Citizen Inquiry Report Blasts Canadian Government Response to COVID
‘We Cannot Allow This to Happen to Our Children and Grandchildren’
By John-Michael Dumais | The Defender | December 1, 2023
After months of hearings in nearly every province, Canada’s National Citizens Inquiry (NCI) on Tuesday released its final 643-page report on the country’s COVID-19 response, addressing the societal impacts of lockdowns, school closures, mask and vaccine mandates and other measures.
The report, compiled by four independent commissioners, included nearly 5,000 additional pages of testimony from hundreds of people who experienced adverse vaccine reactions, destruction of their livelihoods and education, diminished mental health, damaged reputations, professional discipline and/or censorship, according to True North.
The report contained over 80 pages of recommendations for lawmakers, public institutions and citizens, and called for the establishment of a National Crisis Oversight Council that would serve as an “independent, multidisciplinary body tasked with monitoring, policing and investigating government actions during crises,” including pandemics.
In an online press conference announcing the report, NCI commissioners and others discussed the division and suffering the pandemic measures caused, the failure of institutions to serve citizens and the overreach of government authority that violated rights and freedoms.
They emphasized the importance of unity, open dialogue, accountability and active democratic participation to heal as a nation.
In his opening comments, NCI Commissioner Ken Drysdale, an expert in forensic engineering and investigations, said, “Our lips may be bloodied, and we may be shamed. But we cannot turn away from the horrors of the past three years. We cannot allow this to happen to our children and grandchildren.”
Commissioner Bernard Massie, Ph.D., author of 138 peer-reviewed papers and owner of 12 patents, said, “One of the greatest dangers to democracy is the tyranny of the majority that has forgotten the primordial importance of truth and liberty grounded in the individual responsibility that cannot and should not be outsourced to the administrative state.”
NCI administrator Ches Crosbie, former leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Newfoundland and Labrador, called out Health Canada for approving the COVID-19 vaccines without determining they were safe and effective.
“The expression ‘safe and effective’ is a marketing slogan and a deceptive one,” Crosbie said, adding, “Beyond dispute is that [the] vaccines are adulterated … by the presence of foreign DNA fragments and a sequence from a monkey virus called SV40, suspected of causing cancer.”
Denis Rancourt, Ph.D., co-director of CORRELATION Research in the Public Interest in Canada, told The Defender the NCI report “is a masterful in-depth examination of the COVID response in Canada and the world.”
“Through hundreds of testimonies and thousands of exhibits, the picture that emerges could not be more clear,” he said, adding:
“The entire COVID campaign — from CIA–military planning, to initial Wuhan false flag, to the WHO [World Health Organization] declaration of a ‘pandemic,’ to medical institutional responses, to general lockdowns and impositions on personal behavior, to unprecedented censorship and media alignment, to mandatory vaccination accompanied by dismissals from workplaces, to delicensing medical and legal professionals, to completely biased court rulings, to covering up vaccine harm and deaths, to egregious isolation and mistreatment of vulnerable populations, to shredding of constitutional protections, to criminalizing dissent and demonstrations, to locking away political prisoners, and on and on, in a total blanket of actual totalitarianism in Canada and many countries — has been an outright unjustified vicious assault against people, freedom and democracy.”
A citizen-organized, citizen-run, citizen-funded initiative
The NCI — “funded and staffed by volunteers who believe in a better Canada,” said Crosbie — was established in response to the government’s actions during the COVID-19 pandemic and because “no Canadian government has shown an appetite for a fulsome review of the measures implemented,” according to the report.
Hearings took place over 24 days between March and May in eight cities, from British Columbia to Nova Scotia. More than 300 sworn testimonies from both experts and citizens were collected.
NCI heard expert testimony from doctors, scientists, lawyers, economists, teachers, psychologists, morticians, risk management analysts and experts in public policy, emergency management, occupational health and safety, aviation safety, pharmacy, policing and journalism, according to True North.
Among the 147 experts testifying were Rancourt, known for his analysis of all-cause mortality during the pandemic; Dr. Peter McCullough; Dr. Jay Bhattacharya; Dr. Jessica Rose; Dr. Didier Raoult, the French doctor who promoted early treatment with hydroxychloroquine at the beginning of the pandemic; Dr. Sabine Hazan; Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research ; Catherine Austin Fitts; James Corbett; Dr. William Makis; Dr. Charles Hoffe; Edward Dowd; J. Jay Couey, Ph.D., staff scientist for Children’s Health Defense; Jeffrey Tucker of the Brownstone Institute; Steve Kirsch, founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation; and Dr. Jordan Peterson.
The commissioners invited testimony from representatives of all provincial/territorial and federal levels of government across Canada — including “sixty-three members of government, regulators, and authorities” — but none accepted or testified.
However, NCI was able to obtain records of government positions from court proceedings, policy statements, press conferences and other evidence of their actions, and incorporate these into their hearings and findings.
NCI considered testimony on pharmaceutical interventions (use of drugs, vaccines and other treatments) and non-pharmaceutical interventions (masking, lockdowns, closures of public facilities and quarantines), and analyzed their impacts in the following categories:
- Social — including restricted public meetings, movement and ability to interact and meet with other people.
- Civil — the abridgment of rights and freedoms, the imposition of restrictions and forced mandates, assessed at the personal, institutional and organizational levels.
- Economic — the shutdown of businesses and the characterization of “nonessential” businesses, restrictions to employment and overall impacts.
- Health — forced medical procedures, lack of access to patients due to mandates, doctors treating virtually; injuries resulting from forced medical procedures and isolation.
“These testimonies provide irrefutable evidence that an unprecedented assault has been waged against the citizens of Canada. Not since World War II has the nation experienced such a devastating attack on its people,” Drysdale told True North.
