COVID-19
Researchers run up the score on ‘journalists’ – Many conspiracies are not so theoretical after all
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Ian Madsen
Conspiracy Theorists Beat Authorities in Credibility
Journalistic objectivity, curiosity, skepticism, neutrality, and even impartiality are in decline.
It is not merely how quickly and savagely that opinion analysis, or commentary elements of most news organizations are to dismiss challenges to establishment claims, pronouncements and proposals. The bigger disappointment is that the ‘news’ side swiftly dismisses or contradicts anything that goes against what government or government-aligned officials, and spokesmen, declare.
Nowhere was this more evident than in Covid-era propaganda. Or, rather, outright disinformation was disseminated. Often ‘facts’ were wrong – and their defenders knew better.
A basic glaring fabrication was defended for years. It was the cover story that Covid first leapt to human beings in a ‘wet market’ in Wuhan, China. This was, to some, apparently less ‘racist’ than a lab leak from the nearby Wuhan Institute of Virology. This in effect conveniently protected those involved in the research (such as including those in the U.S. government who financed it).
More Covid fallacies: the fatality rate was high – but in reality it was (lower than the flu for the vast majority of people); ‘social distancing’ of two metres could stop transmission; and everyone was at equal risk (yet children and youth had negligible risk; the old or obese far more). Also, that lockdowns would stop or that newly developed vaccines would work. Yet more: cloth and surgical masks were protective while vaccines were better than natural or acquired immunity. The biggest fallacy: health authorities knew what they were doing.
Several earlier infectious disease scares failed to have prepared experts (SARS-2003, West Nile, Zika, MERS, Ebola, Dengue Fever, others). Also, despite years of experience, proper information, protocols, procedures, facilities, equipment, personnel or supplies.
Related fallacies were that massive Covid-panic spending was noninflationary, or, that inflation was ‘transitory’, still cause pain today. ‘Modern Monetary Theory’ pundits encouraged governments and central bankers to monetize the debt issued to fund handouts and stimulus schemes. Critics who were castigated for warning that Canada’s government health care was disaster-bound are now validated.
Another sinking Establishment battleship is the Climate ‘Crisis’ lobby’s catastrophizing. The shrillest claim is that Earth’s, supposed, rapid warming is an ‘existential threat’. This fantasy is used to justify any and all countermeasures, no matter how destructive or expensive.
Rational adaptation to warming has been ignored: moving away from coastal areas (subject to rising sea levels), strengthening infrastructure, using more fireproofing, augmenting water supplies, changing agricultural practices, altering outdoor work hours, and employing more air conditioning.
Predictions of warming over the past thirty years have been repeatedly exaggerated. Heat-related deaths still far outnumber those of cold. Another claim, that carbon dioxide is ‘evil’, is false; it is a plant food that increases crop yields dramatically.
Climate crusaders claim that solar and wind energy can reliably and cheaply replace fossil fuels. That is, again, incorrect. Yet, still widely supported by politicians and the media. One related example is the promotion of heat pumps to replace gas furnaces, despite being more expensive to buy, and to run than natural gas furnaces are.
A related fallacy is that ‘green’ and, more honestly, anti-hydrocarbon Environmental, Social and Governance, ‘ESG’ investment funds outperform regular stock market indexes. That has been disproven.
‘Conspiracy Theorists’: Many touchdowns. Authority Figures and Mainstream Media: Zero.
Remain skeptical.
Ian Madsen is the Senior Policy Analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
COVID-19
Crown still working to put Lich and Barber in jail
From LifeSiteNews
The Crown’s appeal claims the judge made a mistake in her verdict on the intimidation charges, and also in how she treated aggravating and mitigating factors regarding sentencing.
Government lawyers for the Crown have filed an appeal the acquittals of Freedom Convoy leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber on intimidation charges.
The Crown also wants their recent 18-month conditional sentence on mischief charges replaced with harsher penalties, which could include possible jail time.
According to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), it is “asking the Ontario Court of Appeal to enter a conviction on the intimidation charge or order a new trial on that count,” for Barber’s charges.
Specifically, the Crown’s appeal claims that the judge made a mistake in her verdict on the intimidation charges, and also in how she treated aggravating and mitigating factors regarding sentencing.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, both Lich and Barber have filed appeals of their own against their house arrest sentences, arguing that the trial judge did not correctly apply the law on their mischief charges.
