Blogger Comment:Well they would do this wouldn’t they the Democrats and where they just want their criminal activities and vast fraud covered up, so they clam up on their whole sordid and mega-corruptive conspiracy against the American people and hopefully criminally con the American people again in the future…for there is no dignity in lying to our country to get elected under false pretences and then in reality, to run it solely for their Globalist elites masters behind the scenes not the people, as the Democrats did it 100% wise from 2021 > through 2025, where they did not give one iota from the American peoples’ wellbeing…and where if they got into political power again…God help us, they would simply sell the United States of America hook, line and sinker down the Suwannee river and the American people, where the great nation of the US of A, would be no more…totally destroyed in a mere 4-years as PM Starmer is doing for the Globalists in the UK presently now…so keep a keen eye on Britain and what happens to a nation when a Globalist puppet is in charge…and what would happen exactly to America if the Democrats were ever in power ever again…God forbid…period
.
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has pulled a classic bait-and-switch, deciding to bury its 2024 election after-action report rather than face the music.
The DNC revealed that it will keep the findings of this critical review hidden from the public, a directive straight from Chairman Ken Martin, Just The News revealed.
This move starkly contrasts with earlier promises of openness, especially as the party gears up for future congressional fights.
In February, Martin was elected DNC chair with a mission to dissect the party’s losses in the Senate and White House.
As reported by The New York Times, he committed to a thorough audit of past mistakes and a blueprint for recovery.
Yet, that promise has been shelved.
Martin is now opting to seal the report from public view.
A DNC spokeswoman, speaking anonymously to The New York Times, noted that Martin fears a public reckoning could undermine efforts to reclaim congressional power next year.
This decision follows Democrat successes in statewide races in New Jersey and Virginia in 2024.
However, it is raising questions about whether recent wins have dulled the appetite for self-reflection.
Over the summer, sources hinted the report would sidestep thorny issues like former President Joe Biden’s reelection bid and key choices in failed Democrat presidential candidate Kamala Harris’s campaign.
Internally, the party clashed over the audit’s scope.
Some senior Harris aides are even refusing interviews, leaving accountability in limbo.
Still, DNC officials leaked a summary of findings to The New York Times.
The leak paints a picture of strategic blunders that conservatives might quietly applaud.
The report critiques the party’s obsession with the sheer volume of voter contacts over quality engagement.
Meanwhile, peer-to-peer texting failed to move the needle.
It also flags underinvestment in streaming platforms to court younger voters, strained data systems, and a defensive stance on public safety and immigration.
Republicans, on the other hand, seized economic messaging.
Martin summed up his rationale with a quip:
“Here’s our North Star: Does this help us win?”
One wonders if winning means dodging hard truths.
This secrecy suggests the DNC might be more focused on optics than fixing what’s broken.
Blogger Comment:When a Democrat aligned government like the present Labour government with a Globalist puppet in charge that sent over 100 political officials from 10 Downing Street to lobby in the United States for the Democrats in the 2024 elections and where Trump knows what Labour is, and where you know this is not political at all, but something sinister that has people intensions, but of the very worst kind…and we can see this in the UK in just around 1-year under Starmer, where the country is literally going down the tube and drain…but on purpose of course and for a reason…’the Globalist elites “Great Reset and their golden year of 2030 when they have stated that they take over the West with their so-called UN/Democrat backed one-World Globalist elite Govermment…read up on it, you will be amazed what’s happening out there...
.
The UK’s socialist Labour Party-controlled government has rejected calls from the British public to roll back its Orwelian censorship laws, instead doubling down on digital restrictions even as backlash intensifies at home and abroad.
Britain’s globalist government rejected widespread public demands to roll back its sweeping Online Safety Act (OSA).
More than 160,000 Britons signed a petition urging Parliament to repeal the Act, a law critics warn has rapidly evolved from a child-protection measure into one of the most aggressive censorship systems in the democratic world.
Instead of reconsidering, MPs used the debate to push for even stricter controls on VPNs, age-verification tools, encrypted messaging platforms, and AI chatbots.
The debate in a sparsely attended Westminster Hall session revealed a stark divide as the public demands digital freedom, and the government presses for deeper surveillance and expanded authority.
Law Fueled a 700% Surge in VPN Use
Since the OSA took effect, VPN usage across the UK has skyrocketed by 700%, as citizens turned to privacy tools to escape the law’s sweeping content restrictions.
That explosion in VPN adoption prompted MPs to suggest regulating the tools outright, a proposal that has alarmed civil liberties groups, who say the government is inching toward full control over online access.
Critics argue that the OSA’s broad and vague provisions have created a de facto censorship regime, forcing lawful political discussions, hobby forums, and independent message boards offline due to burdensome compliance demands from Ofcom.
One administrator of a Sunderland AFC fan forum nearly shut the site down entirely after struggling to navigate the regulator’s requirements, an example now cited widely by OSA critics as evidence that the law is crushing small platforms while tech giants absorb the compliance costs with ease.
Government Targets AI Chatbots, Encryption, and Online Speech
MPs also signaled an aggressive expansion of the Act’s scope.
Several lawmakers argued that AI systems should face rapid regulation, with some warning that chatbots could “manipulate” children.
Calls to police generative AI, monitor chatbot interactions, and broaden age-verification requirements confirm that ministers intend to widen the Act’s reach far beyond its original purpose.
This expansion places encrypted messaging, AI development, and privacy tools at the center of the government’s next wave of regulation, raising new concerns that the OSA will evolve into a system capable of monitoring or restricting private digital communications.
In one of the debate’s clearest illustrations of the government’s posture, MP Lizzi Collinge argued that the law’s censorship powers were no different from “safety features,” insisting that online spaces require supervised controls comparable to physical environments.
