Why You Need Trusted News Sources

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 829
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I’m not defending Trump or his policies, but at least the Potus has open access by the press...he may answer, he may ignore them, he may tell the to F off, but at least he has the guts to be in front

Now we all have to quit quoting him so we never have to see a post from him.

The only Rock I see here is the heads of the people that think a single news source provides anything but biased reporting. most of the american news outlets are owned by a single company with a

Posted Images

Check the 19 second mark; for good or ill, right or wrong, he clearly blocked her arm and actually forced it down as she reached for the mic... LOL there are no dinging bells at that point and he wasn't trying to avoid the contact. The bigger question here is should she have been reaching/grabbing for the mic?

Mic grabs should be left to security. The other question is why was he still there, I would have punted him a month ago...

Video doesn't lie, outlets using it to prove a point should at least review it to see if it matches the narrative, the guy who reviewed this is likely clearing out his locker right now. This proves the opposite of what they are saying and they should have edited that portion out, then it would only be fake news as opposed to stupid news. BTW, the CBC has latched on to this storey and are spinning it the same way, that after being noticeably AWOL on the Statscan bank information grab.

Are you still suggesting he was trying to avoid physical contact?

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree... The truth must continue to be told.

Here's a story you likely haven't seen on any of the raving anti Trump news networks. Being as this storey is from The Congo and impacts black people, is their omission inherently racist? Could they actually be guilty of what they accuse everyone else of being? Where are snowflake tears for people with real problems?

 You actually have to search for real news now...


 Here is an up to the minute breaking news story from CNN. Might be a reason they balked at a short notice 60 mile presidential motorcade eh? I would too. Most amazing of all, they don't seem the least bit embarrassed.


They actually flew that thing to Paris.... maybe the cargo fee could have been better spent in the DRC.


Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites

More absolute BS on this story with out any factual information or logical thought to back it up.

I’m starting to worry about future of the States. This constant agenda of fake news against the President can not end well. Revolution #2 is in the making imo. 


“ It seems that soldiers who were captured aren’t the only ones that President Trump doesn’t like. He also apparently doesn’t care much for the ones who died for their country.

On Saturday afternoon, the president was scheduled to attend a ceremony at the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery, where 2,289 U.S. soldiers are buried — a small part of the 116,000 Americans who gave the last full measure of devotion during World War I. It was the sort of solemn occasion that U.S. presidents have considered an integral part of their duty at least since the Gettysburg Address. But Trump couldn’t be bothered.”



Link to post
Share on other sites

This from the man who has the State funded CBC in his back pocket at his beck and call...LMAO !! What a ****** hypocrite  

Attacks on the media are a threat to democracy, Trudeau says


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told a press freedom event in Paris Sunday that one of the bulwarks protecting democratic governments from being undermined is also an institution under stress — a free-thinking, robust media.

"If a democracy is to function you need an educated populace, and you need to have an informed populace, ready to make judicious decisions about who to grant power to and when to take it away," Trudeau said.



Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a different story would be written if they hadn’t demonized him from day one. If the media had been actual reporters instead of political pawns things might be different.

I was forced to watch CNN last week at the Dentists.  It was nothing but constant Trump bashing. . when I sat for my cleaning I asked the girl to change to CBC...Same story....It’s no wonder why so many sheople hate him . That’s  all they are TOLD to think and Canadians suck it back like maple syrup questioning nothing....” It has to be true...it was on CNN “ !!

Extremely sad reflection on the Canadian education system IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, deicer said:

The only ones who disagree with it are the minority who are part of the Trump base of supporters.

Yup, them damn deplorables are at again. Climate change, gun control, tweaking the media's nose - when will it ever stop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, deicer said:

The only ones who disagree with it are the minority who are part of the Trump base of supporters.

It's CONTROL OF THE MEDIA that's the danger here.... not attacking the media for being controlled or those who hold and exercise that control.  Or even worse, the public who support and enable those who seek to entrench and expand that control.

 It's like we are in some demented alternate universe where everything we have learned from history has been turned on its head... people are actually proud of how wrong they have it. I'm reminded of the quote "thinking themselves wise, they became fools."

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will have to respectfully disagree with your point on control of the media.  

Media is driven by the numbers of subscribers.  If it is shown as crap, numbers drop, fake news goes away.  Can we agree on that?

Donnie legitimises the real 'fake news' and minimises the truth because it is against him.

