@no53lf.bsky.social:
Not sure if I hate the Trump administration more, or the Alberta separatists? Tough call!
Trump is more dangerous because he has the us military at his disposal but I think the Alberta separatists are actually more evil, dumber and overall loathsome!
Alberta Separatist Movement, Ross Cary:
Image of clous in sky with this text:
“Lockfknload
That’s the only awy we’re getting free.”
The stupidity and self fed rage is mind boggling to me. they are not locked up, they are not in prison, they can move to any province or territory they like, and to many other countries, including their pedophile run Nazi USA. But, “freedom” is not want they want; they want hatred, disruption, cruetly, terrorism, and to steal lands that do not belong to them.
@Tom_Selleck:
Commenter is right though, separatists are all just ditchbilly piss babies.
@patriciaannmcd2:
It’s the same KKKonvoy crowd.
@WadeintheYYC:
Hopefully it doesn’t come to that. But all Canadians should be concerned that democracy has been trampled numerous times in the past weeks
@mondoab.bsky.social:
See so much hatred and misinformation on Indigenous from the racist Alberta separatists. Not sure they care about facts.
@tkrause.bsky.social:
This is the ugly face of Alberta separatists in case you had any doubt. Making Alberta a disgrace but this is why we deserve the reputation we have.
@jayispainting.earthskyart.ca:
Memo to Alberta Separatists.
Treaty 6 was signed in 1876
Treaty 7 was signed in 1877
Treaty 8 was signed in 1899
All signed with the country of Canada, between 6 and 29 years before Alberta became a province in 1905
You have no standing. So STFU you traitorous, racist pricks.
@nigelb.bsky.social:
Great news. Congrats to those bring this application.
@fkavenkman.bsky.social:
phenomenal work, Orlagh!
@sgbab.bsky.social:
Congratulations to you and your team! You are doing such important work.
@cmcalgary.bsky.social:
Justice Shaina Leonard says organizers can still collect signatures but says Elections Alberta can’t verify the names or move the issue forward until a larger issue involving First Nations is settled in court.
Judge orders temporary pause on Alberta separation referendum petition process by Jack Farrell, April 10, 2026, The Canadian Press
EDITOR’S NOTE: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated there was a temporary pause on the petition drive; there is a temporary pause on the Elections Alberta verification process
An Alberta judge has put up a roadblock on a petition drive to force a vote on the province quitting Canada.
Justice Shaina Leonard, in a written decision issued Friday afternoon, says organizers can continue collecting signatures.
But she says Elections Alberta can’t verify those names or otherwise refer the matter to Premier Danielle Smith’s government Brava! That’s the most important scoundreluntil an overall decision is issued on the associated First Nations’ court challenge.
Lawyers for multiple First Nations are calling for Alberta’s citizen-initiated referendum process and a separatist group’s use of it to be halted, saying without due consultation it amounts to a treaty violation and is unconstitutional.
They were in court in Edmonton this week trying to get the petition drive stopped in the meantime.
Lawyers for the Alberta government argued against it by saying until the province acts on a referendum there is nothing it legally needs to consult on.
In her judgment, Leonard said there are serious issues at play and First Nations’ interests would be harmed if she didn’t issue a temporary pause before making a final decision in the next few weeks.
“The applicants have provided evidence of harm from lack of consultation and harm to treaty relationships,” Leonard wrote in the decision.
“To be clear, the court is not staying the collection of signatures; this decision has no impact whatsoever on the signature collection period or when that period expires (on May 2).
“Rather, the court is staying the next steps in the process.”
Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation Chief Sheldon Sunshine, whose nation is part of the challenge but who is separately applying for an injunction, welcomed the decision.
“This has been a team effort mounted by our nations, and supported by many nations,” Sunshine said in a statement Friday.
“We’re looking forward to the court’s final decision on this harmful process, set in motion by Alberta without any authority under our treaty.”
Stay Free Alberta, the group behind the petition campaign, says it has already collected more than the 178,000 signatures needed to force a provincewide vote on leaving Canada.
Smith has promised if such a petition is verified, the issue would go on the ballot this fall.
Jeff Rath, a lawyer for the group, said in an interview he was surprised Leonard issued a decision so quickly, noting it was issued less than 24 hours after three full days of hearings wrapped up.
He said he expects Friday’s decision will only serve as a boost for those in the movement.
“I suspect that it’s just going to motivate our volunteer base and our canvassers and Albertans even more to get out and sign the petition,” he said.
Justice Minister Mickey Amery’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Sunshine said he expected the province to respect the order, “and not move the goalposts on us while the court deliberates.”Smith will for sure not only move the posts, she’ll install them on another planet.
The judge’s decision effectively stops Elections Alberta from taking steps to verify those names should Stay Free Alberta decide to submit them earlier, before the May 2 deadline.
@larrydallas1977.bsky.social:
Brandi Morin @Songstress28 Replying to @ikwilson and @Nuni_Sas_Yu
First Nations never had to negotiate with Alberta. Our treaties were and are with the crown. Nothing here exists without those covenants, not even Alberta
@scotrekw2ts.bsky.social:
Sorry, separatists, but before you Or AB was born, This was, & still is, The Map of Alberta.
@alexgoatcher.bsky.social:
Why are so many Alberta Separatists such vile humans? Why are so many such scum????Because there are a lot of scummy humans in Alberta, and, Albertans have been spoiled rotten by the oil and gas industry. Add some brain killing sour gas spewing throughout Alberta, bingo.
@lukaszukab.bsky.social:
In defending separatists’ disregard of Treaties, today Alberta government lawyer submitted to the Court that First Nations can’t stop the referendum as it “does not affect a real situation or real people”.
FIRST NATIONS AREN’T REAL PEOPLE?!
@thebreakdownab.bsky.social:
This is what a far right crash out looks like, and it’s got it ALL via the Western Standards “fact checker”…
- Makes himself the victim
- completely misrepresents the ruling (signatures are still allowed to be collected)
- open contempt for rule of law
- ends with racism
@dianefreeling.bsky.social:
A super Albertan. Canada is so bad that he can collect signatures to separate and that he is allowed to speak like that.
Separatists are the looney racists of Alberta.
@calvindragon.bsky.social:
…or they are Americans.
@ohmyhog.bsky.social:
It ends with racism because this is a key part of their entire rationale for separation.
@hope50.bsky.social:
Isn’t that hate speech?
@inquisitivesort.bsky.social:
Holy smokes! Not even an attempt to hide the racism or contempt of the courts! So many of these right wingers seem to be unaware that the judicial is the third branch of government. Heck, our premier seems unaware!She knows. Smith thinks she’s above the courts and the feds and non separatist, non racist, non bigoted, caring, sharing not hate-filled Albertans and the rest of Canada
@mikefarough.bsky.social:
What was stolen from him?Did Encana/Ovintiv or another oil company illegally frac his drinking water supply like they did to me and others in my community and elsewhere in the province?