Civil liberties advocates say the framing is deeply misleading because the OSA empowers the government to remove legal content, suppress dissenting views, and strong-arm private companies into enforcing government-approved speech standards.
Critics Warn the OSA Reflects a Global Trend Toward State-Controlled Digital Spaces
Analysts note that the OSA mirrors historical censorship regimes under the guise of public protection, from 17th-century licensing laws to modern authoritarian internet controls.
The difference, they warn, is that the OSA is advancing under democratic branding, even as its impact aligns with surveillance systems long associated with nondemocratic states.
The debate also exposed a growing international rift.
Vice President J.D. Vance has openly criticized Britain’s push to police online speech and undermine encryption, warning that the UK risks setting a dangerous global precedent for digital suppression.
Public Pushback Growing as Parliament Closes Ranks
Downing Street appears committed to expanding the law anyway, signaling that VPN tracking, restrictions on encrypted platforms, and AI oversight will be central pillars of upcoming regulatory frameworks.
Ofcom has already begun researching VPN use, and age-verification companies are lobbying for deeper involvement.
Despite public resistance, Parliament has shown no interest in curbing its own authority.
The OSA remains intact and expanding, a law critics say erodes privacy, chills free expression, and opens the door to an unprecedented level of state involvement in everyday digital life, all under the banner of “safety.”
The public revolt is still growing.
But for now, the government has made its position clear: the censorship regime stays.
Blogger Comment:We can see that Trump and his Administration are the only ones who has intensions to make peace and where the Democrats want war, war and more war and never-ending war…for war is good for the Globalist elites in Davos and other places, as other than Pharmaceuticals) make people ill and then sell the cures for the disease that they have created and unleashed…Covid times just a single one here and more on the way…continually), chemicals (that kills our crops that feeds us and also to keep our numbers in check) and energy (false energy sources like the Net Zero hoax that cost and arm and leg, but do hardly anything in making the people energy safe, as they are totally inefficient – Trump knows this well), war is a rich provider of wealth for the elites and they know that and why they never want wars to end and new ones sponsored by them to keep on starting, for they are not interested one iota in peace, as that’s the “slow-lane” to fabulous unadulterated wealth and where they know that their time on this earth is a mere 7 or 8 decades on average and why they love wars that kill, but enrich themselves far more quickly than other ways…its their reality and why they control all western political leaders except in 4-countries, the USA, Hungary, Slovakia and Italy and once Trump goes there will be complete hell on earth unless he launches “Operation Overlord 2.0” before he is out of office…fact not fiction…let us all hope that he does and invades Europe to start with and then finishes off the other Globalist controlled nations…where that is the only road to long-term freedom for humanity and nothing else less…period…for everlasting PEACE to become a reality…
.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has warned the American people that key U.S. allies in Europe are seeking to draw the United States into a direct military conflict with Russia, an effort she says is being assisted by globalist officials inside the American intelligence bureaucracy.
Gabbard told attendees at Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest in Phoenix on Saturday that “warmongers in the deep state” remain committed to preventing Russia and Ukraine from reaching a negotiated settlement.
This effort, Garbbard notes, is directly undermining President Donald Trump’s ongoing push to pressure both sides toward a peace agreement.
“Predictably, they use the same old tactics that they’ve always used,” Gabbard continued.
“The deep state within the intelligence community weaponizes ‘intelligence’ to try to undermine progress,” she said, motioning air quotes.
She added that those same officials then leak classified assessments to “mainstream propaganda media” outlets to create false narratives aimed at sabotaging diplomacy.
Gabbard argued the broader objective is not simply preserving the current conflict, but escalating it.
“[Globalists] foment fear and hysteria as a way to justify the continuing of the war and their efforts to undermine President Trump’s efforts towards peace,” she said.
“And do so in this case in order to try to pull the U.S. military into a direct conflict with Russia, which is ultimately what the EU and NATO want.”
“We cannot allow this to happen,” she added, drawing applause from the audience.
Warns of Islamist Ideology as a National Security Threat
Gabbard also used her remarks to highlight what she argued is a growing internal threat to U.S. security: the rise of Islamist political ideology within American communities.
“There’s a threat to our freedom that is not often talked about enough,” she said.
“And it is the greatest near- and long-term threat to both our freedom and our security, and that is the threat of Islamist ideology.”
According to Gabbard, Islam, when applied as a political system, seeks to impose a “global caliphate” and is fundamentally incompatible with the constitutional foundations of the United States.
“This is already underway in places like Houston,” she told the audience.
“This is not something that may possibly happen; it is already happening here within our borders.
“Paterson, New Jersey, is proud to call themselves the first Muslim city.”
She added that Islamist ideology “is propagated by people who not only do not believe in freedom, their fundamental ideology is antithetical to the foundation that we find in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, which is that our Creator endowed upon us inalienable rights.
“The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
The remarks come amid heightened tensions in Europe, escalating conflict along the Russia–Ukraine front, and a broader reassessment of NATO’s strategic aims under President Trump, who has repeatedly pressed European governments to shift from escalation to diplomatic resolution.
Blogger Comment:One of the Globalist’s brainwashing machines through their bought and paid for US Democrat Party that these people totally lean-too…period…totally politically captured…totally…“Top European Official Blows Whistle: Ukraine Stealing U.S Aid, Laundering Money Back to Democrats”
A new analysis shows that ABC’s propaganda show “The View” booked 341 guests in 2025, including 128 liberals and only two guests categorized as conservative, underscoring the program’s long-running reputation for ideological imbalance.
The findings were revealed in a study from the watchdog group Media Research Center (MRC).
With the show airing its final original episode of the year on Friday, the MRC reviewed every politically relevant segment.
The study found that the daytime talk show welcomed 25 Democrat politicians among its 128 liberal guests, while featuring only a single Republican officeholder.