Commissioner Janice Kaikkonen, an educator and public policy researcher, said at the press conference that her experience with NCI had been “quite the journey,” and that “the picture being painted was much deeper, all more devastating and divisive, and the response from our public institutions on every Canadian far more destructive” than she expected.
Kaikkonen said society still needs to address “the impact on … children of being isolated from their friends and their social networks and their structures being taken from them.”
“The juncture Canadians face in moving forward must include exposing the forces that willingly subscribed to destroying our beloved country from the inside out,” she said.
Breakdown of legal system
NCI heard extensive evidence that Canadian courts failed to uphold the rule of law during the pandemic, leading to “a breakdown in confidence and an erosion of trust in a Canadian legal system,” according to the report.
None of the legal experts who testified or consulted with NCI reported success in any court across the country against the measures or mandates.
Similar to the U.S., the Canadian system of government is comprised of executive, legislative and judicial branches. However, during the pandemic, “much of the rule-making power in Canada coalesced into the executive, which resulted in unelected public health offices across the country ruling as petty tyrants, without accountability or oversight,” the report stated.
The report attributed this in part to the “overgrowth of the administrative state,” resulting in “Canadian courts … pay[ing] more and more deference to the powers of unelected administrative bodies,” leading to “a perfect storm” where unelected officials who are “not subject to oversight through an election” have “powers over Canadians” that are “largely unchallengeable in court.”
The most obvious example of administrative overreach — enforced by professional bodies that regulate various health professions — was the public health orders, the report stated, which “subvert[ed] rights on the premise of ‘protecting the greater good.’”
Commissioner Heather DiGregorio, senior partner in an Alberta law firm, said during Tuesday’s press conference that her position as a lawyer made her pay particular attention to the testimony about the Canadian legal system, the Canadian Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
“By guaranteeing that the government cannot tread on my neighbor’s rights, we guarantee our own,” she said. “This is never more important than when things are difficult in times of fear and uncertainty.”
The evidence gathered from the NCI hearings “all points one way: to a significant breakdown of Canadian institutions,” DiGregorio said.
She cited such undesirable pandemic outcomes: “The division of our society. Neighbors pitted against neighbors. Families torn apart. Individuals suffering grievous injuries that their own doctors won’t acknowledge. Feelings of isolation. Depression. Suicides. Pain and grief.”
“Canadians have been left with a feeling that there is no person to protect them from government overreach,” the report stated. “This is worrisome evidence of a breakdown of the rule of law.”
Despite the grievous lapses in the legal system during the pandemic, DeGregorio said, “Seeing the strength of ordinary Canadians, even in the darkest times of their lives, gave me renewed hope.”
Proposals, outlook going forward
In addition to the establishment of a National Crisis Oversight Council — which the report said should include enforceable subpoena powers — the NCI report called for a full judicial investigation of the COVID-19 vaccination authorization process in Canada, leaving open the possibility of criminal liability under existing Canadian law.
It also called for an in-depth review of how Canadian courts handled all pandemic-related cases to “rebuild public confidence in the justice system.”
Citing the need to ensure “proper checks and balances,” the report recommended examining and reforming the extent of executive authority during emergencies and establishing laws that require administrative bodies “to demonstrate their expertise and rationale for decisions, particularly when those decisions infringe on individual rights.”
Regarding healthcare, the report called for establishing a clear framework for oversight of public health authorities’ decision-making processes during emergencies, and an “independent, multidisciplinary inquiry into the governance of professional colleges, especially those governing medical professionals,” to ensure transparency, accountability and adherence to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
During the press conference, DiGregorio called for “accountability for the actions of others,” but said we also need to “look at our own actions and take accountability for the part that each of us have played.”
Kaikkonen called for “Each and every one of us saying we’ve had enough, this is not going to happen again, and we’re going to stand with people who say no, who have that strength,” and with “people who are being shamed publicly or abused or trodden over.”
Voicing his hopes for the report, Drysdale said, “In the end, it is not the report itself that wields the power of transformation. … It remains just a tool, lying dormant on a shelf … until thousands or millions of people choose to wield that tool.”
Massie said it’s going to take time before things change, but that “it’s not going to take the majority of people to wake up to make a difference. … You just need a critical mass of people … to move [on the] political front, provincial, federal, [and in] court.”
Rancourt told The Defender :
“Canadians may have produced the most comprehensive report, which is an historic landmark. Now, will there be accountability? To what degree, and what form will it take?
“Every citizen’s awakening is one unit of the needed accounting, and this report has been a process that catalyzed more awareness.”
John-Michael Dumais is a news editor for The Defender. He has been a writer and community organizer on a variety of issues, including the death penalty, war, health freedom and all things related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Ireland’s Educator Minister says Ireland will introduce a “legally binding” statutory online code for “disinformation” removal
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | November 30, 2023
Simon Harris, Ireland’s Education Minister, has raised alarms about what he suggests is the rampant spread of “disinformation” on social media, describing it as a significant threat to democracy.
His concerns mirror those of Tánaiste Micheál Martin, particularly in light of the recent Dublin riots, where social media has been blamed for spreading “hate,” a notion that the government in Ireland is using as an excuse to call for more censorship online.
The riots, characterized by violence and destruction, followed a stabbing by an immigrant citizen outside a north city center school, injuring three children and a woman.
Harris, in his statement, specifically criticized Elon Musk’s X for its failure to censor certain speech.
On RTÉ’s Morning Ireland, Harris expressed his full agreement with the Tánaiste.
“I think there is a very serious issue, not just in this country, but in western democracies now in relation to social media platforms, which I use, which I appreciate and which have great value – but also when wrongly used having an ability to spread disinformation and undermine democracy,” Harris said.
According to The Journal, he said that by early next year “there will be a ‘legally binding’ statutory online code in relation to the removal of information that is deemed to be disinformation.”
As many politicians often do, Harris attempted to suggest that he supports free speech while calling for the censorship of “disinformation.”
