Connect with us

Opinion

SLOBODIAN: Beware the MSM lies on Israeli-Palestine conflict

Misinformed Canadians are bombarded by news delivered with omissions, rewritten history, biases, and outright lies.

mm

Published

on

Israel’s on fire. Yet some in Canada’s media pour gas on the flames by reporting vitriolic mistruths about a raging conflict.

The ramifications spill into Canadian streets.  

Misinformed Canadians are bombarded by news delivered with omissions, rewritten history, biases, and outright lies.

This hurts the Israeli and Palestinian people.

For some, only Israel’s to blame.

Careless reports demonize the Israelis – that includes children and elderly – rushing to bomb shelters since May 10 when the terrorist group Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) teamed up to start firing rockets into Israeli civilian areas from their Gaza stronghold.

On average, 400-500 rockets per day have rained down on Israel, 90% intercepted by her Iron Dome air defense system. Still, 12 Israelis have been killed and 330 injured.

Hamas fires a rocket at Israel. Courtesy YouTube

Hundreds of rockets launched by Hamas misfires landed in Gaza. That they kill and maim their own in a conflict they provoked, is a detail missing from many reports by media, who claim to care deeply about the Palestinian people. Hypocrites! 

About 130 Hamas, 30 PIJ members and 200 civilians have been killed  with 1,300 injured.

Hamas is a Palestinian terrorist group. It was declared so by Canada, the European Union and the U.S. 

News reports identify them as militants, not terrorists.

Hamas says Israel has no right to exist. 

Huge money goes into supplying the Hamas weapons cache. For years, tens of billions of dollars in international aid has poured into Palestinian coffers. Little trickles down to the people. 

But biased media blame the plight of impoverished Palestinians on Israel.

Media are too cowardly to admonish Hamas for putting Palestinians – including children and elderly – at risk. Hamas strikes surrounded by civilians to protect themselves from retaliation, knowing the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) tries to avoid attacking civilians. 

The media knows this but prefers to chastise Israel for having the audacity protect itself.

Meanwhile, in Canada, dishonest reporting stirs up raucous protests from coast to coast. From the level of outrage, one might think rockets were being fired into Canadian neighbourhoods instead of 9,000 km away. This is Canada. Protests that erupt into violence don’t belong here. 

And certainly, perfidious details spewed by media put a target on the backs of Canadian Jews.

It emboldens anti-Semitics who know the public’s manipulated into sympathizing with them and angry with those terrible Jews. Fanatics hunger to get triggered. Any trivial reason will suffice.

Attacks against Jews aren’t uncommon. A recent Statistics Canada report revealed of 608 hate crimes reported in 2019, 296 were anti-Semitic attacks.

Media outlets know Jews are the most targeted hate-crime group yet carry on spinning facts to glorify antagonists and condemn victims.

A few recent examples: 

CBC The National: Sasa Petricic, a former Middle East reporter, claimed Palestinian rocket fire came “in return” to Israeli airstrikes in Gaza. False! The IDF retaliated after Hamas and PIJ terrorist rockets barraged Israel.

CBC As It Happens: Anchor Carol Off was displeased Israel bombed apartment complexes in Gaza. Off didn’t mention a known fact – Hamas and PIJ operated out of these facilities. Or that the IDF dropped leaflets, sent text messages, made phone calls, and roof-knocked to warn civilians to leave the area.

Off turned to clashes at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. She intimated Palestinians just trying to worship at the Al Aqsa mosque defended themselves from Israeli police firing rubber bullets. 

Said Off: “But if you’re being shot at, it is not a natural response to resist and throw rocks back?” Pathetic! Rioters attacked police first with a stockpile of rocks, boulders and Molotov cocktails they happened to have on hand while praying. 

Toronto Star: Rhythm Sachdeva and Zena Salem reported on a pro-Palestinian protest in Toronto and wrote about the “fighting between Israelis and Palestinians.” False! The fight is between the IDF and terrorists, not Palestinian civilians.

The article stated: “The violence, set off by Hamas firing a rocket into Israel on Monday, came weeks after mounting tension.” Egregious lie! In the first 24 hours Hamas fired 480 rockets. 

Toronto Star: In an Op-Ed Shenaz Kermalli expressed dismay that anyone would say Israel has a right to defend itself. She said Israel carried out 9/11-like terrorist attacks. No one in the Twin Towers, the Pentagon or on United Airlines Flight 93 fired rockets at Islamic terrorists flying airplanes. Israel responded to terrorists firing rockets on their civilians. 