The only other “conservative” guest was actress Cheryl Hines.
However, Hines was only counted as right-leaning because she defended her husband’s policies.
“Their noticeable lack of right-leaning guests is just like their search for someone to fill the ‘conservative seat’ in the panel,” MRC associate editor Nicholas Fondacaro said of the findings.
“They don’t want to have anyone on the show who’s going to lead to embarrassing moments of their leftist cast members being held to account for the wild and controversial things they say or call them out on their hypocrisies.”
A Rolodex of Democrat Officials
The guest list emphasized the point.
In 2025 alone, the show featured:
Sen. Tammy Duckworth
Sen. John Fetterman
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer
Sen. Elizabeth Warren
Rep. Jasmine Crockett
Sen. Amy Klobuchar
Gov. JB Pritzker
Sen. Elissa Slotkin
Sen. Chuck Schumer
Sen. Cory Booker
Sen. Raphael Warnock
Gov. Wes Moore
Former President Joe Biden and former First Lady Jill Biden
Former Mayor Rahm Emanuel
Former Rep. Anthony Weiner
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries
Sen. Joe Manchin
Former Vice President Kamala Harris
Then-mayoral candidate Zohan Mamdani
Then-mayoral candidate Andrew Cuomo
Sen. Bernie Sanders
The show also hosted Obama-era staffers turned “Pod Save America” hosts Jon Favreau, Jon Lovett, and Tommy Vietor; Biden Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre twice; GLAAD activist Sarah Kate Ellis; and Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
Two Guests Counted as Conservative
Only two guests qualified as “right-leaning” by the MRC’s criteria: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and Cheryl Hines.
Fondacaro noted that Hines “isn’t truly even a conservative,” explaining:
“While having left-wing politics herself, she was forced to defend her husband’s — and, by extension, the Trump administration’s — policies.
“Thus, she was counted as right-leaning.”
As for Greene, Fondacaro wrote that the program invited her only because “she was being a headache for Congressional Republican leadership during the government shutdown.
“The cast also tried to recruit her to become a Democrat.”
He added that ideological imbalance is unlikely to change.
“With the show set to return on January 5, 2026, and President Trump speaking out against her, Greene was already announced as a guest for their January 7 episode,” he wrote.
Fondacaro noted that it would be two days after Greene was set to step down from Congress and just one day after Rep. Jasmine Crockett’s (D-TX) third appearance in less than a year.
MRC Calls for FCC Review
MRC President David Bozell argued that the findings demonstrate that the show should no longer be considered part of ABC’s news division.
In a statement, Bozell said:
“‘The View’ should be renamed ‘The Cackle’ and eliminated from the ABC News Division and placed in the comedy lineup with a warning label, ‘This show is for non-entertainment purposes only.’
“We welcome an FCC investigation into whether ‘The View’ still qualifies as a bona fide news program.
“We don’t think it does.”
Behar’s Claim Refuted by Conservatives
The MRC also highlighted co-host Joy Behar’s on-air claim that Republicans refuse to appear because “they’re afraid of us.”
The watchdog pointed out that numerous prominent Republicans have since come forward publicly with evidence showing the opposite that their offers to appear were rejected or ignored by the program’s producers.
How the Count Was Conducted
The MRC’s methodology required a guest to express political views during the episode to be classified as liberal or conservative.
Public figures who did not discuss politics were excluded, even if they were outspoken elsewhere.
Actor Robert De Niro, despite a history of attacks on President Trump, was not categorized as a liberal guest because “politics did not come up.”
Blogger Comment:People who are literally blind to what has been going on since 2020 and Covid will think that this article is mad and can never happen, well you should visit Canada for just one western nation that is controlled by the Davos and other places Globalists…for Canada is now a a cesspit of death and destruction, but that is how the Globalists work and where there are only 4-Western nations that are now not controlled by the Globalists, the USA, Slovakia, Hungary and Italy, for all the others have been captured and are now being run into the ground (for a purpose – The Great Reset timed to be fully introduced by the Globalist elites by 2030 and to basically to controll us mere mortals) by their carefully selected political leaders who are their puppets…Covid was the start in earnest of this suppression of humanity and now will be joined by a whole host of dire and insane things to come…but people like in Germany during the 1930s did not believe it, but where the globalists are the pinnicle of all that Hitler did and far more deadly than what he did to Europe and its people, as the Globalists intend to do all this to all western nations, not just those in Europe…basically destroy them, their societies and their people…you and me with all our loved ones…you think that this is insane, well the German people thought that as well and where history repeats its self-continually and for sure…where all the control technology is now in place and all paid for through your taxation to the Globalist technology giants That they control financially and where we have now paid for our own demise and enslavement by the most sophisticated evil minds and evil enemies of humankind ever…who are those mysterious, but seen in the clear light of day, the Globalist elites who literally control the world…for their own use…period
For you only have to read Hitler’s Speech to his top generals only the week before he started the genocide that you have been told little of, as the Globalists control most of MSM including the social platforms – “Adolf Hitler: “The Obersalzberg Speech” – https://www.bleadon.org.uk/media/other/24400/Hitler-obersalzberg-speech-22August1939.pdf… thinkit will never happen again, think again as you have certainly being fooled by the media who only tell you what they want to tell you, which is what the Gloobalists have toild them to tell you…
.
A veteran British physician is sounding the alarm that 2026 will go down as the year Western governments openly normalize what he bluntly calls “mass slaughter of the disabled, the poor, the frail, the old, the unemployed and the unwanted.”
Dr. Vernon Coleman, a long-time critic of global health bureaucracies and government overreach, argues that so-called “assisted dying” and “medical assistance in dying” (MAiD) have already crossed a line in countries like Canada and the Netherlands.