From the report:
“The Minister said he would ‘absolutely defend’ the right to free speech, adding ‘it’s the cornerstone of all democracy.’
“What we’re talking about here is the spread of disinformation and the spread of hatred. And I simply wouldn’t be, nor would I wish to, but I wouldn’t be allowed to in this studio. The social media platform is a form of media, it is a media platform and therefore I think there are real legitimate questions around the rules that apply online,” he said.
Comparing Coverage: Dublin riots vs Black Lives Matter
By Gavin O’Reilly | OffGuardian | November 30, 2023
Last Thursday afternoon, news would spread throughout Ireland of a horrific knife attack on three young schoolchildren and their teacher outside a Gaelscoil (Irish-language school) in Dublin city centre. At the time of writing, the youngest of the victims, a five year old girl, remains gravely ill in hospital.
With it soon emerging that the suspect was an immigrant who had previously been served a deportation order in 2003, tensions that had been building across the country over the past year in response to the immigration policy of Leinster House, which has seen large amounts of male migrants placed into wildly unsuitable locations such as an inner city office block and a children’s school, would come to a head. Calls for a protest in Dublin later that night would rapidly spread throughout social media.
Such protests have become a mainstay across Ireland over the past year, with the government of WEF ‘Young Global Leader’ Leo Varadkar labelling protesters as ‘’far-right’’ and carrying out surveillance of organisers in response, a strategy that has served only to exacerbate tensions even further.
Last year in Canada, under the rule of fellow WEF ‘Young Global Leader’ Justin Trudeau, a similar response would take place to the Freedom Convoy, a protest movement launched by Canadian truckers following the decision to mandate jab passports for drivers returning from the US, the largest land-border in the world and a key component of the Canadian economy.
Just as open borders policies serve the interests of the global elites that the WEF represents, via the undermining of national sovereignty and the devaluing of labour, jab passports served their interests by acting as conditioning for the introduction of an eventual mandatory digital ID, which in line with the Great Reset initiative would allow the government-corporate alliance to have an unprecedented level of control over its citizens’ finances in a cashless society.
The fraught tensions that had spurred on Thursday’s planned protest however, would seemingly attract an opportunistic element, one that had engaged in looting and the burning of vehicles in Dublin on the night.
Unsavoury scenes, though it cannot be understated that, in terms of magnitude, they are a universe apart from the stabbing of children.
The establishment media however, did not hold the same view; with the unrest that swept Dublin dominating newspaper headlines alongside accusations that it had been “organised by the far-right”, the brutal attack on the children and their teacher being consigned to a mere afterthought.
Security Minister for the southern Irish state, Helen McEntee announced that legislation would be fast tracked to introduce Facial Recognition Technology – another key component of the Great Reset – in response to the riots, and it was announced that MMA star Conor McGregor was being investigated for ‘’inciting hate’’ over a post on X that he had sent the night BEFORE the stabbings.
A lockstep response of condemnation, though one that lies in stark contrast to the response towards the riots that swept the United States following the death of George Floyd in May 2020, for which a minutes silence was held in the southern Irish Parliament, something that has so far not occurred for the victims of last Thursday’s mass-stabbing.
To understand why, one must look at the wider political context at the time of George Floyd’s death.
Four days prior to the footage of Minnesota police officer Derek Chauvin kneeling on Floyd’s neck going viral, Joe Biden, the then-Democrat candidate for that years US Presidential election, infamously declared that whoever voted for the incumbent Donald Trump over him ‘’Ain’t black’’ in an attempt to garner support amongst the black community of the United States for his Presidential campaign. A PR disaster, and one that confirmed he was in need of the black vote in order to guarantee an electoral victory.
Thus, the death of George Floyd was weaponised to guarantee such a result, with violent riots sweeping the United States in the aftermath. In contrast to the one night of looting and arson that took place in Dublin however, the mainstream media would provide cover for the months-long unrest in the US, with corporate outlet CNN notoriously describing it as ‘’fiery but mostly peaceful’’ at one stage.
Key to this was the involvement of George Soros, a significant donor to both the Democrat Party and the Black Lives Matter organisation via his Open Society Foundations, a globalist support-network that has sponsored colour revolutions from as far afield as Ukraine and China.
It is also why last week’s night of unrest in Dublin, carried out amidst a wider political context of opposition to globalist policies in Ireland, came in for far more media condemnation than the months of BLM-led riots that took place in the United States in 2020.
Gavin O’Reilly is an Irish Republican activist from Dublin, Ireland, with a strong interest in the effects of British and US Imperialism; he was a writer for the American Herald Tribune from January 2018 up until their seizure by the FBI in 2021, with his work also appearing on The Duran, Al-Masdar, MintPress News, Global Research and SouthFront. He can be reached through Twitter and Facebook and supported on Patreon.
Sometimes they really are out to get you
Gatito Bueno – bad cattitude – November 27, 2023
Well that sure does maybe explain why so much of this felt like a milspec psyop…

Jeez, can you imagine if they did something like this in the US?

Because this sure seems like waging info-war on your own people…
Yikes.

First, Do Harm: A Sorry Tale in the Daily Mail
Dissenting Doctors Dishonourably Disparaged
Health Advisory & Recovery Team | November 29, 2023
The sordid state of the medical system here in the UK is laid bare in excruciating detail in a recent Daily Mail article which chooses to perpetuate myths and disinformation rather than engage in genuine reporting.
The story so far
Dr Sarah Myhill – a doctor now working as a naturopath – is being hounded by the General Medical Council (GMC) who have referred her to various hearings at the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS). Myhill’s alleged transgressions are outlined in great detail on the MPTS website, but the gist of the complaint seems to be that Myhill has had the temerity to highlight the benefits of low-cost treatments (such as Vitamin D) over expensive – and possibly harmful – pharmaceuticals.