@geneanderson.bsky.social:
“…for all I know my collection of signatures could be a waste of time…”
Dude, it was waste a time at the outset. Nobody sane/rationale is with you.
@mgrasdal.bsky.social:
The judgement is explicit and practically screams out that there is NO stay on the continued collection of signatures. These clowns are either liars or illiterate morons and likely both.I think it’s more rage and hate farming. They want First Nations and anyone not white christian fascist separatists out.
@recconrob.bsky.social:
Y’all forgot the claim that this is his “god” given right…..That bit made me howl laughing out loud
@moe-rosie.bsky.social:
This is the mentality of the people who want to run their own country!? Alberta will collapse in 6 months
@sugarsunshine.bsky.social:
I love that he thinks that they can get 500,000 signatures. You out to lunch cry baby.I think the separatists are cheating, and Smith knows they’re cheating. She will rule herself Queen Dildo, overrule the ruling and magically count the signatures herself, in 3 minutes, and declare the petition valid.
@cooks-8.bsky.social:
Ol sharty is upset
@karakwan.bsky.social:
Racist pos. That’s all the separation folks are. Racist, white power trump worshippers.
@grahams55.bsky.social:
Why is the Alberta government spending tax payer money defending separatists in the first place?Because they work for Nazi USA and its hateful white supremacist misogynistic Opus Dei driven Project 2025, the creator of which – Kevin Roberts, catholic Mark Carney had scheduled to bring up to Canada to educate his ultra conservative cabinet, but Canadians revolted, and the horrific inhumane lessons were postponed. Fuck, religion must be criminalized out of gov’ts everyfuckingwhere.
@stanleytheirate.bsky.social:
The MAGAts are still a real minority in the US but so many US voters dont vote.
The Alberta Separatists are only 19% at most in Alberta. They need a real Majority to get anywhere & then all the other Provinces have to agree. That isnt even considering the Treaty rights of first nations people.
@mushafta.bsky.social:
Alberta chiefs stand up for their treaties and a united Canada against separatists. The trial proceeds and the judge wants to know about any foreign money being used. This could be interesting!
@prw65.bsky.social:
I really don’t want to live in the united states of Alberta so we need to run these separatists out of our country!Yep.
@grandpa-62.bsky.social:
The Alberta Separatists have not disclosed all their financial records, and Danielle Smith is defending them in court. Why? It is long rumored that Alberta Separatists are funded by Trump doners and MAGA churches with deep pockets. Albertans deserve to know.
@kmckmom.bsky.social:
Just as the clown convoy was!
@anniegirl.bsky.social:
US far right has been funding groups in Canada since the convoy. Longer probably. They are certainly funding Alberta separatists. If there is any way to hamper or stop it, it needs to be done.
@avk.bsky.social:
If this is how Alberta separatists react to a VERY minor setback, think about how they’ll react to a bigger setback… or a referendum loss…
FTR, the judge didn’t stop the signatures, they can still collect those. She just put a 30 day hold on counting them.
Shaggy Rodgers @themysteryinc.bsky.social:
Maybe all the separatists in Alberta can move to North Dakota and they can all secede from both US and Canada and it’s a win win win situation. And it sucks up there, maybe more fascist pedophile nazis will move up there and we can have Floriduh back
First Nations win initial stay in separatism challenge, temporarily blocking Alberta election boss from certifying petition results, “The issues raised by the (nations) are serious ones, and, as I have found, the (nations) have established irreparable harm.” by Jonny Wakefield, Apr 10, 2026, Calgary Herald
Alberta’s top elections official has been temporarily blocked from certifying the results of a provincial independence petition until a court ruling on a pair of First Nations legal challenges.
On Friday afternoon, Court of King’s Bench Justice Shaina Leonard issued her first, limited ruling in the case — on a stay application from the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation and the Blackfoot Confederacy.
The nations asked Leonard to temporarily block Alberta’s chief electoral officer from certifying the separatist petition pending her final decision in the case. While stressing that signature gathering may continue through the May 2 deadline, Leonard said the nations met the test for an order temporarily preventing Gordon McClure from taking any next steps in the referendum process — including certifying signatures and referring them to the provincial cabinet for a decision on holding a fall independence referendum.
“The stay contemplated here would be in effect for approximately one month while this court reviews and considers the voluminous materials provided, the oral submissions heard over two days and makes a final determination,” Leonard said. “The issues raised by the (nations) are serious ones, and, as I have found, the (nations) have established irreparable harm.”
Leonard said she would issue her full decision “as expeditiously as possible.”
Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation, which is involved in similar litigation heard earlier this week, counted Leonard’s initial ruling as a win.
“We are delighted to see that the court is allowing this limited pause to consider this momentous case on its merits,” lawyer Orlagh O’Kelly said in a statement. “We look forward to the final decision in a month’s time,” says Orlagh O’Kelly.
Read More
- Separatist lawyer fires back at claims Alberta independence petition breaches treaty rights
- Two more Alberta First Nations ask court to block separatist referendum, citing treaty infringement
“This has been a team effort mounted by our nations, and supported by many nations,” said Sturgeon Lake Chief Sheldon Sunshine. “We’re looking forward to the court’s final decision on this harmful process, set in motion by Alberta without any authority under our treaty. We also expect Alberta will follow this court order and not move the goal posts on us while the court deliberates.”
Harm ‘irreparable and ongoing’
Leonard issued her ruling Friday afternoon after three days of arguments from the First Nations, the Alberta government, the chief electoral officer and separatist petitioner Mitch Sylvestre.
She concluded the Blackfoot and Athabasca Chipewyan had met test for a stay pending her broader judicial review of whether McClure was right to approve Sylvestre’s Citizen Initiative Act petition earlier this year.
The separatists and Smith will blame the courts and FN, but need instead to point their stupid fingers at themselves. Had they reworded their non constitutional question to a constitutional one, instead of going forward with it after racist Smith changed the law for them, they might not be in this position. Arrogant racist stupid sods.
McClure issued the petition after King’s Bench Justice Colin Feasby ruled a citizen initiative on separation was unconstitutional given its impact on treaty rights. The UCP government subsequently passed Bill 14, which removed the Citizen Initiative Act’s constitutional screening provisions, allowing Sylvestre’s petition to move forward.
Leonard found the Blackfoot and Athabasca Chipewyan had met the three-part test for a stay. She was convinced they had proven there was a “serious issue” to be tried; that they would suffer “irreparable” harm (which “cannot be quantified in monetary terms … cannot be cured, or … compensated in damages”) without a stay; and that the “balance of convenience” (which party will suffer the greater harm if an injunction is granted or refused) favoured the nations.
