Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

EU-Created Fund Interfering in Georgia’s Elections – Parliament Speaker

Sputnik – 28.02.2024

TBILISI – The EU-established European Endowment for Democracy (EED) fund is interfering in the parliamentary elections to come in Georgia by financing various political parties, Georgian parliamentary speaker Shalva Papuashvili said on Wednesday.

“EED does not disclose its own expenses in Georgia. Apparently, the fund directly finances political parties and interferes in the elections. Holding the elections properly is part of the nine points [needed to be taken by Georgia for EU integration] and we cannot deal with this alone. The European Union, its representative office, the European Commission must intervene, because this foundation is an institution created by the EU,” Papuashvili told reporters.

If not stopped, foreign funding will harm the elections, which are scheduled to take place in the country, on October 26, and hinder the choice of the Georgian people, the parliamentary speaker added.

“We are seeing that a significant part of the opposition is being financed directly from abroad and, given the fact that the current year is an election year, this is equivalent to foreign interference in the elections in Georgia. Foreign interference is one of the threats expected in these elections … For the elections to be transparent, it is necessary to prohibit and stop direct or indirect funding of parties in Georgia through European channels,” Papuashvili said.

Established in 2023 by the European Union, EED officially aims to promote democracy in the European Neighborhood, the Western Balkans, and Turkiye.

February 29, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

How to Stop the WHO – #SolutionsWatch

Corbett | February 27, 2024

We all know the problem by now: the World Health Organization is trying to override your health freedoms and abrogate your bodily autonomy in the name of their scamdemic agenda. But what is the solution? Join James for this in-depth exploration of the ideas, organizations and actions that are already in motion to derail the WHO tyranny and regain our medical sovereignty.

WATCH ON: ARCHIVE / BITCHUTE ODYSEE / ROKFIN / RUMBLE   /SUBSTACK or DOWNLOAD THE MP4

SHOW NOTES:

Episode 417 – The Global Pandemic Treaty: What You Need to Know

Episode 442 – The Global Pandemic Treaty Is A Threat To Us All

Episode 445 – James Corbett Testifies at the National Citizens Inquiry

Canadian petitions to parliament

UK petition

US petition

The Global WHO Uprising Has Begun! on CHD TV

Amending The International Health Regulations (2005) – Health.Govt.NZ

Netherlands Letter To Parliament

South Africa Bill To Withdraw From WHO

Press conference on the growing concerns over the WHO ‘pandemic treaty’

Presentation to Irish parliament

UK Reject and Exit the WHO!

Good News: The UK’s membership of the WHO seems to be unlawful and legal action is pending

DoorToFreedom.org

jamesroguski.substack.com

screwthewho.com

exitthewho.org

Nullification – #SolutionsWatch

Maharrey on The Corbett Report

Michael Maharrey on “Shot Callers” discussing nullifying the WHO agreements

This week, please PAY FORWARD your gratitude for this work by sending info on the WHO takeover to someone in your life and by supporting the group or the individual that put that info together.

February 29, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism, Video | | Leave a comment

Canada’s Liberal Government Advances “Online Harms” Censorship Bill

Trudeau wants new laws to censor online speech

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | February 27, 2024

Canada’s Justice Minister Arif Virani has advanced a highly controversial bill, named Bill C-63, proposing comprehensive new legislation aimed at addressing online “hate” speech.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

The bill covers seven types of harmful material, from content sexually exploiting or re-victimizing children and survivors, to content promoting violence and extremism.

But it also outlaws online “hatred,” so-called “hate speech,” and forms of deepfakes.

In an attempt to decrease the prevalence of harmful content, this legislation puts the onus on online platforms to be accountable and transparent about how they handle such content.

Platforms like social media and live-streaming services are included under the legislation’s “online services” umbrella.

The bill would also create a new “standalone hate crime offense that would apply to every offence in the Criminal Code and in any other Act of Parliament, allowing penalties up to life imprisonment to denounce and deter this hateful conduct as a crime in itself,” – the briefing explained.

The proposed law would also raise the maximum punishments for the four hate offenses from five years to life imprisonment for advocating genocide and from two years to five years for the others when persecuted by way of indictment.

The Liberal government states that the bill’s proposed regulations centre on the platforms most frequented by Canadians. However, the specifics will depend on whether these platforms meet the eventual user thresholds. Over time, the government may hold other platforms accountable, if these platforms end up posing “a significant risk of harm.”