This matter should hardly be controversial, even to the mainstream – after all, many will have heard or watched the various TV series such as ‘Dopesick’, ‘Painkiller’ or even the BBC recent Panorama expose ‘The Antidepressant Story’. In contrast to these expensive chemical compounds that have multiple adverse effects – both on individuals and society as a whole – stand inexpensive treatments and lifestyles that are as cheap as (and substantially healthier than) chips.
Consider the benefits of Vitamin D – the ‘sunshine vitamin’ – extolled in no lesser organ of public opinion than the Daily Mail itself, Mark Solomons reporting only a few weeks ago that “a third of Britons have Vitamin D deficiency due to spending too much time indoors, poor diet and failing to take supplements”.
What an opportunity to follow this excellent educational reporting with an additional piece that promotes healthy living and the perils of the over-promotion of ‘pill popping’.
Alas… ‘achievement not unlocked’. The headline alone is a classic of the disinformation genre, a masterclass in deceptive propagandisation comprising just 23 words (and a number):
Precisely why all Welsh doctors approaching retirement are deemed worthy of this drive-by assassination by headline is not fully clear – perhaps that is just the Daily Mail’s house style. That aside, the following twin headline double-barrelled untruths deserve greater scrutiny:
- Vitamins C & D are branded “other ‘potentially harmful’ substances”, which is of course entirely correct… but only in the sense that too much of almost anything is not only possibly harmful, but potentially lethal. Water – that elixir of life, the molecule that makes up almost 60% of your bodyweight – can cause death not only by drowning, but also by overhydration: “After downing some six liters of water in three hours in the “Hold Your Wee for a Wii” contest, Jennifer Strange vomited, went home with a splitting headache, and died from so-called water intoxication”. If Vitamins C & D are now ‘potentially harmful’ and result in witch-hunt reporting, can we expect the Daily Mail to refer itself for censure for calling for its readers to “drink plenty of fluids” without suitable caveats? In comparison to this – potentially lethal – advice from the Daily Mail, Dr Myhill has advocated taking a high dosage of Vitamin D but at a level no greater than a level that recent research has determined to be safe.
- The ‘livestock dewormer’ in question is in fact Ivermectin, a very cheap and Nobel prize-winning antiviral drug. After a history of veterinary use, it was approved by the FDA for human use in 1996, has been on the World Health Organisation’s list of essential medicines since at least 2015 and was described in the Journal of Antibiotics in 2020 as an antiviral “wonder drug” that “is continuing to surprise and excite scientists, offering more and more promise to help improve global public health by treating a diverse range of diseases, with its unexpected potential as an antibacterial, antiviral and anti-cancer agent being particularly extraordinary… perhaps more than any other drug, ivermectin is a drug for the world’s poor. For most of this century, some 250 million people have been taking it annually to combat two of the world’s most devastating, disfiguring, debilitating and stigma-inducing diseases, Onchocerciasis [river blindness] and Lymphatic filariasis. Most of the recipients live in remote, rural, desperately under-resourced communities in developing countries and have virtually no access to even the most rudimentary of medical interventions. Moreover, all the treatments have been made available free of charge thanks to the unprecedented drug donation program”.
What a heart-warming story! If only the Daily Mail had chosen to share this feel-good blockbuster with its readers. Many doctors chose to prescribe Ivermectin off-label, which is entirely normal behaviour (after all, repurposing a drug that already has a defined safety record is far less risky than rushing a new medicine – which by definition will not have a long track record – to market):
“There are clinical situations when the use of unlicensed medicines or use of medicines outside the terms of the licence (i.e. ‘off-label’) may be judged by the prescriber to be in the best interest of the patient on the basis of available evidence. Such practice is particularly common in certain areas of medicine: for instance, in paediatrics where difficulties in the development of age-appropriate formulations means that many medicines used in children are used off-label or are unlicensed“.
Who better to make these kinds of decisions than a patient’s doctor?
Many people will be aware of what happened next. Various shenanigans ensued resulting in Ivermectin being discredited. One of the most Kafkaesque situations was an FDA-orchestrated smear campaign that branded Ivermectin as ‘horse-paste’ and informed people that “you are not a horse”. Quite an eyebrow-raising stunt when you consider that Ivermectin is safe enough to feature on the CDC website with an oral dosage level that is declared safe for use in children over the weight of 15kg. The FDA was – quite rightly – subsequently eviscerated in a recent Fifth District court ruling:
“The Food and Drug Administration is not a physician, so it had no business cautioning people not to take Ivermectin”.
The ruling is worth reading in full.
Returning to the Daily Mail headline, we can summarise the situation as follows: authorities have censured a doctor who promoted (within their known safe usage parameters!) certain vitamins and antiviral treatments. Whether or not these treatments are effective or not is essentially irrelevant – they are safe, which is more can be said for any newly introduced pharmaceutical product with no long-term safety data attached.
Contrast the prescription of these safe treatments with said authorities’ recent (well, since late 2020) enthusiastic one-size-fits-all promotion of various injectable products that were claimed to be both ‘safe’ and ‘effective’.
There is, of course, a rational (if somewhat chilling) explanation as to why we find ourselves in this bizarre and counter-intuitive situation.
It is worth pausing for a moment to consider what twisted circumstances can have arisen for the medical establishment to weaponise its disciplinary procedures, especially in the case of a doctor that has already attempted to take herself off the register. The GMC and the MPTS are only too aware that:
“suspension has a deterrent effect and can be used to send out a signal to the doctor, the profession and public about what is regarded as behaviour unbefitting a registered doctor.”
The action against Myhill seems overly vindictive and a waste of time, money and resources. The absurdity of proceedings has been inadvertently – and succinctly – summarised by the GMC’s KC, Tom Kark:
“The problem with the Myhill cases is that all the patients are improved and all refuse to give witness statements.”
