Category: US

Posted on

The Myocarditis Foundation, And Donations From Financially Interested Parties

It’s a narrative seen all too often lately: heart problems and death among young and healthy people is common. There’s nothing too alarming. Well, is that really the case? Are things this straightforward, or is something obvious not being discussed?

On the surface, there’s nothing wrong with an organization whose purpose is to bring public awareness to common health problems. There are certainly many of them. The Myocarditis Foundation is just one of these groups.

Upon digging a little deeper, there are questions about this group, and what its interests really are. In particular, it’s curious where their financing comes from, and what they leave out of the conversation. But first, a bit of backstory:

Regeneron was one of the companies in 2020 who was vying to get a cure onto the market for this so-called “Covid-19”. They ultimately got Regen-CoV (casirivimab and imdevimab) emergency use authorization with the FDA. This obviously wasn’t full approval, but allowed the products to be distributed. Regen-CoV has some interesting side effects, to put it mildly.

The story gets more interesting. Regeneron has many products either in testing, or already on the market. One such case is a partnership with Sanofi on a cancer drug. Another drug was something called Arcalyst, which was to be repurposed by a company called Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals. This essentially amounts to taking a commerical drug, and finding an entirely new purpose for it.

In its information for investors, Kiniksa explains how this happened to come about. They are quite open that this is someone else’s creation.

Rilonacept was discovered and developed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Regeneron) and is approved by the FDA under the brand name ARCALYST® for the treatment of CAPS. Kiniksa licensed rilonacept from Regeneron in 2017 for evaluation in diseases believed to be mediated by both IL-1α and IL-1β, including recurrent pericarditis. The FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation to rilonacept for recurrent pericarditis in 2019. Based on the Phase 3 RHAPSODY data announced today, the Biologic License Application (BLA) for CAPS will transfer to Kiniksa, and the company plans to submit an sBLA with the FDA in recurrent pericarditis later this year. Upon receipt of FDA approval for rilonacept in recurrent pericarditis, Kiniksa would assume the sales and distribution of rilonacept for the approved indications in the United States and will evenly split profits on sales with Regeneron.

Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals was founded in 2015 in Bermuda. Despite being a “new” company, there were able to raise $80 million relatively quickly. Over the next year, they would obtain the exclusive rights to rilonacept. 2018, they were able to raise $170.7 million with their IPO, or initial public offering. 2019, the FDA conferred “Breakthrough Therapy” designation on them and they went into Stage 2 testing. All of this is pretty impressive for a company that seemingly came out of nowhere.

June 29, 2020 Kiniksa announced the Phase 3 testing for its drug to combat recurring pericarditis. What a coincidence that they would soon have such a growing market for their product.

March 18, 2021, Kiniksa received FDA approval for its product. Proprietary name is Arcalyst, and the established name is Rilonacept. “Treatment of recurrent pericarditis (RP) and reduction in risk of recurrence in adults and children 12 years and older.” Interesting how this product came along just in time for the wave of heart problems that would ensue.

[1] Regeneron is involved in conducting research into various cures for Covid-19. Of course, so are many others.
[2] Kiniksa takes an existing product from Regeneron. It’s used as a cure for pericarditis, the scale of which is likely made much worse by Covid-19 vaccines.

Problem. Reaction. Solution.

Now, what does all of this have to do with the Myocarditis Foundation? It turns out that Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals is one of their major donors. In their Spring 2021 newsletter, the Foundation celebrates the revelation of Kiniksa’s approval for recurring pericarditis with the FDA.

It’s curious that the other corporate donors are insurance companies. Just a thought, but perhaps there is some larger effort to limit liability of businesses everywhere.

A cynic may wonder if the Myocarditis Foundation’s focus on heart damage from Covid-19 is a way to boost business for Kiniksa, and to deflect attention from the long term effects of these vaccines. With so much money at stake, it’s hard to write off any possibility.

Looking through the tweets and publications of the Myocarditis Foundation, they never seem to address the elephant in the room: how many recent cases of heart problems are caused by these vaccines?

