Apparently, the psychological stress on the Ottawa Police is becoming quite troublesome.
They are asking people to stop calling 1-613-236-1222.
Saturday, February 19, 2022
The Democracy Disconnect in Canada Highlights a Big Mistake Conservatives Make
When the terms “freedom and liberty” are allowed to be defined as extremist sentiment, what you end up with are Canadian federal police beating people in the streets and arresting citizens who petition their government for freedom. Meanwhile, the ever fearful and politically correct conservatives in Parliament grasp their pearls while simultaneously cowering to avoid labels.
Somewhere there is a radical called Saul Alinsky, the trainer of modern revolutionary communists and political leftists – who dedicated his training manual to Lucifer, smiling as he watches the results of his teachings. Unfortunately, we have not yet seen the worst of what is to come from this.
Allow me to highlight the point with two easily referenced examples from Canadian media (infiltrated with ideological stenographers) and contemplate the larger message against government saying we must “defend our democracy” while removing political protest. Notice the evolution of the collective narrative in just a few days.
The word “freedom” is extremist (Feb 13) … Conservatives are “extremist” (Feb 18)
When “freedom and liberty” are defined as extremism, conservatives become defined as extremists. See how that works? Yes, linguistic judo and ideological training provided by Saul Alinsky, in his rules for radicals.
In essence, Alinsky taught the budding communists to define the opposition, isolate them, ridicule them and marginalize them. Now, if you find yourself having a mental reference to a race of persons as defined during World War II, before Alinsky’s book was even written, your reference point is solid.
Whenever we allow any entity, group, or collective echo-chamber to change the terminology, we are making a big mistake. Orwell wrote about the outcome in his book 1984, where The Ministry of Peace is established to create war; the Ministry of Truth is established to create lies and propaganda; the Ministry of Love established to justify torture and beatings; and the Ministry of Plenty to control food production leading to starvation.
These are not simply contradictions in words and terms, these are an earlier version of what David Mamet later described as necessary tools for modern leftists. In order to advance severe ideological positions, they must pretend not to know things. Ignoring contradictions is a feature of modern leftism, not a flaw.
Denial of truth allows easier trespass.
However, the issue of not really believing in the message of freedom and liberty is far more consequential.
What we are witnessing in Canada is not only an outcome of a severely ideological tribe of leftists; the worst part of what we are forced to witness is an outcome of conservative politicians with ZERO skills at fighting back against it.
The Conservative Party of Canada is a weak, ineffective, useless and scared political apparatus.
They are cowards, because they really do not believe their own message.
They are so afraid of the Alinsky linguistics, they expend all of their energy trying to avoid labels. As a result of their all-consuming politically correct avoidance efforts, they have no other skills to fight.
The leftists shout, “look a swastika”, and immediately their opposition jumps to the defensive. People have become so accustomed to this ever-repeating situation, they have lost all reference for what “liberty and freedom” actually mean.
“Look a swastika,” should be met with a voice declaring, “yes, and how incredible it is that our commitment to liberty is so strong that we can see a multitude of expressions, even those we do not agree with, and not tremble, cower or fear over their appearance.”
The fact that a group could walk down Parliament Hill carrying a banner that says, “We Love Communism” and no one cares, is the truest version of freedom and liberty. However, fighting for freedom, liberty and self-determination depends on believing in it.
“Look a swastika.” Yes, and we proudly have the strongest free speech democracy in the west. You do not have to agree with the speech or even like it, to defend the right of independent thought.
Liberty, freedom and self-determination depends on believing in your message.
Donald Trump believes in it, that’s why DC hates him. The Brexiteers in the U.K believe in it, that’s why the British Parliament hate them. Ultimately the Canadian truckers believe in it, and that is exactly why the leftist political class in Ottawa hate them.
Additionally, the unapologetic audacity within all three aforementioned groups also strikes fear into their opposition because Alinsky’s tactics do not work against people who believe their message.
The need for control is a reaction to fear.
Anger is a very visible response from the political left whenever their collective policies are challenged or rejected.
The modern political left does not view rejection as a rebuke of their ideology, instead they view rejection as a signal they need to push harder. From their perspective they need to reeducate their target, to force a change in thinking from incorrect thoughts to correct thoughts, and the only acceptable path is to push harder.
The abuser says, “if you had made me a better sandwich, I would not have needed to slam your head into the fridge,” the same principle applies here.
