The Authoritarian Legacy of Justin Trudeau
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | January 6, 2025
After nearly a decade in office, after attempts at photogenic diplomacy and tearful apologies, Justin Trudeau is stepping down as Canada’s Prime Minister, leaving behind a legacy as divisive as it is dramatic. To some, he was the poster child for progressive leadership, a leader who championed climate action and diversity while bringing Canada into the global spotlight. To others, he was an over-polished politician whose tenure was defined by censorship, economic mismanagement, and the weaponization of state power against his own citizens. His resignation marks the end of an era—one defined as much by lofty rhetoric as by policies that left a deep mark on civil liberties and public trust.
So, what’s Trudeau’s Canada after nearly ten years? A land of progressive aspirations or a dystopian Pinterest board?
Censorship: The Friendly Autocrat Edition
Few things capture Trudeau’s tenure better than his government’s legislative war on free speech. Let’s start with the dynamic duo of digital overreach:
Bill C-10: “Regulating the Unregulatable”
The saga of Bill C-10 began innocently enough. Trudeau’s government framed the bill as a noble effort to modernize the Broadcasting Act. After all, the law hadn’t been updated since 1991, back when Blockbuster was thriving and the internet was just a nerd’s dream. The goal, they said, was to “level the playing field” between traditional broadcasters and streaming giants like Netflix and YouTube.
Sounds fair, right? Not so fast.
The devil was in the details—or the lack thereof. The bill gave Canada’s broadcast regulator, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), sweeping authority to police online content. Originally, user-generated content like vlogs, TikTok dances, or indie films were supposed to be exempt. However, midway through the legislative process, Trudeau’s government quietly removed those exemptions. Suddenly, your cat video could be classified as “broadcast content,” giving bureaucrats the power to decide whether it met Canadian cultural standards.
Critics, including legal scholars and digital rights groups, raised the alarm. They argued that the bill’s language was so vague it could allow the government to dictate what Canadians saw, shared, or created online. The specter of state-controlled algorithms choosing what gets promoted on platforms was too close to censorship for comfort.
But the government dismissed the concerns, painting critics as alarmists. In Trudeau’s Canada, wanting clear limits on government power apparently made you a conspiracy theorist.
Bill C-36: Hate Speech or Debate Killer?
Not content to merely oversee what Canadians could create, Trudeau’s administration went a step further with Bill C-36, a supposed weapon against online hate speech. If Bill C-10 was about controlling the medium, this bill was about controlling the message.
What Did It Do?
- Reintroduced a controversial section of Canada’s Human Rights Act, allowing people to file complaints over online hate speech.
- Allowed courts to impose hefty fines and even jail time for offenders.
- Gave the government the power to preemptively penalize individuals suspected of potentially committing hate speech—a sort of Minority Report approach to thought crime.
The problem? The bill’s definition of “hate” was so expansive that it could potentially criminalize unpopular or offensive opinions. The bill didn’t just target clear-cut incitements to violence; it targeted anything deemed likely to expose individuals to “hatred or contempt.” Critics feared that “hatred or contempt” could mean anything from political dissent to sharp critiques of government policies.
Even more alarming was the prospect of a “snitch culture.” The bill encouraged private citizens to report each other for suspected hate speech, potentially turning disagreements into legal battles.
David Lametti, Trudeau’s Justice Minister, defended the bill, claiming it struck the right balance between free expression and protection from harm. But when legal experts and civil liberties groups united in opposition, it became clear that balance was not the government’s strong suit.
The Financial Freeze Heard ‘Round the World
The Freedom Convoy protest of 2022
The Freedom Convoy—the moment when Canada went from polite protests and Tim Hortons to frozen bank accounts and police crackdowns.
In 2022, when truckers and their supporters descended on Ottawa to protest COVID-19 mandates, Trudeau didn’t meet them with dialogue or even his trademark smile-and-wave. Instead, he dusted off the Emergencies Act, something no prime minister had dared touch before. Overnight, financial institutions became Trudeau’s personal enforcers, freezing accounts of protesters and anyone who dared to support them.
Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, Trudeau’s second-in-command at the time and a walking, talking LinkedIn connection to global elites, eagerly played bad cop. Under her direction, the financial clampdown turned Canada’s banking system into a political weapon. It wasn’t lost on critics that Freeland’s cozy ties to global financiers made the whole thing look like an international crackdown on dissent.
And what of the precedent? Trudeau’s message was clear: disagree with the government, and you might lose access to your life savings. It was a masterclass in how to turn financial systems into handcuffs, leaving civil liberties in tatters.
The Media Muzzle: Subsidizing Obedience
Also on the chopping block was journalistic independence. Trudeau’s government rolled out legislation forcing media outlets to register with a government body to qualify for funding. On the surface, this was marketed as a lifeline for struggling journalism. Because nothing says “press freedom” like reporters dependent on government handouts, right? It’s a classic move: offer financial aid with one hand and hold the leash with the other.