(1) https://twitter.com/myocarditisfndn/status/1461721312087486470
(2) https://www.regeneron.com/covid19
(3) Regeneron’s COVID-19 Response Efforts
(4) https://www.regencov.com/
(5) https://www.pharmalive.com/regeneron-and-sanofi-collaboration-receives-third-fda-drug-approval/
(6) https://www.kiniksa.com/about
(7) https://www.kiniksa.com/diseases
(8) https://investors.kiniksa.com/news-releases/news-release-details/kiniksa-announces-positive-data-phase-3-trial-rilonacept/
(9) Kiniksa Announces Positive Data from Phase 3 Trial of Rilonacept in Recurrent
(10) https://www.fda.gov/media/97001/download
(11) Corrected 20210930_ ANNUAL_Breakthrough_Approvals
(12) https://www.myocarditisfoundation.org/
(13) https://twitter.com/myocarditisfndn
(14) https://www.myocarditisfoundation.org/supporters/corporate-donors/
(15) Corporate Charitable Giving – Myocarditis Foundation
(16) https://www.myocarditisfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2020-Financial-Summary.pdf
(17) https://www.myocarditisfoundation.org/newsletter/
(18) https://www.myocarditisfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Spring-21-Newsletter.pdf
(19) Myocarditis Foundation Spring-21-Newsletter
(20) https://www.myocarditisfoundation.org/research-and-grants/research-and-grant-program/
(21) https://www.iscmf.org/
(22) https://www.iscmf.org/covidregistry

AND FOR SOME EXTRA READING:
(A) Canadian Pharmaceutical Sciences Foundation Funded By Big Pharma
(B) Canadian Pharmacists Association: Subsidies While They Lobby Against You
(C) CDN Immunization Research Network Funded By Pfizer, GSK, Sanofi
(D) B.C. Pharmacy Association Funded By Drug Companies
(E) U.S. Council On Patient Safety: Women’s Health
(F) Emergent BioSolutions Lobbying All Federal Parties
(G) British Fertility Society Funded By Pharmaceutical Companies
(H) American College Health Foundation Is Funded By Big Pharma-and-insurance/

Posted on

Recent Expenses, Source Countries Of People Entering Canada Illegally

Even though the mainstream press has largely stopped covering the issue, people are still coming into Canada illegally, and we are still covering their expenses.

While our Government and media routinely distract with fear-porn about a non-existent virus, the important issue of border security seems to have disappeared. Admittedly, it has been neglected here on this site as well.

In any event, let’s look at some recent information about the costs associated with this virtue signaling. Keep in mind, this is not a complicated issue. Governments could put a stop to this problem overnight if they wanted to. The only reasonable conclusion is that they want to “appear” to be helpless, while ensuring this continues.

INSTITUTION/PLACE DATE AMOUNT
Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development Apr. 25, 2018 – Mar. 31, 2019 $900,000
ARK Group DMCC Mar. 16, 2020 – May 31, 2021 $999,894
CCFC – Christian Children’s Fund of Canada Mar. 21, 2017 – Dec. 31, 2021 $12,671,151
City of Hamilton (Government) Aug. 2, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2020 $220,000
City of Ottawa (Government) Apr. 5, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2020 $7,000,000
City of Toronto (Government) Jul. 31, 2018 – Mar. 31, 2019 $26,000,000
City of Toronto (Government) May 10, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2020 $45,000,000
City of Toronto (Government) Aug. 29, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2020 $17,000,000
City of Toronto (Government) Apr. 1, 2020 – Mar. 31, 2021 $23,000,000
City of Toronto (Government) Apr. 1, 2020 – Mar. 31, 2021 $16,000,000
City of Ottawa (Government) Jun. 26, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2020 $10,100,000
City Of Victoria (Government) May 15, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2020 $6,000,000
International Organization for Migration 2013-2014 Project $3,087,839
International Organization for Migration Dec. 7, 2015 – Dec. 31, 2018 $10,000,000
International Organization for Migration April 2018 to April 2019 $22,000
International Organization for Migration Feb. 1, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2023 $15,000,000
International Organization for Migration Mar. 15, 2019 – Mar. 15, 2020 $19,500
International Organization for Migration Mar. 26, 2019 – Mar. 26, 2020 $50,000
International Organization for Migration Jun. 24, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2023 $2,219,042
International Organization for Migration Mar. 12, 2020 – Sep. 30, 2023 $1,199,636
Nakache, Delphine (University of Ottawa) Mar. 15, 2018 $213,936
Province of Manitoba (Government) Jul. 31, 2018 – Mar. 31, 2019 $3,000,000
Province of Manitoba (Government) Aug. 21, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2020 $5,000,000
Province of Quebec (Government) Aug. 29, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2020 $250,000,000
Province of Quebec (Government) Apr. 1, 2020 – Mar. 31, 2021 $94,000,000
Province of Quebec (Government) Apr. 1, 2020 – Mar. 31, 2021 $30,000,000
Regional Municipality of Peel (Government) Aug. 21, 2019 – Mar. 31, 2020 $2,200,000
United Nation High Commissioner for Refugees Mar. 29, 2019 – Mar. 29, 2020 $50,000

Some of these grants are worth a look in closer detail. Keep in mind, this is just what’s getting flagged by “irregular”. There is most likely more money coming from other sources.

With the International Organization for Migration, it looks like we are handing out cash to facilitate the illegal movement of people. It doesn’t seem like prevention at all.

