Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Censorship Industrial Complex

Canadian bishops condemn Liberal ‘hate speech’ proposal that could criminalize quoting Scripture

Published

5 minute read

 From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Canada’s Catholic bishops have condemned the proposed amendments to Bill C-9 warning that quoting the Bible in good faith could become punishable by up to two years in prison.

The Canadian Catholic bishops have condemned proposed restrictions on quoting religious texts, which would potentially criminalize sharing Bible passages.

In a December 4 letter to Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) advocated against proposed amendments to Bill C-9, the “Combating Hate Act,” to allow Canadians to be punished for quoting Scripture.

“[T]he proposed elimination of the ‘good faith’ religious-text defence raises significant concerns,” the letter, signed by CCCB President Bishop Pierre Goudreault, explained. “This narrowly framed exemption has served for many years as an essential safeguard to ensure that Canadians are not criminally prosecuted for their sincere, truth-seeking expression of beliefs made without animus and grounded in long-standing religious traditions.”

Goudreault pointed out that “the removal of this provision risks creating uncertainty for faith communities, clergy, educators, and others who may fear that the expression of traditional moral or doctrinal teachings could be misinterpreted as hate speech and could subject the speaker to proceedings that threaten imprisonment of up to two years.”

“As legal experts have noted, the public’s understanding of hate-speech and its legal implications are often far broader than what the Criminal Code actually captures,” the letter continued. “Eliminating a clear statutory safeguard will likely therefore have a chilling effect on religious expression, even if prosecutions remain unlikely in practice.”

In conclusion, Goudreault recommended that Liberals either scrap the proposed amendment or issue a statement clarifying that “good-faith religious expression, teaching, and preaching will not be subject to criminal prosecution under the hate-propaganda provisions.”

He further suggested that the Liberals “commit to broad consultation with religious leaders, legal experts, and civil liberties organizations before any amendments are made to Bill C-9 that would affect religious freedom.”

“We believe it is possible to achieve the shared objective of promoting a society free from genuine hatred while also upholding the constitutional rights of millions of Canadians who draw moral and spiritual guidance from their faith traditions,” the letter continued.

As LifeSiteNews reported earlier this week, inside government sources revealed that Liberals agreed to remove religious exemptions from Canada’s hate speech laws, as part of a deal with the Bloc Québécois to keep Liberals in power.

Now, the Bloc amendment seeks to further restrict free speech. The amendment would remove the “religious exemption” defense, which has historically protected individuals from conviction for willful promotion of hatred if the statements were made “in good faith” and based on a “religious subject” or a “sincerely held” interpretation of religious texts such as passages from the Bible, Quran, or Torah.

As a result, quoting the Bible, Quran, or Torah to condemn abortion, homosexuality, or LGBT propaganda could be considered criminal activity.

Shortly after the proposed amendment was shared on social media, Conservatives launched a petition, calling “on the Liberal government to protect religious freedom, uphold the right to read and share sacred texts, and prevent government overreach into matters of faith.”

Already, in October, Liberal MP Marc Miller said that certain passages of the Bible are “hateful” because of what it says about homosexuality and those who recite the passages should be jailed.

“Clearly there are situations in these texts where these statements are hateful,” Miller said. “They should not be used to invoke or be a defense, and there should perhaps be discretion for prosecutors to press charges.”

His comments were immediately blasted by Conservative politicians throughout Canada, with Alberta provincial Conservative MLA and Minister of Municipal Affairs Dan Williams saying, “I find it abhorrent when MPs sitting in Ottawa – or anyone in positions of power – use their voice to attack faith.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

CBDC Central Bank Digital Currency

Can the COVID Scamsters Stick the Landing?

Published on

But it’s another thing altogether for those conspirators to follow through on that psyop and actually achieve their desired end goal: the erection of the biosecurity state.

For those of us who managed to maintain our sanity over the last five years, the question is not whether COVID was a psyop—the answer to that question was obvious from the start—but whether the COVID conspirators have accomplished their objectives.

So, where do we stand in 2025? Did the COVID scamsters win?

This Substack is reader-supported.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Lockdowns

One of the intended effects of the COVID psyop was to take the concept of lockdowns and social distancing from the realm of obscure authoritarian fantasy to stone-cold reality.

As I pointed out in my 2020 video on “What NO ONE is Saying About The Lockdowns,” the idea of using school shutdowns, mandatory lockdowns and social distancing as pandemic prevention measures was first floated by Albequerque high school student Laura Glass for her local science fair project. (For those who are interested, she won third place!)