Critics were quick to point out the slippery slope. When the same entity paying the bills also sets the rules, the line between journalism and government PR gets blurry fast. Trudeau, of course, framed this as support for democracy, but the result was a media landscape nervously eyeing its next paycheck while tiptoeing around criticism of its benefactor.
Big Brother Gets a Twitter Account
Then came the surveillance. Under Trudeau’s watch, Canadian intelligence agencies dramatically expanded their social media monitoring. Initially, this was framed as a necessary tool against extremism. But “extremism,” much like “disinformation,” is a flexible term in the hands of those in power. Activists and protest groups—voices traditionally central to democratic discourse—suddenly found themselves under the microscope.
Imagine logging onto X to vent about a new housing policy, only to realize your tweet has been flagged by a government algorithm. The message was clear: dissent might not be illegal, but it was certainly inconvenient.
Disinformation: The Government’s New Buzzword
Trudeau’s pièce de résistance was his crusade against “disinformation.” This word became the Swiss Army knife of excuses, used to delegitimize critics and corral public opinion. Do you have a bone to pick with government policies? Disinformation. Questioning pandemic mandates? Disinformation. Unimpressed with Trudeau’s latest photo op? You guessed it—disinformation.
To hammer the point home, his administration launched a series of public awareness campaigns, ostensibly to educate Canadians about the perils of online misinformation. These campaigns, dripping with paternalistic condescension, often blurred the line between fact-checking and outright propaganda. The subtext was unmistakable: dissent, even if rooted in genuine concerns, was a threat to national cohesion.
Canada’s New Normal: The Fear of Speaking Freely
The cumulative effect of these policies wasn’t subtle. Everyday Canadians began censoring themselves, not out of respect for others but out of fear of stepping on the wrong bureaucratic toes. Content creators hesitated to tackle divisive topics. Activists wondered whether their next rally would land them on a government watchlist. What was once a robust marketplace of ideas began to resemble a sparsely stocked shelf.
And yet, Trudeau’s defenders remain loyal, arguing that his policies were noble attempts to safeguard society. However, as history has repeatedly shown, the road to censorship is paved with the promise of safety, but its destination is a society too scared to speak.
The Legacy of Controlled Speech
So what’s the verdict? Is Trudeau a misunderstood guardian of democracy, or is he the wolf who prowled under the guise of a shepherd? It’s hard to champion inclusivity and diversity when fewer voices are allowed to join the conversation. Canada may someday reckon with the full implications of these policies, but the damage is already visible.
And as Canadians tiptoe around their digital platforms, one question remains: how free is a democracy where everyone whispers?
Hoax Alert: Acker is Angry (2024)
Karl’s Substack | January 4, 2025
According to Jake Tapper writing for CNN there was a so-called ‘anti-Semitic hate crime’ in Detroit, Michigan in December 2024.
We read how:
‘The home of a Jewish member of the University of Michigan’s Board of Regents was vandalized early Monday, in what the university described as “a clear act of antisemitic intimidation.”
The incident marks the third time Jordan Acker, a Michigan attorney elected to the board overseeing the university’s governance, has been targeted since the start of the Israel-Hamas war.
“The University of Michigan condemns these criminal acts in the strongest possible terms,” the school said in a statement. “They are abhorrent and, unfortunately, just the latest in a number of incidents where individuals have been harassed because of their work on behalf of the university. This is unacceptable and will not be tolerated.”
The sound of shattering glass jolted Acker from his sleep just after 2 a.m. Monday, he told CNN. He went downstairs to find his front windows had been smashed and his wife’s car vandalized with what he described as “messages about Palestine with a Hamas upside triangle.”
The upside-down triangle has become a symbol of violent resistance to Israel, according to the Anti-Defamation League. Photos provided by Acker show someone scrawled “Divest” and “Free Palestine” on the vehicle.
Acker said his neighbors captured the incident on their ring camera and called the police. CNN has reached out to the Huntington Woods Police Department for comment.
“As a public official, you expect a certain level of criticism – even protests – but this is not protest, this is terrorism,” Acker said, adding the incident took place while his daughters were asleep upstairs.
“This has nothing to do with the First Amendment, has nothing to do with Palestine, nothing to do with Israel and everything to do with trying to harass and intimidate Jews,” Acker said, “And this Jew will not be intimidated by it.”’ (1)
Now before I get into the meat of this claim this is the ‘anti-Semitic’ vandalism:
Now while it can be reasonably described as politically motivated vandalism given the political message, damage to Acker’s car and the smashed window; ‘anti-Semitic’ is not only pushing it but ludicrous.