To enhance awareness of key communities in Central America of the risks associated with irregular pathways of migration and of the options available for regular migration, including to Canada;
.
To strengthen capacity of local government agencies and stakeholders in the target countries to develop information campaign strategies to better inform communities on safe and regular migration pathways and risks of irregular migration.

As one example (albeit a small one), Canadian taxpayers sent $50,000 to Costa Rica. The idea was to discourage them from coming illegally, but to inform them of the litany of methods to enter Canada legally.

This grant will support UNODC to strengthen the migration management capacity of Nigeria through technical assistance in the areas of national migration /immigration policies and procedures, deterring irregular migration, and improving data collection and analysis related to human trafficking and migrant smuggling.

Another grant sent $1.2 million to Nigeria, to combat human smuggling and trafficking. At least that was the stated goal. However, consider the large numbers of Nigerians simply coming across the border from the United States, it seems more like we just subsidized their travel.

In fact, Nigerians have been the largest group to enter Canada illegally over the last few years.

ORIGIN INTAKE ACCEPTED REJECTED PENDING
Total 59,384 22,591 16,152 17,555
Nigeria 16,187 4,120 6,777 4,658
Haiti 9,236 1,861 4,205 2,655
Columbia 3,425 1,269 420 1,599
Pakistan 2,343 918 505 800
Democratic Republic of Congo 2,094 362 292 1,328

Note: This doesn’t count withdrawn and abandoned claims.

All of this since 2017, according to the IRB. People can just stroll through the border (and this happens often) at Roxham Road. A serious country would turn them away, not shell out millions for locals to feed and house them.

The United States is such a dangerous country, we are told. However, they get tens of thousands (or more) of asylum claims every year. Strange that people are so willing to flock to an unsafe place. Unless of course, this is all about shopping around for better benefits and living conditions.

Despite all the talk about the border being closed with the U.S., that isn’t true at all. People are still able to come in and pretend to be refugees. The only real difference is that Roxham Road has been converted into a normal border port, and is processing illegal aliens.

As a sign of where things are heading, consider this recent announcement. Refugee claimants (people waiting for a hearing), who have accumulated enough hours working in health care can apply to stay. This seems to also apply to people who entered the country illegally. There seems to be no standards in who we let into this field.

This applies to both pending and failed (yes failed) asylum applicants. If they have enough hours, they can apply for permanent residence. The hours required is the same as for health care workers on visas: (120 between March and August 2020, and either 750 hours or 30 hour/week for 6 months).

It’s a bit of a meme that we have doctors, scientists and engineers flooding the borders. Apparently, this is what’s actually happening.

At a time when health care workers are being terminated for refusing to take the experimental shots, a replacement work force is coming in. The catch seems to be a lack of concern for bodily autonomy. This problem is likely to just get worse.

More to come on this long neglected topic.

(1) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc
(2) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/id/cic,094-2018-2019-Q4-D198772004,current
(3) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/id/cic,094-2019-2020-Q4-D208778003,current
(4) https://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/statistics/Pages/irregular-border-crossers-countries.aspx
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/refugees/healthcare-workers-permanent-residence.html
(6) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/refugees/healthcare-workers-permanent-residence/eligibility.html#s3

Posted on

Kape Technologies Buying Up VPN Services, VPN Review Sites

It’s fairly common these days to have VPNs (virtual privacy networks) for both business and personal computer use. But what about the companies who offer these services? How much data do they save, and what happens if they get bought about by another provider? Will the same terms and conditions be honoured for previous customers?

True, this broke a while ago, but is worth a mention for the long term security and privacy issues. Unfortunately, internet privacy is just assumed by far too many people.

The site restoreprivacy.com put a considerable amount of work into this article. They’ve compiled quite the reference list. Rather than rehashing everything, go visit their site for more information.

A few of the points listed are these:

  • 2017: Crossrider purchases CyberGhost VPN for $10 million
  • 2018: Crossrider changes name to “Kape”
  • 2018: Kape purchases Zenmate VPN for $5 million
  • 2019: Kape purchases Private Internet Access for $127 million
  • In May 2021, news broke that Kape had purchased a company called Webselenese. Like Kape, Webselenese also operates out of Israel and runs the websites vpnMentor.com and Wizcase.com.
  • 2021: Kape purchases ExpressVPN for $936 million by far the largest VPN acquisition to date

VPNs do have legitimate purposes and make an enormous difference in protecting people online. However, no company is truly invulnerable.

How do we know that a VPN company is what it claims to be, and not a front for intelligence gathering? Such an operation would put Facebook to shame in terms of its capabilities.