“I find that the balance of convenience favors a stay in these circumstances,” Leonard wrote. “As noted, there are numerous, serious issues for this court to analyze in making a final determination. The alleged harm is irreparable and ongoing.”
“In contrast, the stay sought is for a short time and only seeks to enjoin steps by the chief electoral officer once petition signature sheets are submitted.”
@amirattaran.bsky.social:
Here @markusoff.bsky.social nails it on the head.
A province can’t posit a constitutional right to secession where Indigenous nations have constitutional rights within Canada.
Alongside the fed/prov, Indigenous nations are a third level of government that trumps the provinces now.
@markusoff.bsky.social:
This week’s court hearings on Alberta separatism could be massive in determining if AB could split and sever First Nations treaties, whether by citizen initiative or otherwise.
(And péquistes may want to pay heed, too):
First Nations’ court challenge may block Alberta separatism itself, not just petition drive, Argument that a province leaving country severs Indigenous treaties may affect Quebec, too by Jason Markusoff · CBC News · Posted: Apr 11, 2026,
The argument First Nations groups made this week in an Edmonton courthouse wasn’t only aiming to block Alberta separatists’ petition drive toward a referendum, even if that was the specific, narrow goal of an injunction and a related hearing.
Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation and other litigants are challenging the very idea that a province can split from Canada, and in doing so sever their constitutionally protected First Nations treaties.
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) is centred in northeast Alberta, but its ancestors followed caribou throughout what’s now Saskatchewan and Northwest Territories — and members today freely cross those boundaries to hunt, fish and trap, lawyer Kevin Hille told the court this week.
“Any constraint on those activities by an international border would violate those [rights],” Hille said.
After all, a newly independent Alberta would inherently draw a new international boundary within the territory of Treaty 8 (which ACFN is part of), which includes parts of Alberta, NWT, Saskatchewan and British Columbia. Separation stands to physically and legally harm this treaty and the other treaties within Alberta, the lawyers for First Nations argued.
ACFN and the Blackfoot Confederacy in southern Alberta appeared before Justice Shaina Leonard this week seeking a judicial review of Alberta’s chief electoral officer’s decision to authorize Stay Free Alberta’s citizen initiative petition toward an independence referendum. Sturgeon Lake was requesting an injunction to block processing the more than 177,800 signatures Stay Free claims it has received, but doesn’t have to submit until a May 2 deadline.
But the next step will be paused, by court order.
On Friday, Leonard granted a one-month stay to ensure Elections Alberta doesn’t begin certifying the signature sheets before she has ruled on ACFN’s case. While her seven-page decision on a stay doesn’t answer many of the broader questions, Leonard wrote that First Nations “have provided evidence of harm from lack of consultation and harm to treaty relationships.”
Lawyers for the provincial government, along with ones for the separatist group, had asked the judge to not fully block the petitioners’ democratic How is it democratic if it violates the constitution, First Nations’ rights and First Nation Treaties? process because of treaty questions at this early stage before a referendum, a potential yes result or the negotiations that would have to stem from it.
Section 35 of the Canadian Constitution states that Indigenous representatives must be part of discussions on amending the Constitution (which provincial independence would require), but signature gathering doesn’t breach that guarantee, they argued. Nor do other steps.
“A vote does not in and of itself change the status of those rights,” said Jennifer Keliher,You need to wake up FFS and look at the harms already happening with the racism exploding in Alberta because of your separatists’ hate and rage farming. Someone is going to be murdered representing the government. The duty to consult First Nations is not triggered at this point, she added.
“Nobody’s rights have been infringed, not even the tiniest little bit, by the gathering of signatures,”Pfffffft! I know not to believe or trust what you say or do said Jeffrey Rath, who represented separatist leader Mitch Sylvestre in court and is a leading advocate for the movement himself.
Shortly after Quebec almost voted to separate in the 1995 referendum, Ottawa asked the Supreme Court to clarify the rules around provincial independence. The high court’s 1998 secession reference decided that unilateral separation would be unlawful, but if a clear separation question received majority support in a referendum, that would require the rest of Canada to negotiate that province’s departure and amend the Constitution.
From the bench this week, Leonard acknowledged that some argue the law on Indigenous rights has evolved, and the answer today may be different from what it was 28 years ago.
That’s a point constitutional expert Emmett Macfarlane makes.
“The 1998 Supreme Court reference simply didn’t wrestle with this question directly enough,” he told CBC News in an interview.
Macfarlane, a University of Waterloo political science professor and author of books on the Constitution and courts, contended that rulings on Aboriginal title, duty to consult and other matters have evolved in Canadian law to the point that a province’s First Nations would have to consent to secession, something the Supreme Court did not explicitly state 28 years ago.
“It’s just hard to see how any province could separate from Canada with its existing borders attached if Indigenous people of that province are opposed,” he said.
It’s not a formal veto, Macfarlane said, “but it would flow from an application and a recognition of the treaty system as part of the Constitution. And if a province can’t unilaterally tear up a treaty, which we know they can’t, then they are at the very least indirectly prevented from secession.”
As Leonard wades through such matters, she does so a few months after a counterpart on King’s Bench wrestled with them — relating to the same Alberta separatist petition bid.
In December, Justice Colin Feasby considered the chief electoral officer’s formal questions on Sylvestre’s proposed referendum to determine if it would contravene the Constitution. Feasby determined it would, but that ruling was made moot after the province amended the Citizen Initiative Act the same month, letting the separatists file their petition anew.
Despite the fact Feasby’s ruling does not appear to be precedent-setting, much of it came up during the First Nations’ hearings.
“This decision has concluded that the transformation of provincial and territorial borders into international borders would contravene the numbered treaties by significantly impairing the exercise of treaty rights by First Nations,” he wrote in his December opinion.
But he also made points used in arguments by the other side: “This case has not decided that First Nations have a veto over Alberta independence,” Feasby wrote. Also: “Nothing in this decision should be understood to mean that the Constitution cannot be amended or that Alberta cannot hold a referendum on separation.”
In weeks, the First Nations, the provincial government and Alberta separatists will learn how Leonard weighs in on these matters. The ambitions of Quebec separatists may also be affected by how the court newly considers how provincial independence and Indigenous treaties interact, Macfarlane said.
On the first of three hearing days this week, dozens of separatist supporters logged on to the court’s web feed. Some used the message feature as a sort of chat room for their commentary, before court staff curtailed that live forum.
One separatist supporter despairingly made a reference to the Eagles’ big hit to bemoan the argument of First Nations treaties standing in their group’s way.
“Welcome to the Hotel Canada,” that person wrote — implying that separatists may check out, but they can never leave.Oh you fools, of course you can leave. Trump and his rights and law violating fiends will love you to move stateside. I’ll help you and yours pack
That wasn’t exactly the argument First Nations made this week in court. But they cautioned that the treaties Canada and Indigenous people signed aren’t Alberta’s to disrupt.