This is because it is clearly targeted at Israel – hence the BDS and ‘Free Palestine’ references in the graffiti on Acker’s car – and Acker while jewish has been a staunch and vocal pro-Israel supporter for quite some time who has had the police violently break up pro-Palestine protests of the University of Michigan campus (2) and as such as been the focus on anti-Zionist political protest stunts – such as the vandalising of the sign of his legal practice – (3) for quite some time.
Acker’s response has been exactly the same and has claimed that anyone protesting against him is ‘anti-Semitic’ and criticism of the jewish state is also ipso facto ‘anti-Semitic’. (4)
To quote Acker:
‘I was not targeted here today because I am a regent. I am a target of this because I am Jewish. This neighborhood is Jewish, and because some people, under the pretext of helping Palestinians, feel the obligation to single out Jews, especially liberal ones for an attack. It is unacceptable, it is un-American, and it must stop now.’ (5)
Given this and the fact – as Jacob Maggid has explained in the ‘Times of Israel’ – that:
‘The activists shouted various accusations and grievances at Acker, claiming that he “supports Israeli genocide” in Gaza and is behind the “persecution” of anti-Israel protesters who were recently indicted for trespassing and resisting law enforcement during the break-up of a pro-Palestinian encampment on campus.’ (6)
Or put another way: Acker is a jewish lawyer who is using his position as Regent of the University of Michigan to crack down on anti-Israel sentiment and protests on campus and thus limit the scope of intellectual inquiry as it pertains to Israel, but also uses his jewishness as a shield to enable him to label any resistance and/or criticism of him and his policies as ‘anti-Semitic’.
So thus, while this is a case of politically motivated vandalism it is not an ‘anti-Semitic hate crime’ in any way, shape or form.
The War on Speech Is Turning into a Monty Python Sketch
Truthstream Media | January 3, 2025
Please help support us on Patreon, read our goals here: 
/ truthstreammedia or SubscribeStar here: subscribestar.com/truthstreammedia
As context is very important for all videos, this message is to confirm that the purpose of this video is reporting on or documenting the content. Note that we make an effort to research for context and cite our sources as appropriate.
Our First Series: Vimeo.com/ondemand/trustgame
Site: TruthstreamMedia.com
X: @TruthstreamNews
Backup Ch: Vimeo.com/truthstreammedia
DONATE: http://bit.ly/2aTBeeF
Newsletter: http://eepurl.com/bbxcWX
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
State Department Rebrands Defunded Global Engagement Center into New Counter-Disinformation Hub
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | January 4, 2025
As we previously reported would be the case, the celebration about the shutting down of the US government’s most overt censorship unit would be short-lived. The State Department is moving forward with plans to reassign employees and resources from a controversial office accused of stifling media into a newly created internal unit, as revealed by documents obtained by the Washington Examiner. This maneuver is already drawing criticism, with some alleging it is a thinly veiled attempt to rebrand and continue the disputed activities of the defunct office.
The Global Engagement Center (GEC), established in 2016 to counter foreign disinformation, faced fierce scrutiny from Republicans over claims it collaborated with groups like the Global Disinformation Index to target and demonetize right-leaning US media outlets.
In late 2024, Congress defunded the GEC, effectively shutting it down. Yet, a December 6 communication from the State Department to Congress outlined a plan to “realign” 51 GEC employees and nearly $30 million in funding into a new “Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference Hub.”
Republicans are expected to investigate the matter closely, with concerns that the new hub could replicate the GEC’s controversial operations.
A Legacy of Controversy
The GEC claimed its mission was to counter foreign disinformation, but allegations of domestic overreach cast a long shadow. It funded initiatives like the Global Disinformation Index and NewsGuard, groups accused of pressuring advertisers to blacklist certain US media outlets.
These actions prompted legal challenges, including a December 2023 lawsuit by conservative outlets The Federalist and The Daily Wire, alongside the State of Texas.
Despite its closure, top officials from the GEC have already found new roles in the State Department.
The hub will report to the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and will inherit significant resources. According to the documents, $69 million previously allocated to the GEC will be redistributed across the State Department, with $29.4 million designated for the R/FIMI hub. This funding includes salaries, contract staff, and operational support. However, a source noted that, unlike the GEC, the new hub would lack grantmaking authority.
New Censor Replacing Old Censor at Meta
By Adam Dick | Peace and Prosperity Blog | January 4, 2025
Some people are optimistic that the promotion of Joel Kaplan to be Meta’s president of global affairs heralds the end of, or at least a big reduction in, censorship at Meta’s social media sites of Facebook and Instagram. This optimism springs from the fact that Kaplan leans Republican in the notoriously Democratic leaning company, and even was White House deputy chief of staff for policy in the Republican George W. Bush administration.