This leftist political approach is based on a cognitive inability to reflect or contemplate their ideology is flawed. There are several reasons for this, including that their belief system is not a natural outcome of independent growth. They had to be taught to hate, and when confronted they do not know how to argue.
Instead, they put the emotion of their views as the motive for their effort, and they become incapable of changing direction. From the perspective of the modern political left, if they were to change direction, they would be rejecting the foundation of their own personal value. They cannot do that. It is not them that are wrong -ever- it’s you.
Those who do not adhere to the insane ideological goals of the far left, are viewed as the problem that must be overcome.
The leftist emotional attachment to ideology is why these avowed and ideological followers cannot be redeemed or coerced into reasonable positions with any logical argument. Instead, it is you who must be re-educated to see their worth, to value their ideology. You, the person or group who stands in their way, will always be viewed as the problem.
Failing to accept the fundamental set of core beliefs within the modern political left is a flaw on the side of those who engage in the battle for ideas.
It doesn’t matter how good your ideas and policies are, even when you deliver results to prove your accuracy, this specific opponent will always revert back to attacking the success based on their view of your wrongthink.
“Freedom” becomes extremist.
Arguing with a political leftist like Justin Trudeau, in the hope they can be convinced to change direction, is futile. He is disassociated on a mental and emotional level from any semblance of a capacity to consider he may be wrong.
This is why Canadian conservatives must harden, become more severe, and never let up in the fight against leftist Canadians.
Even in victory, the blue collar working class commonsense approach must be relentless.
The modern left has to be destroyed on such a scale as their dangerous ideology is reduced to burning embers; however, do not trick yourself into believing it will ever be fully extinguished.
History has taught us that even when the professional political left is seemingly wiped out, enough will remain waiting for another Alinsky or Obama type personality to blow them gently into a state of reignition…. and the cycle will start again.
The events in Ottawa have triggered them to such an extent, they needed to invoke National Emergency Measures, a state of national emergency and martial law.
Conservatives in Canada must now fully expect this insane crowd to become even more entrenched, even more vitriolic, and yes, even more crazy. We will see it with even bigger demands on their Big Tech allies to crush voices of communication against their enemy.
They won’t just stop with debanking, that’s too immediate. Now comes the longer-term issue of controlling communication to ensure the uprisings never happen again.
Prime Minister Trudeau will demand more control mechanisms, more censorship, more deplatforming of his opposition, more silencing of voices, more demonetization of content platforms by the government’s corporate allies. He will go even harder in the totalitarian direction, all the while proclaiming it is one effort to “save Canadian democracy”.
This is what they do.
Trudeau’s tribe are like the scorpion in Aesop’s fable about the frog crossing the river. They are incapable of not stinging… it’s what they do.
We are The Last Refuge because we accept the political left as they are, not as we wish them to be.
The problem for conservatives in Canada is the same problem for Republicans in the era before the rise of Donald Trump. They do not believe their own message.
Candidate Donald J. Trump knew the Republican Party was incapable of succeeding, because they did not fight for what they claimed to believe.
So, Trump started to fight for GOP issues; visibly fight against the ideological left with common sense promises, policies and brutally obvious solutions. We all saw the response from the professionally Republican class in their rebuke of Trump’s style of fight, which I must emphasize was the only effective approach to destroying the political left in the past three decades.
Conversely, leftists in Canada and Democrats in the U.S. do believe their message; even when that message is fundamentally toxic to the survival of their nations.
Liberals (CAN) and Democrats (USA) believe in what they are doing, and they will never retreat from their doing it. The modern political left is intent on destroying the foundation of this nation. That is their mission, and this fight must be viewed through the urgency of a prism where we accept this is a zero-sum game.
You cannot comply your way out of tyranny any more than you can negotiate your way out of the gallows. If you are considered the enemy of the modern leftist movement, they will seek your destruction.
The only way to fight this adversary is with brutal hand-to-hand combat where you never, ever, concede an inch.
That is… well…. if you believe your message.
Remembering Women’s Suffrage Protestors
Tactics and Techniques of the National Womans Party Suffrage Campaign
Founded in 1913 as the Congressional Union for Woman Suffrage (CU), the National Woman's Party (NWP) was instrumental in raising public awareness of the women's suffrage campaign. Using a variety of tactics, the party successfully pressured President Woodrow Wilson, members of Congress, and state legislators to support passage of a 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guaranteeing women nationwide the right to vote. In so doing, the NWP established a legacy defending the exercise of free speech, free assembly, and the right to dissent.
