Connect with us

International

Prime Minister Trudeau called ‘dictator’ to his face in blistering speech in European Parliament

Published

6 minute read

It wasn’t the response Prime Minister Trudeau was hoping for.  In fact in a career filled with humiliations on various international trips, Wednesday’s speech at the EU in Brussels has to be the worst experience of all for Canada’s PM.

As part of a longer speech in which Trudeau called on the EU for more support for Ukraine, Canada’s Prime Minister blamed the leaders of the Freedom Convoy for threatening democracy.  That assertion did not go over very well.

Croatian MP Mislav Kolakusic responded by calling out Trudeau for violating the civil rights of Canadians participating in the Freedom Convoy protests.  In a blistering speech to fellow EU Parliamentarians, Kolakusic turned to Trudeau and called his actions in crushing the Ottawa protest “dictatorship of the worst kind”.  Trudeau sat quietly and listened as the MP from Croatia informed him many Europeans watched as he “trampled women with horses,” and blocked “the bank accounts of single parents.”

Click on the video below to see the humiliating tongue-lashing.

Kolakusic wasn’t the only European Union to express outrage with Prime Minister Trudeau today. Here’s German MEP Christine Anderson.

Meanwhile, Romanian MEP Christian Terhes outright refused to attend Trudeau’s speech.  Probably a good thing for Trudeau judging by the tone of this social media post from Terhes today.

The following is from the Facebook page of Christian Terhes MEP from Romania.

I refused to validate the imposition of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who gave a speech in front of the Plenary of the European Parliament on 23.03.2022, the reason why I was not in the hall when he spoke.
You can’t come to teach Putin’s democracy lessons from the European Parliament, when you pass with horse hoofs over your own citizens who demand that their fundamental rights be respected.
The difference between democracy and tyranny is not given by the geographical location of political leaders, but by the values that this promotes.
The “West” is not a space of freedom as a geographical place, but as a civilization, developed as a result of the fact that, based on Jewish-Christian values (respectful that man was created in the image and likeness of God and was exposed, with a price of d it’s the blood, of the Son of God), he built a society and a state system that has put in the center of HUMAN, which is/served by the state.
The opposite of the “west” is not the “east” as a geographical place, but as a social and state order, which, based on Marxist philosophy, puts the state and its bureaucrats at the center, who are served by people.
Or, when you, a political man from the “west”, implement at home methods of repression and violations of the rights of your own citizens, what do you ask for respected rights, as Putin does it at home, you are nothing better than him. Instead, to the tyranny you implement, you add deceit and hypocrisy, destroying the freedom and values of the “west”.
These impostor leaders of the west today brought the world into the chaos we find ourselves in today, specifically because they moved away from the values that made the “west” a free and prosperous world.
The “Cold War” was won not with weapons, but with the values of the free world. In short, freedom to break tyranny!
The removal of western leaders from these values (individual freedom, respect for rights and freedoms, etc), but, not only did they make them lose their moral ascent, but they allowed the rise of tyrants like Putin.
Putin’s imperialist plans are not new. However, the leaders of the West ignored the obvious, continuing to do business with Russia, which was selling them cheap gas, petron and coal, while on the money of the West, Putin was against his army.
Between the Russian imperialist tyranny, promoted by Putin, and the neomarxist tyranny claimed to be progressive promoted also by Trudeau, in which people are deprived of their rights and freedoms, becoming the objects of the state, I do not choose any.
I choose, instead, to promote and fight for the same conservative values that brought peace through prosperity in Europe: national sovereignty, individual freedom and respect for human rights, which are a gift I received from Du God because we are created in His image and likeness.
———-

Finally, thanks to Montreal based communicator Viva Frei for this compilation.

After 15 years as a TV reporter with Global and CBC and as news director of RDTV in Red Deer, Duane set out on his own 2008 as a visual storyteller. During this period, he became fascinated with a burgeoning online world and how it could better serve local communities. This fascination led to Todayville, launched in 2016.

Follow Author

Censorship Industrial Complex

Who tries to silence free speech? Apparently who ever is in power.

Published on

Now that Trump is running Washington, Conservative thinkers must ponder a new-found appreciation for silencing speech they don’t like.

From StosselTV

Donald Trump, before he was reelected, said he’d end government censorship. But now that he’s in office? He calls speech he doesn’t like “illegal.”

Free Speech should be a bedrock American value, no matter who’s in office. After the murder of Charlie Kirk, Republicans, who once complained about censorship, became censors. Democrats suddenly flip-flopped. All politicians should remember, the way to fight speech you don’t like, is with more speech, not censorship.

After 40+ years of reporting, I now understand the importance of limited government and personal freedom.

——————————————

Libertarian journalist John Stossel created Stossel TV to explain liberty and free markets to young people.