Yet, there is plenty of reason for skepticism. Support for free speech has become a rallying cry for many Republicans in response to censorship efforts by Meta, other companies, and governments over the last few years. However, many Republicans and Republican-leaning individuals still are keen on censoring people, though sometimes for different reasons than are many Democratic or Democratic-leaning individuals. Consider efforts by Republicans, with Texas Governor Greg Abbott a good example, to shut down very broadly defined “antisemitic” communication.
Also, Kaplan is not a hire from the outside. He joined Meta 13 years ago as vice president of United States public policy. Since 2014 he has been the company’s vice president of global affairs. In this job, Kaplan has worked with Nick Clegg — the person Kaplan will succeed. Are we to believe Kaplan has spent all this time itching to tear down the censorship implemented, with his help, by his boss? They have had some differences of opinion regarding Meta’s censorship, but let’s wait and see what change comes.
Clegg, in a Thursday Facebook post, profusely praised Kaplan ascending to Clegg’s job, stating:
And no one could pick up from where I’ve left off with greater skill and integrity than my deputy, Joel Kaplan. I am simply thrilled that Joel will now become Meta’s Chief Global Affairs Officer.
Hmmm. That is not suggesting a big change in policy on censorship is on the way.
Reporter Glenn Greenwald provided in a Friday Twitter post a fact that challenges the optimism that Kaplan’s promotion signals the end of, or even a large reduction in, censorship by Meta. Greenwald wrote, using “FB” to refer to Facebook: “Kaplan was the senior FB official who worked directly with the Israeli Government to ensure that Israel’s demands for censorship were honored.”
Backing up his claim, Greenwald linked in his Twitter post a September 12, 2016 The Times of Israel article that detailed Facebook’s, at the behest of the Israel government, then substantial and expanding clamping down on communication. This was years before the company’s name change to Meta.
The article identifies Kaplan as a Facebook employee who took part in a high-level meeting to carry out the arrangement with the Israel government:
Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked and Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan met Monday morning with senior Facebook officials in an effort to jointly stem online incitement that Israel claims leads to terror activities.
The Facebook officials included Joel Kaplan, vice president of Global Public Policy and a former deputy chief of staff for policy at the White House, and Monika Bickert, Facebook’s head of product policy and counterterrorism.
And the censorship by Facebook at the Israel government’s request was ongoing before the meeting. Noted in the article:
In a speech at a conference in Herzliya, also on Monday, Shaked said that Facebook has already started removing 95 percent of content Israel has requested it to remove, while YouTube has complied with Israel’s requests 80 percent of the time, the Israeli news website Ynet reported.
But, that was just the start. The Israel government wanted even more censorship from Facebook. From the article: “In the meeting Israel requested that Facebook be more proactive in removing materials that could be seen as incitement to terror and the joint teams will study how to work together to serve the interests of both parties, a person familiar with the matter said.”
This man is the hope for stopping censorship? Hoping is fine, but it is often important to keep your feet firmly on the ground as well.
Journalist killed by Ukrainian drone strike
RT | January 4, 2025
Aleksandr Martemyanov, a freelance reporter with the newspaper Izvestia, has been killed in Russia’s Donetsk People’s Republic after the civilian vehicle he was riding in was attacked by a Ukrainian drone, Russian media reported on Saturday.
At least five other journalists, who were also in the car, including two RIA Novosti reporters, were injured in the attack, the news agency said. The vehicle was hit while traveling on a road away from the frontline between the town of Gorlovka and the regional capital city of Donetsk.
The car carrying the reporters was hit by a kamikaze drone. Martemyanov succumbed to his wounds shortly thereafter, Izvestia has confirmed.
At the time of the attack, the reporters were returning from Gorlovka after filming the aftermath of the strikes on the town, which has been coming under indiscriminate Ukrainian artillery, missile, and drone attacks on an almost daily basis.
The attack on the journalists’ car appeared to be deliberate, Maksim Romanenko, a reporter with RIA Novosti, suggested. Romanenko sustained relatively minor injuries – bruising on his face and a concussion – during the incident.
Last ditch media sanctions from the West against Russia are like a sick child crying for help
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 3, 2025
Many analysts will be wondering what Trump will do about Russian sanctions when gets into the Oval office, although there is some optimism that he will try and reverse them. He is cautious not to get into a debate about this subject, which leads me to suspect that this will be one of the bombshells he will drop on the Biden administration which left him the small gift of signing off over a billion dollars of military aid to Ukraine. What almost no Americans understand though, which is largely the fault of mainstream media, is that these military spending sprees are really all about feeding a dual-purpose racket which really has nothing to do with the actual war in Ukraine, which everyone now admits Russia is winning. On one hand, it is of course pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the 5 main arms manufacturers in the U.S. in a move which could arguably be called illegal state aid; on the other hand the kit which is sent to Ukraine from the U.S. – and the UK – is mainly being sold on a number of black markets, with only about 30 percent or thereabouts actually reaching Ukrainian troops. My own investigation has proved that the Zelensky cabal are selling off the heavy equipment like armoured personal carriers (APCs) and lorry loads of American made assault rifles to dealers in the international arms bizarre of Libya – where Middle Eastern terrorists, or their affiliates in the Sahel buy it at bargain prices.
