International
Is the attempted assassination of anti-globalist Slovakian prime minister a warning of things to come?
Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico
From LifeSiteNews
By Angeline Tan
On April 10 of this year, Fico ominously predicted that assassination attempts like the one on his life could very well happen in his country:
And I’m just waiting for this frustration, intensified by Dennik N, SME or Aktuality (Slovak news), to turn into the murder of some of the leading government politicians.
On May 15, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico was shot in what the country’s Interior Minister Matúš Šutaj Eštok described as a “politically motivated” assassination attempt, according to reports from Euractiv.
Based on eyewitnesses cited by Euractiv, Fico was greeting people at the House of Culture in the Slovak city of Handlová when he was shot.
Eštok cautioned that Slovakia was “on the edge of a civil war” owing to political disagreements with the Fico government, also declaring that Juraj Cintula, the 71-year-old man who fired five bullets at Fico, may have “acted as part of a group of people that had been encouraging each other to carry out an assassination,” as per Reuters reports.
According to local reports, just two hours after Cintula’s attempted killing of Fico, the suspect’s “communication history” online was deleted.
While Slovak authorities found that Cintula had no prior criminal record, he had been outspokein in his opposition to Fico’s government. Materials uploaded on social media depicted Cintula participating in an anti-Fico protest, chanting, “Long live Ukraine!”
Based on reports by Slovak media, Cintula told police that he had planned the attack a few days prior, but that he did not plan on killing Fico.
The CNN news outlet quoted Eštok as saying:
The reasons (the suspect gave) were the decision to abolish the special prosecutor’s office, the decision to stop supplying military assistance to Ukraine, the reform of the public service broadcaster and the dismissal of the judicial council head.
Interestingly, the reactions of mainstream media outlets to Fico’s attack belie their bias against the bullet-ridden Slovak leader, whose Smer-Social Democracy Party won last year’s elections on a campaign that resisted mass migration, guarded national sovereignty against centralized European Union control, and lambasted NATO’s military aid to Ukraine.
For instance, the BBC news outlet had this to say:
Fico has been accused of cosying up to figures like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, which has led some analysts to speculate that he might be trying to steal a page from the regime of a leader described by the European Parliament as running a ‘hybrid regime of electoral autocracy.’
Likewise, the U.K.’s Daily Mail portrayed Fico as a “pro-Putin” “anti-vaxxer”:
Critics argue that he has abandoned Slovakia’s pro-Western course..he is fiercely opposed to immigration and has criticized same-sex marriages. He became the country’s most prominent voice against masks, lockdowns and vaccinations during the Covid pandemic. He is also an admirer of Vladimir Putin and has vowed not to support Ukraine.
Furthermore, Sky News claimed that “Fico has long been a divisive figure,” characterizing the Slovak leader as “pro-Russian, anti-American.” Responding to mainstream media outlets’ “palpable coldness” to Fico’s shooting, particularly that of Sky News, Brendan O’Neill wrote in The Spectator:
A guest commentator said Fico’s views are ‘very divisive in Slovakia’ and ‘very divisive in the EU’. And therefore – wait for it – ‘it’s not surprising that this sort of event might take place’. Got that? Because Fico is a controversial figure, according to the EU anyway, it shouldn’t be a great shock that someone decided to shoot him. It is hands down the most disturbing thing I’ve heard on a mainstream news channel in some time. A democratically elected leader is riddled with bullets, Slovakian democracy itself is horrifically assaulted, and you’re not surprised?
O’Neill added:
The commentator on Sky listed Fico’s supposedly problematic views. He’s a populist and a nationalist, we were informed. Worse, he opposes military aid for Ukraine. What are we saying here? That it is ‘not surprising’ if public figures who hold such views – that nationhood is important, that the EU can be a pain in the backside, that aid to Ukraine should stop – are set upon by maniacs? This strikes me as a very dangerous message.
Fico’s supporters have blamed the onslaught of media villainization of the leader as one of the causes that prompted Cintula to shoot him. Eštok also decried the unfavorable media coverage of Fico:
It was information that you have recently presented. The way you presented them, I think each of you can reflect.