Beyond privacy rights, there are also property rights to think about. If a person or company publishes content, and then ads are inserted (without consent), is that not interference? If content doesn’t reach its destination as it should, it can have financial consequences.

A few ideas to think about:
-Consider different browsers, 1 for sensitive use, another for more general use
-Have multiple encryption methods
-Think twice about sending certain material at all, which should be commonsense
-Talk in person, and avoid technology where possible
-Research who actually owns your VPN service
-Be prepared to walk away if needed

Yes, there is the argument that “if you aren’t doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide”. However, there’s nothing wrong with people wanting to keep their personal lives private.

While this is a bit different from the normal subjects, it’s worthwhile to think about the long term impacts of your online data. Also, with the creeping authoritarianism and medical tyranny (for your safety of course), Governments could very well get in on this. One of the consequences of limiting public gatherings is that it drives people online, where it’s much easier to monitor their content.

(1) https://restoreprivacy.com/kape-technologies-owns-expressvpn-cyberghost-pia-zenmate-vpn-review-sites/
(2) Former Malware Distributor Kape Technologies Now Owns ExpressVPN
(3) https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2015/06/09/from-israel-unit-8200-to-ad-men/?sh=2755192f26e2
(4) These Ex-Israeli Surveillance Agents Hijack Your Browser To Profit From Ads
(5) https://restoreprivacy.com/expressvpn-executive-uae-surveillance/
(6) High-Level ExpressVPN Executive Ensnared in Criminal Surveillance Operation
(7) https://www.reuters.com/world/us/american-hacker-mercenaries-face-us-charges-work-uae-2021-09-14/
(8) Ex-U.S. intel operatives admit hacking American networks for UAE _ Reuters
(9) https://business-review.eu/news/israeli-company-crossrider-buys-romanias-cyberghost-for-eur-9-2-mln-132813
(10) Israeli company Crossrider buys Romania’s CyberGhost for EUR 9.2 mln
(11) https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-crossrider-renamed-kape-after-switching-to-cybersecurity-1001227178
(12) Crossrider renamed Kape after switching to cybersecurity – Globes
(13) https://blog.malwarebytes.com/detections/adware-crossrider/

Posted on

Public Media Alliance, Brussels Declaration, Protecting Journalists & “Media Freedom”

The Public Media Alliance claims that harassment, threats, and violence towards journalists is a serious concern. This organization also thinks the media isn’t independent enough. While that is certainly true, it seems this NGO is less than sincere in what it states it supports.

For some even more Orwellian organizations, check this piece on: (a) Journalism Trust Initiative; (b) Trusted News Initiative; (c) Project Origin: and (d) The Trust Project. There’s also this article on the Coalition For Content Provenance And Authenticity.

So-called public service media, or PSM, refers to media outlets that are either run by, or heavily financed by the respective Governments. The PMA is quite blunt about this.

Financial models for public media organisations vary but an element of public funding is central. This is usually provided by either allocation from general government resources or via a general charge on users (licence fee). Public media organisations also supplement declining public resources with external revenue in order to maintain quality.

However, what will become clear is that the PMA doesn’t really advocate for a free and open media. Instead, it calls for media — and publicly funded ones — that operate within their own ideologies.

Within the PMA, there is a subgroup called the Global Task Force, or GTF.

The GTF claims its values are: access, accuracy, accountability, creativity, impartiality, independence and high standards of journalism. All these underpin an informed and healthy democracy. Many of these are under assault by various forces, both private and public.

It also says on its webpage that “public service media must develop a coordinated global response mechanism in order to defend and promote core values.” At face value, there is nothing that catches attention.

The Global Task Force exists to defend the values and the interests of Public Media.
.
The Global Task Force (GTF) was formed to develop a consensus and single, strong voice around the issues and challenges facing public media worldwide. An industry led initiative, the GTF offers a perspective that spans countries, languages and cultures.

The 8 members of the “Global Task Force” have openly supported the Brussels Declaration, which they claim is a new global initiative to protect journalists and media freedom.

  • David Anderson, Managing Director, ABC (Australia)
  • Thomas Bellut, Director General, ZDF (Germany)
  • Delphine Ernotte Cunci, President & CEO, France Télévisions (France)
  • Tim Davie, Director General, BBC (United Kingdom)
  • Jim Mather, Chair of the Board, RNZ (New Zealand)
  • Hanna Stjärne, Director General, SVT (Sweden)
  • Catherine Tait, President & CEO, CBC/Radio-Canada, GTF Chair (Canada)
  • Yang Sung-dong, President & CEO, KBS (South Korea)

This is by no means the entire list who endorsed the Brussels Declaration. In fact, dozens of broadcasters, mainly publicly funded, have already signed on to it. These include:

  • Radio-Télévision belge de la Communauté française (RTBF) – BEL
  • Vlaamse Radio- en Televisieomroeporganisatie (VRT) – BEL
  • Radio-Canada – CAN
  • CBC/Radio-Canada – CAN
  • France Télévisions – FRA
  • Radio France – FRA
  • British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) – GBR
  • Nederlandse Publieke Omroep (NPO) – NLD
  • European Broadcasting Union (EBU) – INT ORG
  • Public Media Alliance (PMA) – INT ORG
  • Les Médias Francophones Publics – INT ORG
  • Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (ZDF) – DEU
  • Arbeitsgemeinschaft der öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (ARD) – DEU
  • International Federation of Journalists – INT ORG
  • European Federation of Journalists – INT ORG
  • Knowledge Network Corporation – INT ORG
  • Die Schweizerische Radio- und Fernsehgesellschaft (SRG SSR) – CHE
  • Médias multiplateforme éducatif et culturel du Québec – CAN
  • Sveriges Utbildningsradio – SWE
  • France Médias Monde – FRA
  • Yleisradio – FIN
  • Sveriges Television (SVT) – SWE
  • Asia – Pacific Broadcasting Organisation – INT ORG
  • Lituanian National Television and Radio – LTU
  • TV5 Québec Canada – CAN
  • TV5MONDE – FRA/INT ORG
  • Televisión América Latina (TAL, Union of Latinamerican Public, Educational and Cutlural Broadcasters) – INT ORG
  • Sindicato Nacional de Periodistas de Costa Rica – CRI
  • Korean Broadcasting System (KBS) – KOR
  • Radio New Zealand (RNZ) – NZL
  • Radio Télévision Suisse (RTS) – CHE
  • Radio and Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina – BIH
  • Österreichischer Rundfunk (ORF) – AUT
  • Rádio e Televisão de Portugal (RTP) – PRT
  • NHK (Japan Broadcasting Corporation) – JPN
  • Australian Broadcasting Corporation – AUS

That is quite the list, and it will surely grow in time.

Now, what is the Brussels Declaration? Primarily, it revolves around 5 points and commitments, claiming to want to protect a free and independent media worldwide.

[1] We improve the safety of journalists and other media staff
[2] We stand up for the independence of public broadcasters
[3] We encourage well-informed democratic debate
[4] We support a strong and diverse news media landscape
[5] We promote diversity, fairness and inclusion within our own organisation and in the society we serve

On the surface, there is nothing objectionable about any of this. In fact, these are great goals to work towards. However, when we see these principles applied in practice, and the rampant double standards, questions start to come up.

Each point could be an entire article by itself, but we will try to make this short, and more manageable. Considering the content of the Brussels Declaration, it’s fair to ask who wrote certain parts of Trudeau’s legislation over the last several years.

1. Enhancing the safety of journalists, crews and media professionals

All journalists, crew members and media professionals need to be able to safely perform their duties. To that end, the signatories commit to providing the resources and support their employees need to protect themselves from physical violence and online harassment, while raising public awareness about the impact of those attacks on democracy.

No one supports having physical harm come to journalists. However, legitimate criticism (and trolling) is often conflated with violence or attacking. By doing this, it undermines efforts to hold reporters accountable for what they publish, especially things that are provably false.

That said, there is little to no coverage of protests in Australia, Europe, and elsewhere. Nor do mainstream outlets cover police brutality towards peaceful demonstrators. It’s almost as if there was a certain narrative to push.

2. Standing up for the independence of public service media

The signatories commit to publicly condemning any attempt to undermine the independence of public service media — whether it’s through political pressure, financial threats or retribution, harassment or attacks against employees, or antimedia rhetoric. They also commit to improving understanding of the distinction between public and state broadcasters.

Public service media is independent? Watch 2:25 to 4:40 in particular, from this October 2020 video. Not a peep from any of the “journalists” there. Tam openly admits that: (a) journalists are asked to promote their agenda; (b) social media directs people to certain sites; (c) taking down content; (d) demonetizing content; and (c) manipulating the algorithm to bury certain content . However, not only are there no objections, but no one seems even the slightest bit surprised by this.

As for the independence of public service media, would it be too much to ask that it be made obvious that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is a major donor of the BBC? It’s not like this was difficult to find, or that it’s even much of a secret at this point.

3. Fostering an informed and civil democratic debate

In response to the global disinformation crisis, the signatories commit to providing trusted news and information, supporting fact-checking initiatives, boosting media literacy, and monitoring and removing hate speech from their platforms. They also pledge to call on social media companies and regulators to eradicate online hate on third-party platforms.

Calling on social media companies to remove “hate”, whatever that is? This raises the obvious question of who actually writes legislation in Parliament to call for such things.