And Trump certainly understands the racket and will want to stop it. Dropping the mother of all bombshells on the Biden legacy by scrapping the sanctions and blocking any more aid would be an effective way to do that.
But it’s the sanctions on Russia media which he should also give priority to, given that, with the state of western media being such a shambles, we had to rely on RT for example, in the UK and U.S., to ask the difficult questions and hold our administrations to account.
The recent news at the end of December that the EU is cracking down even further on Russia media and individuals who are active within it – journalists and others – is another parting shot which smacks of desperation. The West is under no illusions privately that it is losing the war in Ukraine and is wondering how it can tell a fairy tale story to its own voters so as to deflect blame with the sole purpose of staying in power. This is really what media sanctions are all about. Shutting down any narrative that could possibly hold you to account and expose the tawdry reality of the mess the West has made in Ukraine based on the military industrial complex gaining too much power and eating up elites in its path. The Biden administration will be remembered for this. A new dawn in just how much power these arms manufacturers have and what lengths they can go to, to get the big contracts. This will all come out in the Trump administration with documentaries about Biden and his son’s laptop and how Ukraine was a holiday camp for them to go to with empty suitcases and return with a few million dollars. Like a cash machine which keeps churning out cash due to a computer glitch. The lure of Ukraine and corrupt western elites is nothing new. But during Trump’s first term citizens of the West are going to see the dark side to the events which led up to Russia’s invasion. And it stinks.
Part of that racket, going back even to 2013 or 2014 was to try and shut down Russian media. In reality, it was simply RT which elites noticed was gaining popularity in many European countries from people who had lost all faith in their own media which had fallen into the grubby hands of the powerful elites and their dirty games long ago. It used to be the case that in Brussels, the hold that the powerful institutions had on journalists was so strong in such an abusive relationship that what we saw each day on TV and in the newspapers was pure EU propaganda on a scale that even the Soviet Union could not muster. There used to be however the contrast between Brussels and member states where the media were more robust and anti-establishment. But no more. Now the political journalists along with the defence correspondent in the UK for example are practically government propaganda agents who probably think they were journalists once. Their work is to keep the lies about Ukraine, as one example, flowing so that the public are distracted and can’t focus on what is under their nose. Sometimes the plain truth is so close to the person looking for it, that it can’t be seen. Distance is required. When RT operated in the UK, there was this certain environment which questioned more and provided an alternative viewpoint which was needed in any functioning democracy. Trump’s priority should be to finish the sanctions and adopt a more grown-up approach to resolving Ukraine as the Russians want a longer-term solution rather than quick fix buggerydoo. Ending the sanctions on Russian media would be a good message to western elites that have fed from the trough for so long with the lies which have been created that their time is up. Trump’s back.
‘From nationalist to Islamist’: Syria’s de facto rulers order sweeping reforms to school curriculum
The Cradle | January 2, 2025
The Ministry of Education in Syria announced on 1 January a series of new reforms to the country’s previously secular nationwide curriculum, which has sparked controversy and outrage.
The changes will affect all levels of education and include significant amendments to religious and historical studies – namely, the removal of important events in Syrian history and the erasure of content about Syria’s historical connection to polytheistic civilizations and empires.
The ministry confirmed textbooks will undergo large-scale editing to delete and rephrase passages, alter and delete images, and eliminate any material linked to the former government of Bashar al-Assad and his predecessor, Hafez al-Assad.
Some examples of the changes to be made include the removal of the terms “Ottoman injustice,” “brutal Ottoman rule,” and any reference to Ottoman “occupation” in Syria, as well as the deletion of important historical events that took place during the Ottoman Empire’s reign in the country.
References to the “Martyrs of May 6” – which relate to the Muslim-Christian Arab nationalists who were executed by Ottoman ruler Jamal Pasha in 1916 in Beirut and Damascus – will be removed.
Entire segments of Syrian history will also be scratched – including the period between the end of the Ottoman Empire and the election of Shukri Quwaitli as president in 1943. The term “1973 Liberation War,” referring to the 1973 Arab–Israeli war, was replaced with just “1973 war.”
The new curriculum will also exclude all references to pagan gods and goddesses in ancient Syrian civilizations, including Canaanite entities and deities of other empires and civilizations.
