pretty scary to think about how strong the manipulation factor is of mainstream media. It’s almost like the government WANTS this to happen, to make the public so afraid of a protest that they cower in fear so that they become DEPENDENT on the government that should have dealt with the troublemakers in the first place
I’ve no doubt that 90% of that convoy were good people, but much like every other riot in the last 40 years in this country, there’s an element of anarchism even in this country that likes to bring chaos to the table.
what does the media have to gain, from hiding what’s actually happened in Ottawa as Arminius described? Why does Trudeau not want to engage in dialogue with thousands of people who have driven across the second largest country in the world to protest government mandated vaccinations?
Offending a group of people with power? Presumably there may be a very vocal minority who sympathise with the convoy and cannot tolerate hearing anything negative about it? I’m just speculating as I’m not Canadian.
Why does the UK government not engage in dialogue with the thousands of protestors on any given issue? I don’t like that elected representatives across the world in general are becoming more and more distant from the populace they represent, but how do we find the balance between representation and letting minorities hold too much power over the rest?
So, Prince Andrew has reached an out of court settlement with Virginia Giuffre. It’s been reported that he has agreed to pay approximately £12m to her and her foundation (that supports victims of abuse).
No admission of liability. Acknowledges Giuffre suffered abuse. Regrets his association with Epstein.
There’s no way such a sum could be afforded by Andrew as a private individual. Questions will now (must now) be asked about where those funds are coming from, on whose authority, and on what justification/rationale.
By way of comparison, if the amount being reported is accurate, it’s more than 10 times that paid by Epstein to Giuffre under their settlement.
It’s also more than what it would cost Andrew in legal fees were he to have continued to defend the action brought by Giuffre.
Didn’t he sell some ski lodge recently? Not sure how much he could have gathered from that deal.
I’m just a little perturbed by the fact that he no longer has to sit trial for this. It doesn’t feel right that you can pay someone off for potential crimes without any admission of guilt.
Just on this - it was a civil trial so a settlement with financial restitution is a common outcome. Were Prince Andrew ever charged with a criminal matter (never see it happening, esp in UK) then paying off the victim would not stay proceedings.
“[Bukovsky] responded immediately by saying he did download images and that they would be on the computer in his study. … In an interview, Bukovsky told detectives he had become interested in child abuse images in the 1990s in the context of a debate on the control and censorship of the internet. … ‘Bukovsky said his initial curiosity turned into a hobby, rather like stamp collecting,’ Carter said. The dissident continued to download images between 1999 and 2014, and estimated that he had accumulated a collection of ‘1,500 movies’. His interest varied year by year. The last downloads took place days before his arrest.”