The real problem that exists in my opinion, that has led to the masses believing scam news, is that they have purposely dumbed down the education system.  Nobody thinks for themselves anymore. (Except for us, and that is why we debate our differing viewpoints).

Society has been purposely dumbed down to create sheep that won't push back.  Just look at what Donnie is having DeVos do to the education system even more at this time.

So when the fascist stands up and shouts 'Fake News', the majority no longer asks..... Why?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, deicer said:

Media is driven by the numbers of subscribers.  If it is shown as crap, numbers drop, fake news goes away.  Can we agree on that?

Propaganda is commonly defined as “information, especially of a biased nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.” Editorial staffers may decide what content to cover and what not to cover, but news is an entity onto itself and doesn’t dance to the tune of subscribers or yield to their whim. By contrast, a classical music station does and arguably should. Playing 80s rock would be silly, right?

If a news station has one main thrust and one main theme there is clearly an underlying agenda in support of that theme. When agenda transcends the news and the news becomes defined by the agenda, it enters the realm of propaganda by virtue of its intent. Even if you don’t like the term, you would have to admit that much of what passes for news is now weaponized and CNN has pretty much cornered the market on all things anti Trump.

So in short, no… when the news is driven by the politics of the subscriber, or worse by the station owner, or worse yet, by the state or a segment thereof, it becomes, at a minimum, something other than news. The fact that it has a particular following is simply a byproduct of polarization IMO. I fear we have gone so far along the polarization road that the white lines have become blurred. The message is controlled but not by the subscribers, they are simply along for the ride, share the same destination and are willing to pay the toll in order to get there. The fact they are on the same bus isn't news and they aren't actually the ones doing the driving. Cheers



Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Wolfhunter said:

Propaganda is commonly defined as “information, especially of a biased nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.”


I agree with this in principle.

Where I see a difference is that you have multiple news outlets, all reporting the changes that the current administration is trying to effect, and also directly questioning the principals involved.

The propaganda is the administration attempting to deflect from the truth by changing the perspective of the general public with regards to reporting of the news.

When Acosta questioned Donnie about his use of the term 'invasion',  it would have be a non-issue if Donnie had just addressed the question it would probably just gone away. Instead, it was turned into a very un-presidential personal attack on the reporter.  Like his style or not, the reporter was just doing his job.  He has to question and push back.  By doing what he did, I see Trump trying to overall disgust the press corps into quitting.  He doesn't question what they are doing, he makes it a personal attack.  Then to have Acosta ejected and his pass pulled, that's authoritarianism, plain and simple.

Again, the other side of Donnies conduct is that there has been an incredible increase in 'fact checking'.   With that many outlets debunking the lies that Trump says, how can you ever believe him?

So yes, there is propaganda happening.  It just isn't from the Free Press. 

And that is fascism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, deicer said:


So yes, there is propaganda happening.  It just isn't from the Free Press. 

And that is fascism.


Seriously?  One would have to be pretty naive to not see what’s going down here.

Trudeau threw a temper tantrum and banned Sun News in 2014 because he disagreed with them, and now he's lecturing the world about how important media is to democracy. OMFG Just stop.

The only difference is President Trump has taken the media to task and they don’t like any one stepping on their toes...... All in the guise of “ Freedom of the Press”  What exactly is “ Freedom of the Press” ....Where is their sanctimonious reset button when needed. IMO they are totally out of control and when the inevitable revolt comes with a big push back, they should be front and center in the accountability rankings. Canadian politicians are no different in their treatment of a press that doesn’t kneel to their beck and call. 


“Why Justin Trudeau's Sun Media ban is the worst kind of politics

It may be standard practice for politicians to give antagonist reporters a timeout. That doesn't mean Canadians should shrug it off.

Liberal leader Justin Trudeau has for two years charmed the Canadian public with his tousled locks and promises of a different kind of politics.

One he says is “focused on you” and won’t resort to personal attacks.

But his party’s move Tuesday to ban Sun News reporters from accessing the dauphin is the worst kind of politics as usual. It’s just the latest example that Trudeau offers more of the same, just wrapped in a prettier bow.

The row started when Sun News Network host Ezra Levant posted an odious rant accusing the Liberal leader of seeking to deflower a bride whose wedding he photobombed and calling his parents “sluts.”


Levant’s rant also exemplifies everything that’s wrong with hyper-partisan politics in this country, but he isn’t running for the highest office in the land on a seemingly empty promise to do things differently. And Levant’s colleagues should not be punished for his lack of dignity or respect for fellow scribes.