Studies on Chinese philosophical thought are also excluded, as well as scientific studies relating to the theory of evolution and brain development.
References to female monarchs, such as Queen Zenobia of Palmyra, have been erased. Khawla bint al-Azwar, a Muslim warrior described as one of the greatest female soldiers in history, was labeled as a fictional character.
The meaning of the word “martyr” will be altered from someone who is killed “in defense of the homeland” to someone who is killed “to uphold the word of God.”
The term “those who have incurred wrath” will be changed to “those who have gone astray from the path of goodness,” specifying Christians and Jews.
Entire segments of the curriculum that were unspecified by the ministry will also be taken out.
“The curricula in all Syrian schools are still in place until specialized committees are formed to review and audit the curricula,” newly appointed Syrian Minister of Education Nazir al-Qadri said on Thursday.
“We adopted images of the Syrian Revolution flag in all school books, and we corrected some incorrect information in the Islamic Education curriculum, such as explaining some Quranic verses in an incorrect way, and we adopted their correct explanation as stated in the interpretation books for all educational levels,” he added, seemingly downplaying the alterations which are set to be made.
Syrians have reportedly called for nationwide protests and the dismissal of the education minister.
“After reviewing the amendments, it’s clear that, aside from removing signs of the criminal Assad regime, the rest changes have a distinct religious tone,” said journalist Hussam Hammoud.
Academic and Syria commentator Joshua Landis said Syrian textbooks “are moving from a nationalist to Islamist interpretation” of history.
Manufacturing Dissent
By Joshua Stylman | November 17, 2024
As I often do on Sunday mornings, I was drinking my coffee and scrolling through my news feed when I noticed something striking. Maybe it’s my algorithm, but the content was flooded with an unusual amount of vitriol directed at Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s nomination as HHS Secretary. The coordinated messaging was impossible to miss—talking heads across networks uniformly labeling him a “conspiracy theorist” and “danger to public health,” never once addressing his actual positions. The media’s concerted attacks on Kennedy reveal more than just their opinion of his nomination—they expose a deeper crisis of credibility within institutions that once commanded public trust.
The Credibility Paradox
The irony of who led these attacks wasn’t lost on me—these were largely the same voices who championed our most destructive pandemic policies. As Jeffrey Tucker aptly noted on X this morning:
The Coordinated Response
This hypocrisy becomes even more glaring in the New York Times’ recent coverage, where dismissive rhetoric consistently replaces substantive engagement. In one piece, they acknowledge troubling trends in children’s health while dismissively declaring “vaccines and fluoride are not the cause” without engaging his evidence. In another, Zeynep Tufekci—who notably advocated for some of the most draconian Covid measures—warns that Kennedy could “destroy one of civilization’s best achievements,” painting apocalyptic scenarios while sidestepping his actual policy positions.
Meanwhile, their political desk speculates about how his stance on Big Food might “alienate his GOP allies.” Each piece approaches from a different angle, but the pattern is clear: coordinated messaging aimed at undermining his credibility before he can assume institutional authority.
The Echo Chamber Effect
You can almost hear the editorial conveyor belt opening as senior editors craft the day’s approved reality for their audience. The consistent tone across pieces reveals less independent analysis than a familiar pattern—mockingbird media still in action. As I detailed in How The Information Factory Evolved, this assembly-line approach to reality manufacturing has become increasingly visible to anyone paying attention.
What these gatekeepers fail to grasp is that this smug dismissiveness, this refusal to engage with substantive arguments, is precisely what fuels growing public skepticism. Their panic seems to grow in direct proportion to Kennedy’s proximity to real power. This orchestrated dismissal is more than a journalistic flaw—it reflects a larger institutional dilemma, one that becomes unavoidable as Kennedy gains traction.
The Institutional Trap
The Times faces an emerging dilemma: at some point, they’ll need to address the substance of Kennedy’s arguments rather than rely on dismissive characterizations—especially if he assumes control of America’s health apparatus. Just this morning, MSNBC anchors were literally shouting that “Kennedy is going to get people killed”—yet another example of using melodramatics and fear instead of engaging with his actual positions. Their reflexive ridicule strategy backfires precisely because it avoids engaging with the evidence and concerns that resonate with parents and citizens across political lines. Each attempt to maintain narrative control through authority rather than evidence accelerates institutional credibility collapse.
Beyond Kennedy: Redrawing Political Lines
The NYT’s analysis about Kennedy potentially alienating GOP allies particularly highlights their fundamental misunderstanding of the shifting political landscape. As a lifelong Democrat who still champions many traditional progressive values, Kennedy transcends conventional political boundaries. His message—”We have to love our children more than we hate each other”—resonates precisely because anyone who dismisses this crusade to restore American vitality as mere political theater is blind to the groundswell of people who’ve grown tired of watching their communities crumble under the weight of manufactured decline.