As Conor Gallagher wrote in Naked Capitalism:
… it’s the questioning of the NATO line and opposition to digging the Project Ukraine hole even deeper that got Fico and Smer in hot water with the Atlanticists that run Europe nowadays. Fico and Smer are relentlessly labeled pro-Russia for nothing more than their belief that Project Ukraine is not good for Slovakia. Not that there’s anything wrong with being pro-Russia, but since when does not wanting to go to war with Russia make one ‘pro-Russia’?
In comments about mainstream media portrayals of the Eurosceptic Fico as “pro-Russian,” Sputnik columnist Dmitry Babich said:
Such clichés became commonplace in mainstream European press against any non-systemic political leader who stands for his or her country’s sovereignty or veers from the EU’s ‘common foreign policy,’ not necessarily in unison with Russia.
On the same note, senior research fellow at the Global Policy Institute George Szamuely remarked:
[The alleged shooter is] basically on the same side as all of the EU media, the EU apparat, all the EU political figures who have been denouncing Fico and Slovakia for their supposed pro-Putin, for his supposed pro-Putin agenda, for his being in the service of the Kremlin. {The media has] come up with another story, which is that, somehow, Fico brought this on himself… because he’s such a polarizing figure. He’s so divisive and the political atmosphere in Slovakia is very, very toxic. A lot of hatred, a lot of hate speech. And, who’s behind it all? Robert Fico.
“There is social polarization and political antagonism in all of Europe, but usually nobody is shooting at prime ministers. [This happened] only in Slovakia,” Dimitris Konstantakopoulos, a former security and foreign policy advisor to late former Greek Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou, declared in statements to Sputnik, commenting on the dangerous situation which has developed in the heart of Europe in the wake of the attempt on Fico’s life.
“What people will think all around Europe is that this is a signal to any politician who would like to disagree with the main NATO and the European Union policies – that he has to be careful not to be assassinated,” Konstantakopoulos elaborated.
“I will remind you that they have already blown up the Nord Stream pipeline, and we’ve also had the assassination or attempted assassination of Russian journalists and politicians inside Russia. So it seems that [going back] long ago there was a ‘war party’ in the West which has decided not to permit a Russian victory in Ukraine. And that means using all possible means,” Konstantakopoulos highlighted.
Pro-Ukraine forces hoping to “discipline” leaders who do not support Ukraine in its conflict against Russia can use violence or other ways to push their agenda forward, Konstantakopoulos told Sputnik.
In context, Brussels has previously threatened to undermine the economy of Viktor Orbán’s Hungary if he vetoes Ukraine’s attempt to become an EU member. Also, in May this year, the Verden regional court in Lower Saxony, Germany, ruled that the Rotenburg Eurosceptic Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) leader Marie-Thérèse Kaiser was guilty of “incitement to hatred” for posting crime statistics showing that Afghanistan refugees committed a disproportionate number of sex offenses in the country.
The German court’s ruling caught the attention of billionaire Elon Musk, with Musk posting:
Are you saying the fine was for repeating accurate government statistics? Was there anything inaccurate in what she said?
Last year, AfD co-leader Tino Chrupalla was reportedly attacked with a syringe, causing him to go into anaphylactic shock, during an election campaign event in Ingolstadt, Bavaria. Nevertheless, the Associated Press (AP), citing German prosecutors and police, stated that “there were no indications yet that Chrupalla was attacked.”
Days earlier, Alice Weidel, another AfD co-leader, along with her family, had been scurried away to an undisclosed location for safety following intelligence reports of an upcoming attack on the nationalist politician. Rather than keeping silent or denouncing violence, leftist German Green Party MP Renate Künast, in an X post, questioned if Weidel had staged the “security problem to suit the election” in Bavaria at that time.
On April 10 of this year, Fico ominously predicted that assassination attempts like the one on his life could very well happen in his country:
And I’m just waiting for this frustration, intensified by Dennik N, SME or Aktuality (Slovak news), to turn into the murder of some of the leading government politicians.