He argues that other Western nations will soon topple and warns that the United Kingdom is now being maneuvered down the same path under the banner of “compassion.”
According to Coleman, this isn’t about choice or dignity.
It’s about building a state-run mechanism to quietly eliminate those the system views as a burden.
Coleman raised the alarm in a new essay where he warns about the rise in euthanasia and the slippery slope into full-blown eugenics.
His warning is blunt: if the public does not stop it now, euthanasia will not remain a “rare, carefully regulated last resort.”
It will become a routine exit ramp for governments to eliminate the burden of anyone who is old, ill, disabled, poor, lonely, or simply inconvenient.
Britain’s “Death by Doctor” Bill: From ‘Compassion’ to a Legal Killing Machine?
In the U.K., Coleman points to the fast-tracked “assisted dying” legislation in Parliament as the next major front.
He notes that MPs in the House of Commons “narrowly” voted the bill through.
However, many lawmakers, he argues, had “no real idea” what they were actually authorizing.
Yet, the bill now sits in the House of Lords with growing time and political pressure behind it.
Coleman characterizes the bill as one of the most dangerous and misleading pieces of legislation ever introduced in Westminster.
On paper, it is sold as a tightly controlled option for a small number of patients in severe pain, desperate to end their lives.
In practice, he insists, that is never where it stops.
He warns that the globalist political playbook is now familiar:
1) Pass a tightly worded law.
2) Reassure the public that it will be used “rarely” and only in “exceptional” circumstances.
3) Then quietly expand the criteria, weaken safeguards, and normalize the practice until it becomes just another “treatment option.”
In his view, this is not speculation.
It is exactly what has already happened around the world.
Canada: “Death by Doctor” as a Model for Mission Creep
Coleman argues that Canada is the clearest warning of where “assisted dying” regimes inevitably lead once the door is opened.
Canada legalized MAiD in 2016 with a key condition: the patient’s natural death had to be “reasonably foreseeable.”
That legal phrase was initially presented as a strict safeguard.
Within a few years, Coleman notes, the safeguards were eroded step by step:
• The “reasonably foreseeable” requirement was dropped.
• MAiD eligibility expanded to people with “grievous and irremediable” medical conditions — a broad, subjective category.
• The program was then extended to non-terminal disabilities, chronic illnesses, and loss of independence.
Canada is now preparing to open MAiD to people whose primary condition is mental illness, and discussions have already included minors.
From there, Coleman argues, the logic was extended further: poverty, isolation, and lack of support have become de facto reasons to die.
He cites cases reported in Canadian media and public testimony where:
• Disabled veterans were reportedly offered euthanasia instead of support or adaptive equipment.
• Patients with depression, eating disorders, or long-term psychiatric conditions were told they could pursue MAiD as an “option” rather than receiving sustained treatment.
• Individuals who could not secure adequate housing or disability support considered assisted death because they could no longer survive with dignity.
Coleman’s core claim is stark: what began as a supposedly “rare and regulated” last resort has become a system where the state, medical bureaucracy, and cash-strapped health services treat premature death as a cost-saving measure.
He notes that official Canadian figures already show tens of thousands of deaths through MAiD, and he argues the real numbers may be higher due to the way causes of death are recorded.
From Care to Culling: When Vulnerable People Are Steered Toward Suicide
Dr. Coleman emphasizes that the most chilling trend is not just who qualifies on paper, but how vulnerable people are being nudged toward euthanasia in practice.
He cites reported cases in which:
• A paralyzed veteran asking for a wheelchair ramp was allegedly offered euthanasia instead.
• A woman seeking help for depression was asked if she had considered MAiD, with staff reportedly mentioning that a state-administered death would be “more comfortable” than a suicide attempt.
• Family members claim hospital staff persistently pressured them to sign Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders or agree to “assisted dying” for elderly relatives.
Coleman’s argument is that once a culture and legal system normalize the notion that death is a medically managed solution to suffering, economic pressures, ideological agendas, and bureaucratic convenience begin to do the rest.
He warns that the poor, disabled, chronically ill, mentally distressed, and the elderly become prime candidates for “death by doctor” when treatment is deemed too costly, beds too scarce, or their lives too “low quality” in the eyes of the system.
The “Slippery Slope” Is No Longer Theoretical
Supporters of assisted suicide often dismiss concerns about a slippery slope as fearmongering.
Coleman responds by treating the “slope” as a documented historical pattern.
He points to international examples where:
• In the Netherlands and Belgium, euthanasia has extended to minors, people with autism, learning disabilities, and psychiatric disorders.
• In some cases, parents or relatives reportedly approved euthanasia for demented or incapacitated patients who could no longer meaningfully consent.
• Over time, “exceptional” categories quietly become routine.
Coleman warns that “assisted suicide” laws will be no different in any other nation that passes similar laws.
He argues that once the legal architecture is in place and doctors are empowered to deliver lethal injections, the pressure to expand, streamline, and normalize the practice will be relentless.
The Myth of the ‘Peaceful, Painless’ Euthanasia
One of the most powerful parts of Coleman’s argument is his direct attack on what he calls the “convenient myth” that euthanasia is gentle, peaceful, and painless.
He cites medical reporting and case studies from countries with established euthanasia regimes and from U.S. death-penalty protocols, including:
• Failed lethal injections where patients took hours or days to die.
• Cases of vomiting, gasping, spasms, and apparent distress after the administration of “cocktails” of killing drugs.
• Instances in which patients reportedly woke up after ingesting so-called “death doses,” creating confusion about what to do next.
• Autopsy evidence from executions showing fluid build-up in the lungs consistent with the sensation of drowning or suffocation.
Coleman argues that:
• There are no standardized protocols guaranteeing a quick, painless death.