The NWP effectively commanded the attention of politicians and the public through its aggressive agitation, relentless lobbying, clever publicity stunts, and creative examples of civil disobedience and nonviolent confrontation. Its tactics were versatile and imaginative, drawing inspiration from a variety of sources–including the British suffrage campaign, the American labor movement, and the temperance, antislavery, and early women's rights campaigns in the United States.
Traditional lobbying and petitioning were a mainstay of NWP members, but these activities were supplemented by other more public actions–including parades, pageants, street speaking, and demonstrations. The party eventually realized that it needed to escalate its pressure and adopt even more aggressive tactics. Most important among these was picketing the White House over many months, leading to the arrest and imprisonment of many suffragists.
The willingness of NWP pickets to be arrested, their campaign for recognition as political prisoners rather than as criminals, and their acts of civil disobedience in jail shocked the nation and brought attention and support to their cause. Through constant agitation, the NWP effectively compelled President Wilson to support a federal woman suffrage amendment. Similar pressure on national and state legislators led to the ratification of the 19th Amendment in 1920.
View the complete essay (PDF).
Tactics and Techniques of the National Womans Party Suffrage Campaign
And few notable excerpts from another more lengthy article.
Radical Protests Propelled the Suffrage Movement. Here’s How a New Museum Captures That History
The first of the “silent sentinel” protests occurred on January 10, 1917. Twelve women, fighting for their right to vote, stood peacefully before the White House with picket signs all day, and every day after that, even as the nation entered the Great War in April. Though other suffragists voiced concern that the protest criticizing President Woodrow Wilson could stain the entire movement as unpatriotic, that did not deter the most resolute picketers.
Though other suffragists voiced concern that the protest criticizing President Woodrow Wilson could stain the entire movement as unpatriotic, that did not deter the most resolute picketers.
June 22, days after the protesters’ presence embarrassed the President in front of Russian dignitaries, the D.C. police arrested suffragist Lucy Burns and her compatriots.
Burns and the other women were brought to a D.C. jail, then released immediately because local law enforcement could not figure out what to charge them with, or even what to do with the women. As historian and journalist Tina Cassidy explains in Mr. President, How Long Must We Wait? Alice Paul, Woodrow Wilson, and the Fight for the Right to Vote, the D.C. authorities were in a difficult position. “One the one hand, the authorities were trying to stop the pickets,” she writes. “On the other, they knew if the women were charged and—worse—sent to prison, they would be instant martyrs.” Burns and the other women were brought to a D.C. jail, then released immediately because local law enforcement could not figure out what to charge them with, or even what to do with the women. As historian and journalist Tina Cassidy explains in Mr. President, How Long Must We Wait? Alice Paul, Woodrow Wilson, and the Fight for the Right to Vote, the D.C. authorities were in a difficult position. “One the one hand, the authorities were trying to stop the pickets,” she writes. “On the other, they knew if the women were charged and—worse—sent to prison, they would be instant martyrs.” The police eventually decided the protesters had illegally obstructed traffic.
Throughout the late summer and fall, suffragists were arrested, held and released by the Metropolitan Police Department, which were befuddled on how to handle this headline-grabbing form of protest that was not a simple criminal matter but one of large political consequence. Stevens, describing one crowd’s reaction to an arrest, evocatively wrote in her propaganda memoirs, “But for the most part an intense silence fell upon the watchers, as they saw not only younger women, but whitehaired grandmothers hoisted before the public gaze into the crowded patrol, their heads erect, their eyes a little moist and their frail hands holding tightly to the banner until wrested from them by superior brute force.”
The civil disobedience and hunger strikes culminated on November 14, 1917—the “Night of Terror.” According to the accounts of suffragist Eunice Dana Brannan, the harrowing night began when the women asked to see Lorton prison superintendent W.H. Whittaker in an organized group to petition to be treated as political prisoners. Upon meeting his wards, Whittaker threw the first woman to speak to the ground. “Nothing that we know of German frightfulness short of murdering and maiming non-combatants could exceed the brutality that was used against us,” Brannan recounted in the New York Times, prevailing upon the ethnic nationalism of World War I-era America.
Prison authorities had tried to suppress public awareness of what was going on. From D.C.,
Some news outlets fell back on sexist tropes and mocked the suffragists’ claims; a Washington Post article described Burns as “worth her weight in wild cats,” Paul as someone who could “throw a shoe twenty fit and hit a window every time” and sympathized that the prison guards had to listen to the “infernal din of 22 suffragettes.”