Fico’s ominous predictions are not entirely unfounded, given the history of covert operations (that were sometimes violent) in Europe.
Following Fico’s shooting, India-based news outlet Firstpost ran an article citing U.S. journalist Nebojsa Malic and Habertürk reporter Ozcan Tikit stating that a continuation of “Operation Gladio” was linked to the attempt on Fico’s life.
The same article described Operation Gladio as “a clandestine operation involving a network of ‘stay-behind’ armies established in Europe during the Cold War,” backed “by NATO and the CIA with the cooperation of European intelligence agencies,” to gear up for a possible invasion by the then-Soviet Union.
Notably, the article reported that “NATO played a central role in coordinating these secret armies aiming to ensure that resistance would continue even if the official military forces were defeated or occupied,” ensuring “violent incidents including bombings and assassinations to destabilize the political situation.”
Firstpost added:
While initially intended as a defensive measure against a Soviet invasion, some of these groups became involved in internal political activities including influencing elections, engaging in acts of terrorism and manipulating political processes to counteract left-wing movements and parties.
Strikingly, while Fico has been labeled as “pro-Russia” by many mainstream media outlets, these same media outlets were quick to point out his attacker’s apparent links to pro-Russia paramilitaries and anti-immigrant forces, rather than highlight the attacker’s sympathies for the Kyiv regime under anti-Christian leader Volodymyr Zelensky. Ironically, Sky News reported the fact that Cintula, the would-be assassin, had commemorated the birthday of Marxist terrorist Che Guevara, a key figure in the Cuban revolution.
Evidently, the EU globalists, as echoed by their sycophants in establishment media outlets, have revealed their true colors once again via their reactions to Fico’s shooting. In view of the impending European Parliament elections from June 6 to 9, during which conservative and Eurosceptic politicians are set to win many votes, it is very likely that the globalist brahmins in Brussels and their coterie are panicking to retain power, even as their legitimacy to lead is declining.
In desperation, it would not be surprising if more assassinations (both physical and character) aimed at dissident leaders or public figures take place in the future.
espionage
Breaking: CSIS warned Health Canada of “insider threat” from Wuhan Institute-tied scientist Dr. Qiu Seven Months Before Lethal Ebola Shipped to China
Sam Cooper
In an explosive admission, Parliament’s Canada-China Committee has confirmed that Canada’s spy agency, CSIS, issued a direct and unheeded warning to senior health officials in August 2018, raising concerns about “insider threat activities” linked to Dr. Xiangguo Qiu and her husband, Keding Cheng.
This alert, delivered seven months before the couple’s network—with connections to the highest levels of Chinese biological weapons research—coordinated the shipment of live Ebola and Henipah virus samples from Canada’s high-security National Microbiology Laboratory (NML) to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), highlighted risks posed by their continued access to sensitive materials.
“CSIS held a briefing for personnel responsible for security at [Public Health Canada],” in August 2018 that “focused on foreign interference and included possible indicators of insider threat activities, as well as other security risks,” according to CSIS’s submission to the Committee. In CSIS’s presentation, “student programs were identified as being one of these possible threat vectors,” prompting “[Public Health Canada] to flag two scientists to CSIS, Dr. Cheng and Dr. Qiu,” the Committee report, released Tuesday, states.
Despite these explicit warnings, no immediate restrictions were placed on Qiu, Cheng, or their Chinese students’ access to Canada’s sensitive research materials. In December 2018, Public Health Canada authorized a fact-finding investigation into the concerns, but the delayed response effectively allowed them to continue their operations, further endangering Canada’s security.
Please support this important journalism.
Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber of The Bureau.
The Committee report also finds—like the ongoing Hogue Commission—that Justin Trudeau’s government, including senior bureaucrats and ministers, showed a reluctance to act on or even acknowledge urgent alerts from CSIS, exposing a stark divide between CSIS’s view of Chinese threats and Trudeau’s.