Additionally, Bill C-63 proposes establishing a censorship organization, which will oversee digital “safety” issues. This organization is anticipated to include a five-member digital safety commission, an independent digital safety ombudsman, and a digital safety office. These will assist in addressing Canadians’ grievances about platforms’ content moderation decisions.

In a recent critique of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s approach to regulating online speech, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre didn’t mince words. He accused Trudeau of labeling any speech he personally dislikes as “hate speech.” This accusation comes amidst discussions surrounding Canada’s proposed online harms bill, a legislation echoing similar efforts in other western democracies aimed at curbing hate speech, terrorist incitements, and violent content online.

Poilievre’s comments reflect a growing concern about the potential for such laws to be misused for broader censorship. This concern is not unfounded, given precedents in other countries where similar laws have veered into the realm of suppressing free speech. The Conservative leader’s stance suggests a keen awareness of these risks.

The term “woke authoritarian agenda” was used by Poilievre to describe the draft of the online harms bill, which he and his party are committed to opposing. He draws attention to the Trudeau administration’s handling of the 2022 “Freedom Convoy,” a protest against COVID-19 restrictions. Poilievre points out the government’s extreme measures, including freezing citizens’ bank accounts, as indicative of a mindset that easily conflates criticism with hate speech.

Highlighting the Trudeau government’s actions during the pandemic, Poilievre remarked, “Justin Trudeau said anyone who criticized him during the pandemic was engaging in hate speech.” This statement underscores a fear that the government might use the proposed legislation to silence dissent in various scenarios.

February 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Tucker Carlson makes shocking revelation about Moscow trip

RT | February 27, 2024

Tucker Carlson said on Tuesday that US spies had monitored him while he was in Russia earlier this month, and leaked to a ‘friendly’ outlet that he had met with Edward Snowden. This is despite the American journalist’s claim that he had tried to keep his meeting with the NSA whistleblower a secret.

Carlson went to Russia to interview President Vladimir Putin. During his eight days in Moscow, he also met with Snowden – and US spies found out about it, he told podcaser Lex Fridman in the course of a three-hour conversation.

“I was being intensely surveilled by the US government,” Carlson told Fridman, noting that US spies had thwarted his plans to interview Putin in 2021 and that he received confirmation that he was being intensely monitored ahead of his Moscow trip. “Then, I’m over there, and of course I want to see Snowden, whom I admire.”

Snowden allegedly accepted Carlson’s invitation to have dinner at the Four Seasons Hotel, but declined the interview as well as a photo request, saying that it would be better to tell no one.

“I didn’t tell anybody,” Carlson told Fridman, however the meeting was leaked. “Semafor runs this piece – reporting information they got from the US intel agencies, leaking against me, using my money, in my name, in a supposedly free country – they run this piece saying I met with Snowden, like it was a crime or something.”

“If you have a media establishment that acts as employees of the national security state, you don’t have a free country. And that’s where we are,” Carlson added.

Carlson revealed that he did not fear getting arrested in Russia at any point, but was warned by his lawyers that the US might arrest him depending on the content of the Putin interview.

“I felt not one twinge of concern for the 8 days that I was there,” he told Fridman about being in Moscow.

Before he left for Russia, his team of attorneys counseled him to “not do this… A lot will depend on the questions you ask of Putin. If you’re seen as too nice to him you could be arrested when you come back,” Carlson quoted the lead lawyer as saying, to which he said he replied, “You’re describing a fascist country, OK?”

In 2013, Snowden revealed that the NSA was systematically engaged in mass illegal spying on American citizens. Fearing for his safety, he fled to Hong Kong with the intent to reach Ecuador, which did not have an extradition treaty with the US, but was stopped during a layover in Moscow after Washington canceled his passport. Russia ended up granting him asylum and reportedly, eventual citizenship.

One of the founders of Semafor, the outlet to which Carlson claims US spies leaked his dinner with Snowden, is Ben Smith, a former editor-in-chief of the now defunct BuzzFeed newsroom. In 2017, Smith notoriously published the ‘Steele Dossier,’ a sham document leaked by US spies to discredit incoming President Donald Trump.

February 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

FRENCH BILL SEEKS TO CRIMINALIZE MEDICAL “MISINFORMATION”

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | February 22, 2024

Press and medical journalists appear to be the target of a new bill proposed in France that may seek to criminalize criticism of therapeutic and prophylactic remedies that have been deemed safe by the medical community.