Joe Biden Makes a Big Announcement on Ukraine That Only Raises More Questions About His Competency
Joe Biden arrived 55 minutes late today to give a short presser on the ongoing crisis between Russia and Ukraine. Following his comments, the president then took only three, pre-selected questions, before leaving for what I’d assume is another long weekend of naps and pudding.
Is that the kind of effort you’d expect from a man supposedly trying to defuse a major incursion into Europe? Probably not, but it’s what we’ve come to expect from Biden, perhaps the least hard-working president in American history.
Still, despite his concerning physical appearance and seeming drowsiness, Biden did manage to say a few things of note in the presser. Namely, he is once again proclaiming that a Russian invasion of Ukraine will come in the “coming days.”
How many weeks does this make of the White House making this same proclamation? Remember when the invasion was going to happen before the Olympics? Then it was going to happen a week ago, when the United States evacuated its embassy. Then the Russians were going to attack on Wednesday. That day came and went like those before it — without incident.
I’m not saying Russia won’t eventually invade. In fact, I think it’s more than likely at this point in time. What I am saying is that it makes the United States look weak and incompetent to keep making these predictions and have them not come true. In fact, I’d posit that Putin knows exactly what he’s doing in that respect, and that Biden is playing right into his hands.
Besides, to the extent that Biden’s continual beating of war drums can be considered a strategy, I’m convinced it’s the absolute worst one imaginable if the goal is to discourage Russia from invading Ukraine. By spending almost a month confidently insisting that a Russian invasion is “imminent,” Putin has now been unnecessarily backed into a corner. He almost has to invade now, in order to avoid the embarrassment he would suffer if he doesn’t, at home and abroad.
Instead of giving Putin multiple off-ramps to save face without actually gaining anything, the White House has systematically taken away the possibility of de-escalation with its short-sighted rhetoric. Further, by leaving Russia little choice but to invade in order to not look weak, Putin is now in a position to gain even concessions from NATO and the United States. After all, if an invasion is a forgone conclusion, then any last-ditch efforts to stop it will naturally include more giveaways.
In short, Biden has given Russia even more leverage by overly legitimizing the threat. It’s also worth noting that the White House’s strategy has run directly counter to that of Ukraine, whose leaders have sought to quell fears and talk down the possibility of war in order to not tempt Putin.
What exactly is the play here? Does Biden believe he’ll benefit politically from a Russian invasion if he is seen as having predicted it? I’d suggest that’s incredibly naive. Or perhaps Biden thinks that if he keeps saying something enough, that Putin will be petty enough to just do the opposite? That also strikes me as a desperate ploy from a man who is in over his head.
Whatever this administration is trying to do, they are showing themselves wholly incapable of doing it. The incompetence on display from the top down is striking. In fact, if I didn’t know any better, I’d think Ben Rhodes was back in the White House. That’s how ludicrous the administration’s response to all this has been.
And to be clear, I’m not suggesting Biden’s rhetoric means he actually wants a war. Anyone proclaiming that is outthinking themselves. There is no situation where the Democrat Party doesn’t get utterly destroyed domestically if a war breaks out in Europe on their watch. Rather, what we are seeing is a president who just doesn’t have anything better to offer. This “cry wolf” strategy is the best he’s got.
Internal DCCC Poll Predicts a 2022 Bloodbath and the People They Will Blame Have Already Been Identified
A Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) internal poll of voters in competitive or “swing” congressional districts was leaked earlier in the week. On Tuesday, Politico got the head’s up, and the online outlet SFGATE.com got the slide decks on Thursday.
The top line from the presentation was gruesome for a party that was already sure that November 2022 had the potential to be a bloodbath.
The poll found that that 57% of voters in competitive congressional districts agree with the statement, “Democrats in Congress have taken things too far in their pandemic response,” and 66% of self-defined “swing” voters in competitive districts agree with that statement. White and Hispanic voters in competitive districts were equally as likely to agree (59%), while Black voters (42%) and Asian voters (46%) disagreed with the statement. The poll also did not define what “taken things too far” means.