• Monitoring during euthanasia is minimal, and there is no way to know exactly what the patient experiences physiologically in their final moments.
• The serene image sold to the public, a quiet fade into sleep, is often marketing, not medicine.
If anything, he suggests, a bullet would likely be faster and more reliable.
The fact that governments avoid such blunt methods, he implies, is not about mercy, but optics.
From “Assisted Dying” to Depopulation and Organ Harvesting
Coleman goes further than most critics, tying euthanasia into a broader global agenda.
In his view, pushing “death by doctor” is not just a misguided policy; it is an integral feature of a depopulation and eugenics project aimed at managing “surplus” population.
He notes several converging trends:
• Palliative care and hospices are underfunded or closing.
• Health systems are rationing treatment and leaving patients on waiting lists where many die before they are seen.
• Elderly patients have been subjected to “Do Not Resuscitate” orders or withdrawal of food and fluids without proper consent.
• Against that backdrop, euthanasia is sold as a compassionate “choice,” even as genuine care becomes harder to access.
Coleman also raises a deeply uncomfortable point that organs are being harvested from people who are euthanized by their governments.
He warns that:
• The most viable organs come from people who die in controlled, medically managed scenarios, not from random accidents or natural death at an advanced stage.
• Euthanasia provides precisely that: a predictable, controlled death in a hospital setting, with organs still in condition to be harvested.
• As organ donation systems increasingly move from opt-in to presumed consent, euthanasia could quietly become a pipeline of high-quality organs.
In his view, this creates a perverse incentive structure where:
• The same system that encourages vulnerable patients to die can turn around and reserve their organs for the political and economic elite.
Coleman portrays euthanasia as the ultimate inversion: those most in need of protection are steered into early death, while their bodies are mined for parts.
The Culture Shift: From Protecting Life to Managing Death
Beyond policy mechanics and horror stories, Coleman is most concerned about the cultural and moral shift.
He argues that:
• Once the state and medical profession reposition themselves not just as healers but as authorized killers, the entire foundation of medicine changes.
• Many doctors want nothing to do with this, but a system under financial strain will always find enough willing participants.
• The same political class that mishandled the pandemic, advanced experimental mandates, and centralized more power over daily life is now being trusted to decide who can be legally killed.
He also warns about new speech and “influence” restrictions around euthanasia, citing proposals in places like Scotland that would criminalize attempts to talk someone out of assisted death.
In other words, the state moves from allowing euthanasia, to encouraging it, to punishing those who resist it.
“Speak Now or Regret It Later”
Dr. Coleman’s conclusion is not subtle.
He insists that:
• Euthanasia bills are not neutral health policies; they are tools to accelerate depopulation, cut costs, and eliminate those deemed “useless eaters.”
• Safeguards will not hold. They never do.
• Once the machine is built, it will not be reserved for the most extreme cases—it will be normalized, expanded, and defended as “progress.”
He warns that many people will only grasp the full horror when it is too late, when a parent is pressured into “choosing” death, when a disabled person is steered toward euthanasia instead of care, or when a depressed relative is quietly approved for a lethal injection.
By then, he suggests, resistance will be branded as selfish, “anti-choice,” or even criminal.
In a final warning to the public, Coleman asserts that, if you stay silent now, you may not like the world that silence builds.
Blooger Comment:This is what your taxpayer’s money is paying for…your very own demise, as withiout the people’s taxation, your government has no money and only borrow DEBT off the Globalist elites in Davios and elsewhere all the time and where we foolishly pay off as well through our taxation…it is a totally corrupt never-ending system that the Globalists like with this dire financial invention of theirs and now it is one that is and will even destroys us from the inside, without relent with Globalit’s AI technology and only created for them, not the people and where all “Western nations” are going to the dogs…notice I do not state “Eastern nations” and that should tell you something what is really happening…but people just cannot see it…can you ?
A new analysis from the McKinsey Global Institute warns that roughly 40% of American jobs could be replaced by artificial intelligence (AI), marking one of the most sweeping estimates yet of the technology’s economic impact.
According to the report, titled “Agents, Robots and Us,” current AI and robotics technology is already capable of automating more than half of all U.S. work hours, both cognitive and manual, if businesses fully redesign their workflows around automation.
McKinsey’s researchers found that the jobs most at risk involve drafting, processing information, and routine reasoning tasks that AI agents can already perform at scale.
Hiring trends are reflecting this shift: paralegals, administrative and office support roles, and even some programming jobs have all seen slowing demand.
The analysis also highlights physical, high-risk labor performed in warehouses or in machine-operation roles, which McKinsey says are especially likely to be replaced by robotics.
Jobs with Human Traits Face Lower Risk
McKinsey estimates that about one-third of U.S. jobs will be difficult to automate because they rely on uniquely human attributes.
Roughly 70% of tasks performed by nurses, caregivers, and other healthcare workers require physical presence, empathy, hands-on dexterity, and interpersonal judgment.
The report notes that these are elements that current AI and robotic systems cannot replicate.
Maintenance and repair roles, which often require on-the-spot problem-solving in unpredictable environments, were also categorized as resistant to automation.
Economic Upside
The report concludes that the primary barrier to widespread AI adoption is not technical capability but policy and investment.
According to McKinsey, rethinking entire workflows, rather than automating isolated tasks, could generate as much as $2.9 trillion in economic value annually by 2030.
The findings arrive as Washington debates how to regulate emerging AI systems and whether to slow their deployment.
While some fear rapid automation could disrupt millions of workers, others argue that delaying adoption will hand a competitive advantage to foreign economies aggressively embracing AI.
McKinsey’s analysis makes clear that the debate is no longer about whether AI can replace large segments of the workforce.
Instead, the report concludes that it is more of a case of whether federal policy will allow businesses to take full advantage of the technology or force a slower, more limited transition.