Should the Government be financing the fact-check organizations that keep it in line? Moreover, should political operatives be running such groups? How is there real accountability when the media and the groups monitoring them are funded by the same people? Isn’t it just a dog-and-pony show at that point? It’s not independent if funding depends on pushing a narrative — regardless of who’s pushing it. While too numerous to name here, below are recent articles on exactly this subject.

(a) https://canucklaw.ca/media-subsidies-to-counter-online-misinformation-groups-led-by-political-operatives/
(b) https://canucklaw.ca/taxpayer-grants-to-fight-misinformation-in-media-including-more-pandemic-bucks/
(c) https://canucklaw.ca/counter-intelligence-firms-to-influence-elections-canada-and-abroad-registered-as-charities/
(d) https://canucklaw.ca/more-pandemic-bucks-for-disinformation-prevention-locally-and-abroad-civix/
(e) https://canucklaw.ca/phac-supporting-science-up-first-online-counter-misinformation-group/
(f) https://canucklaw.ca/rockefeller-spends-13-5-million-to-combat-misinformation-in-u-s-elsewhere/
(g) https://canucklaw.ca/poynter-self-claimed-factchecking-group-funded-by-media-giants/
(h) https://canucklaw.ca/disinfowatch-ties-to-atlas-network-connected-to-lpc-political-operatives/

4. Supporting a strong news ecosystem with a diversity of sources

A diverse mix of public, community and private news media is fundamental to a strong news ecosystem and healthy democracy. Consequently, the signatories commit to collaborating with other domestic media outlets to protect local journalism — including sharing best practices on journalist safety and speaking with one voice on common challenges.

Quite interesting. Last April, CBC reported that Dominic LeBlanc, President of the Privy Council, was openly considering laws to ban “misinformation” around the so-called pandemic. Although nothing seems to have happened (yet), this is absolutely chilling. Nonetheless, CBC seemed relatively uninterested, and only gave this a passing mention. Moreover, these outlets seem rather blase about the steady erosion of civil rights, and the ever changing narratives.

Also, how is it exactly that there is a diversity of sources, when they are all being financed to some degree by the Government? Just like the fact-checkers, the media itself is bought off. This extends to many smaller and “independent” news sources. See below.

(a) https://canucklaw.ca/media-in-canada-obedient-to-govt-covid-narrative-largely-because-of-subsidies/
(b) https://canucklaw.ca/postmedia-subsidies-connections-may-explain-lack-of-interest-in-real-journalism/
(c) https://canucklaw.ca/postmedia-gets-next-round-of-pandemic-bucks-from-taxpayers-in-2021/
(d) https://canucklaw.ca/nordstar-capital-torstar-corp-metroland-media-group-more-subsidies-pandemic-bucks/
(e) https://canucklaw.ca/aberdeen-publishing-sells-out-takes-those-pandemic-bucks-to-push-narrative/
(f) https://canucklaw.ca/many-other-periodicals-receiving-the-pandemic-bucks-in-order-to-push-the-narrative/
(g) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-37i-tri-city-news-pulls-article-where-bonnie-henry-admits-false-positives-could-overwhelm-system/
(h) https://canucklaw.ca/canada-emergency-wage-subsidy-bailing-out-banks-credit-unions-media-companies/
(i) https://canucklaw.ca/media-5-the-origins-of-true-north-canada-which-its-founder-hides/

5. Promoting diversity, equity and inclusion within our organizations and in the societies we serve

In order to uphold the ideals of pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness that underpin democratic societies, the signatories commit to more accurately reflecting the diverse makeup and perspectives of the populations they serve, both in their programming and workforce — while also leading efforts to make their workplace inclusive for everyone.

This presumably means forced diversity. In the West, it means less whites, and in particular, less white men. And that’s pretty twisted, considering how few whites there are in general in the mainstream press.

(a) https://canucklaw.ca/press-forward-anti-white-independent-media-controlled-and-funded-by-the-establishment/
(b) https://canucklaw.ca/hirebipoc-replacing-whites-in-the-media-industry-all-at-taxpayer-expense/

In any event, it’s great news knowing that the CBC and some other outlets have signed the Brussels Declaration. It’s so relieving to know that strong, independent media will continue for the years to come.

Sarcasm aside, it doesn’t appear that the Public Media Alliance, the Global Task Force, or any of these groups actually care about having an independent media. This seems more like an effort to protect their dominance, while ignoring the assault on true reporters.

