The Ugly Truth of Eric Weinstein and ‘The Intellectual Dark Web’
Matt Ehret | October 20, 2024
What is Eric Weinstein’s role behind the mass migration policies of the UN? What else is lurking behind this strange thing dubbed ‘the Intellectual Dark web’? Find out by watching this first of a two part Canadian Patriot Review interview with Johnny Vedmore.
To watch part two, become a paid follower of matthewehret.substack.com
Follow Johnny Vedmore’s work here:
https://linktr.ee/JohnnyVedmore
**********************************************
1) Make a donation to the Canadian Patriot
https://www.patreon.com/canadianpatriot
https://canadianpatriot.org/support-us/
2) Subscribe to Matt and Cynthia’s Substack
https://matthewehret.substack.com/
https://cynthiachung.substack.com/
3) Buy some books!
https://canadianpatriot.org/untold-history-of-canada-books/
4) Subscribe to our Telegram Channels
https://t.me/CanadianPatriotPress
On Rumble
https://rumble.com/user/MattEhret
On Bitchute:
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/FPD8fbk6o541/
On Odysee:
https://odysee.com/@canadianpatriotpress3573:4
On Soundcloud:
https://soundcloud.com/mattehret
‘Childish Temper Tantrums’ – Australian Councilor Fires Back at Pressure From Authorities
By Anatoly Donstov – Sputnik – 24.10.2024
Following his powerful interview with Sputnik, Adrian McRae, businessman and member of the Town of Port Hedland Council in Australia, has been urged to resign by Western Australia Premier Roger Cook in a desperate attempt to silence him.
“Earlier this week, before the Premier had heard I was in Russia, he suggested that the entire Town of Port Hedland Council should get back to “knitting” when we demanded him to show us evidence that the Covid-19 vaccines were safe… So, instead of acting like a true leader, … he attacks me personally and resorts to ad-hominem – the last refuge of a failed argument. I feel sorry for him actually. I don’t know what I’d do if I was in his shoes,” McRae told Sputnik, explaining Cook’s “contempt” towards him and “all West Australian Councilors.”
On Wednesday, the Premier called for the resignation of McRae, labeling him “an embarrassment” after his interview with Sputnik, ABC reported. In the interview, the businessman criticized Australian and Western media for biased coverage of Russia and challenged the narrative portraying Moscow as the enemy.
McRae warned that free speech is under threat in the West, while BRICS countries still offer hope for its protection. As an observer in the 2024 Russian presidential election, McRae praised the transparency of the process, drawing heavy criticism from Australian media.
“It’s simple. The Premier is using the boogeyman of Russia to attempt to ruin my character in hopes of people forgetting about the important questions my entire Council has asked him regarding the mRNA vaccine contamination. He is deflecting the subject to the best of his very limited ability and making an absolute fool of himself in the process,” McRae told Sputnik, explaining why Cook has gone to such lengths to smear him.
Despite the Premier’s desperate attempts to suppress the council member, McRae remains a strong voice against Western censorship and political corruption, with Sputnik delivering the uncensored truth that the West fears.
“Sadly for the Premier, I have truth and science on my side. He, on the other hand, has nothing but a dying prostitute media and a really poor scriptwriter. So no, I am not too concerned about the Premier and his childish temper tantrums,” McRae said confidently, undeterred by the threats from the Western Australia Premier.
EU President Likens Free Speech to Infectious Disease
Ursula von der Leyen advocates “pre-bunking” in the public forum to “vaccinate” people against “disinformation”
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | October 23, 2024
EU President Ursula von der Leyen just joined the ranks of former Senator John Kerry and other globalist ghouls in declaring war on free speech by perversely proclaiming that the EU citizenry needs to be “vaccinated against disinformation.”
Like every censor in history, she characterizes her censorship program as a means of expunging erroneous information and ideas from public discourse. By using the word “disinformation,” she implies that she and her clique are already the sole possessors of the truth about everything, and that everyone who has and shares heterodox ideas is necessarily in error.
Her entire premise is FALSE for the following reasons:
1). Knowledge about the world is constantly evolving through constant inquiry, discussion, and dissemination. Knowledge is NOT a static thing. This is why countries with stifling censorship regimes have experienced intellectual, scientific, and artistic stagnation. Their rulers try to freeze the human mind in its state at their moment in history.
2). NO state, university, or ecclesiastical committee has ever been in possession of the full truth of any matter. Official orthodoxies have always been challenged by heterodox thinkers. Indeed, virtually every major advance in human insight has been performed by heterodox thinkers.
3). As John Milton observed in his 1644 pamphlet, Areopagitica, contending with error is an intrinsic part of learning and discovery. We literally learn by making mistakes and correcting them. If free speech is suppressed for the objective of preventing the propagation of erroneous thought—or “vaccinating against it”—it will become extremely difficult if not impossible for people to learn and discover.
4). Without a single exception in history, the people who hold power always advocate the orthodoxy that sustains and extends their power and that of their friends and supporters.