But perhaps the intention is to come after other doctors that dare to speak out, and also to deter others from joining them in speaking truth to power.
The promotion of one-size-fits-all pharmaceutical interventions is clearly a profitable endeavour for various pharmaceutical companies and associated vested interests, but it is clearly not in the best interests of patients. Doctors promise to “first, do no harm”, and they – and all associated establishment regulators and other authorities – pay appropriate lip-service regarding patient autonomy, choice and informed consent as encapsulated in any (and one would hope all?) documented formulations of the Doctor-Patient relationship.
But the truth is starkly different. There are good doctors who are willing to put patients first, resist groupthink and stand up to bullying regulators. The hounding and demonisation of these doctors is an appalling and sinister crime. It happened before covid, it happened during covid, and it is happening now. It is sad to see spineless reporting by those in the mainstream media who (1) should know better and (2) have the resources to stand up to the drug pushers.
Perhaps the only answer is bottom-up resistance. If enough people resolve to ensure that justice is done, then complaining to the GMC might make a difference.
‘If We Get Away With It, It’s Legal’: Documents Reveal New Details on U.S. Government’s ‘Censorship-Industrial Complex’
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | November 29, 2023
Government agencies, private-sector firms, academia and nonprofits were collaborating to combat alleged “misinformation” and “disinformation” as far back as 2017, according to new documents released Tuesday.
The “CTIL Files” — which refer to the Cyber Threat Intelligence League, or CTI League, a key player in the so-called “Censorship-Industrial Complex” — are based on documents received from an unnamed but “highly credible” whistleblower, according to investigative journalists Michael Shellenberger, Alex Gutentag and Matt Taibbi, who released the files.
The new documents rival or exceed the “Twitter Files” and “Facebook Files” in “scale and importance,” according to the journalists, two of whom — Shellenberger and Taibbi — were instrumental in releasing many of the “Twitter Files” that first called attention to the “Censorship-Industrial Complex.”
A comprehensive picture of the birth of the ‘anti-disinformation’ sector
The documents, which the journalists detailed on Substack, center around the activities of the CTI League, which “officially began as the volunteer project of data scientists and defense and intelligence veterans but whose tactics over time appear to have been absorbed into multiple official projects, including those of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).”
According to the journalists, the CTI League documents “offer the missing link … to key questions not addressed in the Twitter Files and Facebook Files” and “offer a comprehensive picture of the birth of the ‘anti-disinformation’ sector.”
“The whistleblower’s documents describe everything from the genesis of modern digital censorship programs to the role of the military and intelligence agencies, partnerships with civil society organizations and commercial media, and the use of sock puppet accounts and other offensive techniques,” the journalists wrote.
Documents in the “CTIL Files” show members of the CTI League, DHS officials and key figures from social media companies “all working closely together in the censorship process.”
This “public-private model” laid the groundwork for “anti-misinformation” and “anti-disinformation” campaigns launched by the U.S. and U.K. governments in 2020 and 2021, the journalists wrote, including attempts to circumvent First Amendment protections against government censorship of speech in the U.S.
Such tactics included “masking censorship within cybersecurity institutions and counter-disinformation agendas; a heavy focus on stopping disfavored narratives, not just wrong facts; and pressuring social media platforms to take down information or take other actions to prevent content from going viral,” they added.
The CTI League went still further though, the journalists wrote, engaging “in offensive operations to influence public opinion, discussing ways to promote ‘counter-messaging,’ co-opt hashtags, dilute disfavored messaging, create sock puppet accounts, and infiltrate private invite-only groups.”
Such censorship lies at the heart of Missouri et al. v. Biden et al., a First Amendment censorship case where injunctions were issued against several federal agencies and government officials, barring them from communicating with social media companies regarding user content. The injunctions are now under review by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Former British intelligence analyst charged with creating counter-disinformation project
The journalists wrote that while previous releases of the “Twitter Files” and “Facebook Files” revealed “overwhelming evidence of government-sponsored censorship,” they had not revealed “where the idea for such mass censorship came from.”
The whistleblower alleged that a key figure in the CTI League, “a ‘former’ British intelligence analyst, was ‘in the room’ at the Obama White House in 2017 when she received the instructions to create a counter-disinformation project to stop a ‘repeat of 2016.’”
By 2019, this analyst, Sara-Jayne “SJ” Terp, had “developed the sweeping censorship framework,” leading a team of U.S. and U.K. “military and intelligence contractors” who “co-led CTIL.” Previously, in 2018, Terp attended a 10-day military exercise organized by the U.S. Army Special Operations Command, according to the journalists.
It was there that Terp met Pablo Breuer, a former U.S. Navy commander, who became a key figure in the CTI League. According to Wired, the two realized that misinformation “could be treated … as a cybersecurity problem.” This led to the development of CogSec, which soon housed the “MisinfoSec Working Group.”
“Terp’s plan, which she shared in presentations to information security and cybersecurity groups in 2019, was to create ‘Misinfosec communities’ that would include government,” the journalists wrote.
By spring 2020, it appears Terp achieved this plan, as the CTI League partnered with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which has been implicated in prior releases of the “Twitter Files” for its role in the “Censorship-Industrial Complex.”
The MisinfoSec Working Group included Renee DiResta, a former CIA operative who worked for the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) — later renamed the Virality Project (VP). This group “created a censorship, influence, and anti-disinformation strategy called Adversarial Misinformation and Influence Tactics and Techniques (AMITT).”
According to the journalists, AMITT adapted “a cybersecurity framework developed by MITRE, a major defense and intelligence contractor that has an annual budget of $1 to $2 billion in government funding.” MITRE is a backer of the Vaccination Credential Initiative and the SMART Health Card — a digital “vaccine passport.”