Dr. Qiu’s associations with China’s military and scientific programs had deep roots. She began her work at the Winnipeg NML in 2003, followed by her husband’s employment there in 2006.
As early as 2013, Keding Cheng filled out an application for the PRC’s “Science and Technology Innovation Talent Program of Henan Province,” requiring applicants to “passionately love the socialist motherland [PRC]” and maintain Chinese citizenship.
By 2016, Dr. Qiu was nominated for an award by a senior military official from the Chinese Academy of Military Medical Sciences, recognizing her collaborations with Major-General Chen Wei, a leading figure in China’s biological weapons research. CSIS investigations revealed that Dr. Qiu and Major-General Chen collaborated on multiple research projects dating back to 2012.
Dr. Qiu’s use of Canada’s facilities to benefit China was well recognized in Beijing. An award nomination for Dr. Qiu noted that she “used Canada’s Level 4 Biosecurity Laboratory as a base to assist China to improve its capability to fight highly pathogenic pathogens … and achieved brilliant results.”
In October 2016, Dr. Qiu co-authored a paper with Major-General Chen and other scientists affiliated with the Chinese Academy of Military Medical Sciences, further deepening her connection to Chinese military research. By this time, Qiu had also been recruited into China’s Thousand Talents Program—a PRC initiative aimed at harnessing international scientific expertise—and these affiliations, conspicuously absent from her Canadian curriculum vitae, made her a person of interest to CSIS, especially as her work increasingly intersected with China’s biosecurity research.
Concerns over Qiu and Cheng’s activities continued to mount at the NML. In October 2018, Cheng, accompanied by a restricted visitor, attempted to exit the lab with two Styrofoam containers, claiming they were empty. By January 2019, Cheng breached security again by using another employee’s passcode to enter the NML.
On March 23, 2019, Public Health Canada received its fact-finding report, which advised administrative investigations into Qiu and Cheng. Yet, only days later, on March 31, live samples of Ebola and Henipah viruses were shipped from the NML to the WIV, highlighting critical lapses in Canada’s security protocols.
In response to these revelations, the Committee’s report outlines recommendations to safeguard Canada’s scientific resources from similar threats in the future. Chief among these is a call for the Government of Canada to immediately terminate all research collaboration with PRC-affiliated entities in sensitive fields, such as artificial intelligence, aerospace, and advanced digital infrastructure.
A key recommendation is to designate the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the Thousand Talents Program as Named Research Organizations under Public Safety Canada, subjecting them to enhanced scrutiny and restricted partnerships due to their potential security risks. Furthermore, the Committee suggests that Canada explore constitutionally compliant legal measures to prevent individuals under national security investigation from leaving the country. Despite RCMP investigations, the couple was able to leave Canada.
As investigations mounted, irregularities in the WIV shipment were noticed, and it was only in January 2021 that Public Health Canada terminated the couple’s employment. Nathalie Drouin, Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council, acknowledged with evident understatement, “it is a timeline that needs to be looked at.” However, Richard Fadden, the director of CSIS from 2009 to 2013, testified that the timeline “was too long” and the viral shipment to WIV “should not have happened.”
In his opinion, the incident at the Winnipeg NML revealed a deep cultural issue long present in Canada’s federal administration. “I don’t think the culture in this particular lab and in large parts of the public service had caught up with the change in facts as we understand China,” Fadden said. His comments emphasize a notable gap between CSIS’s understanding of the Chinese threat and that of Trudeau’s administration.
“This gap in the understanding of risk between national security and science sectors at the federal level, particularly with regard to the threat to Canadian interests posed by actions of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), was illustrated in testimony before the Special Committee,” the report says.
On one hand, Minister of Health Mark Holland noted that “countries such as China are implicating themselves in our domestic processes in a way that would have been unimaginable just five years ago” and are “potentially willing, in this instance, to use pathogens that threaten humanity in order to advance their geopolitical agenda.” But Fadden pointed out that “CSIS was already aware of concerns about the PRC’s actions,” noting that since Xi Jinping’s rise to power in 2013, the institutionalization of espionage and interference techniques by the CCP has intensified.