Ursula von der Leyen is the quintessence of this principle. As president of the EU, she conducted secret negotiations with Pfizer CEO to purchase a 20 billion Euros of Pfizer’s fraudulent and dangerous vaccine so that it could be inflicted on all the citizens of the European Union. She is currently under criminal investigation for her conduct in this affair that has come to be known as Pfizergate.
It takes a special kind of chutzpah for a powerful state official who is probably guilty of committing a major crime—a crime that has been systematically and ruthlessly concealed—to lecture the public about the need for censorship. The time has come for the citizens of Europe to rid themselves of Ursula von der Leyen and her clique of corrupt tyrants.
To be sure, there is increasing evidence that the Biden Administration has been exerting pressure on Germany—which remains an American vassal state—and the EU to step up its censorship regime. I will cover this strange development in a subsequent post.
Germany Is the EU’s Censorship Champion

By Robert Kogon | Brownstone Institute | October 22, 2024
Note that X, rebranded as a “free speech platform,” provides information on platform users to the governments of EU member states in connection with not just illegal speech — and, yes, national legislation in EU countries includes many “speech crimes” — but also legal speech that is deemed “harmful.”
This is the real innovation involved in the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA): It creates an obligation for platforms to take action in the form of “content moderation” against not just illegal content, but also ostensibly harmful content such as “disinformation.” Note that in the period covered in X’s latest “Transparency Report” to the EU on its “content moderation” efforts, nearly 90% of such requests for information on the purveyors of ostensibly “illegal or harmful speech” came from just one country: Germany. See the below chart.

Note that X also takes action against posts or accounts for “illegal or harmful speech” that is reported to it by EU member states or the European Commission. Such action may involve deletion or geo-blocking (“withholding”) of content. But, as the “enforcement options” linked in the report make clear, it can also involve various forms of “visibility filtering” or restricting engagement — “in accordance with our Freedom of Speech, Not Reach enforcement philosophy,” as the report puts it.
Here again, Germany is top of the table, having submitted 42% of all the reports to X on “illegal or harmful speech” and nearly 50% of the reports from member states. See the chart below. Germany submitted nearly twice as many reports as any other member state — France finished a distant second — and over ten times more reports than comparably-sized Italy. The European Commission submitted around 15% of the reports.

It is also notable that Germany submitted by far the most reports on content entailing “negative effects on civic discourse or elections,” yet another category of speech that is clearly not illegal per se but that is deemed “harmful” enough under the DSA regime to require suppression. (Hence, while the content is not per se illegal, it would be illegal for platforms under the DSA not to suppress it. This ambiguity is at the very heart of the DSA censorship regime.) Germany submitted well over half of all such reports and over 60% of the reports from member states.
Finally, it is worth noting that the overwhelming majority of these reports and the related “enforcement actions” undoubtedly involve English-language content. This can be gleaned from the fact that nearly 90% of X’s “content moderation team” consists of English speakers. The “primary language” of 1,535 of the team’s 1,726 members is English, as can be seen in the below chart.

But why should Germany or the EU be accorded any jurisdiction over English-language discourse? Needless to say, Germans are not as a rule native English speakers and only 1.5% of the total EU population has English as their mother tongue.
In any case, two things are very clear from X’s “Transparency Report.” One is that Elon Musk’s “free speech platform” is not that and is in fact devoting enormous resources, both in terms of “trained” human censors and programming, to complying with the EU’s censorship regime. And the other is that Germany is the EU’s — and hence undoubtedly the world’s — undisputed, online censorship champion.
There were 226,350 “enforcement actions” taken by X in response to reports from EU member states or the EU Commission in the reporting period covering barely more than three months. This is to say nothing of the “enforcement actions” taken proactively by X in accordance with its own DSA-compatible terms of service and rules.
Lest readers have trouble reconciling the foregoing with the viral kerfuffle between Elon Musk and Thierry Breton and the famous “proceedings” against X that were initiated under Breton’s leadership, please see Jordi Calvet-Bademunt’s helpful account of the “preliminary findings” of the EU Commission’s investigation here.
According to a new Bloomberg report, EU officials are even contemplating taking into account the revenues of some of Musk’s other companies in calculating a potential fine against him. Needless to say, despite the fact that the sources are unnamed, this has been widely construed as a further escalation in a mammoth free speech struggle between Musk and the EU.
But as Calvet-Bademunt’s analysis shows, the EU’s case against X, as it now stands, has nothing to do with insufficient “content moderation” — or, in other words, censorship — but merely concerns other, more arcane, aspects of the DSA.
Interestingly, the original proceedings opened against X did indeed involve “content moderation” and — believe it or not – could even have had a positive impact on freedom of speech, since X was ostensibly being investigated not for failing to remove or suppress user content, but rather for failing to inform users about such “content moderation decisions” or, in other words, shadowbanning. But, as Calvet-Bademunt shows, this aspect has been dropped from the investigation.