Many have rightly pointed out that Trudeau the Younger is by no means the first politician to put reporters “in the box” for perceived bad behaviour. His father was also notoriously mercurial with reporters.”

That doesn’t mean, however, that it should be shrugged off.

Canadians’ respect for journalism and their democratic institutions have declined in tandem, but neither can function without the other.

Given Trudeau’s rhetoric about repairing Canadians’ trust in democracy, he should also be concerned about their trust in its fourth estate.

We could shrug our shoulders, “twas ever thus” — because the tensions between media and parliaments date to the early days of constitutional monarchy over a century before Canada was a country.

Or we could demand better. Much has been written (some in books landing just this fall) about the growing irrelevance of parliament and its deleterious effect on democracy that I won’t repeat here. One thing is certain: It’s a problem Canadians are starting to notice and Trudeau is selling them snake oil they just might take to the polls next October.

This isn’t the first time Trudeau has promised big, empowering changes. His commitment to open nomination meetings was tested in last year’s race for the Trinity-Spadina byelection in Toronto. And he failed with flying colours, after party infighting turned into a very public war of words and threats of lawsuits.

We’ve seen his playbook before. A young Stephen Harper once pledged fully open nomination meetings, an empowered backbench and a reformed Senate.

The bastion of open accountability that is Ottawa under Harper shows just how committed he was to those Reforms. Er, reform.

If we really want a different kind of politics in this country. One where Question Period is more than pre-canned talking points written by 20-something staffers then we need to start holding politicians to the higher standards they espouse.

So, Mr. Trudeau, if you really proffer a “different kind of politics” then show us with your actions. Because your words are clearly just more empty promises.

And last time I checked, that’s the definition of politics as usual.




Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet another example of Trudeau hypocrisy...


Justin Trudeau unwisely plays media like April fools


“ We are the only political party opening our fundraisers to be media,” he said. “We’ve encouraged the Conservatives and the NDP to do the same, but apparently their commitment to transparency is easier when they are talking about it rather than doing it.”

That takes some kind of moxy.

What Trudeau didn’t tell the crowd, however, was that the media had been herded into a small back room upon their arrival by Trudeau’s handlers and kept out of sight until he took the stage.

According to a Canadian Press report, they were also banned from speaking to anyone at the event — no interviews, therefore, no quotes or context — and then they were ushered out of the ballroom like sheep when Trudeau was finished speaking.

This is the Liberals’ definition of freedom of the press?

The media, no two ways about it, had been played by Trudeau and his people, which does not go down well in a business where printers’ ink is bought by the barrel and the airways need to be filled 24/7.

Down the road, there will be a price to pay for this.

In the meantime, cue talk radio.



Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites

The list goes onnnnn.

What words will Justin Trudeau ban next?


“ However, these rules go beyond accommodation. They ban language government deems offensive, and compel civil servants the use language preferred for ideological reasons.

What’s next? Federal legislation outlawing Mother’s Day? Stiff new penalties for retailers that put up Father’s Day displays in stores?

Trudeau was quick to verbally slap a woman who said “mankind” instead of “peoplekind” at one of his public town halls.

Now his government is banning civil servants from saying Mr., Mrs., Ms., father or mother.

We’d complain about “Big Brother,” but fear that’s no longer acceptable either.”




Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, deicer said:

The propaganda is the administration attempting to deflect from the truth by changing the perspective of the general public with regards to reporting of the news.


Fascism is about control of the media, propaganda is simply a tool to be wielded after control is established. Truth craves facts and when facts are missing it makes truth elusive. Control is about sidestepping facts and spinning truth to suit the agenda. While there is enough guilt to go around, Trump's efforts at propaganda pale when compared with CNN so it seems clear to me that he doesn’t have the control or even a portion of the control you credit him with. He may become enraged at them, but that in no way garners him any power over them in fact it’s symptomatic of a lack of power over them.  

The entire discussion about the wreath laying in Paris stands as an example, it was all noise and no news; completely lacking in any of the impartial facts I needed to make a judgement for myself. Who was controlling that agenda and why? Finding the truth is easy, tell me what the weather was, tell me what his meetings where about, who they were with and what time they ended, tell me where the beast was located, then I can tell you what likely happened and why. The whole discussion about rain in his hair was nothing short of foolish. BTW, I went looking for that info and couldn’t find it.