Barber’s lawyer, Diane Magas, said that her client “relied in good faith on police and court direction during the protest. The principles of fairness and justice require that citizens not be punished for following the advice of authorities. We look forward to presenting our arguments before the Court.”
On October 7, Ontario Court Justice Heather Perkins-McVey sentenced Lich and Chris Barber to 18 months’ house arrest after being convicted earlier in the year of “mischief.”
Lich was given 18 months less time already spent in custody, amounting to 15 1/2 months.
Lich and Barber were declared guilty of mischief for their roles as leaders of the protest against COVID mandates in April 2022, and as social media influencers. The conviction came after a nearly two-year trial despite the non-violent nature of the popular movement.
The Lich and Barber trial concluded in September 2024, more than a year after it began. It was originally scheduled to last 16 days.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, the Canadian government was hoping to put Lich in jail for no less than seven years and Barber for eight years.
LifeSiteNews recently reported that Lich detailed her restrictive house arrest conditions, revealing she is “not” able to leave her house or even pick up her grandchildren from school without permission from the state.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, Lich, reflecting on her recent house arrest verdict, said she has no “remorse” and will not “apologize” for leading a movement that demanded an end to all COVID mandates.
COVID-19
Freedom Convoy leader Tamara Lich to appeal her recent conviction
From LifeSiteNews
Lawyers will argue that there is no evidence linking Tamara Lich ‘to the misdeeds of others.’
Freedom Convoy leader Tamara Lich said she will appeal her recent mischief conviction in an Ontario court, with her lawyers saying “there was no evidence linking her to the misdeeds of others.”
In a press release late yesterday, Lich’s legal team, headed by Lawrence Greenspon, Eric Granger, and Hannah Drennan, made the announcement.
“Lawyers for Tamara Lich filed Notice of Appeal in the Ontario Court of Appeal of the conviction for mischief arising out of the Freedom Convoy,” the release stated.
Lich’s legal team noted that there are two reasons for the principal grounds of appeal.
“While there was substantial evidence that Tamara encouraged the protesters to be peaceful, lawful and safe, there was no evidence linking her to the misdeeds of others,” they said.
The second reason for the appeal, according to Lich’s lawyers, is that the “trial judge failed to give effect to the principle that communication that would otherwise be mischief is protected by section 2(b) of the Charter, freedom of expression.”
On October 7, Ontario Court Justice Heather Perkins-McVey sentenced Lich and Chris Barber to 18 months’ house arrest after being convicted earlier in the year of “mischief.”
Lich was given 18 months less time already spent in custody, amounting to 15 1/2 months.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, the Canadian government was hoping to put Lich in jail for no less than seven years and Barber for eight years for their roles in the 2022 protests against COVID mandates.
Interestingly, Perkins-McVey said about Lich and Barber during the sentencing, “They came with the noblest of intent and did not advocate for violence.”
As reported by LifeSiteNews, Lich, reflecting on her recent sentencing of over a year’s house arrest for her role in the 2022 Freedom Convoy, laid bare the fact that when all is said in done, seven years of her life will have been spent in a government-imposed “lockdown” in one form or another.
LifeSiteNews recently reported that Lich detailed her restrictive house arrest conditions, revealing she is “not” able to leave her house or even pick up her grandkids from school without permission from the state.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, Lich, reflecting on her recent house arrest verdict, said she has no “remorse” and will not “apologize” for leading a movement that demanded an end to all COVID mandates.
-
Business1 day agoCarney budget doubles down on Trudeau-era policies
-
espionage2 days agoU.S. Charges Three More Chinese Scholars in Wuhan Bio-Smuggling Case, Citing Pattern of Foreign Exploitation in American Research Labs
-
COVID-191 day agoCrown still working to put Lich and Barber in jail
-
Business1 day agoCarney’s Deficit Numbers Deserve Scrutiny After Trudeau’s Forecasting Failures
-
Business1 day agoCarney budget continues misguided ‘Build Canada Homes’ approach
-
International1 day agoKazakhstan joins Abraham Accords, Trump says more nations lining up for peace
-
Business1 day agoHere’s what pundits and analysts get wrong about the Carney government’s first budget
-
Energy17 hours agoCanada Cannot Become an Energy Superpower With its Regulatory Impediments