Prior to 2020, the notion of locking down healthy populations to prevent the spread of disease was still pie-in-the-sky fantasy. No government had seriously attempted to impose lockdowns or social distancing on a mass scale and the very thought of mass quarantines and government-imposed, electronically monitored lockdowns would have been laughed off as conspiracy paranoia.

On the other side of the 2020 divide, however, lockdowns became not only thinkable but an essential tool in the biosecurity state’s toolbelt.

Since 2020, for example, we have seen the extent to which lockdowns penetrated the popular imagination reflected in such ideas as “climate lockdowns.” After all, if locking people in their homes worked for a planetary health emergency, why not use it for a planetary climate emergency?

Yet another example of the mindset shift that has occurred over the past five years arrived last week when the UK Covid-19 Inquiry delivered its verdict that the lockdowns the UK government imposed during the scamdemic were “too little, too late“ and that they could have saved 23,000 lives by locking down earlier.

This is, of course, nonsense. Actually, it’s worse than nonsense; it’s nonsense based on made-up numbers from a known liar. As Off-Guardian point out in their (shadow-banned) tweet on the subject:

For those who don’t know, the tweet is referring to this passage from the inquiry’s report:

Professor Ferguson told the Inquiry that in later work which analyzed the impact of restrictions in England: “we explicitly modelled the counterfactual scenario of moving the lockdown of 23rd March back to 16th March, and estimated mortality … would have been reduced by 48%.“ That could have equated to a reduction in deaths in England from 48,600 to approximately 25,600 in the first wave up to 1 July 2020.

“Professor Ferguson” is, lest we forget, Neil Ferguson, the “virus modeller” (or should that be the “Liberal Lysenko“?) from Imperial College London who produced the computer model suggesting that 500,000 Britons were destined for the grave unless the UK government imposed a national lockdown. Ferguson has since walked back that claim and now denies calling for a lockdown at all, but it should be kept in mind that his about-face came after he was caught breaking the UK lockdown restrictions to carry on an affair with his married lover.

This is also the same Neil Ferguson who used his amazing “virus modeling” powers to predict 50,000 deaths from the UK’s 2002 mad cow outbreak (actual number of deaths: 177) and up to 200 million deaths from a potential, theoretical bird flu outbreak (which has yet to arrive).

Ferguson’s projection of what could have resulted if the government had locked down faster and earlier suffers from the same “garbage in, garbage out” tomfoolery as the Club of Rome’s environmental apocalypticism. Keep in mind that the number of people who would supposedly have been saved by a quicker UK lockdown is based on a fundamentally flawed input: the number of people who the UK government assert died of COVID. Those of us who called out the scam from the start have been noting for years that these COVID death tolls are statistical chicanery, since they rely on the fraudulent claim that everyone who died with COVID—as measured by the scientifically meaningless PCR test—had in fact died of COVID.

In other words, Ferguson’s numbers are plucked out of thin air and aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. They should not be taken seriously by anyone, whatever their opinion on the efficacy of lockdowns.

But, as usual, the damage has been done. The controlled establishment media has run their headlines about the lives that could have been saved by earlier lockdowns, and the type of people who still get their news from these mockingbird repeaters will now be more certain than ever that social distancing and quarantining populations is the right thing to do in the event of a declared health emergency.

Chalk that one up as a win for the COVID scamsters.

QR Codes, Vaccine Passports and Digital ID

Even more important to the would-be medical tyrants than the normalization of lockdowns and social distancing, however, was the creation of the technological infrastructure upon which the biosecurity state is enabled. This digital infrastructure includes:

If you’ve read about my recent experience trying to order breakfast in Malaysia, you’ll know that, once again, the COVIDians have been remarkably successful in achieving their objectives. As I found out during that Malaysian sojourn, scanning QR codes to access online menus and using cashless payment systems to pay for purchases is becoming so normalized in certain parts of the world that it can be difficult to so much as order breakfast without a smartphone and cellular service. Indeed, the smartphone has become a virtual prerequisite for participation in the public space, and it was the scamdemic that allowed the shift to 100% dependence on smartphones to take place.