Blogger Comment: This is just a small pointer to how evil this man really is and the pinnacle of what he is doing and has done to humanity is insane and in the same mindset vein as Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, Fauci and the Pharma Mafia all rolled into one if you read and research into him from alternative information/news sources other than the Globalist ‘CONTROLLED’ MainStreamMedia that only tell you what the Globalists want you to know, including all their constant lies to cover-up the real truth of constant genocide that they undertake across the world and the insidious crimes against humanity that Gates and his other Globalist friends undertake behind the scenes…read up is my advice to humanity and before their golden year of 2030 is upon us all and where and when, they have said and stated many times since 1971 on their “January platform” in Davos, that they will take ‘CONTROL’ of the new world order through their insane plans for us all within their deadly and dire ‘Great Reset’ agenda for humanity …period
.
Bill Gates was also seen in a framed picture inside Epstein’s mansion on his private island (lower left).
Earlier this week, additional photos revealed Gates standing alongside Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly Prince Andrew.
Gates has repeatedly claimed his interactions with Epstein were limited to “several dinners,” but the growing volume of photographic evidence is prompting renewed scrutiny of those assertions.
The timing has only intensified public interest.
The White House has been racing to redact hundreds of thousands of Epstein-related documents before Friday’s legal deadline requires their release.
The files will potentially expose the most detailed look yet at nearly two decades of federal investigations into Epstein’s exploitation of young women and underage girls.
Gates’s associations with Epstein first drew global attention in 2019, when the New York Times reported the tech mogul met Epstein “after Epstein was convicted of sex crimes.”
A 2023 Wall Street Journal investigation further alleged Epstein attempted to leverage an alleged affair involving Gates and a Russian bridge player in 2017, a claim Gates has not addressed in detail.
Gates’s ex-wife, Melinda, has publicly said she ended the marriage partly because of his ties to Epstein.
She called Epstein “abhorrent” and “evil personified.”
Despite that background, Gates has continued to insist his contact with Epstein was minimal and motivated by philanthropic ambitions.
His explanation, “I had dinner with him, and that’s all,” is under renewed pressure as more images emerge showing Gates in settings that appear to extend beyond business meetings.
In one photo released December 12, a younger Gates is seen smiling next to a man believed to be Epstein’s longtime pilot, Larry Visoski, standing beside Epstein’s jet.
The image contrasts sharply with Gates’ 2023 statement to ABC Australia, where he dismissed the entire relationship as limited to a handful of meals.
Gates has repeatedly called his involvement with Epstein a mistake.
“In retrospect, I was foolish to spend any time with him,” he told the Wall Street Journal earlier this year.
“So yes, I think I was quite stupid.”
His spokesperson has maintained that Epstein attempted to “leverage a past relationship,” adding:
“Mr. Gates never had any financial dealings with Epstein.
“As Bill has said before, it was a mistake to have ever met him.”
The newest tranche of Epstein estate photos includes far more than Gates.
Images show Epstein surrounded by groups of women; photographs of a woman whose body was inscribed with quotes from Vladimir Nabokov’s novel Lolita; and social gatherings featuring high-profile figures, including director Woody Allen, businessman Thomas Pritzker, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and linguist Noam Chomsky.
None of those individuals is implicated in Epstein’s crimes, however.
Several photos depict Epstein’s infamous Boeing 727, nicknamed the “Lolita Express,” which has previously been associated with travel by numerous prominent figures, including Clinton and ex-Prince Andrew, according to released flight logs.
Other disturbing images feature passports from multiple countries, including Ukraine, Russia, Lithuania, and South Africa, with identifying information redacted.
Investigators say these documents may have belonged to Epstein’s trafficking victims.
This is consistent with testimony that Ghislaine Maxwell regularly seized passports from girls taken to Epstein’s island.
Epstein’s own U.S. passport, issued in 2019, was also displayed.
It contains a notice stating the bearer “is a registered sex offender who was convicted of a sex offence against a minor.”
The growing evidence trove, now tens of thousands of images and documents, is renewing pressure on public officials and former associates who have long attempted to distance themselves from Epstein.
Democrats have selectively released 68 photos so far, with more expected as federal agencies prepare for the legally mandated document dump.
With Gates appearing yet again in newly surfaced material, questions surrounding the true extent of his relationship with Epstein, and the accuracy of his past statements, are certain to intensify.
“The Continual NIGHTMARE WORLD “AFTER” the World Economic Forum’s (The WEF) “GREAT RESET” by 2030 and where the World’s People and Humanity will be Totally Subjugated to a Life Without Freedom in Perpetuity…
…READ more about what is coming to humanity including yourself, on our website where there are more informative article of the horrors that 2030 will bring to the world that ‘truth; has determined over the last 54-years…https://world-freedom.co.uk/
Blogger Comment:The Globalists are closing in inch by inch day by day now as we come nearer to their Golden year of 2030, when all Hell lets loose…literally without parrallel and the start of the end of humanity…
A British court has handed an 18-month prison sentence to a 36-year-old man for two social media posts that were viewed a total of 33 times, a case now raising fresh alarms over the United Kingdom’s increasingly aggressive “hate speech” laws and the collapsing state of free expression.
Luke Yarwood was jailed this week for two anti-immigration posts on X, written after a Christmas market car attack in Magdeburg, Germany, in December 2024.
The supposed crime was what online speech UK authorities now classify as “racial hatred.”
During his court case, prosecutors also blasted Yarwood for the “extremely unpleasant posts” that he wasn’t being criminally prosecuted for.
His own brother-in-law, with whom he reportedly had an ongoing conflict, reported him to the police.
