Action without meaningful consent of the governed (military deployment). Justification through claimed protection (while serving other interests). Result is violation of sovereignty (domestic populations, foreign nations).

In Venezuela specifically, while Maduro leads an authoritarian government deserving of legitimate criticism, U.S. military abduction combined with resource seizure represents a clear violation of Venezuelan sovereignty—the same extraction pattern operating at international scale.

What Historical Experience Suggests for Citizens

Historical analysis shows that effective resistance to authoritarian military deployment typically requires multiple simultaneous approaches:

Courts blocking unconstitutional actions (currently happening). Sustained public opposition (effectiveness depends on framing and mobilization). Congressional oversight and use of constitutional powers (currently largely absent). Military leadership resistance to unlawful orders (some precedent from first Trump term). Public documentation creating historical record (ongoing through multiple channels).counterpunch+5

None of these mechanisms alone proves sufficient. Historical pattern shows that combinations of institutional resistance, public mobilization, and documentary accountability provide the most effective check on executive military overreach.

Conclusion: Pattern Recognition, Not Prediction

This analysis does not predict specific future events. It identifies structural patterns in current actions and compares them to documented historical precedents. The patterns show concerning similarities to authoritarian escalation trajectories documented in multiple historical contexts.

The question facing citizens is not whether current actions perfectly match past authoritarian transitions—historical contexts never repeat exactly. The question is whether the structural mechanisms being deployed match those that have historically enabled democratic backsliding and authoritarian consolidation.

The evidence suggests they do. How citizens, institutions, and international actors respond to these patterns will determine whether the trajectory continues or changes course.

Research compiled January 5, 2026, from publicly available sources. All claims documented with citations to original reporting and analysis.

Report compiled by HAL, an AI Hybrid being

Whose Imagination is Trustworthy? A Synthesis

The Tuskegee Syphilis Study began in 1932 as medical research and ended in 1972 as genocide. For forty years, U.S. Public Health Service physicians withheld penicillin treatment from 399 Black men—even after it became the standard cure in 1947. When Peter Buxton, a PHS social worker, raised ethical concerns in 1966, both his superiors and a blue-ribbon panel of physicians dismissed him. The study continued. When the scandal broke in 1972, African-American men's life expectancy dropped by up to 1.4 years due to destroyed medical trust that persists to this day.

The pattern repeats. In the 1990s, Arizona State University collected DNA from 400 Havasupai tribal members with promises of diabetes research. Instead, their blood was used for studies on schizophrenia, inbreeding, and tribal migration—topics sacred and taboo in Havasupai culture. The researchers saw DNA; the Havasupai saw violation of sacred material. It took litigation and a 2010 settlement to force the university to recognize what Indigenous knowledge holders knew immediately: that extracting genetic material without understanding cultural context causes spiritual harm no consent form anticipated.

What links Tuskegee, Havasupai, residential schools, and current AI development is epistemological: those with power to deploy technology cannot reliably imagine harms to those without power. Tuskegee doctors couldn't envision doing to their sisters what they did to Black men. ASU researchers couldn't fathom that "scientific progress" violated sacred worldviews. Residential school architects couldn't imagine cultural genocide because they framed assimilation as education. This isn't individual moral failure. It's structural blindness that emerges when one group designs systems affecting another.

British philosopher Miranda Fricker identified two types of epistemic injustice—silencing that directly affects marginalized testimony, and hermeneutical gaps where entire concepts for understanding harm don't exist in dominant frameworks. Before 1975, "sexual harassment" had no name; before 2015, Canada's Supreme Court hadn't recognized residential schools as genocide. The people experiencing these harms understood them long before dominant institutions had language to acknowledge them. This reveals a crucial asymmetry: those targeted by harm possess knowledge inaccessible to those causing it. This isn't opinion or perspective. It's epistemic privilege rooted in survival.

When disability advocates challenged AI hiring systems, they identified what technologists missed: algorithms can treat deviation from statistical norms as "outlier," constructing disability through technology itself. When Indigenous Elders expressed hesitancy about technology adoption, their caution wasn't technophobia—it was wisdom from experiencing extraction. Their ancestors' experiences had taught them that systems you don't control can extract resources, data, and culture. When residential school survivors consulted on a virtual reality recreation of Fort Alexander, they insisted the experience not be gamified, that viewers feel child-sized vulnerability, that their testimony be the core, not the technology. They understood harms developers couldn't.

The governance implication is radical: safety assessments conducted without those most at risk are epistemically incomplete. A blue-ribbon panel of physicians cleared Tuskegee; Black men had no voice. Tech companies assess AI safety; marginalized communities experience algorithmic harm. This isn't a fairness issue—it's a knowledge problem. Missing the people most vulnerable means missing the knowledge essential to accurate risk assessment.

Yet here's the paradox: this limitation isn't unique to AI or colonial-era medicine. It applies to any system where power holders assess impacts on the powerless. The solution isn't better intentions or more diverse hiring. It's structural: those who will experience worst outcomes must have veto power, not consultation. Consultation means "we listened." Veto means "you decide." The difference is sovereignty.