Terp used AMITT to develop the DISARM framework, which the World Health Organization (WHO) applied in “countering anti-vaccination campaigns across Europe.”
The same framework “has been formally adopted by the European Union and the United States as part of a ‘common standard for exchanging structured threat information on Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference’” according to the journalists.
‘Can we get a troll on their bums?’
According to the journalists, MisinfoSec’s motivation for counter-misinformation was the “twin political earthquakes of 2016: Brexit and the election of Trump.”
“There’s something off kilter with our information landscape,” Terp and other CTI League members wrote, according to documents.
“The usual useful idiots and fifth columnists — now augmented by automated bots, cyborgs and human trolls — are busily engineering public opinion, stoking up outrage, sowing doubt and chipping away at trust in our institutions. And now it’s our brains that are being hacked,” they added.
In spring 2020, the CTI League set its sights on COVID-19-related narratives, targeting users who engaged in messaging that ran contrary to official policy.
“CTIL began tracking and reporting disfavored content on social media, such as anti-lockdown narratives like ‘all jobs are essential,’ ‘we won’t stay home,’ and ‘open America now,’” the journalists wrote.
“CTIL created a law enforcement channel for reporting content as part of these efforts. The organization also did research on individuals posting anti-lockdown hashtags … and kept a spreadsheet with details from their Twitter bios. The group also discussed requesting ‘takedowns’ and reporting website domains to registrars,” they added.
Regarding the “we won’t stay home” narrative, internal documents revealed by the whistleblower showed that CTI League members wrote, “Do we have enough to ask for the groups and/or accounts to be taken down or at a minimum reported and checked?” and “Can we get all troll on their bums if not?”
They also called posters circulating online promoting anti-lockdown posters “disinformation artifacts,” saying, “We should have seen this one coming” and asking “can we stop the spread, do we have enough evidence to stop superspreaders, and are there other things we can do (are there countermessagers we can ping etc).”
During CTI League brainstorming sessions to develop strategies for “counter-messaging for things like encouraging people to wear masks,” statements such as “Repetition is truth” were uttered by CTI League staff, the journalists noted.
The CTI League also sought to go “beyond simply urging Twitter to slap a warning label on Tweets, or to put individuals on blacklists.”
According to the journalists, “The AMITT framework calls for discrediting individuals as a necessary prerequisite of demanding censorship against them” and “trying to get banks to cut off financial services to individuals who organize rallies or events.”
As part of these efforts, even truthful information was targeted. In a 2019 podcast on “Disinformation, Cognitive Security, and Influence,” Terp admitted, “Most information is actually true … but set in the wrong context.”
“You’re not trying to get people to believe lies most of the time,” she said. “Most of the time, you’re trying to change their belief sets. And in fact, really deeper than that, you’re trying to change, to shift their internal narratives … the set of stories that are your baseline for your culture.”
Previous “Twitter Files” releases have revealed that true information was targeted for censorship by the U.S. government and social media platforms like Twitter if the information contradicted official policy regarding COVID-19 vaccines and restrictions.
‘Cognitive security’ a euphemism for censorship
In the same podcast, according to the journalists, Terp said, “Cognitive security is the thing you want to have. You want to protect that cognitive layer. It basically, it’s about pollution. Misinformation, disinformation is a form of pollution across the Internet.”
The journalists wrote, “A key component of Terp’s work through CTIL, MisinfoSec, and AMITT was to insert the concept of ‘cognitive security’ into the fields of cybersecurity and information security.”
Such “cognitive security” was seen as being threatened by the erosion of the mass media’s control on information and influence over public opinion.
Documents revealed by the whistleblower included a MisinfoSec report stating “For a long time, the ability to reach mass audiences belonged to the nation-state (e.g. in the USA via broadcast licensing through ABC, CBS and NBC).”
“Now, however, control of informational instruments has been allowed to devolve to large technology companies who have been blissfully complacent and complicit in facilitating access to the public for information operators at a fraction of what it would have cost them by other means,” the report said.
The same report also called for a form of “pre-bunking,” to “preemptively inoculate a vulnerable population against messaging,” suggesting that DHS-funded Information Sharing and Analysis Centers could be used to promote such pre-bunking.
‘If we get away with it, it’s legal’
Public-private partnerships were specifically sought out in an attempt to circumvent First Amendment free speech protections in the U.S., the documents revealed, even while Bloomberg, The Washington Post and Wired wrote glowing articles portraying the CTI League as a mere group of “volunteer” cybersecurity experts.
Yet, according to the journalists, “In just one month, from mid-March to mid-April [2020], the supposedly all-volunteer CTIL had grown to ‘1,400 vetted members in 76 countries’” and had “helped to take down 2,833 cybercriminal assets on the internet” including some which impersonated government organizations, the United Nations and WHO.
On the same 2019 podcast, according to the journalists, Breuer explained how the CTI League was getting around the First Amendment, by working to get “nontraditional partners into one room,” including “maybe somebody from one of the social media companies, maybe a few special forces operators, and some folks from Department of Homeland Security.”
Together, they would “talk in a non-attribution, open environment in an unclassified way so that we can collaborate better, more freely and really start to change the way that we address some of these issues,” Breuer said.
Breuer even likened these tactics to those employed by the Chinese government, saying “If you talk to the average Chinese citizen, they absolutely believe that the Great Firewall of China is not there for censorship. They believe that it’s there because the Chinese Communist Party wants to protect the citizenry and they absolutely believe that’s a good thing.”
“If the US government tried to sell that narrative, we would absolutely lose our minds and say, ‘No, no, this is a violation of our First Amendment rights.’ So, the in-group and out-group messaging have to be often different,” he said.
The whistleblower told the journalists that CTI League leaders did not discuss their potential violation of the First Amendment.