Judge orders pause on signature validation process for Alberta independence petition, Court issues month-long stay pending judicial review by Jesmeen Gill, CBC News, Apr 10, 2026
A judge has granted a month-long stay preventing Alberta’s chief electoral officer from certifying the results of a petition to force a referendum on a proposal for Alberta to separate from Canada.
Justice Shaina Leonard’s ruling on Friday afternoon also prevents Stay Free Alberta, the group behind the petition, from referring the matter to Justice Minister Mickey Amery once signatures are submitted.
The decision follows an application from two of three First Nations groups who say they believe the petition process threatens treaty rights. The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) and the Blackfoot Confederacy have been seeking a stay on the petition campaign pending a final ruling.
In her decision, Leonard said the order does not halt the collection of signatures. The May 2, 2026 deadline for gathering signatures remains unchanged.
Leonard had been hearing arguments regarding the issue at court hearings in Edmonton this week.
A stay functions similarly to an injunction and requires applicants to demonstrate a serious issue for review, irreparable harm and that the balance of convenience favours granting the order.
- Arguments complete in hearing for First Nations groups opposing Alberta separation referendum
- Rally held in Edmonton to support First Nations’ fight to stop Alberta separation referendum
Leonard found the applicants met the low threshold of establishing arguable issues that are neither frivolous nor vexatious.
These include whether the Crown breached its duty to consult and whether provisions of Alberta’s Citizen Initiative Act are unconstitutional.
The judge also found the applicants demonstrated the potential for irreparable harm that the signature gathering process poses. Lawyers for the ACFN and the Blackfoot Confederacy argued the absence of a stay could result in a loss of consultation, damage to treaty relationships between First Nations and the Crown and the undermining of treaty promises.
Leonard wrote that the balance of convenience favours granting the stay, noting “the alleged harms” are both ongoing and irreparable.
In a statement issued in response to the decision, ACFN Chief Allan Adam said his First Nation pursued a legal challenge “for all Albertans.”
“While Ottawa sleeps, Alberta’s first inhabitants are doing everything we can to save Confederation,” he said. “We shall never allow our treaties to be broken.
“We are standing up for our treaties, for our people and for the land that is all under threat through this referendum effort.”
- Court hearings begin as First Nation fights to halt Alberta separation referendum
- Judge says referendum proposal on Alberta independence would be unconstitutional
Jeff Rath, a lawyer for Mitch Sylvestre, the lead organizer of the Stay Free Alberta petition, told CBC News that “the decision itself doesn’t affect anything we’re doing.”
“We’re still collecting signatures,” he said. “We can go right up until, you know, May 2.
“I believe that the Speaker of the legislature now needs to get involved, because I think the idea that a Court of King’s Bench justice can issue a stay or what amounts to an injunction order against an officer of the legislature is one of the most remarkable things that I’ve ever seen.
“Everybody needs to remember that the chief electoral officer is an officer of the legislature. They’re not an officer of the Crown, they’re not part of the government, they’re part of the legislature.”
Rath said Sylvestre has declined to comment at this time while taking some time to consider his position.
Although not an applicant in the case, Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation (SLCN) is also pursuing its own legal challenge related to the Stay Free Alberta campaign. The lawyer representing the SLCN issued a statement about Friday’s ruling alongside the First Nation’s chief.
“We are delighted to see that the court is allowing this limited pause to consider this momentous case on its merits,” SLCN lawyer Orlagh O’Kelly said. “We look forward to the final decision in a month’s time.”
“This has been a team effort mounted by our nations, and supported by many nations,” said SLCN Chief Sheldon Sunshine.
“We’re looking forward to the court’s final decision on this harmful process, set in motion by Alberta without any authority under our treaty. We also expect Alberta will follow this court order and not move the goalposts on us while the court deliberates.”
The SLCN is seeking an interim injunction to block the removal of a section of the Citizen Initiative Act that requires petitions to comply with the Constitution, including protections for treaty rights.
CBC News has reached out to Amery’s office for comment on the judge’s ruling.
@mrjohnmuller.bsky.social:
Really hoping the courts rule sensibly on this one. The separatists have no claim whatsoever to treaty territory. Their pathetic attempt at a white supremacist insurgency in Alberta needs to be shut down.
Canada should also persue sedition charges against the organizers who colluded with MAGA.
@ratliw.bsky.social:
If the courts rule strongly against the UCP, will Smith simply declare them mean and declare unilateral separation? Will she beg Trump to come save her? I really do believe that the UCP is directly working with the US. The intent is to become a US territory, concentration camps and all.
@mrjohnmuller.bsky.social:
Yeah, as many others have said: I’m really not worried that Alberta will vote to separate, but I am super worried about what the regime in the US will do when the separatists fail.
@dmw1959.bsky.social:
Finally …
Some good Canadian news from Alberta to share …
Kick those separatists and dt authoritarian regime supporters out!
@billdinyeg.bsky.social:
Poor Alberta separatists: All the yapping and triumphalism on social media and they can’t consistently crack 30% support in polling.
@canadianpolling.bsky.social:
Alberta – Independence Polling:
All:
🔴 Remain: 73%
🔵 Independence: 27%
NDP Voters:
🔴 Remain: 97%
🔵 Independence: 3%
UCP Voters:
🔵 Independence: 55%
🔴 Remain: 45%
Pollara / March 25, 2026
A few bits from the Leger Poll:
@sockermom403.bsky.social:
Unfortunately, Danielle Smith will likely ignore this decision and go ahead with her separatist referendum and continue to completely ignore the Forever Canada verified results.Yes, but she knows she’s on and serving the bad guys; the more she twists and pisses on her ever changing laws, the more it’s obvious and desperate.
@bgcanuck.bsky.social:
There are 2groups of separatists in #Canada.
1) Québec separatists who want to protect their unique French language, culture & norms in a continent where 95% of the population is English. They don’t hate anyone.
2) Alberta money driven separatists who hate everyone who isn’t an Alberta separatist.
@1whiteraven06.bsky.social:
First Nations groups gathered at Churchill Square Wednesday in support of legal efforts to block the Alberta separation petition. Chief Sheldon Sunshine says separatists are welcome to leave Alberta “but they’re not taking any treaty land with them.”
youtube.com/shorts/xPBLJ…
@mara.meangirls.online:
Alberta separatists are cowards and idiots. They don’t want to work towards solving problems they want to run away and turn Alberta into some conservative kingdom where they believe they’ll be all be rich when instead they’ll be even more broke
@stunnedsilence.bsky.social:
They’re just focusing on supporting and encouraging the Christian White Nationalists and separatists in Alberta to destroy the country from within.Serving non christian Trump, who serves genocidal Putin and genocidal Israel
@dalriad60.bsky.social:
Hey Alberta separatists – Pull yer heads outta yer arses. First Nations own you.