These aren’t the only factually challenged reports on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict by Canadian media – some of whom are subsidized by your tax dollars.

HonestReporting Canada, an independent organization promoting fairness and accuracy in Canadian media coverage of Israel and the Middle East, has exposed thousands of false or biased news reports.

Stay tuned.

Slobodian is a Western Standard columnist based in Manitoba

lslobodian@westernstandardonline.com

Linda Slobodian is the Manitoba Senior Columnist for the Western Standard. She has been an investigative columnist with the Calgary Herald, Calgary Sun, Edmonton Sun, and Alberta Report. lslobodian@westernstandardonline.com

Continue Reading
2 Comments

2 Comments

  1. William lloyd

    May 20, 2021 at 7:53 pm

    You have my support completely ,I believe that there really is no reporting anymore its just scripts prepared or influenced by the higher ups. Just propaganda. I hope we can find ways of reaching canadians with the truth about whats going on at home and abroad. It will have to be secure, or it will be removed. They can not have the masses ,learning the truth or at least other opinions.

  2. Mars Hill

    May 19, 2021 at 11:06 am

    Good story and it’s helpful but you do realize you’re ‘preaching to the choir’, most of us could have wrote this 20 years ago. The sole purpose of bill c10 is to stop articles and outlets like this as the cabal can see the sheeple waking up. Better button up your bonnet, things are going to get real weird for a time but all will end well (:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

WAGNER: Central Canada’s decades-long attack on Alberta oil drives the need for independence

“Within Canada, Alberta’s economy will be smothered by anti-oil policies and general hostility to resource development. Outside of Canada, Alberta’s economy can flourish and supply much-needed energy to willing customers.”

mm

Published

on

A new book by Western Standard Senior Columnist Michael Wagner makes the case that Alberta must become independent. The following is a brief excerpt from No Other Option: Self-Determination for Alberta.

Alberta is rich in fossil fuels, which are essential components for advanced modern economies. With the energy crisis of the 1970s, Central Canada benefited enormously from Alberta’s abundance through government-imposed low oil prices and an export tax on oil. Subsequently, as Alberta’s oil was later allowed to reach world price levels, the federal government continued to reap large financial rewards at Alberta’s expense.

Now, many voters in Central Canada want Alberta’s fossil fuels to be locked in the ground, supposedly to prevent climate change. What this would mean for Albertans is crystal clear: poverty and a future without economic hope. In effect, Central Canada wants Alberta to return to its status of a have-not province, like it was before the discovery of oil at Leduc in 1947. To see the future that voters in Toronto and Montreal envision for Alberta, simply look back to the economic struggles the province experienced in its first few decades. It’s not a pretty picture.

But there is absolutely no reason why Albertans should accept this fate. Albertans have the opportunity to determine their own future, and they should do so. Through entirely peaceful, legal, and constitutional means, Albertans have the power to choose a future of self-determination and prosperity. That is, Alberta can become an independent country.

Seceding from Canada to form an independent country is certainly a drastic step. But there really is no other option. Serious proposals have been made in the past to reform Canada so the West could receive a greater voice in national institutions. These kinds of reforms – with the Triple-E (equal, elected, and effective) Senate being top of the list – have been rejected and are no longer viable. This means Albertans face a stark choice between the status quo, with its inevitable economic decline, or independence.

Many people in Alberta are very hesitant to embrace secession due to strong personal and emotional ties to Canada. This is reasonable and completely understandable. There is much laudable about Canada, including the freedom and prosperity it offers to its citizens. Canadians also have much to be proud of in their past, such as the courageous exploits of the Canadian military in the world wars, as well as other conflicts. Indeed, there is much to admire about Canada when it is compared to the other countries of the world.

Nevertheless, Canada has been going in a rather unhappy direction since the late 1960s. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau had a vision for a different kind of country that he did much to accomplish. It’s not a coincidence that the first efforts to create a separatist organization in Alberta took place during Trudeau’s first term as prime minister. Today, Pierre’s son, Justin, pursues a different set of policies that harm Alberta’s future. 

There is a lesson to be drawn from these two periods of Trudeau administrations: If Albertans don’t choose a new direction for their province, they will forever be entangled in cyclical periods of hostile federal policies.

In short, Albertans must choose between the status quo and independence. Within Canada, Alberta’s economy will be smothered by anti-oil policies and general hostility to resource development. Outside Canada, Alberta’s economy can flourish and supply much-needed energy to willing customers. This latter option will lead to prosperity for Albertans and their children. The choice is clear.