“The ethos was that if we get away with it, it’s legal, and there were no First Amendment concerns because we have a ‘public-private partnership’ — that’s the word they used to disguise those concerns. ‘Private people can do things public servants can’t do, and public servants can provide the leadership and coordination,’” the whistleblower said.
According to the journalists, the authors of the MisinfoSec report also “advocated for police, military, and intelligence involvement in censorship, across Five Eyes nations, and even suggested that Interpol should be involved.”
The CTI League documents also suggest that the organization was involved in a form of domestic spying, with one document noting that while censorship activities abroad are “typically” performed by “the CIA and NSA and the Department of Defense,” such efforts “against Americans” necessitate the use of private partners because the government lacks the “legal authority” to do so.
According to the whistleblower, CTI League members also went to great lengths to conceal their activities, with a CTI League handbook recommending the use of burner phones, online pseudonyms and the generation of fake AI faces. One document advised, “Lock your s**t down … your spy disguise.”
One suggested list of questions to be posed to prospective CTI League members proposed asking whether those individuals had ever “worked with influence operations (e.g. disinformation, hate speech, other digital harms etc) previously” and whether those efforts included “active measures” and “psyops” (psychological operations).
Indeed, according to the documents, several CTI League members had worked for the military or intelligence agencies, while according to the whistleblower, “roughly 12-20 active people involved in CTIL worked at the FBI or CISA” — even, for a time, displaying their agency seals alongside their names on the CTI League’s internal Slack channel.
Terp, for instance, previously designed machine learning algorithms and unmanned vehicle systems for the U.K.’s Ministry of Defence.
According to the whistleblower, the CTI League sought “to become part of the federal government.”
Shellenberger, Taibbi to testify before Congress this week
According to the journalists, the FBI declined to comment, while CISA, Terp and other CTI League figures did not respond to requests for comment.
However, one CTI League member, Bonnie Smalley, did respond to the journalists’ request. She wrote, verbatim, “all i can comment on is that i joined cti league which is unaffiliated with any govt orgs because i wanted to combat the inject bleach nonsense online during covid. … i can assure you that we had nothing to do with the govt though.”
“CTIL appears to have generated publicity about itself in the Spring and Fall of 2020 for the same reason EIP did: to claim later that its work was all out in the open and that anybody who suggested it was secretive was engaging in a conspiracy theory,” the journalists wrote.
“But as internal messages have revealed, much of what EIP did was secret, as well as partisan, and demanding of censorship by social media platforms, contrary to its claims,” they said, adding that “EIP and VP, ostensibly, ended, but CTIL is apparently still active, based on the LinkedIn pages of its members.”
The journalists said the documents will be presented to Congressional investigators and made public, while protecting the identity of the whistleblower.
Shellenberger and Taibbi will testify at Thursday’s hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. They previously testified before the same committee in March.
On Tuesday, Taibbi appeared in a live YouTube webcast presenting some of the key revelations from the first release of the “CTIL Files.”
Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD.TV’s “Good Morning CHD.”
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
New Zealand Government will inform WHO it does not agree to International Health Regulations amendments
By Rhoda Wilson | The Exposé | November 28, 2023
The newly sworn-in New Zealand government intends not to be pushed around by UN resolutions or by the World Health Organisation anymore.
According to a coalition agreement with New Zealand First, the new government will undertake a “National Interest Test” before accepting any agreements from the United Nations or the World Health Organisation’s proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations.
To this aim, the New Zealand Cabinet must “reserve against” proposed amendments to International Health Regulations by 1 December 2023.
On Friday, centre-right National signed coalition agreements with libertarian ACT New Zealand and populist New Zealand First allowing the three parties to form a government, bringing an end to six years of left-wing governments in New Zealand.
Yesterday, New Zealand Governor General Cindy Kiro, who represents British monarch King Charles III as head of state, swore National Party leader Christopher Luxon in as New Zealand’s 42nd prime minister along with ministers of his cabinet at Government House in Wellington. Parliament is expected to sit next week and begin working on new policies.
On the day they were signed, Friday, the incoming government released its coalition agreements which outlined a number of policy plans. You can read the coalition agreement between the New Zealand National Party and ACT New Zealand HERE, and between New Zealand National Party and New Zealand First HERE.
According to the coalition agreement with New Zealand First, one of the most urgent issues the new government must address is that the Cabinet will tell officials not to agree to any policy changes suggested by the World Health Organisation (“WHO”). The coalition agreement states:
Strengthening Democracy and Freedoms
Ensure a ‘National Interest Test’ is undertaken before New Zealand accepts any agreements from the UN and its agencies that limit national decision-making and reconfirm that New Zealand’s domestic law holds primacy over any international agreements.
As part of the above, by 1 December 2023 reserve against proposed amendments to WHO health regulations to allow the incoming government to consider these against a “National Interest Test.”
Coalition Agreement between the National Party and the New Zealand First Party
Ontario Cop Appeals Conviction For Freedom Convoy Donation
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | November 29, 2023
Constable Michael Brisco, a highly respected officer of the Windsor Police Service, found his professional reputation threatened for making an online donation to a protest in support of civil liberties.
Armed with no previous disciplinary records, Brisco has been thrust into a legal tussle over his $50 donation to the Ottawa Freedom Convoy’s peaceful protest via GiveSendGo on February 8, 2022.
Get the background on this case here.
Importantly, this occurred within the permissible boundaries set by an Ontario Superior Court Judge, allowing people to participate in the protest in Ottawa, provided their advocacy did not include honking. Brisco, who chose to fund the peaceful protest anonymously and not in his capacity as a police officer, now finds his actions punished.
The crux of this issue surfaced when the GiveSendGo donor list was compromised and fell into the possession of the Ontario Provincial Police Service.
Brisco’s name was flagged in the data breach and subsequently forwarded to the Windsor Police Service, gently illustrating the porous safety afforded by digital privacy. Brisco now stands accused of what the Windsor Police Service deems “discreditable conduct.”