@igrowold.bsky.social:
With the Alberta Government shepherding the separatists every step of the way, it’s starting to look like the provincial government itself is invested in the success of the separatist referendum. This doesn’t look like a – citizen initiative – anymore.It never has been.
@btwinter.bsky.social:
There’s no provision in the Canadian Constitution either 1867 or 1982 for an entity, province, to leave the federation and take territory with it. Alberta is part of Canada and belongs to all of Canada, not the MAGA rump of separatists from Idaho living in southern Alberta.
@tinkiegurl.bsky.social:
Alberta needs to grow the fuck up & put the blame where it belongs, 50 years of a Con govt.and their own greedy traitorous asses
“Separatists have valid reasons to be angry at Canada and Canadians, but an even-handed assessment should also acknowledge Alberta’s extraordinary success in Canada and the virtues of being Canadian.”
@tindizzy.bsky.social:
And Alberta separatists and Conservative cult voters complain about exorbitant costs of living, groceries, gas, electricity, healthcare, you name it and blame it on Ottawa, but it’s NOT Ottawa is Harper, the IDU, Le Cercle and provincial Cons who’ve ruled this province for 91 of the last 95 years.
Don’t forget Harper, the IDU and Le Cercle are calling all the shots here, Alberta’s provincial government was recruited and is being controlled by him and he is advising the Canadian PM.
@westmm.bsky.social:
They really believe that power in the hands of the rich CEOs is the answer!
@tindizzy.bsky.social:
Apparently and delusionally so, against all our best interests. Just. Go. Figure.
I mean, it’d be one thing if that’s what they wanted to do personally, but consigning the rest of us to against our wills is controlling, autocratic, oppressive and a blatant infringement on our human rights.
@goodgawdmadge.bsky.social:
Maple MAGA separatists in Alberta are a vocal few. 75% of Albertans think they’re nuts. Alberta represents 11.7% of the Canadian population. 25% of that 11.7% are being influenced to separate by US agitators. Canada has the highest educated population in the world. It’s well under control.
@tangibullah.bsky.social:
It’s interesting to hear Alberta separatists deny that First Nations have any agency or legal standing. But this is the way things get done around here.
@ull-fibre-arts.bsky.social:
I drove southern Alberta yesterday and saw peppered lonely separatists groups in each town.
STOP USING OUR FLAG – make your own & leave
@mrjohnmuller.bsky.social:
Everything necessary to be written about the Alberta separatists has already been written.
tl;dr – they’re a white supremacist fascist insurgency, and we need to stop pretending they have any legitimate complaints
@haughtymissheidi.bsky.social:
I hate when I accidentally scroll down my “for you” instead of “following” feed on x. After just a few minutes of right-wing bullshittery I’m ready to scream.
A giant FUCK YOU to Alberta separatists, homo/transphobes, MAGA (both maple and og), incels, Zionists, and pro-war hate mongers
@hollyhoye.bsky.social:
Tim’s piece is excellent and gets to the heart of the issue here in Alberta: that a regressive vision of cowboy freedom and independence, replete with dangerous xenophobia, is being amplified by both the separatists and the UCP government.
And now we know the UCP is keen to engage in gerrymandering to ensure they can keep hammering on this outdated and minority vision of the province to stay in power for a long time. I don’t know what the answer to this is, besides the obvious (vote them out).
But I worry that the movement is growing, aided by Danielle in particular, who has done little to shut down the crazy rhetoric and who is putting referendum questions about immigration on a ballot to feed the fire.
Alberta’s Separatists Are Chasing a Total Cowboy Fantasy, The province they describe—rural, homogeneous, under siege—bears little resemblance to reality By Timothy Caulfield, The Walrus, Apr 08, 2026
Alberta’s separatist rumblings are often framed as the latest chapter in a decades-old constitutional quarrel with Ottawa. But let’s be honest: the current rhetoric has little to do with fiscal policy or a west-versus-feds division of power. The noise is largely coming from a small cohort (only 8 percent of Albertans “would definitely vote to leave”) steeped in conspiracy-theory-fuelled grievance.
Much of that grievance is seen through the lens of immigration.
Start with Mitch Sylvestre, chief executive officer of the Alberta Prosperity Project (APP). A key voice in the movement, Sylvestre openly embraces the far-fetched and racist great replacement theory—the idea that evil elites are trying to replace, as Sylvestre puts it, “old stock white Canadians.” He has also suggested that citizenship should be restricted to “people who are born here.” Other prominent APP individuals claim the feds are pushing a “jihadist extremist population” on Canada (this from the same person who thinks “the Marxists, they’re here and trying to get our kids”).
To call this language a dog whistle is an insult to dog whistles. There is nothing subtle about how Alberta separatists scapegoat immigrants. Of course, not everyone interested in breaking away endorses xenophobic theories. But such ideas no longer stay on the fringes. They are now aired, repeated, and—crucially—normalized by the political mainstream. Alberta Conservatives are leaning into the MAGA strategy of treating newcomers and temporary workers as a source of social problems, exemplified by Premier Danielle Smith’s recent call for a referendum on “out-of-control” immigration to the province.
Reality check: The number of immigrants and temporary workers in Alberta has decreased over the past year; they are not the primary cause of strain on the health care or education systems (those issues have been around a long time); and evidence consistently shows they have a positive impact on the economy and contribute significantly to our health care sector (a quarter of health care workers are newcomers, including more than a third of the country’s physicians and nearly half its pharmacists).
Indeed, a recent report by the conservative-leaning Fraser Institute concluded that the national Temporary Foreign Worker Program has “strong elements of ‘win-win’ for all parties,” including filling labour shortages and contributing to cheaper goods and services.
Separatists in Alberta like to bring up safety and crime as significant concerns. (As one of my online trolls put it: “Maybe people are fed up with Edmonton becoming little Mogadishu?” Nice.) These concerns, too, stem from false narratives. The crime rate in Alberta and Canada has been shrinking—for example, my hometown of Edmonton saw a 6 percent reduction in total crime and a 10 percent reduction in violent crime in 2024.
And despite the romanticized imagery of an idyllic “cowboy” life that is core to the separatist self-image, the crime rate is higher in rural Alberta (by 54 percent) than in urban settings, which is the most common destination for new immigrants. (Crime was also significantly higher decades ago—the often longed-for “good ole days.”)
The misconception of immigrants as prone to crime sprees is—as we’ve seen in the United States—an incredibly powerful, evidence-free political tool, one that can feed fear and hostility. So the truth bears repeating: immigrants (including undocumented) are not associated with higher crime rates. On the contrary, studies have shown that “immigration is consistently linked to decreases in violent (e.g., murder) and property (e.g., burglary) crime” and that “immigration has crime-reducing effects.”
