Internet
Trudeau-appointed senator apologizes for asking media to edit Conservative opponent’s op-ed
Senator Lucie Moncion
From LifeSiteNews
Liberal Lucie Moncion disagreed with a piece written by Conservative Donald Plett in the Hill Times about overspending in the Canadian Senate and had her staff submit revisions.
A Trudeau-appointed senator who boasted to colleagues that she was able to successfully get edits made to a commentary piece published by a conservative political rival issued an apology.
“I assure all senators the committee is taking necessary steps to ensure this doesn’t occur again,” said Ontario Senator Lucie Moncion, a former banker and the chair of the Senate committee on internal economy who was appointed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2016. “I wish to offer you my personal, unreserved and unqualified apology.”
Moncion also said that she has “learned from this event,” which made headlines in Canada, after she told the Senate, as reported by LifeSiteNews, that she was able to get a August 21 piece published by Senator Donald Plett, who serves as the Opposition Senate leader, edited from its original form.
Plett, a Conservative, wrote a piece in the Ottawa weekly newspaper the Hill Times titled “Trudeau’s Experimental Senate Changes Are Turning Out To Be A Dud.”
Moncion took issue with what was written in Plett’s piece, telling senators “inaccurate information was presented” and that they had to “remain vigilant.”
According to Moncion, she had members of her staff make the revisions to Plett’s commentary, which included complaints about overspending in the Senate.
Moncion claimed that “(o)nce a newspaper has the facts it is free to change an article, remove it or leave it as is,” adding, “I repeat: The newspaper is free to make corrections.”
Senators were told that the corrections made to Plett’s piece were not due to libel or misstatement but because of a technical aspect, according to Moncion.
The Hill Times is one of Canada’s most heavily subsidized weekly newspapers, receiving more than $1 million in the last 18 months from grants, subsidies, and sole-sourced government contracts.
Plett was not pleased with the changes to his commentary, saying, “This is outrageous. We now have a Senate communications police that will not only ‘fact-check’ what senators say or write outside the chamber, but they will also, in secret, change how you present your thoughts.”
Trudeau has pumped billions into propping up the mostly state-funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) as well as providing large payouts for legacy media outlets ahead of the 2025 federal election. In total, the subsidies are expected to cost taxpayers $129 million over the next five years.
By Christina Maas
Mark Carney dodges Epstein jabs in Hamilton while reviving failed Liberal plans for speech control via Bill C-36 and Bill C-63.
|
It was supposed to be a routine campaign pit stop, the kind of low-stakes political affair where candidates smile like used car salesmen and dish out platitudes thicker than Ontario maple syrup. Instead, Mark Carney found himself dodging verbal bricks in a Hamilton hall, facing hecklers who lobbed Jeffrey Epstein references like Molotovs. No rebuttal, no denial. Just a pivot worthy of an Olympic gymnast, straight to the perils of digital discourse.
“There are many serious issues that we’re dealing with,” he said, ignoring the criticism that had just lobbed his way. “One of them is the sea of misogyny, antisemitism, hatred, and conspiracy theories — this sort of pollution online that washes over our virtual borders from the United States.”
Ah yes, the dreaded digital tide. Forget inflation or the fact that owning a home now requires a GoFundMe. According to Carney, the real catastrophe is memes from Buffalo.
The Ghost of Bills Past
Carney’s new plan to battle the internet; whatever it may be, because details are apparently for peasants, would revive a long-dead Liberal Party obsession: regulating online speech in a country that still pretends to value free expression.
It’s an effort so cursed, it’s been killed more times than Jason Voorhees. First, there was Bill C-36, which flopped in 2021. Then came its undead cousin, Bill C-63, awkwardly titled the Online Harms Act, which proposed giving the Canadian Human Rights Commission the power to act as digital inquisitors, sniffing out content that “foments detestation or vilification.”
Naturally, it died too, not from public support, but because Parliament decided it had better things to do, like not passing it in time.
But as every horror franchise teaches us, the villain never stays away for long. Carney’s speech didn’t include specifics, which is usually code for “we’ll make it up later,” but the intent is clear: the Liberals are once again oiling up the guillotine of speech regulation, ready to let it fall on anything remotely edgy, impolite, or, God forbid, unpopular.
“Won’t Someone Think of the Children?”
“The more serious thing is when it affects how people behave — when Canadians are threatened going to their community centers or their places of worship or their school or, God forbid, when it affects our children,” Carney warned, pulling the emergency brake on the national sympathy train. It’s the same tired tactic every aspiring control freak uses, wrap the pitch in the soft fuzz of public safety and pray nobody notices the jackboot behind the curtain.
Nothing stirs the legislative loins like invoking the children. But vague terror about online contagion infecting impressionable minds has become the go-to excuse for internet crackdowns across the Western world. Canada’s Liberals are no different. They just dress it up and pretend it’s for your own good.
“Free Speech Is Important, But…”
Former Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge, doing her best impression of a benevolent censor, also piped up earlier this year with a classic verbal pretzel: “We need to make sure [freedom of expression] exists and that it’s protected. Yet the same freedom of expression is currently being exploited and undermined.”