This isn’t just about Kennedy—it’s about the media’s inability to address the legitimate concerns of a disillusioned public. When institutions refuse to engage with dissenting voices, they deepen mistrust and fracture the shared foundation necessary for democratic discourse. While RFK, Jr.’s message has resonated across political boundaries, the media’s inability to address core issues—like regulatory failures—reveals just how out of touch they’ve become.
The Art of Missing the Point
Consider this fact-check from the same article: The Times attempts to discredit Kennedy’s Fruit Loops example, but inadvertently confirms his central point: ingredients banned in European markets are indeed permitted in American products. By focusing on semantic precision instead of the broader issue—why US regulators allow unsafe ingredients—the media deflects from substantive debates.
Senator Elizabeth Warren declared this week: “RFK Jr. poses a danger to public health, scientific research, medicine, and health care coverage for millions. He wants to stop parents from protecting their babies from measles and his ideas would welcome the return of polio.” Yet this alarmist framing dodges the simple question Kennedy actually raises: Why wouldn’t you want proper safety testing for chemicals we’re expected to inject into our children’s bodies? The silence in response to this basic inquiry speaks volumes about institutional priorities—and their fear of someone with the power to demand answers.
A Referendum on Manufacturing Consent
Say what you want about Trump, but his “fake news” remarks struck a chord that resonates deeper with each passing day. People who once scoffed at these claims are now watching with eyes wide open as coordinated narratives unfold across media platforms. The gaslighting has become too obvious to ignore. As I explored in We Didn’t Change, The Democratic Party Did, this awakening transcends traditional political boundaries. Americans across the spectrum are tired of being told not to believe their own eyes, whether it’s about pandemic policies, economic realities, or the suppression of dissenting voices.
“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.
It was their final, most essential command.”
–George Orwell, 1984
The Moment of Truth
With Kennedy potentially overseeing America’s health infrastructure, media institutions face a crucial inflection point. Fear campaigns and ad hominem attacks won’t suffice when his policy positions require serious examination. The machinery of coordinated dismissal—visible in identical talking points across networks—reveals more about institutional allegiance than journalistic integrity.
This moment demands something different. When Kennedy raises questions about pharmaceutical safety testing or environmental toxins—issues that resonate with families across political lines—substantive debate must replace reflexive ridicule. His actual positions, heard directly rather than through media filters, often align with common-sense concerns about corporate influence on public health policy.
This institutional pattern of manufactured authority connects directly to themes I explored in Fiat Everything earlier this week—systems built on decree rather than demonstrated value. They don’t sell weapons—they sell fear. The same forces that control monetary policy now seek to dictate public health discourse.
Breaking the Machine
The solution won’t come from institutional gatekeepers (that’s what got us here) but direct examination. We all need to:
- Listen to Kennedy’s complete speeches rather than edited soundbites
- Read his policy positions rather than media characterizations
- Examine the evidence he cites rather than fact-checker summaries
- Consider why certain questions about public health policy are deemed off-limits
I’m not suggesting we accept every contrarian position, but rather that institutional credibility must be earned through rigorous analysis rather than assumed through authority. Until then, coverage like these recent Times pieces will continue to exemplify the very institutional failures that fuel the movements they seek to discredit. As Kennedy approaches real institutional power, expect these attacks to intensify—a clear signal of just how much the guardians of our manufactured consensus have to lose.
UK doctor suspended over posts praising slain Hamas and Hezbollah leaders as ‘legends’
MEMO | January 1, 2025
Dr Rehiana Ali, a British neurologist, was been suspended last week by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) following complaints about social media posts on Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. The interim suspension, lasting 18 months and subject to review, prevents her from practising medicine pending a full investigation by the General Medical Council (GMC).
2025 Looks Bleak For Germany… Energy The Most Expensive In Europe … Growing Speech Tyranny
2025 in Germany will be a year of more energy inflation and loss of free speech rights
By P Gosselin | No Tricks Zone | January 1, 2025
Effective today, Germany’s CO2 surcharge will rise from 45 euros a tonne to 55 euros, which will further fan inflation and social discontent.
Already Germany’s electricity prices are among the highest in the world, and the most expensive in Europe:
Chart: strom-report.com/
Germany clamps down on dissenters, free speech
2025 will not be an easy year for dissenters and critics of the government, as this is increasingly being criminalized in Germany thanks to recently passed laws and acts that aim to suppress free speech in Germany.
The former head Germany’s Constitution Protection Authority (Bundesverfassungsschutz), Thomas Haldenwang (CDU Party), suggested last February when presenting measures to fight right-wing extremism, that human thoughts and speech patterns need to be under surveillance and become the business of the government: “It’s also about shifting verbal and mental boundaries. We have to be careful that thought and language patterns don’t become embedded in our language.”