February 26, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , , | Leave a comment

UK Government Minister Shuns Concerns About “Anti-Disinformation Unit”

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 25, 2024

Critics of the contentious, and some would say at times unlawful, work of UK’s Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU) are expectedly unimpressed by it getting a “rebrand” – that is, a new name.

It remains to be seen if the National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT – née CDU), will continue with activities of the kind that highly likely got the image of the CDU so tarnished that it needed a “rebrand.”

But government officials continue at the same time to deny there was any wrongdoing on the part of CDU to begin with – or that there will be any done by NSOIT.

The controversy over CDU goes back to the “heyday” of the pandemic and censorship of Covid-related content. The accusation – that continues to be rejected by the government – is that individuals, including senior figures from across the UK’s political spectrum, were targeted.

And, their online activity was first surveilled by CDU, which would then flag some posts for removal merely for criticizing the government, rather than “spreading disinformation.”

But, responding to questions about all this in the British Parliament’s House of Lords earlier in the week, an official from the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology – NSOIT’s parent agency, said there was no merit to such claims, or fears, going forward.

“I can confirm not only that it is not the role of NSOIT or the CDU to go after any individuals, regardless of their political belief, but that it never has been,” junior minister Jonathan Berry told the lords, adding that the unit supposedly only looks for “threats from foreign states” – while the form of domestic political persecution it was accused of is something that is “categorically false.”

However, Liberal Democrat Paul Strasburger continues to press the matter, specifically seeking answers as to how NSOIT will be controlled in the future, particularly given what he says was CDU’s “worrying overreach.”

And – why the government “refuses to allow the Intelligence and Security Committee” to do that oversight.

Berry’s response essentially amounted to revealing that NSOIT will – oversee itself.

“As part of the civil service, NSOIT would have robust internal measures to verify and check its own work, and indeed it reports regularly across government and to ministers,” the junior minister is quoted as stating.

Other than that, Berry could offer “reassurances” to the House of Lords regarding the unit’s role, and he at the same time would not speak about either how NSOIT is staffed, nor how many people it employs, referring to it as “a national security institution.”

February 25, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

At Long Last? UK Media Blasts West’s Support to Euromaidan Coup & Ukraine Conflict

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 25.02.2024

Ten years after the Euromaidan coup in Ukraine, a mainstream UK media outlet published an op-ed questioning why the West supported violent mobs against elected president Viktor Yanukovich, stressing that the roots of today’s Ukraine conflict lie in the February 2014 regime change operation.

A leading British newspaper columnist has blamed the Western-sponsored 2014 coup in Kiev for the current military disaster in Ukraine.

The Mail on Sunday, an established British daily publication with the third biggest readership in the UK, published an op-ed by veteran columnist Peter Hitchens.

He raised uncomfortable questions about the ongoing Ukraine conflict and the chain of events in the February 2014 coup in Ukraine.

“What is Britain’s interest in this conflict? Why do so many in politics and the media cheer for carnage that has devastated Ukraine, the country they claim to love and admire?” asked Hitchens. “What has Ukraine gained from it? What can Ukraine and its people possibly gain from it?”

Hitchens also asked why the West supported undemocratic violence and the overthrow of legitimately elected President Viktor Yanukovich.

Laying out the events November 2013 – February 2014, Hitchens stressed that before Euromaidan Ukraine was “a crude but functioning democracy” which faced both east and west politically. He noted that Yanukovich won the 2010 election fair and square, beating his nearest rival Yulia Timoshenko, and that in February 2014 Yanukovich was “the lawful head of state, with two years to run.”

He added that what was painted as a peaceful protest at the start was soon hijacked by a violent mob.

“There is much that is murky about these bitter days, including the mysterious shootings of members of the crowd,” Hitchens said of the sniper shooting spree in February 2014.

The journalist quoted the leaked — and never denied — phone call between Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and then-EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton. The two discussed “stronger and stronger understanding” that “behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovich, but it was somebody from the new coalition.”

Hitchens pointed out that following the bloodshed, Yanukovich signed an agreement with three senior Euromaidan leaders on February 21, 2014 in the presence of three EU ministers.

“Yanukovych offered a rewrite of the constitution to suit the opposition; a new government; early presidential elections (no later than December 2014); and an impartial probe into the violence (which there has never been). All sides renounced the use of force,” the journalist underlined.