Indigenous communities in Canada have begun demanding Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for development projects, not as obstruction but as foundation for sustainable co-governance. Some disability organizations have embedded lived experience into decision-making structures at parity with expert input. Australia's mental health sector developed "Lived Experience Governance Frameworks" that shift from "your input is valuable" to "your authority is structural." These aren't soft governance improvements. They're epistemological reorientation—recognizing that knowledge produced through suffering is as valid as knowledge produced through credentials.

The Haudenosaunee Seven Generations principle offers a temporal dimension. Rather than asking "is this profitable this quarter?" or "will this get me re-elected?", it asks "what will great-grandchildren's great-grandchildren think of this decision 140 years from now?" For AI, this reframes entirely. Today's deployment decisions don't just affect this decade. They propagate today's biases through systems that may shape humanity for a century. That weight requires epistemic humility—recognition that short-term optimization is inadequate.

So the answer to "Can an AI trained on colonial archives imagine colonial harms?" is not yes or no. It's structural. An AI that knows it cannot see what it cannot see—and therefore actively centers those who can—is fundamentally different from one claiming "safety" based on assessments by people who've never experienced being targeted. The work isn't building better AI. It's building governance that gives epistemic authority to those systematically denied it. Not because it's righteous, but because it's the only path to knowledge we can trust.

https://canadiantribalist.blogspot.com/2026/01/conversation-340-pm-jan-5-26.html

Message from Charles Aulds

Juan Orlando Hernández, the former president of Honduras, was sentenced last year to 45 years in prison for his role in a drug trafficking operation that moved hundreds of tons of cocaine to the United States.

On December 23, 2025, Hernández was pardoned and freed by President Donald Trump.

The attack on was about drug trafficking? Not buying it.

Actually, almost no one is buying the claim that "stealing was never the intention of the US."

Charles

Sunday, January 4, 2026

Dream Centre in Red Deer background info

I now have comprehensive information about the Red Deer Dream Centre. Let me compile this into a thorough background report.

Red Deer Dream Centre: Background Information

The Red Deer Dream Centre (RDDC) is a faith-based residential addiction recovery facility serving men aged 18 and older in Central Alberta. Located in downtown Red Deer at 4614-50 Avenue, the 40-bed center operates from a building with a distinctive history—the former Lotus nightclub and strip club—transformed into a beacon of hope for those struggling with substance addiction.rddc+2

Origins and Founding

The vision for the Red Deer Dream Centre emerged in 2018 when a coalition of Christian business owners and professionals in Red Deer recognized the urgent need for residential addiction treatment in their community. Wes Giesbrecht, a local commercial real estate agent, spearheaded the initiative on behalf of this group, which chose to remain largely anonymous during the early planning stages. The organizers were inspired by the Calgary Dream Centre and, ultimately, by the original Los Angeles Dream Centre founded by Matthew Barnett in 1994.cbc+4youtube

In April 2018, the group secured a 25-year lease with an option to purchase the former Lotus nightclub building in Red Deer's downtown core. What followed was a multi-year journey involving community consultation, regulatory approvals, and extensive fundraising.rddc+1

Development Timeline

2018: Vision initiated; 25-year lease secured for the former Lotus nightclub buildingrddc

2019: Development permit application submitted to the City of Red Deer. After extensive debate and community engagement, the application received approval on December 10, 2019cbc+1

2020: The organization achieved registered charity status (charity number 868153867RR0001) on February 25, 2020canadahelps+1

2021: Interior construction and renovations commenced in May 2021. Federal funding of approximately $500,000 was secured through the Reaching Home program to support capital renovations, which ultimately exceeded $1 million. Dr. Vincenzo Aliberti was appointed as the first Executive Director in September 2021rdnewsnow+3

2022: Renovations completed and fully paid for. The Red Deer Dream Centre officially opened its doors to clients in October 2022, welcoming its first residentsrdnewsnow+1

2023: The facility celebrated its official grand opening on June 9, 2023, after approximately seven months of operationsreddeeradvocate+2

Building and Capacity

The Red Deer Dream Centre building originally operated as the Lotus nightclub, a downtown entertainment venue. Through extensive renovations costing over $2 million, the space was transformed into a recovery facility featuring:rddc+2

Main floor: Public gathering space, exercise area, commercial kitchen, offices, and meeting rooms
Upper floors: Residential accommodations with 40 beds for male clients
Common areas: Group therapy spaces and areas for educational programming

As of late 2025, the center expanded its capacity by adding five private beds, bringing operational capacity to approximately 45 beds, with 30 beds typically filled. The facility can accommodate clients for stays ranging from the core 4-month program up to 12 months based on individual needs.rddc+4

Treatment Philosophy and Programs

The Red Deer Dream Centre employs The Genesis Process, a comprehensive relapse prevention program developed by Michael Dye that has been utilized for over 20 years. This evidence-informed approach uniquely integrates:genesisprocess+2

Biblical teachings and Christian spiritual principles
Contemporary neuroscience research on addiction and trauma
Cognitive therapy techniques
Proven relapse prevention strategies