When I seek to identify the “fascists” I’m looking at who exercises the control… not who is being mocked and its by the preponderance of the evidence. Fascism also tends to exalt race of the sovereignty of the individual which seems to be a liberal position of late but regardless, fascism is such a grossly overworked term that it retains little of its actual meaning and virtually none of its impact. It's now a bit like the word hero or nazi.... mostly meaningless. 

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Immigration Minister Hussein caught lying....

Toronto may buy hotel to deal with Trudeau’s border crisis

Recently, when Ontario cabinet minister Lisa MacLeod put out a news release calling on the feds to live up to their responsibilities, the name calling started again.

Trudeau’s immigration minister, Ahmad Hussen effectively called Lisa MacLeod a liar. He also claimed she called aasylum seekers names.

The name she supposedly called many of those coming across the border illegally was “economic migrants” which the federal government’s own data would support.

As for her supposed lie, MacLeod said that approximately 40% of Toronto’s shelter spaces were taken up by asylum seekers. Hussen claimed that wasn’t true and that shelters don’t keep such stats.

Except they do.

And in a rare moment of journalistic fact checking of the Trudeau government, CBC set the record straight the next day.

Too bad for Hussen that people have learned to fact check him now.

I’m sure that if asked about Toronto needing to buy a run down hotel to keep housing so many extra people that Hussen will say it isn’t federal responsibility and then either attack the questioner or call someone names.

If true to pattern he will also claim the federal government is engaged in extensive consultations and conversations.

Just don’t ask for money. Or tell them they are responsible for this mess.



Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites

The CBC reports fake news about Donald Trump

A selectively edited clip of Trump’s spat with CNN’s Jim Acosta made it on to the CBC

There is no question that all types of media platforms and personalities have some form of political bias.  However, when it comes to Canada’s national broadcaster the expectations of political neutrality are higher.  In my view, any political bias funded by tax payer dollars is wholly unacceptable.

Yet when it comes to covering the Trump White House the CBC seems intent on giving the most selectively edited and uncharitable take on the US President.  This was taken to another level when they straight out lied about Donald Trump’s interaction with CNN reporter Jim Acosta.

CBC nitpicks video obscuring Acosta’s actions

The CBC shared a video of Trump’s press conference and notably left out Acosta’s instigation and unwillingness to give up the spotlight.  Then, they showed a back angle that was clearly designed to obstruct the view of the incident were Acosta manhandled an intern.

That was followed up of clips of Trump responding to other reporters out of context to make him look like a lunatic raving about fake news.

All of this may have been acceptable had they not then resorted to outright falsehoods.  After the clip was played two of CBC’s star anchors, Rosemary Barton and Ian Hanomansing had the audacity to claim that Jim Acosta never “put his hands on” the intern.  That claim is “Fake News”.

There are many acceptable angles to take on the Acosta situation, was it an “assault” as some claim?  In my opinion, no it was not.

But it was an inappropriate handling of a young woman, which is something that our society is quite diligent on decrying, at least when it fits a particular political narrative.

There is incontrovertible proof that he did put his hands on the young women.

Acosta has a history of provoking the White House

Now the prevailing narrative from the media is that press freedom and the first amendment are hanging by a thread due to Jim Acosta’s revocation of White house access, a feat he seemed to spend the last two years working towards.

Acosta had a knack for asking unanswerable leading questions while hogging the stage at press briefings, and this incident was no different.

The interesting thing seems to be that democracy and press freedom was not under attack when former president Barack Obama tossed a White House reporter (to the cheers of the press) for “being rude in his house”, in what the media then termed “heckling” not asking questions.

CBC turns a blind eye to Trudeau’s attack on the free press

The CBC even bragged about how much better Canada’s record is on such matters, conveniently forgetting the time our Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, then leader of the Liberal party banned Sun Media from reporting on him due to his dislike of one journalist.

Again, it would be one thing is this were Global or CTV news, those are private companies.  This is the CBC, I (and every other Canadian) pay for this.  These are our employees and the wilful misrepresentation of a story from a news anchor is grounds for termination.

Will Conservatives like me get our wish and have a State broadcaster that doesn’t lie and belittle its political opponents?  Not likely anytime soon.

Is democracy under attack? No.  Everything will be fine, especially Jim Acosta.  He has achieved his goal of being seen as the chief reporter of the resistance and will land himself a show on CNN where he can parlay his White House dismissal in to a hefty meal ticket.