But by the evening of the same day the deal was torn apart by the Kiev mob – “an unelected body with no constitutional or democratic authority” which “certainly did not represent the eastern part of the country,” Hitchens wrote.

The Maidan leaders made no effort to defend the duly-elected president against the violent crowd. In fact, the Ukrainian parliament or Verkhovna Rada moved to remove him in violation of the nation’s constitution, the British journalist noted.

In the aftermath of those events Yanukovich fled Kiev, but did not resign or leave the country, stressed Hitchens, quoting highly-respected Ukrainian historian Serhy Plokhy. That “shows beyond doubt that the elected President was still in office and in Ukraine when parliament voted to remove him.”

But what struck Hitchens the most was the reaction of the West to the obviously illegitimate coup d’etat.

“Western nations, including Britain, should have condemned this action. They are normally vigilant defenders of law and democracy all over the world, are they not? But in this case, they condoned the coup,” the journalist wrote, quoting then-foreign secretary William Hague, who he accused of lying when he told the House of Commons on March 4, 2014 that Yanukovich was removed “by the very large majorities [in the Verkhovna Rada] required under the constitution.” In reality, the vote was unlawful, since Ukrainian MPs lacked the votes needed to do so under the constitution, explained Hitchens.

Lord Hague’s assertion that “it is wrong to question the legitimacy of the new authorities” in fact “seriously misled Parliament,” stressed the journalist.

The events of February 2014 irrevocably divided Ukraine and caused “a filthy little war in the east of the country in which (among other tragedies and horrors) many civilians died at the hands of the Ukrainian army,” Hitchens continued, adding that the current conflict is only the “second stage” of the Ukraine war which started 10 years ago.

While falling short of accusing US and EU of playing a direct role in fomenting the 2014 coup d’etat in Kiev, Hitchens still stressed that “the West blatantly betrayed its own principles to condone and forgive the nasty event.” According to the journalist, those who supported the putsch are also responsible for the ongoing havoc.

“Think of that as you listen to all those loud, safe voices demanding that we keep on fuelling this war, in which Ukrainians die daily for democratic principles we do not, in fact, support,” he concluded.

In an interview with US journalist Tucker Carlson earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin openly attacked the West’s readiness to embrace the illegitimate regime change.

Putin pointed out that the coup was completely “unnecessary” given that Yanukovich met all the demands of Euromaidan leaders on February 21. Furthermore, EU representatives were there and backed the deal between the then-Ukrainian president and opposition leaders. The West had a chance of helping Ukraine stay within the legal framework of democratic processes, and yet US and EU leaders squandered it at the time,” he told Carlson.

Putin made it clear that the Euromaidan events led to the bloodshed in eastern Ukraine that did not accept Yanukovich’s overthrow. After exhausting all avenues for ending the internal west-east Ukrainian conflict through the 2014 and 2015 Minsk agreements, Russia launched its special military operation in 2022 to end the Kiev regime’s years-long war against Russian-speakers in Donbass, according to the Russian president.

Hitchen’s piece for the Mail on Sunday indicates that some understanding of Euromaidan and its disastrous consequences has started to manifest itself in the West.

February 25, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

The EU Is Hotel California

An Unelected Body Of Ruling Class Elites, Indistinguishable From Feudal Leaders Of Europe’s Bloodstained Past

By Manorborn | The Truth Barrier | February 20, 2024

Two weeks ago, leaks emerged in The Financial Times revealing how the EU is setting out to destroy Hungary economically for its refusal to fund the war against Russia.

The irony is stunning. Viktor Orban, the president of Hungary, who was once arrested in his youth for protesting the brutality of the USSR toward his little nation, is now objecting to the EU’s strongarmed sabotage of the sovereignty of member states like his and by the EU’s unjustified, unreasonable treatment of the Russian Federation as an enemy instead of a beneficial economic partner.

Orban was forced to back down a few days later. But by backing down, he weakened Hungary vis a vis Ursula van der Leyen and her minions. Orban should have presented the EU’s unacceptable, coercive plan of economic warfare against the Hungarian people and their livelihoods before the UN.

Hungary has many allies around the world – it’s time to go to them for support now that he’s discovered what Greece discovered a decade or so ago – that the EU is Hotel California.

It was that “lovely face” of Western Europe that drew the love starved Easterners once free from the Soviets. Nimium non crede lepidi faciei. (Trust not too much to an enchanting face).  – Virgil

Before the inception of the EU, Europe was a region of free, sovereign, more or less democratic nation-states with bright economic futures. After federalization under the EU and concurrent with the neocon capture of the US government, EU member states absent Germany, France, Italy and the Twisted Sisters of Benelux gradually found themselves inured in a 21st Century version of the Warsaw Pact with a grim future of belt tightening, war and downward mobility.