One recent demonstration of this smartphone requirement for participation in public life came from an email I received this week from a Corbett Reporter in Canada. He was trying to send a registered letter to the US via Canada Post but was informed that his addressed envelope alone would no longer do. Instead, he now had to fill out an online form and print off a special tracking number in order to mail the item. Not owning a smartphone, he was out of luck. He would have to go home, fill out the online forms on his desktop, print out the paperwork and bring it back to the post office. He opted not to send the letter, vowing instead to never again mail anything to the US.

Living in Japan as I do, the only surprising part of his story is that Canada held off making this change in their postal system for so long. Japan Post implemented the same electronic system for international mail four years ago. Of course, at that time the COVID border closures and postal delivery issues were used as the excuse for the intrusive new policy. But, given that country after country is now bringing in similar measures, the reality is clear: the change to a computer-dependent postal system is a global directive that was pushed, using the cover of COVID contagion, during the scamdemic. The end result is that one must either carry their smartphone with them at all times or spend extra time at home filling out online forms and printing off paperwork if they want to send mail internationally.

Of course, all of these technological “upgrades” to our daily experience—from the smartphone postal system to the QR code menus to the cashless payment systems—serve the same agenda. They are meant to pave the way toward the apotheosis of the biosecurity state: the consolidation of all our information into a single government-issued digital identity app. Soon, we will be giving the government real-time access to all of our daily movements, transactions and interactions and will be signing in with government-issued digital credentials everywhere we go online and in real life.

In the event of the next scamdemic, the scammers will hardly have to do anything at all. The QR code check-ins, vaccine passport checks and cashless payments will already be so much a part of our daily life that we’ll hardly notice any new scamdemic-related restrictions on our activities.

That’s another win for Team COVID. But they’re not done yet.

Clot shots

Another key goal of the scamdemic, of course, was to fast track government approval of mRNA and DNA “vaccine” technologies.

We know this, of course, because the conspirators told us as much in their own words. Who can forget the October 2019 Milken Institute-hosted discussion on the “Universal Flu Vaccine“? In case you have forgotten, that was the conference in which such luminaries as Tony Fauci and Rick Bright lamented that the poor, beleaguered Big Pharma corporations were going to have to spend billions of dollars and at least a decade of hard work proving the safety and efficacy of their DNA/mRNA injection techniques…unless some health emergency arose to justify the emergency approval of these experimental technologies.

So, were Fauci and Bright and their co-conspirators successful in their fast-tracking task? Did they circumvent a decade of regulatory approval work for their Big Pharma buddies? Well, if the point was to invoke a health emergency to get emergency approval for these clot shot monstrosities, then we need look no further than “Operation Warp Speed” for proof that the COVID conspirators were, in fact, remarkably successful.

And let’s never forget that Trump considers the Warp Speed MAGA jabs to be “one of the greatest things ever in politics or in the military!”

Lest there be any doubt about Trump’s devotion to this technology, let’s not forget that he hosted an event launching his $500 billion AI-pushing “Stargate” project on his third day in office earlier this year, at which Larry Ellison discussed using AI to develop personalized mRNA cancer vaccines. And just two months ago, Bill Gates used his place of honor at a White House banquet to boast that he and Trump were discussing “vaccines and gene editing” in their joint effort to “tak[e] American innovation to the next level.”

But this isn’t just about Trump, and it isn’t just about what’s happening in the US. This is a worldwide agenda. And, if this smattering of headlines from the past few months is any indication, the COVID era has given a gigantic shot in the arm (pun intended) to the clot shot “vaccine” manufacturers:

Experimental mRNA flu vaccine shows superior efficacy against symptomatic illness (just don’t ask about the side effects)

COVID Vaccine Tech May Reduce Disabilities in Snakebite Victims

Personalized mRNA Vaccines Will Revolutionize Cancer Treatment—If Funding Cuts Don’t Doom Them

The Dawn of Personalized DNA Vaccines

Immuno Cure and PharmaJet collaborate to advance a novel HIV therapeutic DNA vaccine using needle-free technology in humans

And, exactly in line with my reporting in Who Is Bill Gates? there’s this recent report

New Gates-Funded Microneedle Patch Implant Installs Both mRNA and Quantum Dot Markings Into the Body

Yes, it’s safe to say we are now ensconced in the era of genetic intervention masquerading as “vaccines.”

That’s another win for the WHO mafia.

Mission Accomplished?

I could go on. I haven’t even mentioned yet the passage of the WHO’s pandemic treaty or how its provisions actually encourage the work of the bioweapons industry…in the name of “defense” against such weapons, naturally. (A “poor man’s nuke,” anyone?)