However, as long the CBC feels like they have the right to lie to the Canadian people for political purposes, they will be guilty of the sin they are so fond of accusing the President of.  Dividing a nation.






Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of fascisim ...

UN Compact on migration proposes destruction of Canada

Posted on October 17, 2018

UN Compact on migration proposes destruction of Canada

By Retired Major Russ Cooper, Spokesperson, C3RF

See https://www.citizengo.org/en/signit/166173/view

The Global Compact on migration is an inter-governmentally negotiated agreement coordinated by the United Nations. It has been a work-in-progress for two years with the final text agreed to this past July, 2018. It moves forward to formal adoption by UN members states, (save for the United States, Australia and Hungary) this December in Morocco. It is noteworthy that the U.S. and Australia see the Compact as incompatible with their sovereignty concerns while Hungary desires measures that deter, rather than promote, migration. The two worldviews for and against the Compact could not be further apart as the U.N. sees migration as a benefit to all while opponents see it as a risk to security and social cohesion. Here are some of the aspects of the Compact that Canada is about to sign onto :

It affirms the pre-eminence of international law in areas that include national migration policy and due process in dealing with both regular and “irregular” migrants;

It  requires a “whole of government” approach to eliminating discrimination and intolerance of migrants and their families (Does M-103 ring a bell?);

It seeks to minimize factors that drive migration through the elimination of socioeconomic factors such as poverty and climate change while funding sustainable development at local and national levels in originating states;

It sees border management as an internationally coordinated and integrated affair;

It requires laws that see the provision of basic services to migrants without discrimination on a number of grounds including “political or other opinion”;

It requires the incorporation of national health and education plans and policies that accommodate all migrants without discrimination in a “lifelong” fashion;

It requires the minimization of disparities between migrant and host populations;

It requires passage of laws that penalize hate crimes directed at migrants and the training of law enforcement and other public officials to respond to such occurrences;

It demands the cessation of funds to media outlets that promote intolerance against migrants and the provision of national and regional complaint and redress mechanisms;

It requires the promotion of safer, cheaper and easier means of remittance corridors to originating states; and

It calls for the facilitation of return and readmission to originating states including financial support and the portability of social security benefits and earned benefits from host states.


Make no mistake : This Global Compact, with its promotion of available and flexible “pathways” of migration, means supranational coordination of international border controls. This will not be the first time the world has witnessed such developments as they are resident within the European context of the past few years. It is this context that has seen EU migration policy open up borders to mass Muslim migration from the Middle East and North Africa. The results in areas of security, violent crime, individual rights and finances have been, and continue to be, startling. Is there any reason that similar, supranational efforts at the U.N. level would produce different outcomes for Canada?

The Global Compact, like Motion M-103, has flown under the radar with little public debate before its imminent instatement. As well, it places an inordinate amount of pressure on the host nation to accommodate migrant sensibilities and needs. There is simply no mandate for the migrant to integrate or even consider the possibility that such a capacity might be a part of the migration process. Rather than this, the accepted bigotry of the host population must be “quelled” (M-103) or eliminated (Global Compact). Not great ways to start a “lifelong” relationship between host and migrant communities.

The stakes involved by virtue of the Global Compact are potentially nation-changing and include the type of social dislocation we are beginning to see in Europe. Sure, one might say that the agreement is non-binding since it doesn’t constitute an official treaty or UN Convention but it will establish an international norm regarding  the governance of international migration. It is norms such as these that can become part of what international law experts call “customary international law”. That, in turn, can inform and shape national laws.

Given the fact that the Compact calls up the need for significant resources to be expended by both federal and provincial agencies and for individual Canadians to sacrifice their right to criticize such policies and expenditures, is it not time to openly debate Canada’s participation in such a venture? At the very least and in line with the health and education burdens the provinces must bear, should the provinces, with Ontario at the fore, not be consulted before Canada can even consider lending its signature to such an enterprise?

What to do? It is clear by now that the federal government is simply chasing a U.N. pat on the head as it virtue-signals its “Canada’s back” mantra. They will not listen to your concerns over loss of sovereignty, security and individual rights and freedoms. Is it not better to petition a powerful office that is prepared to listen to these concerns and act? Given the fact that the Premier of Ontario has demonstrated his willingness to “rock the boat” and speak truth to power and the fact that Ontario has much to lose in the way of health and educational capacity, it makes sense to approach him and his administration with your concerns.

If you agree, please sign this petition and pass along your support of the adjoining message to Premier Ford and his administration :




Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.