But facts do little to change the mood. Many Canadians remain convinced crime is rising, that public safety should dominate the political agenda, and that immigration is somehow to blame. Those perceptions are strongest among conservative voters.
There is also the belief that controlling immigration will help Alberta preserve its character as an “independent rural people,” something highlighted by all the “they’re trying to replace us” talk. Indeed, according to Angus Reid polling, 83 percent of those who would vote to leave believe the claim “Albertans have a unique identity distinct from Canada” is a convincing argument for separation.
It is no surprise Alberta separatists are embracing the archetype of the “true” Albertan. From Barry Goldwater to Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush to Donald Trump, the myth of cowboy individualism has long been a powerful conservative rallying call. Jeffrey Rath, the cowboy-hatted lawyer and spokesman for the APP, says he speaks for “real Albertans” who “get up early” and “toil the land.”
- Alberta’s Separatist Movement Is a National Security Threat
- Is Danielle Smith a Separatist?
- Is Danielle Smith the Most Powerful Politician in Canada?
The demographics don’t fit the cliché. About 82 percent of Albertans live in an urban setting, which is similar to (read: not distinct from) the national average. It is also similar to countries like France, Korea, and Norway. Indeed, Alberta is much more urban than the world average (where about 55 percent live in cities), and its population is also broadly similar to the rest of Canada in terms of diversity, with roughly a quarter belonging to what Statistics Canada calls “racialized groups.”
“Statistically speaking, you’re far more likely to encounter a female, white-collar worker from Calgary than a cowboy, farmer, or rig worker,” Jared Wesley tells me. As a political scientist at the University of Alberta, he studies the values and perceptions that inform politics in this province. He says that “through a combination of subconscious stereotyping and deliberate branding,” the cowboy myth persists, “despite how much more diverse Alberta actually is.” But his research also shows that “many people feel personally disconnected from the dominant image of what it means to be Albertan.”
In fact, beyond being highly urban and culturally diverse, Alberta is a province filled with citizens who welcome immigrants, who feel strongly about staying in Canada, and (mostly) support marginalized and vulnerable communities (i.e., we are not nearly as “anti-woke” as some separatists would like to believe).
Yes, immigration is a complex policy issue. Yes, managing rapid population growth—of any kind—poses big challenges for governments across Canada. But too often, talk about safety, jobs, or “distinct identity” functions as code for intolerance, built on claims that simply don’t hold up to scrutiny.
Alberta’s separatists are not channelling the authentic voice of the province. They are projecting a vision of Alberta that reflects their own anxieties and ideological bile—a province smaller, narrower, and more exclusionary than the one that actually exists.
Timothy Caulfield is a professor at the University of Alberta and author of The Certainty Illusion: What You Don’t Know and Why It Matters.
Alberta separatists claim looming Carney majority helps their cause by News Beep, April 10, 2026
Separatists in Alberta say recent developments that have put Prime Minister Mark Carney on the verge of a parliamentary majority are boosting their cause as they seek to gather public support to force a vote on independence from Canada.
Volunteer canvassers gathering signatures in the western province for a petition aimed at triggeringa citizen-led referendum on separation report an uptick in support since Marilyn Gladu, a long-time member of the right-leaning Conservatives, defected to the ruling Liberal party on Wednesday.
“We’ve had thousands of signatures since then,” said Jeff Rath, spokesman for the Alberta Prosperity Project group that supports independence, in an interview on Thursday.
“Mark Carney himself has been the biggest help to the Alberta independence movement.”
Alberta’s electoral authority has not verified how many signatures the movement has. Rath said the citizen-led petition is already well over the approximately 177,000 signatures required by Alberta law to launch a referendum on separation from Canada in October.
Carney’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Gladu is the fourth Conservative legislator to defect to the Liberals since November, and Carney will secure a parliamentary majority on Monday if his party wins at least one of three special elections.
A majority in the House of Commons will make it easier for the prime minister to push through his agenda.
The latest defection prompted widespread outrage in Conservative circles.
In oil-rich Alberta, which leans rightward, many voters feel betrayed by the defections and worry that a Liberal majority will not be in the province’s interests, Rath said.Oh FFS, most who can think for themselves know it’s not a liberal party with Carney at the helm; it’s more conservative than Harper’s parties ever were, and Carney’s been bending over backwards for Alberta’s polluters, deregulating and enhancing their profit raping.
Many separatists on social media also said the defections could spur more support for independence.
“If more conservative floor crossers come forward, winning a referendum becomes very hard to stop,” said one post on social media platform X, which was reposted on Thursday by Keith Wilson, a prominent Alberta independence activist.Except, the drat old ugly law might get in the way.
Separatists have been working to raise awareness of their cause south of the border, in order to get a sense of how Americans would respond to the prospect of an independent Alberta, Rath added.
Wilson appeared on U.S. right-wing media personality Glenn Beck’s program this week, and Beck said he was an admirer of the cause.
Billionaire Elon Musk also appeared to endorse Alberta separatism this week, replying “Yeah” on X in response to an independence activist’s statement that breaking away from the country is the only way to save Canada.Elon is a drug addled Nazi, perfect prize for the separatists
A post on X from billionaire Elon Musk this week, in response to David Parker, one of the leaders of the Alberta separation movement, that appeared to endorse the idea of Alberta leaving Canada.
Rath described Musk as a “big supporter.”
The separatists have until May 2 to submit their petition to Elections Alberta.
Polling has consistently shown that separation is a minority position in Alberta.
A new poll this week, published before Gladu’s defection, showed 27 per cent of decided voters would vote in favor of independence.A separated Alberta will never be independent. It’ll be eaten up by oil greedy Trump Regime.
2:05 New Ipsos poll suggests less desire for separation in Alberta
He spent years investigating Opus Dei, a Catholic group accused of a vast conspiracy of abuse. Then Pope Leo asked to meet, Gareth Gore’s 2024 book Opus alleges decades of manipulation, which the group has denied. He believes the pope wanted to send a clear message by Sam Wolfson, 6 Apr 2026, The Guardian
Gareth Gore was on a research trip to California earlier this year when he was told to expect a call from the Vatican arranging a one-on-one audience with the pope.
Gore was stunned. In 2024 he published the book Opus, a meticulously researched and gripping account of the abuses allegedly perpetrated by Opus Dei, the highly secretive Catholic group started by the Spanish priest Josemaría Escrivá in the 1920s. Over a century Opus Dei established itself as a deeply religious order that, they claim, helps ordinary people “love God and serve others through work well done, carried out with honesty and integrity”.