You can order a copy of Michael Wagner’s new book, No Other Option: Self-Determination for Alberta on Amazon

Michael Wagner is a Senior Columnist for the Western Standard

Continue Reading

Opinion

SLOBODIAN: Docs who speak out about COVID facing brutal suppression

Whistleblowers say doctors who disobey are investigated and face having their medical licences revoked.

mm

Published

on

Doctors and nurses, the heroes who bravely stand between COVID-19 and Canadians, are being bullied, threatened and censored.

They’re warned: Challenge the COVID-19 narrative or reveal serious flaws in how the pandemic’s handled and pay a heavy price.

Whistleblowers say doctors who disobey are investigated and face having their medical licences revoked. 

Nurses fear being fired if they expose manipulated and inflated numbers or cases of vaccinated patients with COVID-19.

Physicians and a researcher spoke on behalf of many colleagues at a press conference on censorship of doctors, scientists and medical information held on Parliament Hill Thursday, hosted by Ontario MP Derek Sloan.

“Many people at high levels across the federal and provincial governments are misleading the public,” said Sloan.

He recently issued a call to medical and scientific whistleblowers. The response is shocking.

Medical professionals are viciously muzzled.

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) issued an April 30 statement warning doctors against going public with questioning the status quo or revealing what they witness in hospitals and clinics.

The College of Nurses of Ontario forbid nurses to talk about what they’ve experienced.

Dr. Byram Bridle, associate professor and viral immunologist in the Department of Pathobiology at the University of Guelph, dares to question vaccines. 

“I, along with a large number of collaborators both within Canada and internationally, have developed serious concerns about COVID-19 vaccines,” he said.

He’s under brutal attack.

“I’m undergoing a very public smear campaign right now,” said Welsh, adding he also receives hundreds of supportive emails from across Canada and the world.

“Since the pandemic was declared, I’ve been trying to serve as a voice of objective, scientific opinion so that the public can make the most informed decisions for themselves possible when it comes to issues related to COVID-19,” said Bridle.

“I’m a publicly-funded servant. You pay for me, Canadians, with your tax dollars.”

In an interview, he was asked if there’s a link between COVID-19 vaccines and cases of heart inflammation in young males. The connection was recently flagged in Israeli studies.

Bridle, a vaccinologist whose research program is based on development of novel vaccines, said it’s possible.

“After the interview, five minutes, it was like a nuclear bomb went off in my world. My life was thrown upside down. I’m sure my life will never be the same again,” he said. 

A fake Twitter account slanders him. Calls and email attacks continue daily.

He’s harassed by some work colleagues. Fortunately, the University of Guelph administration supports him.

Bridle wrote a comprehensive guide for parents to make informed decisions about vaccinating their children.

“I accept that early in the pandemic and when we first rolling out these vaccines we’ve had to largely work based on assumptions. The scientific literature has exploded over the last 16 months. We understand so much more. Now we’re looking at vaccinating children and it’s no longer OK to proceed based on assumptions,” he said.

Proper studies haven’t been conducted, he warned.

“Mass vaccination of millions of healthy Canadian children demands that the level of safety associated with this, the assessed safety profile has to be exceptionally high,” he said.

“By expressing this my career may very well have been destroyed. It’s incomprehensible to me that this has happened.

“I don’t recognize the country that I was born into.”

However, warnings like that issued by the CPSO backfire.

“Doctors, nurses, scientists and other medical experts have indeed reached out to me through various channels to tell me their stories.” said Sloan.

“These honest and hardworking doctors are fully galvanized against the regressive, authoritarian overreach of the CPSO and other similar governing bodies.

“The purpose of governing bodies like the CPSO is to protect the public, not to stifle legitimate scientific inquiry or dissent by professional doctors.”

Dr. Patrick Phillips, an Ontario family and emergency physician went public after seeing his patients suffering “massive harms” from lockdowns, including those with advanced cancer walking into emergency.

“I’ve never seen so many suicidal children,” said Phillips.

The letter from the CPSO is “chilling,” he said.

“It basically saying it’s the professional responsibility of all physicians not to communicate anti-vaccine, anti-masking, anti-distancing, and anti-lockdown statements and/or promoting unsupported, unproven treatments for COVID-19,” he said.

He’s one of many physicians under investigation, facing his medical licence being revoked for promoting treatments like Vitamin D and Ivermectin, both proven to work in numerous trials.

“There’s something bigger than my medical career at this point because lives are being lost and we need to speak out.”

Dr. Don Welsh, a PhD and professor of physiology and pharmacology at the University of Western Ontario, laments physicians under attack.