The DCCC found that critiques of COVID-19 restrictions were slightly less potent than other issues. In swing districts, 64% of voters agreed with the statement that “Democrats in Congress support defunding the police and taking more cops off of the street.” The internal poll found that 80% of self-defined swing voters in competitive districts agreed with the same statement…
Sixty-two percent of voters in contested districts agreed with the statement, “Democrats in Congress have created a border crisis that allows illegal immigrants to enter the country without repercussions and grants them tax-payer funded benefits once here.” Seventy-eight percent of swing voters in those districts agreed.
Sixty-one percent of swing district voters agreed with the statements, “Democrats in Congress are spending money out of control,” and, “Democrats are teaching kids as young as five Critical Race Theory, which teaches that America is a racist country and that white people are racist.” And 59% agreed with the statement, “Democrats are too focused on pursuing an agenda that divides us and judging those who don’t see things their way.”
The DCCC describes the practical import of the data this way.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is recommending a new strategy to endangered members and their teams, hoping to blunt the kinds of GOP attacks that nearly erased their majority last election and remain a huge risk ahead of November. In presentations over the past two weeks, party officials and operatives used polling and focus group findings to argue Democrats can’t simply ignore the attacks, particularly when they’re playing at a disadvantage. A generic ballot of swing districts from late January showed Democrats trailing Republicans by 4 points, according to the polling.
It wasn’t all bleak, though: The data showed that Democrats could mostly regain the ground lost to Republicans if they offered a strong rebuttal to the political hits. When faced with a “defund the police” attack, for instance, the presenters encouraged Democrats to reiterate their support for police. And on immigration, they said Democrats should deny support for “open borders or amnesty,” and talk about their efforts to keep the border safe.
If Democrats don’t answer Republican hits, the party operatives warned, the GOP’s lead on the generic ballot balloons to 14 points from 4 points — a dismal prediction for Democrats when the GOP only needs to win five seats to seize back the majority. But when voters heard a Democratic response to that hit, Republicans’ edge narrowed back down to 6 points, giving candidates more of a fighting chance, especially since those numbers don’t factor in Democrats going on the offensive.
Think about that for a moment. If your candidates jettison all connections to Democrat policy priorities, they can claw their way from 14 points down to only 6 points down. As a reminder, the technical term for losing by 6 points is “loser.”
For this strategy to work, the voters must be profoundly ignorant, and the candidates must lie. And even if you are a proficient liar and the voters are more stupid than usual, it is really hard to walk away from stuff like this from some of the most high-profile members of your caucus.
The framing of the story is interesting. All of these issues–illegal immigration, crime, COVID tyranny, using the school system to propagandize children–are considered “culture war” issues.
That is raising hackles among progressives who are starting to see themselves as the people who have been fingered to take the blame for what happens in 2022 (read this from my colleague Bonchie, That Backlash Against Democrats Everyone Predicted Has Arrived). This post is an excellent example of how the progressives see the ax poised over their necks and can’t do anything about it other than cry.
Politico released select findings of an alleged Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) poll that insisted Democrats running for Congress should avoid so-called “culture war issues” as the 2022 midterms loom. Aside from the fact that the poll was presented as good faith advice rather than what it almost certainly is—preemptive scapegoating of progressives in anticipation of a near-certain midterm blow out—the article offers useful insight into how very serious, material issues are dismissed as “culture war” frivolity simply because they are seen as disproportionately impacting people of color or LGBTQ.
…
This isn’t to say “culture war” issues cannot exist in the sense that relatively low stakes culture issues take center stage at the expense of bigger issues. The recent two-day news cycle about the gender of M&M’s comes to mind. But police budgets, severe border crackdowns, and the basic humanity of trans people are tremendously urgent political contests with real human stakes. Just because they don’t appear to impact our culturally understood and implied “swing voter” of Joe White Guy in the suburbs doesn’t mean they are mere “culture war” fodder. (Though it’s worth noting many of these so-called “culture war” issues, like directing resources from police to social welfare would help working class whites. But since they are only used an avatar for left-punching from our cynical elite rather than humans, this is deemed irrelevant.)
Ultimately, running right on “culture war issues” is what a party does when it can’t offer big picture economics wins. When it doesn’t support single payer healthcare, universal basic income, free college, or myriad other nominally race-neutral policies, If it cannot provide a meaningful enough alternative to Republicans, just tweaking differing Covid relief packages, then this is the logical end point. The idea that Democrats don’t have the image of a party that cares about “kitchen sink” issues because they haven’t recently done anything to promote robust, cross-racial economic populism, and thus ought to do more of it, isn’t even entertained as an option. No, it must be because they talk about other “culture” issues that are perceived to impact people of specific races rather than white people, or in some post-racial way. The solution therefore isn’t to become more economically populist—it’s to run from anything that polls badly and hope people don’t notice.