Now we are witnessing just how individual European nations are no longer free in all instances to make decisions that best serve their distinctive populations. Instead they’re tightly bound to EU governance – a commissariat administered by an unelected body of ruling class elites who’re indistinguishable in character and ambitions from the feudal leaders of Europe’s bloodstained past.

But whereas the Warsaw Pact was formed to protect the interests of the USSR, the EU exists to serve the interests of the US hegemon and the competing globalist vision of the WEF who groom and vet future EU leaders.

Fortunately, Orban, along with Fico in Slovakia, Vučić in Serbia and Matteo Salvini in Italy is one of the few European leaders who is not afraid to call out the authoritarian nature and mounting abuses of the EU. Surely he’s noted the EU’s subservience to US plans for escalating wars to target Iran and eventually directly target Russia for its refusal to lie down and allow the West to select its leaders and open up its resources to the kind of pillaging by the West that transpired under Boris Yeltsin.

Orban knows that what the EU is doing to Russia, it could and would do to Hungary. EU membership will not shield it. Western NGOs have been working round the clock to create regime change in Slovakia, Serbia and Hungary. In 2020 the EU ruled that national laws like the law in Hungary requiring NGOs to register as foreign agents are unlawful. That can only signify one thing: Room keys will always be held by the front desk at Hotel California.

February 24, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Biden Admin Wants To Spend Around $1 Million on University “Disinformation” Monitoring Program

Despite legal scrutiny, the Biden administration continues its interest in speech monitoring.

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 23, 2024

The White House’s latest initiative to carry out its brand of combating misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation (which is now referred to by the handy “MDM” initial) continues to co-opt the education sector.

The Department of Justice agency the National Institute for Justice (NIJ) is behind the funding effort that is said to be designed to study and research “effective technologies and tools for identification, moderation, and/or removal of extremist content.”

grant worth $1 million will be spent to come up with a dashboard featuring an MDM tracker, which is supposed to surveil the internet for both speech, and narratives, and do so in real time. The project’s official name is, “Networks and Pathways of Violent Extremism: Effectiveness of Mis/Disinformation Campaigns.”

And reports say that the targeted speech coincides with “contentious political events.” Critics say that the taxpayer dollars here are in reality going towards suppression of conservative and religious groups, rather than as declared, violent extremists.

The recipient of the grant is South Carolina-based Clemson University. Researchers there are expected to come up with computer models that will keep an eye on accounts singled out as MDM peddlers and identify people associated with allegedly spreading MDM.

Eventually, the effort should produce the real-time tracking dashboard.

Regular citizens may not benefit from this project – considering the “fluid” nature of the very definitions of misinformation and its companions (some reports mention the initial, and subsequent treatment of the Covid origin and Hunter Biden laptop stories as examples of this.)

But the grant does specify who will benefit: law enforcement and policymakers.

This is by no means the only initiative of the kind coming from the Biden administration – since the current US president came to power, $39 million went to “MDM research” from the National Science Foundation (NSF) alone, also in some cases involving prominent educational institutions, such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

And while Clemson researchers are reassuring that their efforts are not politically or ideologically biased, the Internet Accountability Project and the Foundation for Freedom Online are voicing their fears that the end result will be yet another tool facilitating censorship, specifically by suppressing conservative voices.

February 23, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

German Vice Chancellor accuses journalist of doing Moscow’s bidding after probing question

RT | February 22, 2024

German Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck, who is also the country’s minister for economic affairs and climate action, accused “Russian journalists” of “discrediting liberal democracy” after a German reporter asked him about allegations that he had turned to unusual methods of dealing with dissent among his subordinates.

The Green politician was presenting a Federal Economy Report at a press conference on Wednesday when journalist Florian Warweg questioned him about allegations that he used Germany’s domestic security service – the BfV – to run checks on ministerial officials whose opinions were “far from the political course” of the government.

The reporter was referring to a case dating back to August 2022, when two high-ranking officials within the Economy Ministry were suspected of spying for Russia over internal documents that showed “understanding for the Russian point of view” and used arguments that “did not fit the official line of the federal government.”