The conviction comes amid a wave of similar prosecutions, including the recent jailing of 42-year-old Lucy Connolly, the wife of a Conservative councillor, over a comment calling for people to “set fire” to migrant hotels following the Southport attack in 2024.
Prosecutors Admit the Posts Had Just 33 Views But Insist They Could Trigger Disorder
Prosecutor Siobhan Linsley told the court that Yarwood’s “extremely unpleasant posts” had the potential to trigger disorder at one of three migrant hotels in Bournemouth, Dorset.
Yarwood’s defense countered that the posts were viewed just 33 times and were, in reality, “the impotent rantings of a socially isolated man” with no “real-world” consequences.
Judge Jonathan Fuller rejected that argument, calling the posts “odious” and sentencing Yarwood to immediate prison time.
The judge insisted the comments were “specifically designed to stir up racial hatred and incite violence.”
What Yarwood Posted
Court records show Yarwood made two posts between December 21, 2024, and January 29, 2025, amid online speculation that the German attacker was an Islamic extremist.
Responding to a post about Germans “taking to the streets,” Yarwood wrote:
“Head for the hotels housing them and burn them to the ground.”
Another post, in reply to a GB News thread, read:
“I think it’s time for the British to gang together, hit the streets and start the slaughter.
“Violence and murder is the only way now.
“Start off burning every migrant hotel then head off to MPs’ houses and Parliament, we need to take over by FORCE.”
Prosecutors said additional posts showed a “rabid dislike” for foreigners, but admitted they could not prosecute those because they did not explicitly incite violence.
Examples included one post where Yarwood complained about “Walking for ages and not hearing a word of English.”
In another post, he criticized “asylum seekers outside the hotel staring at young college girls.”
Prosecution: Even Microscopic Posts Can Be Criminal
Linsley argued that although the two charged posts had minimal views, Yarwood had other posts in the same period that reached over 800 views, and that he sometimes replied to accounts like GB News with a much larger reach.
One GB News post he responded to had one million views.
However, Yarwood’s replies to these posts did not reach large numbers, and he was not being charged over them.
She said Yarwood demonstrated “anger about the presence of Muslims and foreigners in Britain,” pointing to what she described as “extremely unpleasant posts between December and January.”
Her argument pointed to the broader political climate:
“There are ongoing protests daily around asylum hotels up and down the country that are having to be policed.”
Defense: A Sick, Isolated Man Being Made an Example Of
Defense lawyer Nick Tucker said Yarwood was in a bitter family feud, stressed, mentally fragile, and no longer held the “extremist views.”
He urged the judge to consider suspension of the sentence, citing health concerns and the impact of custody on Yarwood’s relationship with his son.
Tucker said Yarwood’s posts were “the impotent rantings of a socially isolated man with fragile mental health.”
He also argued Yarwood was not a genuine ideologue:
“The defendant is not at heart a racist; he simply found this to be a convenient channel for his discontent.”
Judge: Freedom of Speech Is “Qualified”
Judge Fuller made clear the ruling was intended as a warning:
“You are entitled to express your views, but freedom of speech is not an absolute right; it’s a qualified one.”
He continued:
“The continuing safety and stability of our communities are undermined by actions such as yours.
“The tweets speak for themselves; they are odious in the extreme.
“There could be few clearer examples of words specifically designed to stir up racial hatred and incite violence.”
He concluded that only “immediate imprisonment” was appropriate.
A Growing Pattern
Yarwood’s case is the latest in a rapidly expanding series of UK prosecutions under “hate speech” and “online harm” laws, many involving tiny audiences, private disagreements, or political criticism of migration policy.
In many cases, the “offensive” speech being prosecuted often conflicts with the agenda of the socialist UK government.
The new precedent suggests that social media posts, even those viewed only dozens of times, can now lead to lengthy prison sentences if authorities decide they convey “offensive” political sentiments.
Civil liberties advocates warn the trend is accelerating, and the boundaries of legal speech in Britain are shrinking faster than at any time in modern memory.
Blogger Comment:This is not compassion or doing good, it is pure evil what the Globalist WEF puppet leaders are doing and let that be clear and sink in…
Canada’s euthanasia regime, already the fastest-expanding in the world, is now facing a new and explosive demand for the government to extend state-sanctioned “assisted suicide” to children.
Less than a decade after Canada legalized Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), what began in 2016 as a narrow program reserved for adults whose natural deaths were “reasonably foreseeable” has ballooned into one of the broadest euthanasia systems on the planet.
Chronic illness, disability, and even mental health conditions have all been added to the eligibility list, driving MAiD deaths to unprecedented levels.
Now, advocacy groups are openly pressuring the federal government to allow minors, including those as young as 12 years old, to qualify for doctor-administered euthanasia.
Push to Euthanize 12-Year-Olds with State-Funded Lethal Injections
“Dying With Dignity Canada,” one of the nation’s most influential pro-euthanasia organizations, has issued recommendations calling for so-called “mature minors” to be included in MAiD.
Their proposal goes even further and argues that 16- and 17-year-olds should be euthanized with lethal injections without parental consent if they meet broad eligibility criteria.
The group insists that “maturity,” not age, should determine whether a child can be killed by a medical professional.
Dying With Dignity Canada is pushing to euthanize ‘mature minors’
Critics say the proposals confirm the very warnings dismissed as “fearmongering” when MAiD was introduced.
“A Gruesome, Relentless Logic”
Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, a psychiatrist and leading medical ethicist, warned that the slippery slope argument has proven alarmingly accurate.
“There is a kind of gruesome, relentless logic at work here, and this is why the logical ‘slippery slope’ argument is a valid argument,” Kheriaty said in response to the push.
“Once you cross the line of allowing doctors to kill patients … then it’s very hard to argue that there should be any limitations.”
Kheriaty said he once believed child euthanasia was too extreme to become mainstream policy.