The fact of the matter, in any case, is that no online platform of any size can remain on the EU market and be a “free speech platform.” The DSA makes this impossible.
Robert Kogon is the pen name of a widely-published journalist covering European affairs.
Pro-censorship NGO working with White House to ‘kill Musk’s Twitter’ – report
RT | October 22, 2024
The Center for Countering Digital Hate, a UK-based nonprofit tied to the Labour Party, aims to “kill” Elon Musk’s X platform with help from top Democrats in Washington, according to internal documents leaked by a whistleblower. Musk has declared “war” on the organization in response.
In several monthly planners distributed to staffers this year, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) lists “Kill Musk’s Twitter” as its top annual priority, according to files leaked to journalists Matt Taibbi and Paul Thacker and published on Tuesday. In furtherance of this goal, CCDH staffers are told that they will “focus” on advertising, “trigger EU and UK regulatory action,” and “progress towards change in USA and support for STAR.”
An acronym for ‘Safety, Transparency, Accountability and Responsibility’, STAR is a proposed censorship bill that would create an “independent digital regulator” in the US who could “impose consequences for harmful content.”
In its efforts to build support for these goals, the CCDH contacted Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) in May, and organized an invitation-only conference in Washington the following month, which whistleblowers claimed was attended by a senior adviser at the White House, a Democratic Party staffer in the office of Representative Adam Schiff (D-California), US State Department officials, and the vice president of Media Matters for America, a Democrat-aligned ‘watchdog’ group.
Musk sued Media Matters earlier this year after the organization released a report claiming that advertisements could be seen alongside pro-Nazi posts on X. Musk called the report “manufactured,” and his lawsuit alleges that its sole purpose was to “drive advertisers from the platform and destroy X Corp.”
Musk purchased Twitter for $44 billion in 2022, rebranding the platform as X and rolling back most of its censorship policies. Within days of Musk’s purchase, the White House announced the creation of the now-defunct ‘Disinformation Governance Board,’ ridiculed by conservatives and free speech advocates as an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth.” A week later, the CCDH joined two dozen other liberal NGOs in calling for an advertiser boycott of X.
The CCDH was founded by Morgan McSweeney, chief of staff to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and former director of Labour Together, a think tank closely associated with Starmer’s Labour Party. Labour Together has been advising US Vice President Kamala Harris’ election campaign, and more than 100 Labour Party activists are currently campaigning for Harris in the US.
CCDH CEO Imran Ahmed, who worked with McSweeney at Labour Together, aided Starmer’s rise to power by leading advertiser boycotts against his left-wing opponents. Among these opponents was ‘The Canary’, a leftist news site driven out of business over accusations of anti-Semitism from the CCDH and its subsidiary, ‘Stop Funding Fake News’.
In the US, the CCDH has lobbied the White House to censor Covid-19-related “disinformation,” unsuccessfully tried to get similar content banned from Substack, and led multiple campaigns against Musk.
According to internal documents, Ahmed is aware that the CCDH’s activities risk crossing a line between advocacy and lobbying, which is illegal for nonprofits. Before scheduling meetings with lawmakers earlier this year, someone in the organization advised staff to “understand our limitations” as a nonprofit organization, but still to “inch towards our goal of regulatory action.”
In a series of posts on X on Tuesday, Musk pronounced the CCDH “a criminal organization,” and declared that “this is war.”
Everyone who opposes genocide is bad
But journalists who oppose genocide are the worst
Laura and Normal Island News | October 18, 2024
It has been brought to my attention that British counter-terrorism police visited the home of a man under suspicion of practising journalism. Disgustingly, the man had been raising awareness of Israel’s genocide, and therefore had to be dealt with. The man, who I am reluctant to name out of fear of making him a martyr, is called Asa Winstanley. He is one of the most prominent figures in the worrying wave of radicals who believe genocide is wrong, even when Israel does it.
Thankfully, counter-terrorism police found an excuse to harass Winstanley, even though they had no evidence of terrorism. The thing about counter-terrorism police is they’re supposed to go after terrorists, and no one thinks Winstanley is a terrorist.
Police therefore told Winstanley he is not under arrest, but they’re confiscating his devices on the off-chance they can find evidence. This would be like regular police saying we have no evidence you’re a paedo, but we’re snooping through your hard drive anyway!
Would you feel comfortable being accused of a horrible crime without evidence? If you’ve done nothing wrong, you should be perfectly happy with this grotesque violation of your privacy!
Natural justice is when police harass people they don’t like until they find an excuse to jail them. I’m just praying police find something incriminating on Winstanley’s hard drive, such as the image of a Palestinian flag. If they find one of those, they should bloody well throw the book at him.
Sadly, there is every chance police don’t find anything on the innocent man, but they will probably keep his devices anyway. If they do, he will be out of pocket when he replaces them, and in the meantime, he won’t be able to work. The scumbag won’t be able to raise awareness of the plight of the Palestinians who are being mangled by the weapons we’re supplying.