Prior to Stossel TV he hosted a show on Fox Business and co-anchored ABC’s primetime newsmagazine show, 20/20.

Stossel’s economic programs have been adapted into teaching kits by a non-profit organization, “Stossel in the Classroom.” High school teachers in American public schools now use the videos to help educate their students on economics and economic freedom. They are seen by more than 12 million students every year.

———

To make sure you receive the weekly video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://www.johnstossel.com/#subscrib…

———

Continue Reading

Courageous Discourse

No Exit Wound – EITHER there was a very public “miracle” OR Charlie Kirk’s murder is not as it appears

Published on

By John Leake

Turning Point Spokesman: “No Exit Wound a Miracle”

Charlie Kirk Show producer Andrew Kolvet repeats extremely dubious claim purportedly made by “the surgeon who operated on Kirk.”

Monday Blaze Media (relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey) reported the following:

Turning Point USA spokesman and executive producer of the “Charlie Kirk Show” Andrew Kolvet revealed new details about the shooting that even doctors are calling a miracle. According to Kolvet, the surgeon who operated on Kirk claimed that the high-velocity bullet was powerful enough to kill multiple large animals — and “should have gone through” his body. But for some reason, Kirk’s body was able to stop it.

“I want to address some of the discussion about the lack of an exit wound with Charlie,” Kolvet wrote in a post on X.

“The fact that there wasn’t an exit wound is probably another miracle, and I want people to know,” Kolvet continued, explaining that he had spoken with the surgeon who worked on Charlie in the hospital.

“He said the bullet ‘absolutely should have gone through, which is very very normal for a high powered, high velocity round. I’ve seen wounds from this caliber many times and they always just go through everything. This would have taken a moose or two down, an elk, etc,’” he recalled.

“But it didn’t go through. Charlie’s body stopped it,” he added.

When he mentioned to the doctor that there were “dozens of staff, students, and special guests standing directly behind Charlie” when he was shot, the doctor reportedly replied, “It was an absolute miracle that someone else didn’t get killed.”

“His bone was so healthy and the density was so so impressive that he’s like the man of steel,” Kolvet recalls the doctor saying.

This is not a credible statement, and it raises a number of concerns.

It strikes me as very perplexing that a “surgeon operated on Kirk,” because in the video of the shooting, Charlie reacted with a decorticate posture—that is, an abnormal body posture characterized by flexion of the upper limbs—caused by severe trauma to the central nervous system. This indicates that the bullet either directly struck his cervical spinal cord, or the shock wave of the supersonic bullet passing near his spinal cord traumatized it.

A 150-grain, .30-06 bullet’s energy at 150 yards from the muzzle varies by ammunition, but a common hunting cartridge has an estimated value of approximately 1,800-2,000 foot-pounds (with the bullet traveling at about 2500 feet per second). In other words, the .30 caliber (.30 inch diameter) metal projectile struck his neck with sufficient kinetic energy to move a 2,000 pound mass a linear distance of one foot.

If the bullet that struck Charlie’s cervical spinal cord was a .30-06 fired from 150 yards away, it would have:

1). Severed his spinal cord, killing him instantly.

2). Passed through his neck.

Note that the cervical vertebrae are supported by strong muscles and have high compressive strength, but are far too delicate to stop a .30-06 bullet traveling at 2,500 feet per second.

If ALL of the kinetic energy of the bullet was absorbed by Charlie’s neck, it would have done spectacular trauma to his neck, as distinct from producing the clean bullet hole visible in the video footage that ruptured his Carotid artery.

Though I appreciate that some may find a supernatural explanation to be consoling, it seems to me that the investigation should not rest on the this explanation.

As I wrote a few weeks ago: If I were investigating the murder, I would consider the hypothesis that Charlie was shot with a weapon equipped with a suppressor and loaded with a subsonic cartridge to further reduce the sound. I have seen footage of someone firing a rifle with this setup, and the shot was amazingly quiet. The effective range of such a weapon is about 100 yards or less, and the shooter must be very skilled.

However, such a setup could fire a subsonic projectile that would penetrate a human neck without passing through it. In this scenario, the actual assassin (firing the suppressed rifle) hypothetically coordinated the timing of his shot with someone else firing a normal (supersonic and loud) rifle cartridge into the air at the same time to create a distraction or red herring.

In a functioning society in which the people trust their authorities—including their medical examiners—it would be easy to discover what happened and to disclose at least a preliminary report that would satisfy most reasonable people. The trouble our Republic is facing now is that so many of us no longer trust our federal and state authorities to tell us the truth.

For example, we have strong grounds for suspecting that medical examiners are not diligently investigating (with the proper analytic methods) unexpected, fatal cardiac arrests in young people to determine if they were caused by vaccine-induced myocarditis.

Share

Subscribe to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse).

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X