All in all, this is shaping up to a most interesting year, assuming Joe Biden hasn’t provoked a thermonuclear exchange with Russia and China, and the economy hasn’t been thoroughly trashed. The Democrats are slowly realizing that the policies and rhetoric popular in a handful of very, very liberal congressional districts are loathed by most Americans. Having pushed this garbage for two years, the Democrats are now trying to distance themselves from it by declaring both the rhetoric and its loudest advocates as extreme. Of course, this strategy only works if our candidates let them get away with it. And, as we belong to the “stupid party,” that is a very real possibility.
Ukraine-Russia crisis: British couples undergoing IVF in Ukraine face being separated from their children by war
British couples undergoing fertility treatment in Ukraine face being separated from their children by an impending war - but many have said they not deterred by travelling warnings.
Hundreds of people from the UK and Ireland visit Ukraine every year to undergo fertility treatment or use Ukrainian surrogates.
But with the threat of an impending invasion from Russia, the UK government is advising against all travel to the region.
This has left families torn about whether or not to continue treatment, and concerned about what could happen to any babies born during the conflict.
Mother: Ukraine 'my only hope'
Rend Platings, from Cambridge, has suffered five miscarriages and told Sky News that she believes a fertility clinic in Ukraine is her "only hope" of having another baby.
As well as having IVF at a private clinic in London, she has had four procedures at the BioTexCom fertility clinic in Kyiv. She intends to return to the country in March, for another round.
Mrs Platings has previously travelled to the country with her husband Michael and their seven-year-old daughter Samantha, who was conceived naturally. She has spent thousands of pounds on treatment in Ukraine - and said she is not deterred by travel warnings.
"It wouldn't stop me from going, just because the advice is not to go. The whole thing means too much to me," she said.
"I would take the risk to go on my own, just because I have already risked so much in this painful journey."
She said this clinic was "the best chance" for the family, as they already now their medical background.
"I would love to carry on," she added.
"It would be a dream come true and I really hope that the politicians and whoever is making this situation so difficult, can just calm down and make things peaceful. Everyone just wants peace. We want peace because peace enables us to get on with our lives."
Clinic builds bomb shelter for babies
Experts say that some travel to the country because it is more affordable than having treatment in the UK. After the United States, Ukraine is the most popular country for British people using surrogates abroad.
Speaking from Kyiv, support manager Konstantin Nekrasenko, from BioTexCom, said the fertility clinic has built an emergency bomb shelter to protect any babies born if a war was to break out.
During the pandemic, the clinic had 50 newborns being kept in the Hotel Venice facility, whilst their parents could not reach them as a result of travel restrictions
Mr Nekrasenko said that the clinic, which annually supports around 200 British families from the UK and Ireland for surrogacy and fertility treatment out of its 3,000 clients, was supporting British people concerned about what would happen if their babies were born to Ukrainian surrogates in the middle of a conflict.
He explained: "Those that are really concerned are the couples that are in Kyiv now.
"Last week, I had six British couples in Kyiv. Now I have only two couples left because all of them instantly got emergency travel documents for the baby. The British government reacted and facilitated them getting back home as soon as possible."
He added: "The clinic has done some preparations to react fast in case any emergency situation happens. Shortly, you will see a special shelter will be constructed for the couples and babies who are in Kyiv now. But I would say that all the consulates are doing great work to get passports for the babies as fast as possible."
'Not many' planning to avoid Ukraine
Mrs Rend, who has a British friend expecting a baby to be born to a Ukrainian surrogate in April, said many Brits are "not planning to interrupt their journeys".
She continued: "Every month affects our chances and so we are in a rush. Time is not on our side. Time is never on your side when you're doing fertility treatment."
Kyiv-based Dr Inna Moroz, who specialises in IVF, said that around 50% of her clients are British - and whilst some have decided to go ahead with treatment, many have postponed their flights.
She said: "IVF treatment is age-related - so we can't wait months or years to continue the treatment. We have embryos here, and we are waiting for transfers for example. We don't know how long this situation in Ukraine is going to go on."
She added: "We can be in this political game for a couple of months of a couple of years, we have to continue to live our normal lives, be strong and hope that the situation will be resolved."
Lawyer Natalie Gamble, who specialises in fertility and surrogacy law, is working with British couples in the region.