(1) https://www.publicmediaalliance.org/
(2) https://www.publicmediaalliance.org/global-task-force/
(3) https://www.publicmediaalliance.org/about-us/what-is-psm/
(4) https://www.publicmediaalliance.org/about-us/what-is-psm/content/
(5) https://www.publicmediaalliance.org/brussels-declaration-pma-joins-public-media-and-international-organisations-to-call-for-journalist-safety-and-media-freedom/
(6) https://brusselsdeclaration2021.com/
(7) https://brusselsdeclaration2021.com/declaration
(8) https://canucklaw.ca/journalism-trust-initiative-trusted-news-initiative-project-origin-the-trust-project/
(9) https://canucklaw.ca/coalition-for-content-provenance-and-authenticity-c2pa-project-origin-content-authenticity-initiative/
(10) https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-misinformation-disinformation-law-1.5532325
(11) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Jr_rkzzr2Q
(12) https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/about/annual-reports

Posted on

Poynter: Self Claimed “Factchecking Group” Funded By Media Giants

Ever get the impression that all major media is controlled by a few people? Well, meet Poynter, the factchecking group that is financed by media conglomerates. There’s no conflict of interest here.

In short, these groups act as a form of counterintelligence groups. Their mission being to discredit and deflect from real truth, in order to promote what Governments and corporations are saying. This is little more than propaganda in today’s society.

By supporting the Poynter Institute, you fortify journalism’s role in a free society. Poynter champions freedom of expression, civil dialogue and compelling journalism that helps citizens participate in healthy democracies. We prepare journalists worldwide to hold powerful people accountable and promote honest information in the marketplace of ideas.

Founded in 1975, Poynter is an inspirational place but also a practical one, connecting the varied crafts of journalism to its higher mission and purpose. From person-to-person coaching and intensive hands-on seminars to interactive online courses and media reporting, Poynter helps journalists sharpen skills and elevate storytelling throughout their careers.

We bring together Poynter faculty and industry experts to explore the intersection of journalism, technology and the public interest. Poynter specializes in:
-Ethics and fact-checking
-Reporting and storytelling
-Developing journalism’s leaders
-Advancing newsroom diversity
-Strengthening local news companies

Poynter claims it prepares journalists to hold powerful people accountable. That’s interesting, considering who their donors are. Also, if truth is important, why the focus on storytelling? This group is noticeably silent on the topic of media and social media censorship. As an example, Kevin Chan of Facebook Canada bragged about removing 16 million pieces of information in 2020.

This group is part of the Coronavirus Facts Alliance, whose mission it is to route out “misinformation”, which is pretty much anything that contradicts the official narrative.

As for their major donors, at least they are open about it:

BIGGEST FUNDERS

  • Charles Koch Foundation
  • Democracy Fund
  • Environmental Defense Fund
  • Facebook
  • Foundation to Promote Open Society
  • Gill Foundation
  • Google News Initiative
  • Institute for War and Peace Reporting
  • John S. and James L. Knight Foundation
  • Lumina Foundation
  • MacArthur Foundation
  • Miami Foundation
  • National Endowment for Democracy
  • Newmark Philanthropies
  • Newton & Rochelle Becker Charitable Trust
  • Omidyar Network | Luminate
  • Rita Allen Foundation
  • Robert R. McCormick Foundation

LARGEST CUSTOM TRAINING PARTNERS IN 2019-2021

  • American Society of Business Publication Editors
  • Charles Koch Institute
  • ESPN
  • Facebook
  • Huffington Post
  • Marketplace
  • MRC Media
  • Middle East Broadcasting Networks
  • National Public Radio
  • Newsweek
  • New York Times
  • Pinellas County School District
  • Southern Newspapers Publishers Association
  • The Washington Post
  • TikTok
  • USA Today Network
  • Vice
  • Voice of America – Broadcasting Board of Governors

Do you get it now? This is just another group of fact checkers doing what they can to ensure that the “correct” opinions and points of view are promoted. These aren’t independents, or even quasi independents.

(1) ttps://www.poynter.org/
(2) https://www.poynter.org/major-funders/
(3) https://www.poynter.org/about/

Posted on

Getting Started With Researching Registered Canadian Charities

In both Canada and the United States, registered charities are open to at least some degree of scrutiny by members of the public. This is of importance since a surprising number of NGOs who try to influence your life are actually charities. In addition to meddling, these groups are being subsidized with your tax money. The upside is that it makes it much easier to look into them.

Also in this series, we covered: (a) research, investigative journalism for beginners; (b) FOI/ATIP filings; (c) court record searches; and (d) lobbyist registrations. This is meant as introductory lessons, and not to include everything.

While the focus on this is Canadian charities, you should be aware that it’s possible to search the finances of American ones in much the same way. The information is made public by the Canada Revenue Agency, and Internal Revenue Service, respectively.

A disclaimer: it’s probably best to go into this with an open mind. Surely, the bulk of these groups operate in a completely transparent manner. That said, groups that few have heard of have a disproportionate impact on our lives. Be curious, but willing to have beliefs changed. Also, a great many of these organizations have revenue of just a few thousand or tens of thousands per year. They aren’t pulling too many strings.