According to the Die Zeit report, background checks on the two suspects revealed an “emotional closeness to Russia” but no solid evidence of espionage activity. The investigation itself was reportedly prompted by Habeck’s “confidants,” who allegedly alerted the domestic security agency.

“Was it an isolated case or do you still resort to the [services] of the [BfV] when encountering inconvenient opinions among your civil servants?” Warweg asked. Instead of answering the question, Habeck immediately struck back by questioning the reporter’s credentials. “Are you from Russia Today?” the minister asked, referring to RT.

When told that Warweg was working for the German political blog NachDenkSeiten, Habeck still maintained that the journalist’s question was “full of false allegations” the minister “rejects.” He then went on to say that “security checks” for employees working in sensitive areas were a new “normal standard” amid the current circumstances.

The journalist had worked as an editor for RT’s German-language branch, RT DE, but quit in mid-2022 and has been working at NachDenkSeiten since June of that year.

The NachDenkSeiten blog was co-founded and run by Albrecht Mueller, a former Social Democrat MP and aide to two German chancellors. The media outlet positions itself as a “critical website,” although some German media increasingly have sought to portray it as a “pro-Russian” news outlet that had supposedly fallen under Moscow’s influence.

When further pressed by Warweg about the internal climate in his ministry, which allegedly leaves little room for dissenting opinions, particularly if they are seen as favorable to Russia, Habeck alleged that Moscow was attempting to assault democracy in Germany.

“It is difficult to bear, just a few days after Navalny was murdered, that Russia’s reporters here… discredit Germany’s liberal democracy in such a way,” he said, referring to the death of Russian opposition figure Alexey Navalny in a Russian prison.

The cause of the 47-year-old’s death remains unclear, but the incident has sparked an uproar in the West and was immediately blamed on Moscow. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov earlier said it was “completely unacceptable” for Western politicians to make “outrageous statements” regarding Navalny’s death while the investigation into the case is still ongoing.

February 22, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

‘Conspiracy theorists’ threaten mainstream media, says Canadian PM

RT | February 21, 2024

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Wednesday blamed social media for preventing major news outlets from shaping public opinion the way they used to.

The Liberal Party leader took his message to the Conservative stronghold of Alberta, sitting down with radio host Ryan Jespersen for an exclusive 30-minute interview on his Real Talk podcast.

“There is out there a deliberate undermining of the mainstream media,” Trudeau said, answering a question towards the end of the interview. “There are the conspiracy theorists, there are the social media drivers who are trying to do everything they can to keep people in their little filter bubbles, to prevent people from actually agreeing on a common set of facts, the way CBC and CTV – when they were our only sources of news – used to project across the country, at least a common understanding of things.”

Earlier this month, Trudeau denounced the move by Bell Media to lay off many of its local journalists and sell 45 of its 103 regional radio stations, arguing that local journalism holds Canadian democracy together.

“There are massive changes that need to happen in our media landscape, and [the] government can try and create conditions and incentives for it to happen,” he told Jespersen on Wednesday.

“We’re putting money towards local independent media,” Trudeau added, having argued a moment earlier that such overt funding would compromise news outlets as mouthpieces of the government.

In June 2023, the Canadian parliament passed the Online News Act (ONA), under which search engines and social media platforms would have to compensate news outlets for posting their content. While Google has complied, Facebook is “choosing to be bad guys about this,” Trudeau told Jespersen. Meta has responded to ONA by blocking all news content by Canadian publishers on Facebook and Instagram.

Ultimately, it’s up to Canadians to declare they don’t want to accept the “encrapification of news,” Trudeau said, borrowing the phrase from British Columbia Premier David Eby.

Trudeau’s comments on the podcast also echoed those made by former US President Barack Obama in a May 2023 interview to CBS. Obama named “a divided media” as one of the things he was worried about, noting that the US once had “three TV stations … and people were getting a similar sense of what is true and what isn’t, what was real and what was not.”

“How do we return to that common conversation? How can we have a common set of facts?” the 44th US president wondered at the time.

February 22, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

How The Courts Could Decide Who Controls Congress

By Attorney Bobbie Anne Cox | Knowledge is power! | February 6, 2024

Most voters don’t pay too much attention to the judicial candidates when they head to the polls to cast their vote. Honestly, I can understand their thought process. There’s nothing sexy about courts, judges, judicial panels, and so on. Most voters probably feel like they will never end up in a court of law. If they keep their nose clean, and live a life of lawfulness and piety, then they probably feel that they won’t ever be at the mercy of a judge, or a panel of judges, to decide their fate.