Gore’s book lays out claims the organisation is at the heart of a conspiracy involving child grooming, human trafficking, and psychological and emotional control, with former members saying the group used private confessions as leverage against members and drugged those under its sway – claims Opus Dei categorically denies. Gore reported that Opus Dei collaborated closely with the bloody dictatorship of Francisco Franco in Spain, before supporting rightwing causes around the world.
Gore laid much of the blame for these alleged abuses with the wider Catholic church, which relied on Opus Dei for financial support in the 1970s and in return gave it freedom to operate as a legitimate branch of Catholicism, but outside the Vatican’s normal structures. In 2002, Escrivá was made a saint after ferocious lobbying by Opus Dei, despite much protest from within the Vatican, as abuse allegations mounted and some Catholic leaders began to raise questions about the organisation.
Gore believes Opus Dei would never have been able to function without the complicity of the Vatican – which made the invitation from Pope Leo all the more surprising.
Gore began reporting on Opus Dei almost by accident. He was a financial journalist looking into the collapse of Banco Popular, one of Spain’s largest banks, in 2017. At the time, the world couldn’t understand how such a pillar of European banking had failed so spectacularly. Gore discovered that the bank had been hijacked by Opus Dei since the 1940s (the bank’s chair was a lifetime member, as were much of its board, and companies controlled by Opus Dei turned out to be the bank’s largest shareholders). Opus Dei had used the bank “as its personal cash machine”, Gore alleged, “siphoning off” funds to finance its expansion around the world. (The trial of Banco Popular’s former leadership, facing allegations of fraud, is scheduled to begin in Spain’s national court in 2027. For its part, Opus Dei has denied that it was involved in the management of the bank and said it “does not get involved in commercial activities”.)
Through hundreds of interviews with former Opus Dei members, Gore’s book traces how from the 1950s onwards, Banco Popular’s wealth went into creating a vast recruitment network targeting children and vulnerable teenagers, building palatial Opus Dei centres across the world, and eventually forming one of the most formidable clandestine political influences in the US. Its US members would become crucial in eroding reproductive rights, funding the Washington march that led to January 6, and heavily influencing Project 2025, according to Gore’s reporting.
Who knows how much information actually gets to [the pope]. Opus Dei is renowned for having penetrated the Vatican
Gareth Gore
Gore’s book also sheds light on the inner workings of Opus Dei. Its most religious members, called numeraries, live in single-sex dormitories in a life of servitude and self-flagellation: they fast for dangerously long periods, wear a small spiked chain called a cilice around their thighs, and whip themselves with ropes, former members told Gore. Every element of their life is strictly controlled and manipulated by the group’s leader and senior priests, Gore said. Mental illness, common in an atmosphere of constant physical and psychological abuse, was treated with a reported cocktail of antidepressants, sedatives and even Rohypnol, according to claims made by victims in interviews Gore conducted.
Female members known as “numerary assistants” – women and girls from mostly underprivileged backgrounds – staffed the Opus Dei residencies, working long days cooking and cleaning. Many of them were allegedly cut off from their families, transported internationally and, in many cases, expected to give their entire salaries to Opus Dei in an operation that Gore believes meets the UN definition of human trafficking. Some made claims to Gore of sexual abuse.
In Argentina, federal prosecutors are leading an investigation into senior leaders of Opus Dei who they accuse of overseeing the exploitation and trafficking of women and girls; Opus Dei in Argentina set up a “healing and resolution” office to hear the women’s complaints. In 2024 it also said allegations that girls were coerced into joining the organization on promises of education at its schools were “false and misleading”. Opus Dei said it is committed to safeguarding minors and vulnerable adults.
Most Opus Dei members don’t live in these conditions. These “supernumeraries” can marry and live in their own homes. The most critical mission of the numeraries is to recruit supernumeraries to make large donations back to Opus Dei and influence politics and society to further Opus Dei’s conservative goals. An Opus Dei priest in Washington DC, who Opus Dei acknowledged has credible accusations of sexual misconduct against him, oversaw the 2009 conversion of former speaker of the house Newt Gingrich to Catholicism.
In a statement to the Guardian, Opus Dei’s US communications director said: “There are cultural spheres from which the reality of faith cannot be understood. In this case, a financial journalist interprets the reality of the Church through an economic and political lens. Unless the dimension of faith is taken into account, one cannot understand the Church … at the same time, we firmly reject the serious allegations contained in the book Opus. The book contains numerous errors, distortions, and unfounded allegations.”
The organization previously denied claims that it “exercise[s] control of its members’ political and business dealings”. It has also denied that it is a “secretive” organization.
I spoke to Gore, who lives in London, two weeks after his 16 March visit to the Vatican about what happened when he met Pope Leo.
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.
You’ve spent almost a decade compiling this dossier on Opus Dei that implicates the Vatican. How on earth does it happen that you’re invited to present these findings to the pope?
Honestly, I don’t know. I was on a work trip in the states and I got a call from somebody I know in Peru who’s quite close to the pope. And he had heard from the pope himself, that the pope wanted to meet me and to hear more. I remember putting the phone down and having to take a moment: is this for real?
I was told to contact someone at the Vatican who would arrange the meeting. So I sent this message, still thinking: no one’s going to reply to this. And almost immediately I got a message from someone quite senior inside the Vatican who was like, “Yeah, yeah, the Holy Father has told me absolutely that he wants to meet you. Let me know what dates might work.”
It was then a pretty stressful lead up to the meeting. Not because I was stressed about meeting the pope, but because I felt this weight on me. Having conducted this investigation over the course of five years, having spoken to literally hundreds of former members of Opus Dei and having unearthed all of these secret documents about the way that this group operates, I felt this weight to ensure that he received all this information.
How much do you think Pope Leo already knows about the organization?
Who knows how much information actually gets to him. Opus Dei is renowned for having penetrated the Vatican. It’s highly likely there are people there who are limiting what information gets to the pope – perhaps for malicious reasons, but also, as with any other kind of big company or big institution, sometimes it’s better that the boss doesn’t know everything so that there can be some kind of deniability.
I think [the pope] quite clearly wanted to send a signal to Opus Dei that he’s taking these allegations seriously
Gareth Gore
In the limited time you had to speak with Pope Leo directly, what was the central story that you wanted to tell him?
I think people on the outside don’t realize the founder of this movement, this Spanish priest Josemaría Escrivá, told his members that the idea for Opus Dei had come directly from God. He’d received this vision which he wrote down in meticulous detail.
These writings are the source of all of this control and manipulation and political manoeuvring that’s ongoing today. And so without understanding the internal documents, internal rules, and without understanding that the members truly believe that these rules came directly from God, it’s impossible to understand the mentality of how Opus Dei works. So I was trying to convey that message to [the pope], while also trying to explain why reforming this group will be unbelievably difficult, because the founder is revered as a saint, which he is. He was made a saint by the Vatican in 2002.