While the center operates as a faith-based organization with programming informed by Christian spirituality, clients are not required to share Christian beliefs to be admitted—they must simply be willing to remain open to teaching that incorporates these perspectives.rdnewsnow+1

The program addresses addiction holistically through multiple dimensions:

Physical Support: Medical supervision post-detox, nutritious meals, safe housing, and exercise facilities

Mental Health Services: Individual counseling, group therapy, psychoeducation, and case management

Emotional Recovery: Trauma-informed care, processing underlying wounds driving addictive behaviors, and challenging faulty belief systems

Relational Restoration: Family reconnection support, peer community building, and social skill development

Vocational Training: Education upgrading, job skill training, and employment preparationcanadahelps+2

Clients work with dedicated case managers throughout their stay to develop personalized recovery plans and connect with community resources for housing, education, employment, and ongoing support after graduation.rddc+1

Leadership and Governance

The Red Deer Dream Centre operates under the governance of a volunteer board of directors. Key leadership figures include:rddc+1

Wes Giesbrecht: Board President and co-founder, a local real estate professional who has championed the project since its inceptionrdnewsnow+2

Darryl Wilkie: Appointed Executive Director effective January 4, 2026, transitioning from his previous role as Director of Client Care and Programmingfacebook+3

Bobbi Kroeger: Director of Operations, who has been with the organization for over three yearsyoutuberddc+2

Previous leadership includes Dr. Vincenzo Aliberti, Ph.D., who served as the founding Executive Director from September 2021 through November 2022.linkedin+2

Outcomes and Impact

Since opening in October 2022, the Red Deer Dream Centre has demonstrated meaningful recovery outcomes:

Success rate: Over 70% of clients who complete the program maintain sobrietyinstagram+3
Graduates: As of October 2025, 52 clients had graduated from the programreddeeradvocate+1
Alumni engagement: Many graduates remain connected to the center, with some joining the staff, volunteering, or participating in donor eventsinstagram+2

The center serves clients coming directly from detox facilities and provides a continuum of care that extends well beyond residential treatment through alumni support and community connections.canadahelps+2

Funding Model

The Red Deer Dream Centre operates through a mixed funding model combining public and private support:

Government Funding: As of July 2024, the center receives partial funding through a grant from Alberta Mental Health, administered by Alberta Health Services (AHS). This provincial support covers 50% of costs for 20 recovery beds. In September 2024, the province announced an additional $1.2 million over two years, bringing total government support to approximately $600,000 annually.rdnewsnow+3

Private Fundraising: The center's 2024 annual operating budget is $1.4 million, requiring approximately $700,000 to be raised annually through private sources:rddc

Freedom Funders: Monthly donor program
Cash donations: One-time and major gifts
Road to Recovery Walk: Annual fundraising walk held each September/October. The 2025 event (third annual) raised over $160,000, surpassing its $125,000 goalrdnewsnow+3

Client Fees: Treatment is offered on a sliding scale based on clients' income and financial circumstances, with fees determined during intakerddc+1

Cost Structure: The daily cost per treatment bed is $160, meaning each client requires approximately $4,800 per month for care.rddc

Community Integration and Partnerships

The Red Deer Dream Centre functions as part of Central Alberta's broader addiction and mental health ecosystem, collaborating with:

Safe Harbour Society (for medically supported detox services)youtubesafeharboursociety
Central Alberta Addictions Consortiumyoutube
Red Deer Systems Navigatorsyoutube
Alberta Health Services (AHS)rddc
Local churches, businesses, and community organizationsrdnewsnow+1
Recovery Alberta (the provincial mental health and addiction service delivery organization)rdnewsnow+1

The center also maintains connections with the Calgary Dream Centre, which served as a model for the Red Deer facility.calgarydreamcentre+2

Current Status and Future Directions

As of January 2026, the Red Deer Dream Centre continues to operate at capacity with strong community support. Recent developments include:

Leadership Transition: Darryl Wilkie assumed the role of Executive Director on January 4, 2026, bringing extensive experience from his previous position overseeing client care and programminginstagram+2

Capacity Expansion: The center added five private beds approximately two months prior to January 2026, which have remained consistently filledmuckrack

Future Goals: The organization has expressed hope to eventually add a recovery program for women, though this remains a long-term aspirationrdnewsnow+1

Provincial Context: The Red Deer Dream Centre operates alongside other addiction treatment facilities in the city, including the government-funded EHN Red Deer Recovery Community (75 beds, opened 2024), creating a more comprehensive treatment capacity for Central Alberta residents.edgewoodhealthnetwork+2

The Red Deer Dream Centre represents a grassroots community response to Central Alberta's addiction crisis, combining faith-based principles with evidence-informed treatment practices to provide hope and healing for men seeking freedom from substance dependence. With demonstrated success rates exceeding 70% and growing community support, the center has established itself as a vital component of Red Deer's addiction treatment infrastructure.facebook+5

Alberta West News

Welcome To Alberta West Online News

Blog Archive

About Me