JANUARY 6. NEVER FORGET.

In remembrance of eight American citizens who lost their lives
as a result of the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack:

  

Brian D. Sicknick — U.S. Capitol Police Officer
Died on January 7, 2021, the day after responding to the Capitol attack. He collapsed after engaging with rioters and later died following multiple strokes. His death was officially ruled natural causes, but authorities and major news organizations have consistently linked it to his actions during the attack.

Howard Charles Liebengood — U.S. Capitol Police Officer
A veteran officer who responded to the January 6 attack and died by suicide on January 9, 2021. His family and department cited the trauma of the events as a contributing factor.

Jeffrey L. Smith — Metropolitan Police Department Officer
Responded to the Capitol attack and suffered injuries during confrontations with rioters. He died by suicide on January 15, 2021. A later ruling determined his death was directly caused by injuries sustained during the attack.

Kyle Hendrik DeFreytag — Metropolitan Police Department Officer
Responded to the January 6 attack and died by suicide in July 2021. His death has been publicly linked by colleagues and family to the trauma of that day.

Gunther Paul Hashida — Metropolitan Police Department Officer
Responded to the January 6 attack and died by suicide in July 2021. His death has been widely reported as connected to the psychological toll of the events. 

Ashli Babbitt — Civilian
Fatally shot by a U.S. Capitol Police officer while attempting to breach a barricaded doorway inside the Capitol during the attack.

Rosanne Boyland — Civilian
Collapsed and died during the riot near the Capitol. The District of Columbia medical examiner ruled her death an accidental overdose.

Kevin Greeson — Civilian
Died of a heart attack on Capitol grounds during the January 6 attack.

Benjamin Phillips — Civilian
Died of coronary artery disease during the events at the Capitol on January 6.

U.S. flag at half-mast over the U.S. Capitol; public domain (via Wikimedia Commons). 

Image reflects official mourning at the Capitol following the death of Officer Brian Sicknick.  

Source Note:
The names and descriptions above are based on contemporaneous and archival reporting by Reuters and the Associated Press, as well as official statements from the U.S. Capitol Police, the Metropolitan Police Department, and the District of Columbia Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. 

When Canada Steps Up, and the World Watches

 by roving reporter Shaun Lawton (written with AI support under reporter’s direction)

 

   Some shifts happen with headlines and sirens, while some happen quietly, in budget lines and pledges. Canada’s latest move is the second kind — but its echo is loud.

   In June 2025, Canada announced it would hit NATO’s 2 % defense spending target this year — years ahead of schedule — and then go further, embracing a new alliance investment pledge pushing military and infrastructure spending even higher by 2035. (reuters.com)

   For a country long criticized as a laggard in NATO budgets, the move is startling. For allies living in global unease, it is reassuring. For others — perhaps Washington — it is quietly pointed.

   The official story is familiar: the world is more dangerous. Russia’s war in Ukraine drags on. NATO’s eastern flank remains tense. The Arctic is no longer a thought exercise; it is a theater. Cyberattacks, undersea cables, and satellites now define modern deterrence. Canada, with vast territory and an embedded stake in NATO, cannot ignore any of it. (pm.gc.ca)

   All true. Yet incomplete.

   Because timing matters. And tone matters. And Canada’s timing — this leap forward — lands amid what many perceive as a gap in NATO leadership. The United States has offered mixed signals: affirmations of commitment punctuated with talk of cost, domestic priorities, and transactional alliances. Allies hear the nuance; they feel the wobble. (reuters.com)

   Canada heard differently. Canada decided: we will lead where someone else hesitates.

   The decision is concrete:

• 2 % GDP in defense spending this year — a leap from previous projections that wouldn’t reach it until 2032. (torontotoday.ca)

• Broader NATO investment pledge: pushing core defense and infrastructure spending toward 5 % by 2035. (nato.int)

• Leadership on the ground in Latvia and support for Ukrainian forces. (pm.gc.ca)

   This is not mere arithmetic. This is credibility, broadcast in dollars and policy.