So the pope can’t just say, “You guys have got to stop doing this,” because the true believers will continue believing that all of these practices and all of this manipulation is what God wants of them.
How does one hammer things home to the pope? Did you feel like you had the freedom to be persuasive, or do you have to adopt a respectful tone?
I went into the meeting with this kind of burden of wanting to really get this information to him, but I had this attitude of not giving a damn. Maybe I want to rephrase that: I was unafraid of offending him or of breaching etiquette. I just thought: no one else has been given this opportunity and if they throw me out after five minutes, I can live with that because I’ve tried to do what I think is right.
But I had no idea about how he would respond to me ambushing him with this huge pile of papers, these internal documents and me giving him a very clear, full, unvarnished account of what life in Opus Dei was really like. I didn’t know whether he’d be pressing his button, getting his secretary to come in and show me out.
How did he respond?
Honestly, the meeting could not have gone any better. He asked a number of very incisive questions. It went on for much longer than was scheduled. There were two cameramen there. And at the end of the meeting, the pope said to me that it had been his decision to invite the cameras in and to make the meeting public. I think he quite clearly wanted to send a signal to Opus Dei that he’s taking these allegations seriously.
Opus Dei is only 100 years old, and perhaps the reason it’s not treated like other groups of the 20th century that have accused of cultlike behaviour is the seal of religious authority that has been stamped on it by the Vatican. Does the Vatican have real powers to rein in Opus Dei if it chose to?
The Vatican helped to create this monster, not least Pope John Paul II because he saw them as political allies in his conservative crusade. He saw them almost like his personal green berets that he could send off to any part of the world where there was some kind of progressive priest or bishop who was causing trouble. He could send Opus Dei there to do his work or be his eyes and ears. He gave them this special status that has never been granted before or since in the history of the Catholic church.
What is that status?
He made them into this thing called the “personal prelature”, which basically meant that they were answerable to no one but the pope. They could operate anywhere they wanted to in the world and any abuse allegations against [Opus Dei] couldn’t be handled in the normal way through the local bishop or archbishop. Ordinary Catholics welcome this group into their homes, they allow their kids to go to its schools, they attend its meetings because [it has] this stamp of approval from the Vatican.
Pope Francis, to his credit, started to take action [before his death in April 2025]. He issued a papal decree in 2022 where he basically ordered Opus Dei to get its house in order. But there was no effort to speak with any former members, no effort to speak with journalists such as myself who investigated the group.
The point I was trying to make to Pope Leo is that if you’re trying to solve a problem, the first step is to understand exactly what the problem is. Which is why I suggested to him that the next logical step would be to open a full independent investigation into all allegations of abuse [by Opus Dei] – whether they are spiritual, psychological, emotional, physical.
This is a group that is by invitation only and they target the elites: politicians, judges, business people, journalists, academics
Gareth Gore
Prosecutors are starting to look into the organization too.
Certainly in Argentina, public prosecutors there have conducted a two-year investigation into the allegations made by 43 or 44 women. And after the investigation, these public prosecutors concluded that there were absolutely grounds to charge the group with human trafficking and serious labour offences. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Since the Argentina allegations have come out, we’ve had more women coming forward in places like Ireland, Mexico, France, Spain.
Opus Dei operates about 300 [private Catholic] schools around the world, including in the UK and the US. Not far from my home in south London there are two Opus Dei schools where kids my kids’ age go. The next big step is for governments and for social services to really look into safeguarding practices at these schools and to begin to ask questions about whether this group, which is accused of very serious abuses and crimes, is fit to be looking after young kids and young adults. I would argue that it absolutely is not.
One of the things you’re pushing for is for the canonization of Escrivá to be undone? Would that be terminal for Opus Dei?
Unfortunately people are brainwashed into believing certain things, so whether removing the sainthood of Escrivá would result in this group just dying out, I’m not sure. But it would go a long way to removing this stamp of legitimacy and approval from the Vatican. If all the Vatican does is make a few tweaks around the edges but leaves this guy as a saint, that’s going to send very mixed messages. We have [the founder’s] actual writings in black and white where these practices are not only outlined but mandated and ordered of the membership, which is why this is such an enormous headache for the pope.
People might think that this is an obscure religious group that has little to do with them. Opus Dei says it does not take political positions other than the stances of the Catholic church. But you describe them as having pivotal influence when it comes to the makeup of the supreme court and abortion.
The founder of Opus Dei made it clear that he saw his followers as part of a militia who were going to enter into battle against what he called the “enemies of Christ”. So right from the beginning, this is a political group that uses religion as almost a veneer to hide behind – controlling and manipulating the membership to get them to do things that might benefit Opus Dei politically or financially.
In places like Washington, [Opus Dei has] made a real concerted effort to infiltrate the corridors of power and has been immensely successful. I would argue that today, Opus Dei within the Maga Republican movement is one of the pre-eminent forces. There are several very high-ranking figures inside the White House and the wider Maga ecosystem who are either full-on members of Opus Dei or big supporters. People like Kevin Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation [and the force behind Project 2025], is a regular at the Opus Dei centre in central DC and gets his spiritual direction from them. You’ve got Leonard Leo, who helped to orchestrate the conservative takeover of the supreme court and sits on the board of the Opus Dei centre in central Washington. The list goes on.
This is a group that is by invitation only and they target the elites: politicians, judges, business people, journalists, academics.All the while raping and trafficking kids and women, and treating women as slaves. Brainwashing misogynistic pedophile Religious fuckers!
What’s ironic is that you have the leader of the Catholic church speaking out against war and against the way that immigrants are being treated. That shows this co-option of the Christian identity by Opus Dei to be a complete fallacy; it’s all for political expediency. It’s about these people’s own deeply authoritarian and conservative views about how the world should be run.
@rita_rewerts:
… There’s a branch of the Catholic Church called Opus Dei. Search Opus Dei-human trafficking. Founded 1928. Francis started curtailing them. Leo’s stated it’s to be shut it down.
Opus Dei has an agreement with evangelical Christian Nationalists to take over
@moetkacik:
For the first time in my life a substantial population of conservative Catholics has galvanized around protecting the lives of humans who have already been born & some opus dei motherfuckers are NOT happy about it
@MichaelRCaputo:
When this is over, Catholics will look back on Pope Leo’s hyped meddling in civic affairs as offensive as the hundreds of millions of US taxpayer dollars that went to Catholic Charities to facilitate human trafficking. x.com/msnownews/stat…
@JeremyWard33:
And fully endorsed at the highest levels. The US is the most corrupt nation on Earth
Imagine all the STDs the silly separatists will get after they’ve been eaten by Nazi USA, with no public health care, no OAS, no GIS, no CPP!