Adding to these concerns is the Trudeau government’s controversial denial of access to related records, noted by the report, raising questions of transparency and whether there may have been a cover-up of key details surrounding the case.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Censorship Industrial Complex
Freedom of speech tops list of concerns for Americans
From The Center Square
By
“Republicans trust Republicans to protect their speech, and Democrats trust Democrats. But the true test of commitment to free speech is whether politicians protect dissenting speech. No matter who’s in charge”
Freedom of speech is a critical issue for most Americans, over crime, immigration, and health care, a new poll says.
Despite bipartisan agreement on its importance, there is disagreement on who will safeguard our First Amendment rights – a question the outcome of the presidential election may soon answer.
A new poll from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, or FIRE, conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago finds a majority of Americans rate free speech as very important to their vote in 2024, second only to inflation.
When asked about a host of issues in context with the upcoming election, 1,022 Americans were most concerned with inflation – 68% said increasing costs were “very important,” with 91% calling it at least “somewhat important.”
Free speech followed, with 63% saying it was “very important” and 90% said it was at least “somewhat important.”
“Higher prices might be the top concern for Americans, but a very close second is the increasing cost of speaking your mind,” said FIRE Research Fellow Nathan Honeycutt. “The message is clear: Americans want their free speech rights respected.”
Although at least 90% of both major parties rate it “somewhat important,” 70% of Republicans are more likely to rate it “very important,” as opposed to 60% of Democrats.
The report says Democrats and Republicans both express very low confidence the opposing party will respect their free speech – and Independents don’t trust either party to do so.
It also states that Republicans were more likely to respond that they were somewhat concerned about their ability to speak less freely today than they were four years ago.
“Republicans trust Republicans to protect their speech, and Democrats trust Democrats,” said FIRE’s Chief Research Advisor Sean Stevens. “But the true test of commitment to free speech is whether politicians protect dissenting speech. No matter who’s in charge, FIRE will be there to keep them honest.”
The organization’s Senior Program Officer Marcus Maldonado told The Center Square that it was pleased to partner with the National Constitution Center and First Amendment Watch at NYU to bring the First Amendment Summit back to Philadelphia for the second year in a row.
“Featuring a keynote conversation about global free speech with Jason Rezaian of The Washington Post and panel discussions about free speech online and on campus, the National First Amendment Summit presented the public with a vigorous discussion of the state of free speech in America and around the globe,” he said.
Jonathan Turley, another panelist and author of The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage, said since the beginning of the republic, every generation believes they have some existential threat that allows them to silence their neighbors.
He added that technology and social media have created new free speech challenges, was critical of how Twitter and Facebook have restricted free speech and does not believe in trade-offs made to prevent “disinformation.”
Even though the technology is new, he said, “it takes a lot to get a free people to give up freedom. Since the beginning, fear and anger have caused rage rhetoric, which becomes an excuse for every government to crack down. And the question is whether each generation is willing to give up that part of their freedom.”
Turley asserted that “this is the most dangerous anti-free speech period in our history, because we’ve never seen an alliance with the government, media, academia, and corporations” like this one.”
-
Catherine Herridge2 days ago
CBS News insider says the network knew the Hunter Biden Laptop was verified
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day ago
Hat Trick: Nick Bosa’s Photo Bomb Re-Ignites The Colin Kaepernick Fury
-
COVID-191 day ago
Federal bill would require US colleges to compensate students injured by COVID shots
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta calling for federal election! Premier Smith demands feds scrap dangerous oil and gas production caps
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
‘He’s Willing To Hit Them Hard’: American Adversaries Pull Out The Stops To Derail Trump’s White House Bid
-
International1 day ago
Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules undated ballots won’t be counted in presidential election
-
Health22 hours ago
Dad says 5-year-old develops autism after being forced to get 18 vaccines in 1 day
-
International2 days ago
Political realignment in 2024 has changed American politics