Referring to the Canadian site: checking out if a company is registered as a charity is about as complicated as running a Google search. Simply type in the name, or part of a name. It is actually quite surprising the amount of places that are charities. This includes colleges, universities and many public health “authorities”.

Now, let’s try an example:

Searching with the term “public health“, we get 6 hits. The Public Health Association of British Columbia is one of those on that list, so let’s take a look at that.

Basic information about the PHABC (and other groups) are instantly available. Typically, the last 5 years of financial data will be available, although one can ask the CRA for filings from further back. They will also list the number of employees, and typically the salary ranges of the top 10 highest paid. Usually, these are executives. While this certainly does not include everything, it’s a great starting point when investigating charities.

(Anecdotally) it seems very common that a large part of the revenue is from “other” sources. It would be nice to know specifically what that involved. Perhaps some assets were sold off to make it happen?!

While non-profits are subject to many of the same laws, the financial information isn’t so readily available. Just a clarification here.

The CRA Charity Page works well in conjunction with Corporations Canada. From here, one can look up which groups are registered, and obtain many of their filings. These are free. If a corporation is set up provincially, the filings can be obtained that way, although some charge for copies.

When you know who the Directors are — either from the CRA or a corporate search — do a little digging. Have they sat in Government before? Have they held any public office? Do they have relatives, close friends, or business associates who are in a position to influence policies? While this approach may make some uncomfortable, realize that this is how things work in the real world. It’s not Bills or Motions, but secret handshakes that often determine how things go.

As for formal meetings, check the piece on getting started with lobbyist registries. It’s amazing how much information is out there.

Now, why would a corporation structure itself as a charity? The most obvious explanation is for the tax benefits. Since donations are tax deductible — almost 50% in most cases — it provides an incentive for donors, as the public will actually help finance it. Also, charities are taxes by the CRA in a more generous way than other businesses, or even non-profits. But, there is a trade off: more forced transparency.

Can a person call up a charity to ask for information? Yes, absolutely. In fact, depending on how easy going you are, you may learn about things that never crossed your mind.

This isn’t to suggest that all charities are run with some nefarious purpose. Far from it. However, it’s important to know what you are helping to fund, and if and how they are trying to influence public policy.

Then of course, we have “charities” like the Century Initiative who promote genocidal policies of population replacement with open borders initiatives. Ones like this are definitely worth a deep dive.

Now, if the entity being researched is not a registered charity, then this article will have no impact. That said, a stunning number of them are, so it’s at least worth a look.

One other thing to point out: programs run through the CRA — like the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy and various sickness programs — post a lot of their data online. If nothing else, there’s a significant amount of information available.

Is this a lot of work? It can be, but with practice, it gets much easier. And this is what this series is trying to underscore: self reliance. Instead of depending on some blogger, or YouTuber, or podcast, “you” are your own most reliable source of information. Figure out what’s true and what’s not.

IMPORTANT LINKS
(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch
(2) https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/
(3) https://ic.gc.ca/app/scr/cc/CorporationsCanada/fdrlCrpSrch.html

PROGRAMS RUN BY THE CANADA REVENUE AGENCY
(A) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(B) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-wage-subsidy.html
(C) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-wage-subsidy/cews-statistics.html
(D) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-wage-subsidy/cews-statistics/stats-detailed.html
(E) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/benefits/recovery-benefit.html
(F) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/benefits/recovery-caregiving-benefit.html
(G) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/benefits/recovery-sickness-benefit.html

SURPRISING INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE “CHARITIES”
(1) https://canucklaw.ca/bc-provincial-health-services-authority-is-a-private-corporation-charity/
(2) https://canucklaw.ca/bc-centre-for-disease-control-foundation-is-registered-charity-with-pharma-funding/
(3) https://canucklaw.ca/alberta-health-services-mostly-autonomous-corporation-charity/
(4) https://canucklaw.ca/public-health-ontario-a-semi-autonomous-corporation-whose-leaders-sit-with-on-science-table/
(5) https://canucklaw.ca/executives-of-public-health-charities-drawing-huge-salaries-to-lock-you-down/
(6) https://canucklaw.ca/canadian-public-health-association-is-a-charity-funded-by-drug-companies/
(7) https://canucklaw.ca/charity-university-of-toronto-institute-for-pandemics-funded-by-millers-merck-run-by-ontario-science-table/
(8) https://canucklaw.ca/charity-mcmaster-university-bill-gates-future-of-canada-project-nexus-for-infectious-diseases/
(9) https://canucklaw.ca/media-5-the-origins-of-true-north-canada-which-its-founder-hides/