However, there is a grave danger in this method of thinking. Even if you personally never have the need or the occasion to sue someone, or be sued by someone, judges are rendering decisions in cases that affect your life, whether or not you are a direct party to a lawsuit. A golden example of that notion is my “quarantine camp” lawsuit against Governor Kathy Hochul and her Department of Health. Most New Yorkers are (unfortunately) blissfully unaware of this epic legal battle, and yet, five judges sitting in an appellate court in Rochester, New York may have sealed the fate of 19 million New Yorkers in determining whether or not unelected bureaucrats in the DOH can throw you into a quarantine detention center, with the force of police, for however long they like, without any proof that you are sick. (For more on that, you can read one of my many articles about that lawsuit, or other media content on it, here, or here, or here).

So, judges are every bit as powerful and noteworthy on the ballot as the vote you cast for your governor, or president, or senator, etc… My quarantine lawsuit is just one example. Another example which I’d like to delve into in more detail in this article is how judges may very well end up deciding who controls Congress.

With a very close margin in the House of Representatives, quite literally, every seat counts. (My standard disclaimer applies: I am not Republican. I am a Constitutionalist and believe the power of the people over the power of the political elites must prevail). So let’s set the stage… the Republicans control the House currently by only 4 seats. The Democrats control the US Senate, and the White House. If the Republicans lose control of the House, then Americans will be subjected to a very toxic one-party-rule. Remember my motto on this – I don’t care which party it is, when one party has total control, they go totally out of control! Here’s the article I wrote on that last year.

Most people think of New York as a “deep blue” state that is full of radical left-wing voters. That is terribly wrong. If you look at a map of New York state after the last couple of presidential elections, you’ll see that the vast majority of the state votes “red,” and it’s only a couple of our cities that vote “blue.” New York is the reason the Republicans took control of the House when the 2022 elections yielded a net gain of 5 seats for Republicans. In other words, in 2022, New Yorkers flipped 5 of our Congressional seats from Democrat to Republican, and that gave the Republicans the majority in the House.

So, it’s no surprise that many talking heads say New York is the pathway for the Democrats to regain control of the House next year after the elections this November. And here is where the courts come in. When one political party controls a state legislature, if they are empowered to draw the Congressional districts within their state, then this opens the door to gerrymandering. As a result, the party that is not in control will then usually bring a lawsuit to defend their right to have districts that are not gerrymandered. This happens in lots of states, and it is 100% happening here in New York. I am the spokeswoman for a non-partisan organization called Stop NY Corruption, and as such, I am fully familiar with the redistricting saga that has been taking place here since the 2022 election.

I wrote an article with the history and back story, which you can find here. If you prefer audio/visual, you can check out one of the number of press conferences or interviews I’ve done on this topic, some of which are posted on the Stop NY Corruption website. Most recently, I just spoke at a presser yesterday up in Albany together with former Congressman Lee Zeldin, State Senate Minority Leader Rob Ortt, and Conservative Party Chairman Gerard Kassar. Check out the video of our press conference here or double click on the thumbnail below.

So when these lawsuits over Congressional lines are brought in the courts, no matter which state, it is the decision of the judges that determines whether or not We the People will decide our elected representatives in Congress, or whether the political party bosses will choose what districts we live in, and who our Congressional reps will be. In a recent poll of likely New York voters, 81% of voters believe that gerrymandering is a form of cheating. According to that same poll, 78% of voters believe that gerrymandering leads to more corruption. If you want to see the full poll results, you can find that on the Stop NY Corruption website here.

To add another layer of concern, citizens really need to understand where their judges are coming from. What I mean by that is, in some states (like here in New York), the voters elect our trial court judges, but our appellate court judges and our Court of Appeals judges (New York’s highest court) are all appointed… by our governors. Ugh! So you cannot vote off the bench any “higher court” judges here in New York, and any other state that has this same judicial structure. Remember that the next time you vote in a gubernatorial election. Depending on how your state courts are designed, you may not be voting for just a governor, you could also be voting for the person who appoints your state’s appeals court judges.

Same goes for federal courts… the president appoints all federal judges, no matter what level of court they preside over (trial court, appeals court, United State Supreme Court). So you aren’t just voting for a president this November, you’re voting for the person who will place judges in the federal courts throughout our entire country. Extremely powerful authority.

February 21, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption | | Leave a comment