He no longer believes that, saying:
“A few years ago, I would’ve said, ‘No, I don’t think the Canadian regime is going to go that far…’
“But now, I’m sad to say I wouldn’t put it past them.”
MAiD Now One of Canada’s Leading Causes of Death
Euthanasia in Canada has surged every year since 2016, dramatically so after the 2021 expansion allowing people with chronic illnesses or disabilities to be killed even when they are not terminally ill.
More than 15,000 Canadians died by MAiD in 2023, representing 4.7% of all deaths nationwide.
Roughly 1 in every 20 deaths in Canada now comes from doctor-administered suicide under the nation’s socialized healthcare system.
With mental illness scheduled to become an official standalone eligibility category in 2027, the pool could grow even larger.
But Kheriaty says doctors are already euthanizing people solely for psychiatric reasons.
“There have been at least a few cases,” he said.
“I remember one case of… a woman in her twenties whosesole diagnosis was autism and ADHD.
“Even if it’s not officially legalized … clearly that’s been happening already.”
Underlying Drivers: Fear, Pressure, and Abandonment
Kheriaty says many patients who choose MAiD fear becoming a psychological, financial, or caregiving burden.
And instead of countering those fears with support, too many in the medical system now default to offering death.
“We have to respond by saying, ‘No, it’s a privilege to care for you,’” Kheriaty said.
“It’s a privilege to walk with you through what might be the final stage of your life.”
“Assisted suicide is both dangerous and inhumane… it abandons vulnerable patients who need help.”
A System Spiraling Further Each Year
Canada has already expanded MAiD 13-fold since legalization.
Attempts to halt further expansion, particularly to minors and those with mental illness, have repeatedly failed, despite opposition from mental health advocates, disability communities, and multiple provincial governments.
Advocates for child euthanasia insist they are promoting “compassion” and “autonomy.”
Opponents warn that the country is normalizing the elimination of people who need care, not killing, and now, children may be next.
Blogger Comment:This is not compassion or doing good, it is pure evil what the Globalist WEF puppet leaders are doing and let that be clear and sink in…
Canada’s euthanasia regime, already the fastest-expanding in the world, is now facing a new and explosive demand for the government to extend state-sanctioned “assisted suicide” to children.
Less than a decade after Canada legalized Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), what began in 2016 as a narrow program reserved for adults whose natural deaths were “reasonably foreseeable” has ballooned into one of the broadest euthanasia systems on the planet.
Chronic illness, disability, and even mental health conditions have all been added to the eligibility list, driving MAiD deaths to unprecedented levels.
Now, advocacy groups are openly pressuring the federal government to allow minors, including those as young as 12 years old, to qualify for doctor-administered euthanasia.
Push to Euthanize 12-Year-Olds with State-Funded Lethal Injections
“Dying With Dignity Canada,” one of the nation’s most influential pro-euthanasia organizations, has issued recommendations calling for so-called “mature minors” to be included in MAiD.
Their proposal goes even further and argues that 16- and 17-year-olds should be euthanized with lethal injections without parental consent if they meet broad eligibility criteria.
The group insists that “maturity,” not age, should determine whether a child can be killed by a medical professional.
Dying With Dignity Canada is pushing to euthanize ‘mature minors’
Critics say the proposals confirm the very warnings dismissed as “fearmongering” when MAiD was introduced.
“A Gruesome, Relentless Logic”
Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, a psychiatrist and leading medical ethicist, warned that the slippery slope argument has proven alarmingly accurate.
“There is a kind of gruesome, relentless logic at work here, and this is why the logical ‘slippery slope’ argument is a valid argument,” Kheriaty said in response to the push.
“Once you cross the line of allowing doctors to kill patients … then it’s very hard to argue that there should be any limitations.”
Kheriaty said he once believed child euthanasia was too extreme to become mainstream policy.
He no longer believes that, saying:
“A few years ago, I would’ve said, ‘No, I don’t think the Canadian regime is going to go that far…’
“But now, I’m sad to say I wouldn’t put it past them.”
MAiD Now One of Canada’s Leading Causes of Death
Euthanasia in Canada has surged every year since 2016, dramatically so after the 2021 expansion allowing people with chronic illnesses or disabilities to be killed even when they are not terminally ill.
More than 15,000 Canadians died by MAiD in 2023, representing 4.7% of all deaths nationwide.
Roughly 1 in every 20 deaths in Canada now comes from doctor-administered suicide under the nation’s socialized healthcare system.
With mental illness scheduled to become an official standalone eligibility category in 2027, the pool could grow even larger.
But Kheriaty says doctors are already euthanizing people solely for psychiatric reasons.
“There have been at least a few cases,” he said.
“I remember one case of… a woman in her twenties whosesole diagnosis was autism and ADHD.
“Even if it’s not officially legalized … clearly that’s been happening already.”
Underlying Drivers: Fear, Pressure, and Abandonment
Kheriaty says many patients who choose MAiD fear becoming a psychological, financial, or caregiving burden.
And instead of countering those fears with support, too many in the medical system now default to offering death.
“We have to respond by saying, ‘No, it’s a privilege to care for you,’” Kheriaty said.
“It’s a privilege to walk with you through what might be the final stage of your life.”
“Assisted suicide is both dangerous and inhumane… it abandons vulnerable patients who need help.”
A System Spiraling Further Each Year
Canada has already expanded MAiD 13-fold since legalization.
Attempts to halt further expansion, particularly to minors and those with mental illness, have repeatedly failed, despite opposition from mental health advocates, disability communities, and multiple provincial governments.
Advocates for child euthanasia insist they are promoting “compassion” and “autonomy.”
Opponents warn that the country is normalizing the elimination of people who need care, not killing, and now, children may be next.
World Freedom 