Brisco’s legal team maintains their client’s donation was not evidence of his support for the Ambassador Bridge blockade in Windsor, Ontario. They argue the prosecution’s attempts to link Brisco’s anonymous contribution with allegedly unlawful protests was threadbare, relying solely on newspaper commentaries by several officials, including Ontario’s premier and the prime minister. Specifically, no video, photograph, or indisputable evidence supports the accusations against Brisco.
Get more information on this case at the Justice Center For Constitutional Freedoms.
Elon Musk says advertisers are attempting to blackmail X to censor, tells corporate advertisers: “Go fuck yourself”
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | November 29, 2023
Elon Musk has expressed strong disapproval towards major advertisers withdrawing their support from his social media platform, X. He accused these companies of attempting to coerce the platform and even risk its financial stability, bluntly telling them, “Go fuck yourself… Go. Fuck. Yourself. Is that clear?”
This backlash from advertisers like Disney, IBM, NBCUniversal, and Lionsgate came after activist groups called on giant corporations to pull advertising on X until the platform censors.
At the New York Times DealBook Summit in New York, on Wednesday, Elon Musk spoke candidly about his turbulent year and his stance on being liked. Musk, unfazed by criticism, asserted, “Hate away. There’s a real weakness to wanting to be liked.”
Musk, undeterred, expressed his indifference to advertisers’ withdrawal, stating boldly, “I don’t want them to advertise. If someone is going to blackmail me with advertising or money go fuck yourself. Hey, Bob if you’re in the audience,” Musk added, referring directly to Disney CEO Bob Iger.
Musk also took criticism for supporting a post on X that many said was antisemitic – something Musk says he regrets.
“I handed a loaded gun to those who hate me,” Musk said, calling it “one of the most foolish” things he’s done on the platform.
X has taken legal action against Media Matters, accusing them of a malicious campaign against Musk and the platform, an allegation Media Matters dismisses as baseless.
Trudeau Supports Partnership With EU For Digital ID Push, Suggests it Will Help Curb Online “Disinformation”

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | November 28, 2023
Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, a proponent of centralized control, has finalized a controversial collaborative digital partnership with the European Union. This agreement exhibits full commitment to the introduction of a digital identity system in Canada and the government is pursuing it, in part, under the guise of fighting online “disinformation.”
The Trudeau government’s announcement delineates the terms of the Canada-EU Digital Partnership, which aims not only to institute digital credentials for Canadians but also to bolster cooperation in the field of artificial intelligence (AI).
The contentious partnership insists on a joint effort from Canada and the EU to bolster their respective bilateral and multilateral cooperation in forums like the G7 and the G20.
“The Digital Partnership will allow Canada and the EU to have a stronger common voice in multilateral fora, where appropriate, and bring jointly developed solutions to international partners and advance our joint strategic priorities,” the announcement states.
The G20, an influential conglomerate of the globe’s 19 major countries and the EU, has previously encouraged exploring the creation of “digital public infrastructure,” including potential digital identification systems and perhaps even a centralized digital currency.
This “digital public infrastructure” phrase is the same buzzword being used by the likes of The Gates Foundation and the UN, when it comes to pushing digital ID and payment systems.
Alarmingly for many Canadians that support the protection of civil liberties, Trudeau has demonstrated a seemingly unwavering allegiance to this digital ID agenda.
Separate Tech and State
By Ron Paul | November 27, 2023
Some libertarians dismiss concerns over social media companies’ suppression of news and opinions that contradict select agendas by pointing out that these platforms are private companies, not part of the government. There are two problems with this argument. First, there is nothing unlibertarian about criticizing private businesses or using peaceful and voluntary means, such as boycotts, to persuade businesses to change their practices.
The second and most significant reason the “they are private companies” argument does not hold water is the tech companies’ censorship has often been done at the “request” of government officials. The extent of government involvement with online censorship was revealed in emails between government and employees of various tech companies. In these emails the government officials addressed employees of these “private companies” as though these employees were the government officials’ subordinates.
Government officials using their authority to silence American citizens is a blatant violation of the First Amendment. Yet some conservative elected officials and writers think the solution to the problem of big tech censorship is giving government more power over technology companies. These pro-regulation conservatives ignore the fact that it would be just as unconstitutional if a conservative administration was telling tech companies who they must allow to access their platforms as it is when progressives order social media companies to deplatform certain individuals. Furthermore, since the average government official’s political views are closer to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez than to Marjorie Taylor Greene, giving government more power over social media companies is likely to lead to more online censorship of conservatives.
Instead of giving government more power over social media, defenders of free speech should work to separate tech and state. An excellent place to start is pushing for passage of the Free Speech Protection Act. Unlike other legislation, such as the PATRIOT Act and the Affordable Care Act, this bill is accurately named. Introduced by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul and Ohio Representative Jim Jordan, this bill makes it a crime for any federal employee or employee of a federal contractor to use his position to communicate with a social media company to interfere with any American’s exercise of First Amendment protected rights. Violators of this law would face fines of at least 10,000 dollars as well as suspension, demotion, or even termination and a lifetime ban from working with the federal government.
In addition to working to pass the Free Speech Protection Act, those who object to the big technology companies’ “content moderation” policies should abandon big tech for more free speech friendly platforms. Many of the newer social media companies were started to meet the demand for a “content moderation”-free alternative to the dominant companies. Senator Paul himself stopped posting videos on YouTube because of its suppression of free speech. While my Liberty Report still airs on YouTube, its main platform is Rumble. It is wonderful to do a show on any topic I choose without worrying about being canceled.
Big tech censorship is a problem created by big government. The solution lies not with giving government more power but with separating tech and state. Passing the Free Speech Protection Act and making big tech pay a price for cooperating with big government by leaving to use sites like Rumble are two excellent places to start.