It’s hoped this sort of intimidation will make others think twice about doing the right thing. If the public fully understood the role our rulers are playing in genocide, they would demand their prosecutions. Therefore, the only thing we can do is prosecute those who attempt to tell the truth. I’m sure you will agree this is sensible. However, if you disagree because you too object to genocide, it’s not too late to change your mind.
Simply copy and paste the following words to social media and the judge is likely to give you a reduced sentence:
I would like to apologise for my attempts to stop Israel’s genocide over the past year. I realise now that I was wrong. I only hope my words have not caused distress to the people who are committing genocide or the people who are supporting genocide. I would like to apologise unreservedly to those people and to anyone whose minds I may have polluted with dangerous ideas like “human rights” and “international law”. I only hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me. Now that my thoughts have been corrected, I would kindly ask that police go gentle on me and the courts show lenience. I will never attempt to do journalism again.
Can I just be the first to say fuck journalism? I don’t mean the brilliant corporate journalism that I do, I’m talking about real journalism. Real journalism can go and fuck itself! Anyways, copy and paste the above words and police are likely to cut your beating by thirty minutes and the judge should reduce your sentence to five years. Let’s be honest you deserve so much worse, you fucking do-gooder.
Religious Leaders Push Back Against Australia’s Controversial Speech Bill
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | October 21, 2024
Australia’s “misinformation and disinformation” bill is being criticized by several Christian and Muslim leaders, concerned about the way its provisions might negatively influence religious discourse.
The Communications Legislation Amendment (Combating Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024 is designed to give the government’s communications and media regulator ACMA new powers regarding enforcement of rules that concern online content.
Some reports describe those powers as “broad” and the language of the proposed law also comes across as vague – the word “reasonably verifiable” is there to describe when content can be branded as misleading, false, deceptive, or is “reasonably likely” to cause serious harm.
That the bill excludes “content shared for religious purposes” was not enough to put Australia’s religious leaders’ minds at ease.
For one, platforms must use a number of tests related to “reasonableness” (of content being false, misleading, harmful, etc.), and the process could undermine the exception as these companies can be “reasonably” expected to censor more than necessary, in order to avoid paying fines.
In addition, online religious content will be subject to stricter rules than that which is offline, the signatories of a submission believe, and see the standard of “reasonableness” falling “far below Australia’s obligations under international human rights instruments.”
“We have significant concerns about the overall effect of the Bill on the free dissemination of ideas in the public sphere—in particular, religious speech and debate,” reads the document signed by the Sydney Diocese of the Anglican Church of Australia, the Shia Muslim Council of Australia, Australian Baptist Ministries, Presbyterian Church of Australia, Seventh Day Adventist Church of Australia, Hillsong Australia.
The submission was joined by the New South Wales (NSW) Council of Churches, and the Christian Schools Association.
The signatories state that the bill “places significant constraints on digital communications platform providers and incentivizes them to over-censor content on the possibility that it might be ‘harmful’.”
And despite “religious purposes content” being excluded, Australia’s religious leaders fear that the way the future law defines “misinformation” and “disinformation” is broad enough to allow ACMA to go after what they call “legitimate, good faith expression of religious, moral, and political opinions.”
Another submission against the bill came from Christ the Good Shepherd Church, which was in April the site of a stabbing attack when a priest was wounded. The authorities then used this incident to beat the “online disinformation” drum even harder and press for more censorship.
But this Church opposes such an approach, calling it out for exploiting tragic events for “political gain.”
“The attempt to manipulate public discourse by using this incident is deeply troubling on the state of politics in Australia,” Father Daniel wrote on behalf of the Church.
But, the bill also has its supporters – one being the Uniting Church in Australia Synod of Victoria and Tasmania.
Canada’s State-Funded Legacy Media Unite to Combat “Disinformation”
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | October 21, 2024
A large number of state-funded legacy public broadcasters from around the world have joined the Ottawa Declaration, which calls for combating “disinformation.”
Among the declaration’s points is the one that goes into what its authors – CBC/Radio-Canada – refer to as “accountability from social media platforms.” The document wants to have these platforms implement “safeguards and processes to address where disinformation is disseminated.”
We obtain a copy of the document for you here.
CBC was joined in this and a number of other demands by the world’s largest public legacy media organization, the Public Media Alliance, and its Global Task Force.
Members of that task force are the likes of ABC, BBC, France TV, Germany’s ZDF, and CBC/Radio-Canada, among others.
The declaration they supported was adopted at the 2024 Public Broadcasters International conference in Ottawa, and features “public service media” (“PSM”) claiming that their news and coverage are of “high quality” and of the kind that contributes to the “health of democracies all over the world.”
It then cites the demise of many local outlets and asserts there is now a rise in misinformation and disinformation, as well as that “professional news content” struggles with discoverability on the internet.
Altogether, the declaration states, that this represents “a threat to democracy.” The document parrots what politicians in many countries, including the US and Germany, have been saying these last months when it warns about algorithms and malicious actors destabilizing societies by means of disseminating misinformation.