But you get the point. Just as it’s difficult to deny that the COVID scamdemic was the biggest psyop of our lifetime, it’s equally difficult to deny that the perpetrators of that scam have been remarkably successful, achieving so many of their 2030 Agenda items in one fell swoop.

So, did the conspirators win?

The answer to this question is even more important than it might seem at first glance. History, as we know, is written by the winners, so if the WHO goons and their string-pullers and paymasters did indeed win, then our grandchildren will grow up learning about the terrible plague that threatened to wipe out the global population in 2020. They’ll read about how some crazy kooks resisted the loving lockdowns of the government and warned against the life-saving vaccines. They’ll truly believe we were only saved by the skin of our teeth thanks to our benevolent masters imposing lockdowns, mRNA clot shots and masks on us all (though they should have locked us down sooner and harder!).

This is why spreading the truth about these events is so vital. We must not let the lies stand. If these lies are written into the history books, then the conspirators really have won.

If you agree with me, share this report (or at least the evidence linked herein) with someone you love.


Like this type of essay? Then you’ll love The Corbett Report Subscriber newsletter, which contains my weekly editorial as well as recommended reading, viewing and listening.

If you’re a Corbett Report member, you can sign in to corbettreport.com and read the newsletter today.

Not a member yet? Sign up today to access the newsletter and support this work.

Are you already a member and don’t know how to sign in to the website? Contact me HERE and I’ll be happy to help you get logged in!


Subscribe to The Corbett Report

Thousands of paid subscribers
James Corbett writes about politics and society from an independent perspective
Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

Foreign Leaders Caught Orchestrating Campaign To Censor American Right-Wing Media Companies

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Mariane Angela

Foreign political figures aligned with the United Kingdom’s ruling establishment quietly coordinated an international effort to suppress American right-leaning media.

Labour Party files — including internal documents never before released — reveal a coordinated series of maneuvers, strategic deceptions and covert operations that helped deliver U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer to Downing Street,   according to the book by investigative journalist Paul Holden. The campaign operated largely behind the scenes that mirrored the same tactics a corporate, pro-Israel faction inside the Labour Party used to crush dissent during Jeremy Corbyn’s rise, a strategy that dismantled the party’s left flank and reshaped British politics.

Holden’s reporting shows that these operatives built an array of anti-disinformation groups that presented themselves as neutral fact-checkers while aggressively targeting conservative outlets for demonetization, deplatforming and reputational damage. Internal documents and interviews indicate these organizations were never independent; they worked in lockstep with senior Labour figures who sought to contain populist movements on both sides of the Atlantic.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

Labour officials celebrated an unexpected election surge in 2017, unaware that a faction inside their own party had been covertly diverting resources to undermine Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership. Holden’s investigation reveals that senior Labour bureaucrats secretly operated a parallel campaign from Ergon House, funneling money and support to anti-Corbyn candidates while starving the official operation of crucial funds.

A 2020 leaked internal report (860-page dossier) revealed deep factional divisions inside the Labour Party and showed that senior staff privately opposed Corbyn’s leadership and expressed hope that Labour would underperform in the 2017 election.

The book shows that the misuse of donations was far more extensive than previously known and may have breached election spending laws, especially in constituencies where diverted money was reported incorrectly. The party’s refusal to release campaign materials tied to this funding has intensified criticism of its transparency and raised questions about Starmer’s promise to restore trust in government.

After the 2017 election, strategist Morgan McSweeney began shaping Labour Together into an anti-Corbyn vehicle, using wealthy donors and newly created advocacy groups to amplify allegations that would weaken Corbyn’s support. Holden documents that McSweeney failed to report more than £700,000 (approximately $885,000 to $900,000) in donations despite being legally obligated to disclose them, a violation that later resulted in fines.

BBC News reported in 2022 that Labour Together was fined £14,250 (approximately $18,000) for failing to declare more than £730,000 in donations, confirming that key figures in Starmer’s political orbit had already breached U.K. election transparency laws.

By 2019, McSweeney had aligned himself with Starmer’s leadership ambitions, helping him run as a continuity candidate despite planning a sharp ideological shift once in power. Holden concludes that this project ultimately hollowed out Labour’s credibility, leaving the party mired in collapsing public confidence and confronting mounting questions about the integrity of its top advisers.

(Featured Image Media Credit: UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer/picture by Simon Dawson/Flickr)

Continue Reading

Trending

X