Protecting free speech by regulating it is the sort of logic that keeps satire writers out of work.
St-Onge’s lament about algorithms monetizing debate sounds suspiciously like a pitch from someone who can’t get a word in on X. It’s the familiar cry of technocrats and bureaucrats who can’t fathom a world where regular people might say things that aren’t government-approved. “Respect is lacking in public discourse,” she whined on February 20. She’s right. People are tired of pretending to respect politicians who think governing a country means babysitting the internet.
|
|
|
|
Powerful forces want to silence independent voices online
|
|
Governments and corporations are working hand in hand to control what you can say, what you can read; and soon, who you are allowed to be.
New laws promise to “protect” you; but instead criminalize dissent.
Platforms deplatform, demonetize, and disappear accounts that step out of line.
AI-driven surveillance tracks everything you do, feeding a system built to monitor, profile, and ultimately control.
Now, they’re pushing for centralized digital IDs; a tool that could link your identity to everything you say and do online. No anonymity. No privacy. No escape.
This isn’t about safety, it’s about power.
If you believe in a truly free and open internet; where ideas can be debated without fear, where privacy is a right, and where no government or corporation dictates what’s true; please become a supporter.
By becoming a supporter, you’ll help us:
We don’t answer to advertisers or political elites.
If you can, please become a supporter. It takes less than a minute to set up, you’ll get a bunch of extra features, guides, analysis and solutions, and every donation strengthens the fight for online freedom.
|
|
From LifeSiteNews
The Center for Innovative Public Health Research’s website suggests teenage girls make their ‘own decisions’ about sex and not let their parents know if they don’t want to.
For almost a decade, the U.S. government funded a group that actively works to teach kids how to use sex toys and then keep them hidden from their parents to the tune of $22 million.
According to investigative reporter Hannah Grossman at the Manhattan Institute, The Center for Innovative Public Health Research (CIPHR) has been educating minors about sex toys with public funds.
Records show that the millions given to the group since 2016, according to its website, go toward “health education programs” that “promote positive human development.”
However, the actual contents of the programs, as can be seen from comments from CIPHR CEO Michele Ybarra, seem to suggest that its idea of “human” development is skewed toward radical sex education doctrine.
In 2017, CIPHR launched Girl2Girl, which is funded by federal money to promote “sex-ed program just for teen girls who are into girls.” Its website lets users, who are girls between ages 14 and 16, sign up for “daily text messages … about things like sex with girls and boys.”
The actual content of some of the messages is very concerning. Its website notes that some of the texts talk about “lube and sex toys” as well as “the different types of sex and ways to increase pleasure.”
The website actively calls upon teenage girls to make their “own decisions” and not let their parents know if they don’t want to.
Grossman shared a video clip on X of Ybarra explaining how they educate minors about the use of “sex toys” and dealing with their parents if they are found out.
The clip, from a 2022 Brown University webinar, shows Ybarra telling researchers how to prepare “young person(s)” for her research.
She said if they are doing “focus groups,” she will ask them, “Okay, so what happens if somebody comes into the room and sees words like penis and sex toys on your screen — on your computer screen or on your phone? What if it’s your mom?’”
In 2023, CIPHR launched Transcendent Health, which is a sex-education program for minors who are gender confused. This initiative received $1.3 million of federal grant money that expired last month.
Grossman observed that the federal government “should not fund programs that send sexually explicit messages to minors and encourage them to conceal these communications from parents.”
She noted that in order to protect children and “prevent further harm,” U.S. President Donald Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services “should immediately cancel CIPHR’s active contract and deny its future grant applications.”
“By doing so, the Trump administration can send a clear message: Taxpayers will no longer foot the bill for perverted ‘research’ projects,” she noted.
The Trump administration has thus far, through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), exposed billions in government waste and fraud. Many such uses of taxpayer dollars are currently under review by the administration, including pro-abortion and pro-censorship activity through USAID, “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and neo-Marxist class warfare propaganda” through the National Science Foundation, and billions to left-wing “green energy” nonprofits through the Environmental Protection Agency.
BREAKING: THE FEDERAL BRIEF THAT SHOULD SINK CARNEY
How Canada’s Mainstream Media Lost the Public Trust
Ottawa Confirms China interfering with 2025 federal election: Beijing Seeks to Block Joe Tay’s Election
Indigenous-led Projects Hold Key To Canada’s Energy Future
-
Business2 days agoTrump considers $5K bonus for moms to increase birthrate
-
Business2 days agoChinese firm unveils palm-based biometric ID payments, sparking fresh privacy concerns
-
COVID-192 days agoRFK Jr. Launches Long-Awaited Offensive Against COVID-19 mRNA Shots
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoConservatives promise to ban firing of Canadian federal workers based on COVID jab status
-
Business1 day agoIs Government Inflation Reporting Accurate?
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoCarney’s Hidden Climate Finance Agenda
-
Environment1 day agoExperiments to dim sunlight will soon be approved by UK government: report
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoIs free speech over in the UK? Government censorship reaches frightening new levels