For these reasons, the signatories committed to ensuring wide access to what they consider to be news, “combating disinformation” (and that includes the use of controversial “fact-checkers” but also “verifying content provenance”).
These legacy broadcasters also pledge to restore “civil” democratic debate, and then go into what social media platforms should do.
One demand is to provide distribution of their own content “on fair terms.” And then once again, the declaration returns to “disinformation,” this time in the context of social media.
Legacy broadcasters seem averse to competition but are not above smearing it, and so the document reads that social media platforms “should also have safeguards and processes to address where disinformation is disseminated and impostor content masquerades as professional news media.”
No battle in “the war on disinformation” is complete these days without the mention of “AI.”
The outlets that backed the declaration say they will be complying “with principles of responsible AI use” that will provide them with transparency and “fair use of our content.”
Lights out for the city on the hill

By Stephen Karganovic | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 20, 2024
Throughout the decades of the Cold War, whilst the blocs were competing, two major attractions worked powerfully to the advantage of the West. Firstly, the comfort and prosperity that it was able to provide to its citizens, which its Eastern rivals could hardly match. The second feature that in the eyes of the world gave the West a huge competitive edge was the comparatively better performance of its institutions with regard to individual liberties.
The twin advantages of prosperity and the impression that the West valued freedom successfully neutralised much of the theoretical critique of the capitalist social and economic model. In particular, the West’s ostensible commitment to personal liberties acted as a powerful magnet. As a political weapon it served its purpose effectively. It is indisputable that so long as scrupulous adherence to the rule of law and respect for individual rights were seen as the distinguishing characteristic of Western societies they were widely perceived as a desirable alternative to the competing systems, which often disregarded strict legality and did little to diminish arbitrariness.
This is the state of affairs that prevailed until roughly the 1990s, when the Western bloc finally reached the pinnacle of its global might and was widely perceived as triumphant over its adversaries. But ever since the social gains which had made the lives of common people relatively comfortable and safe, and society cohesive across class lines, are being dismantled throughout the Western world. The sense of legal security that for decades citizens of Western countries unquestionably enjoyed proved equally evanescent. The phenomena of lawless abuse and vulnerability to the powers that be, normal elsewhere but long extirpated from the practice of Western societies and largely faded from the memory of their citizens, have reappeared with a vengeance. On both the domestic and international levels, the “rule of law” rapidly morphed into its unrecognisable caricature. That metamorphosis ultimately became jokingly known as the “rules based order.”
With scant internal opposition or even much public awareness, the core countries of the collective West became infected with the contagion of arbitrariness in the interpretation of inherent human rights and application of legal principles erected to protect them. The transformation, which in historical terms took place with lightning speed, was spearheaded by a ruthless and duplicitous political cabal and was implemented with the connivance of a judiciary which was utterly corrupt and shamefully impotent.
The breakdown of legality is generally a precursor of worse things to come, which almost invariably takes the form of increasingly egregious abuse of power. The point can be illustrated with disturbing but by no means isolated examples of the emerging state of affairs in the countries of the collective West that used to be envied for their freedom. Readers will recall the famous line, “they hate us for our freedom.” The utterance in 2001 of that false assertion whilst doing nothing to advance the cause of freedom did introduce an orgy of destruction and mass slaughter.
The most striking representation of the breakdown of the legal order can be cited today is the illegal kidnapping and incarceration by the German judicial system of German-American lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, under fabricated embezzlement charges. There are many solid reasons for deep state cabal’s virulent hatred of Dr. Fuellmich. He was the spoiler who in 2020 had the temerity to found the Covid pandemic research committee, just as the social control experiment was gaining momentum. The committee’s outstanding work in uncovering the sordid motives and homicidal objectives of the orchestrators of the bogus medical emergency was a major blow to them, especially because it was delivered successfully under conditions of nearly total informational blockade. Dr. Fuellmich’s ultimate, and perhaps overambitious and naively conceived goal of a medical Nurenberg to bring the culprits to justice was never achieved but the very thought of it must have caused nightmares to those he intended to be prosecuted.
“This agenda has been long planned,” Dr. Fuellmich summarised his Committee’s findings. “It’s ultimately unsuccessful precursor was the swine flu some 12 years ago, and it is cooked up by a group of super-rich psychopathic and sociopathic people who hate and fear people at the same time, have no empathy, and are driven by the desire to gain full control over all of us, the people of the world.”
The time came for the psychopaths to seek their sweet revenge, and the operation was not exceedingly difficult because they happen to control the mechanisms of power. Eleven months ago Dr. Fuellmich was imprisoned in Germany on the false allegation of a colleague who had been infiltrated into the Covid Committee that he misused the organisation’s assets for personal benefit. A charge that under German law is a misdemeanour and for which there is no precedent of lengthy pre-trial imprisonment resulted in incarceration that has now lasted for over 400 days under Abu Ghraib conditions, except that it is in Germany and not in Iraq. For a shocking portrayal of those detention conditions, see here. And see here for the disgraceful procedural deficiencies of the trial itself, which is currently in progress, stained by practices incompatible with the image of Rechtsstaat, that Germany along with the collective West regimes associated with it are misleadingly cultivating.