“This behaviour’s unacceptable in Canada,” he said emotionally.

“We have been told by the public health community to follow the science. I want to be clear – science hasn’t been functioning properly the last 13 months as we address COVID-19.”

Welsh called for “full and robust Royal Commission to publicly address the many flaws that underlie this public response” to COVID-19.

Canadians also need to know who tells tyrants to issue shut-up decrees. 

Where’s Dr. Theresa Tam? Silent.

Odd, you’d think Canada’s chief public health officer would leap to the defense of besieged medical professionals.

Slobodian is a Manitoba based columnist for the Western Standard

Continue Reading

Opinion

FROM: Property rights advocates should think twice about an Alberta constitution

“While there is merit to enshrining property rights in a potential new Alberta constitution, there are cautions that Albertans should consider first.”

mm

Published

on

Canada is nearly alone in the world as a liberal democracy having a written constitution lacking any explicit protection for property rights.  Albertans- many of whom are weary of confederation – have often bandied about the idea of a provincial constitution protecting property rights. While there is merit to enshrining property rights in a potential new Alberta constitution, there are cautions that Albertans should consider first.

Property rights are already protected by the common law. For example, in 1978, the Supreme Court of Canada said, “Anglo-Canadian jurisprudence has traditionally recognized, as a fundamental freedom, the right of the individual to the enjoyment of property and the right not to be deprived thereof, or any interest therein, save by due process of law.”

But the common law lacks the power of entrenched constitutional protection because any Canadian legislature could modify it by ordinary statute.

In 1978, Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau’s government introduced Bill C-60, the Constitutional Amendment Act, in parliament.  The bill contained a guarantee of, “the right of the individual to the use and enjoyment of property, and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with law.”

This may be a verboten topic in the West, but Trudeau (The First) even tried to have property rights included in the Charter in 1982. This was opposed — no surprise — by the NDP, special interest groups and others. The Liberal government eventually gave up trying.

But maybe that was a good thing. Constitutionally entrenching property rights has long been the goal of many on the political right, but is it the panacea many assume?

The Americans have explicit protection for property in their constitution’s Bill of Rights, and they have the advantage of a rich intellectual tradition acknowledging the moral and instrumental value of property rights. Nevertheless, their courts have whittled it away, piece by piece, until property rights have become wrought with caveats and exemptions borne of a similar rights balancing approach upon which our courts rely.

There is also a question regarding how effectively a province could protect property rights on its own. If Alberta were to entrench its own protection for property rights, it would apply only to the provincial government and municipalities. It would not prevent the federal government – which would not be bound by Alberta’s constitution – from continuing to violate our property rights. 

A perfect example of this was demonstrated earlier this year when the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the federal carbon tax legislation, which greatly interferes with the property rights of Albertans. Unless something entirely unforeseen changes, Albertans will be forever powerless to stop this sort of federal violation of property rights. Entrenching property rights in an Alberta constitution will have no bearing on any federal violations.   

And lastly, the term “property rights” means something very specific to its advocates, but not to everyone. It’s a vague and uncertain term. Generally, advocates mean legal authority to possess, control, exclude and transfer an interest in something tangible, like land or chattels.  But there are others who believe property rights should include socio-economic rights to education, healthcare, pensions and other benefits. This is a debate Albertans have never thoroughly had, and thankfully our courts have shown reluctance to adopt socio-economic rights without that debate.

And lastly, if Alberta did entrench property rights, are we naive enough to believe all currently existing legislation would not be immediately grandfathered? I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there is a very good chance that nothing would change.

In my view, property is both a moral and legal concept foundational to the success of all free and prosperous societies. Governments should be greatly circumscribed in their authority to take or devalue property. But this is a complicated topic, and property rights should not be entrenched on a whim.

Derek From is Columnist for the Western Standard and an associate lawyer with WKA Lawyers

Continue Reading

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Share

Petition: No Media Bailouts

We the undersigned call on the Canadian government to immediately cease all payouts to media companies.

49 signatures

No Media Bailouts

The fourth estate is critical to a functioning democracy in holding the government to account. An objective media can't maintain editorial integrity when it accepts money from a government we expect it to be critical of.

We the undersigned call on the Canadian government to immediately cease all payouts to media companies.

**your signature**



The Western Standard will never accept government bailout money. By becoming a Western Standard member, you are supporting government bailout-free and proudly western media that is on your side. With your support, we can give Westerners a voice that doesn\'t need taxpayers money.

Share this with your friends:

Trending

Copyright © Western Standard New Media Corp.