Mocking the state now verboten
Haldenwang’s boss, Federal Minister of the Interior Nancy Faeser (SPD Party), wants to treat vocal conservative protesters in the same way as organized crime groups: “Those who mock the state must deal with a strong state.”
“We want to take account of the fact that hate on the internet also occurs below the threshold of criminal liability,”said Federal Minister for Family Affairs Lisa Paus (Greens) at her press conference on February 13 on the topic of ‘Hate on the Internet’.“Many enemies of democracy know exactly what falls under freedom of expression on social media platforms,”
Meant by “enemies of democracy” here are opposition forces, even when democratically elected.
Unwanted election results may be annulled
In response to comments in favor of the conservatives made by Elon Musk, German President Frank Walter Steinmeier hinted he would annul the results of the upcoming February 23 national elections if he doesn’t like the results.
So in Germany, it’s watch what you say and, if the old parties don’t like the election results, then they might just annul them. Germany is slipping back quickly to darker times.
Featured Video
Ian Proud: Economic Reset with Russia to Save Europe
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Magic Hour for Gates
By Gary Jordan | Wake The F*** UP | March 15, 2021
Bill Gates wants to know everything about you.
He wants to control every aspect of your life.
His insatiable thirst for the supervision and scrutiny of every human being alive has sparked a US$1 billion investment that will blanket the earth in video surveillance satellites, providing real-time feedback with a mere one-second delay. He advocates for Orwellian digital tools to track your every move and has bankrolled US$1.7 billion to provide artificial intelligence that will be used to scan each and every visitor to major event venues worldwide. He wants to do away with end-to-end encryption, so he can snoop on your private conversations. He wants to know when and where you travel and who you travel with. He wants you to eat whatever he says you should eat, drink whatever he says you should drink, think how he wants you to think and know only what he wants you to know. Plus he wants to dictate what goes inside your body.
But he doesn’t want you to know a lot about him.
For instance… continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- ‘Fox guarding the henhouse’: AMA, Vaccine Integrity Project to conduct their own vaccine safety and efficacy reviews
- Macron, Merz, and von der Leyen Defend Expanded Speech Controls
- Keir Starmer-tied think tank paid PR firm to target The Grayzone
- ‘Israel’ threatens to genocide Gaza if Hamas refuses disarmament
- Apple Just Bought A Sinister ‘Pre-Speech’ Tech Company Implicated In Genocide
- Israel’s new West Bank registration process declares Palestinian land ‘state property’
- Two children killed in Palestinian Authority ambush in West Bank; Hamas slams attack as ‘black mark’
- Israel Needs Time Before Another Iran War—Here’s Why
- US seizes oil tanker for ‘defying Trump’s quarantine’
- Ian Proud: Economic Reset with Russia to Save Europe
- If Americans Knew
- In Gaza, “rats run over our faces” – Not a ceasefire Day 129
- Israel-backed border guards, GHF-linked aid – Not a ceasefire Day 128
- Israel battles Palestinian right of return, one Palestinian at a time – Not a ceasefire Day 127
- Noor’s short life of unimaginable suffering
- Israel Destroyed Gaza’s Hospitals. Now It’s Banning Doctors Without Borders.
- Is Spite of What Zionists Say, It’s a Good Thing to Criticize Governments
- Palestinian mother, daughter recount strip searches, harsh conditions in Israeli detention
- Israel used weapons in Gaza that made thousands of Palestinians evaporate
- ADL’s Stats Twist Israel’s Critics Into Antisemites
- Why Is the World Silent When the Gaza Genocide Is Not Over?
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: A 4°C Warmer Beaufort Sea Had ‘No Sea Ice’ 11,700 – 8200 Years Ago
- Unfudging The Data: Dutch Meteorological Institute Reinstates Early 20th Centruy Heat Waves It Had Erased Earlier
- German Gas Crisis…Chancellor Merz Allegedly Bans Gas Debate Ahead of Elections!
- Pollen Reconstructions Show The Last Glacial’s Warming Events Were Global, 10x Greater Than Modern
- Germany’s Natural Gas Storage Level Dwindles To Just 28%… Increasingly Critical
- New Study Rebuts The Assumption That Anthropogenic CO2 Molecules Have ‘Special’ Properties
- Climate Scientist Who Predicted End Of “Heavy Frost And Snow” Now Refuses Media Inquiries
- Polar Bear Numbers Rising And Health Improving In Areas With The Most Rapid Sea Ice Decline
- One Reason Only For Germany’s Heating Gas Crisis: Its Hardcore-Dumbass Energy Policy
- 130 Years Later: The CO2 Greenhouse Effect Is Still Only An Imaginary-World Thought Experiment
Aletho News 