The lawless persecution of Dr. Fuellmich for the “offence” of performing a remarkable public service by uncovering and documenting the fraudulent nature and sinister background of the Covid “pandemic” is, however, but the tip of the iceberg in the collapse of the rule of law in the societies that portray themselves as its champions. Additional examples illustrate the breakdown and flesh out the picture of the legal disarray which undercuts the elementary freedoms of citizens and renders them defenceless before the demands of unaccountable Power.
In Ireland, the entire Burke family of Christian believers who refuse to bend their knee to the dictates of gender ideology is being targeted for vindictive persecution. One of the sons, Enoch, who is a school teacher, has so far spent over 400 days in solitary confinement, like Dr. Fuellmich in Germany. His “offence” is that in formerly Christian and Catholic Ireland he refuses to use the pronoun preferred by one of his students who claims other than his biological gender, because Burke holds that acquiescence to the gender identity charade would be a violation of his religious principles. Enoch Burke is being punished for refusing to debase himself as a professional educator and as a free human being by falsely confessing under the duress of his persecutors that 2 + 2 = 5. Nothing short of such a recantation of his conscientiously held beliefs would satisfy his country’s legal and educational overseers, who have gone berserk. He therefore remains in an Irish prison, despite being assured of instant release if only he manifested submission to their lunatic demand. For an insight into the broad official scope of that lunacy, see here.
Enoch’s brother Simeon, who has completed his law studies with honours, is being excluded from admission to the Irish Bar for reasons that have not yet been revealed with full clarity but which appear to also be related to his firmly held religious world-view, identical to his brother’s, which in contemporary Ireland apparently disqualifies one from working in a professional setting. For good measure, Enoch and Simeon’s father, Enoch Burke Sr., has been punished for objecting to LGBT symbols on Irish postal vehicles. For his temerity, taxpayer Burke was informed that henceforth he may come to the local post office to pick up his mail, but that it will no longer be delivered to him.
As in the Fuellmich case, the collective and exemplary punishment meted out to the Burke family is being kept out of the public eye as much as possible. Political and even religious figures refuse to take a stand or comment on it, and the controlled media studiously avoid discussing the subject.
Not to round off this complex picture of civilizational decline but merely to supplement it with another unsettling detail, the institution of thought crime portrayed in George Orwell’s novel, once considered no more than literary fiction, appears now to be enshrined in British law. For the present it appears to be a pilot programme, perhaps a precursor of even more frightening things to come. It operates as a prohibition of prayer within a designated exclusion perimeter around abortion “clinics” in Great Britain. The incriminating prayer would presumably be for the souls of children that departed this world due to the medical attention that they received in those establishments. The private performance of such unauthorised religious offices is now prohibited as it may cause “harassment and distress” to the employees of the “clinics” and their clients. And ominously, according to the Home Office, “anyone found guilty of breaking the law will face an unlimited fine.” One wonders if the European Court of Human Rights would have anything to say about such open-ended punishment schemes. Was anything of the sort ever before recorded in the annals of civilised jurisprudence?
Interaction between the thought police, who of course are merely “following orders,” and citizens suspected of mentally violating the “law” may be watched here by all who cherish their liberty and human integrity.
Wretched British jurisprudence (sceptics should also see here) now boasts its first successful prosecution of a thought crime violator. British Army veteran Adam Smith-Connor was recently found guilty of silently praying for his aborted son inside an abortion “clinic” buffer zone, was sentenced conditionally to two years in prison, and fined £9000 in costs for His Majesty’s court’s expense and trouble in prosecuting him. The courts still are not imposing “unlimited fines,” as the Home Office recommends, but for a retired person who must support a family arguably even that is a considerable sum.
Smith-Connor, be it noted, is far from the only victim of abortion-related thought crime harassment in the United Kingdom.
And also for the record, the theme here is not one’s personal position on Covid, transgenderism, or abortion. The central issue in every one of the cited instances, and others of a similar nature too numerous to mention, is the evident crumbling in the collective West of the legal order. That now makes it possible to impose on peaceful citizens draconian punishments wholly disproportionate to the alleged conduct they are being accused of. To what limits will the severity of punishment extend, or is it potentially as “unlimited” as the threat of monetary assessment the British Home Office is prepared to impose on those undertaking to silently pray in public for unborn babies?
The famed “City on the Hill” that many had been tricked into believing was illuminating mankind from on high is now forlorn and largely deserted. Its lights are getting progressively dimmer, life in it increasingly intolerable. Its deceived inhabitants and ardent admirers are dispersing in every direction. Word is out that a new City of great luminosity and magnetic attraction is being erected elsewhere, and that its architects will soon meet, in Kazan.