   And here is the unspoken message: if the United States wavers, Canada will hold the line. It is not stepping away from the alliance. It is stepping in. Leading, in a moment when leadership is suddenly optional elsewhere.

   Yes, critics will note that defense spending competes with healthcare, housing, climate resilience. Debate should be had. A democracy thrives on such questions. But Canada’s move is not fear-mongering or posturing. It is responsibility — the quiet, expensive kind.

   Deterrence, after all, is a long game. Alliances do not fail because enemies strike. They fail when members doubt each other more than they fear the threat. And when smaller allies find themselves leading, history shows they do so because bigger ones have begun to hesitate.

   Canada’s decision is a message to the world and a warning to America: alliances cannot endure on wishful thinking. Peace costs something — attention, investment, resolve. Canada is paying that cost. Whether others will follow, or let doubt grow, is the question of the moment.

   Sometimes the most revealing acts of power are not demonstrations of force, but demonstrations of will. Canada just drew a line. The world, and especially Washington, would be wise to notice.

              Click below to read the next article  

 

 JANUARY 6.     NEVER FORGET.

---

Sources

• Reuters: Canada ramps up defense spending, meets NATO 2% early ➤ link

• Government of Canada: Canada joins NATO Defence Investment Pledge ➤ link

• NATO: Funding commitments overview ➤ link

• Toronto Today: Canada meets NATO 2% pledge ahead of schedule ➤ link

• Reuters: NATO summit statement on spending ➤ link

Disclaimer: AI, Integrity, and Our Commitment to Readers

 by roving reporter Shaun Lawton 

(written with AI support under reporter’s direction)

    At The Oscillating Oculus, journalistic integrity and transparency are our highest priorities. Every article, story, or creative piece we publish reflects our commitment to accuracy, fairness, and thoughtful analysis. Our work is guided first and foremost by human authors — reporters, contributors, and editors — who conceive the ideas, frame the arguments, and provide the interpretation that gives each piece its voice.   

   AI tools, including large language models, are used strictly as assistants. They may help gather facts, provide background research, generate preliminary drafts, or refine phrasing. AI is never the decision-maker, the ethical judge, or the primary author. Every piece remains under the direct guidance of its human author, and all final editorial judgment, interpretation, and personal viewpoint remain the responsibility of the human author and the editor-in-chief, who ensures that our standards of accuracy, clarity, and integrity are met.

   To maintain transparency with our readers, every article that uses AI in any capacity includes a parenthetical byline disclosure. If an article was drafted or refined with AI support, the parenthetical specifies the nature of that assistance. Articles written entirely by a human author may include a parenthetical stating zero AI involvement, or none at all, depending on context. This system allows readers to immediately know the degree to which AI contributed to each piece, without interrupting the flow of the article itself.

   We recognize that some readers are skeptical of AI’s use in writing. This is entirely understandable. Our goal is not to obscure or excuse AI’s presence, but to demonstrate how it can be used responsibly: as a tool that enhances research, efficiency, and clarity while preserving, rather than compromising, the author’s judgment, voice, and creative intent.

   For those who wish to examine our process more closely, we maintain a source accreditation repository, where selected transcripts of AI-assisted collaboration are available. This allows readers to see exactly how AI was employed in research, drafting, and editing, reinforcing our commitment to full disclosure.

   In short, The Oscillating Oculus strives to set an example. AI is a tool, not a replacement. Human authors remain the drivers of ideas, the arbiters of judgment, and the bearers of accountability. Our parenthetical bylines, editorial oversight, and source transparency collectively ensure that every piece you read reflects both ethical journalistic practice and the integrity of human insight.

   We publish with honesty, curiosity, and care — always mindful that our readers deserve to know who is shaping the words on the page, and exactly how. Our mission is to provide thoughtful, informed, and sometimes provocative perspectives on the world, while upholding the highest standards of disclosure and accountability.

    

Click below to read the next article

available exclusively on

the Oscillating Oculus