Fired for Free Speech: Alison Morrow’s Battle Against Government Censorship
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | October 19, 2024
Alison Morrow (formally Westover), an accomplished journalist, found herself in the throes of a legal battle over her right to free speech. Represented by the Silent Majority Foundation, Morrow has filed a lawsuit against the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and its top officials, citing wrongful termination after she was dismissed for airing an interview on her YouTube channel. The channel, a personal project crafted during her tenure as an environmental reporter at KING 5 in Seattle, became the subject of controversy following her post featuring a highly censored doctor, Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, and his views on COVID-19.
We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.
Morrow’s career at KING 5, which spanned from 2013 to 2019, was marked by significant accolades, including two Emmy awards. Recognized for her independent journalism, DNR was fully aware of her YouTube activities when they recruited her as a communications specialist. Initially, her independent media pursuits were supported by DNR, but the tide turned with her decision to feature Dr. Kheriaty. DNR’s leadership warned Morrow that her continued interviews could lead to termination, a threat she met with a staunch refusal to abandon her First Amendment protections.
Determined to uphold her freedoms of speech, press, and association, Morrow chose to defy DNR’s directive to adhere to approved narratives. This act of resistance ultimately led to her dismissal, prompting her to seek legal assistance from the Silent Majority Foundation, which took up her case to safeguard these fundamental rights.
“The 1st Amendment is one of the most sacred rights of Americans. It is what differentiates our country from most others, that we have the freedom to question our government. It is also central to a free press. I was willing to lose my job – and all that it provided for our family – in order to stand up against the encroaching erosion of this right that I was witnessing at the time, not just in my case but in thousands of others across the country during the pandemic,” Morrow stated. “There was no way to do science or journalism, in the culture of censorship that was driven by our government at the time. That meant millions of people made decisions without informed consent. Given my commitment to seeking truth wherever it leads, I was unwilling to acquiesce to a demand that I remain silent.”
US, Canada and European countries suppressing Pro-Palestine protests: UN rapporteur

Palestinian Information Center – October 19, 2024
NEW YORK – The UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression has accused the United States, Canada, France, Germany, and Belgium of suppressing the right to protest in support of the Palestinian cause. She also condemned Israeli authorities for carrying out dangerous attacks on media personnel in Palestinian territories, criticizing the assassination of journalists.
In a report submitted to the UN General Assembly and the press on Friday, the special rapporteur, Irene Khan—an “independent” expert with the UN since 2020—accused several European countries of imposing measures to restrict freedom of expression and suppress protests against the massacre in Gaza, as well as banning pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
Khan, a Bangladeshi lawyer working in human rights, referred to “demonstrations at universities in the United States that were violently suppressed,” mentioning the intervention of riot police in New York at the end of April to disperse dozens of pro-Palestinian activists occupying part of Columbia University.
Regarding European countries, Khan specifically mentioned “Germany, which has imposed a complete ban on pro-Palestinian demonstrations since October of last year, along with restrictions on such protests in various regions of Germany since then.” She added that these restrictions have never been imposed on demonstrations in support of Israel, but always on those supporting Palestinians.
She continued that “France attempted to take similar measures, but the courts rejected them, and evaluations are now made on a case-by-case basis,” noting that “Belgium and Canada have adopted similar stances.”
At the beginning of the Israeli extermination war on Gaza over a year ago, the French Interior Ministry called for a ban on pro-Palestinian demonstrations for fear of public disorder. However, the Council of State, the highest administrative court, urged the French government to make decisions on a case-by-case basis.
Khan also criticized Israel for “assaults on media in the occupied Palestinian territories—Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem—targeted assassinations of journalists, arbitrary arrests, and numerous cases of destruction of infrastructure and journalistic equipment in Gaza, as well as refusing to allow international press access.”
The independent rapporteur concluded that “the tightening of censorship in Israel and the occupied territories indicates that Israeli authorities have a strategy to silence critical journalism.”
Since October 7, 2023, the Israeli occupation, with unlimited American support, has been waging an extermination war on Gaza, resulting in over 142,000 dead and injured, the majority of whom are women and children, 10,000 missing, massive destruction of infrastructure, and a deadly famine.
Will A Potemkin Election Follow Biden’s Potemkin Presidency?
By James Bovard | Real Clear Policy | October 18, 2024
President Biden has been derided for being a Potemkin president, a figurehead in a vast charade portraying him actually running the government. Biden was forced to withdraw from the presidential race after his disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump in June. But is a Potemkin presidency being followed by a Potemkin election?
Biden’s expulsion from the presidential race did not herald the arrival of truth. Most of the media still tolerates pervasive secrecy on prime issues of the 2024 campaign.
In bygone times, elections were about self-government. Nowadays, voters merely have a cameo role to sanctify the nearly boundless power of officialdom. Every year, the federal government slaps a “secret” label on trillions of pages of information – enough to fill 20 million filing cabinets. And since the government is automatically benevolent (if a Democrat is president), there is no need to trouble citizens with the grisly details of how they are being served.
At the same time Special Counsel Jack Smith is racing to fling all possible dirt at Trump before Election Day, each week we learn of new cover-ups designed to deceive Americans about how badly they have been misgoverned:
- Biden administration has mostly succeeded in covering up the crime wave by illegal aliens ushered into the nation since 2021. Former Border Patrol Sector Chief Aaron Heitke testified to Congress last month that the Biden administration hid the adverse impact from deluging U.S. cities with illegal aliens, including those with terror ties.
- The National Archives announced on Wednesday that it would delay until after the election the release of potentially damning records on Vice President Joe Biden’s dealings with his son and foreign wheelers-dealers – records that have been sought for more than a year by conservative lawyers and activists.
- Biden’s Justice Department sought to bury all the tax charges against Hunter Biden but were thwarted thanks to courageous IRS whistleblowers. Hunter’s guilty plea last month to the tax charges confirms that the Justice Department’s offer a wrist-slap plea bargain to Hunter last year was a shameless obstruction of justice.
- Biden’s FBI last year created “a new category of extremists that it seeks to track and counter: Donald Trump’s army of MAGA followers,” Newsweek reported. FBI whistleblowers have exposed the politicization of an agency that even secretly targeted traditional Catholics who prefer to hear mass in Latin. But the vast majority of FBI surveillance and entrapment abuses remain shrouded.
- Team Biden is covering up both Trump assassination attempts. Biden appointees have stonewalled bipartisan congressional investigations into the abysmal Secret Service failures at Butler, Pennsylvania. The Justice Department has indefinitely delayed hearings for Ryan Routh, the 58-year-old guy caught waiting to shoot Trump on his Florida golf course. Delaying proceedings against Routh assures that Americans will not learn before the election whether the would-be assassin had ties to the CIA, Pentagon, State Department or other agencies that assisted Routh with his massively-publicized campaign to recruit foreign soldiers to fight for Ukraine.
- The Biden administration continues covering up almost everything regarding its support for Ukraine’s fight against Russia. The best info Americans have received was thanks to a young military computer technician who leaked revelations that the Ukrainian military was in far worse shape than Team Biden claimed. Americans have been forced to pay hundreds of billions of dollars but are left in the dark regarding Biden administration machinations that risk pulling this nation into World War Three.
- The House Oversight Committee this week subpoenaed DHS for its records on Tim Walz’s possible ties to the CCP after being contacted by a whistleblower. There is zero chance that the Biden administration will release any of those records before Election Day.
- Political convenience is practically the sole determinant of what Americans are permitted to learn nowadays. After Biden dropped his re-election bid, the administration disclosed records showing that his son Hunter sought U.S. government handouts for Burisma when Joe Biden was Vice President. That scandal was buried until Joe Biden was no longer politically relevant.
Is censorship the biggest X factor for this election? Four years ago, the presidential election may have been swung by the coverup of the damning revelations in Hunter Biden’s laptop. The FBI and the CIA hustled to censor and defuse that story with false rebuttals in October 2020. According to multiple federal court rulings, federal agencies tampered with the 2020 election by censoring millions of comments by Americans who raised doubts about the trustworthiness of mail-in ballots and other election procedures. Federal judge Terry Doughty noted that “virtually all of the free speech suppressed was ‘conservative’ free speech.” A federal appeals court issued an injunction prohibiting federal officials from acting “to coerce or significantly encourage social-media companies to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce . . . posted social-media content containing protected free speech.”
But the Supreme Court refused to recognize that the censorship victims had any legal standing and canceled the injunction. Americans will likely have no idea how many muzzles and blindfolds were secretly attached by federal agencies and federal contractors before Election Day.
Don’t expect journalists to suddenly get hot to thwart those Biden cover-ups. When the media shrouded Biden’s mental debility, it directly endorsed de facto secret rule. How much effort has the New York Times or Washington Post or National Public Radio exerted to reveal who is actually exercising the supreme power nowadays? Exposing that issue could derail Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign so it is ignored. But Biden is as oblivious as ever. When asked by a reporter on Thursday about the situation in the Hurricane Helene storm zone, Biden replied that those states “are getting everything they need. They are very happy across the board.”
Earth to Uncle Joe?!?
But as long as Donald Trump is not elected next month, most of the Washington media doesn’t care who is in control. If the Wizard of Oz was a contemporary political campaign story, the media would overwhelmingly side with the guy behind the curtain. As long as the Wizard recited “Orange Man Bad,” the media would cover up all his abuses.
But “informed consent” is a mirage if the feds blindfold voters. As long as Team Biden keeps a lid on its worst outrages until Election Day, Democrats can snare four more year to abuse the Constitution, the law, and the American people. Unfortunately, self-government is not retroactive.
James Bovard is a contributing editor for The American Conservative. He is the author of ten books, including Public Policy Hooligan, Attention Deficit Democracy, The Bush Betrayal, and Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty. His latest is Last Rights: The Death of American Liberty.

