| Home >> Politics

The CBC: Taxpayer-Funded Leftist Propaganda

Defund the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation)!
Defund the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation)!

1) Introduction

In this article, I will try to explain why I claim that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) is a Leftist propaganda machine funded by Canadian taxpayers.

2) My non-claims

CBC Community Standards Team.

As usual, let's start with the things I am not claiming:

2.1) I am not claiming anything about the whole long history of the CBC, just recent history (say, 10 years or so). Maybe the CBC was fine a long time ago.

2.2) I make no claims about CBC programs that have nothing to do with Leftist propaganda, like weather reports, cooking programs, sports, etc. (as far as I know, those programs are fine).

2.3) I am not aware of the existence of a good "Mainstream" TV channel. I insist on this because of the Leftist's reflex, who start vomiting on "Fox News" as soon as they hear somebody criticize the CBC! First of all, I'm talking about the CBC, not "Fox News" or some other media. Second, what little I know about "Fox News" fills me with as much distrust as toward the CBC.

2.4) I am not asking the CBC to replace Leftist propaganda by right-wing propaganda! Propaganda is propaganda, and I don't like propaganda!

2.5) I'm not even demanding that the CBC stop Leftist propaganda! I just want the CBC to stop censoring Christians! Like a bit of chlorine in a lot of infected water, a bit of truth in a lot of propaganda is vastly sufficient to neutralize the lies. But we do need that little bit of chlorine! The CBC does need to stop censoring Christians, who pay a large proportion of its budget. Or then the CBC should be totally de-funded of public monies.

3) What is "Leftist Propaganda"?

Children's song for Hitler.

What is "Leftist Propaganda"? Let's analyse that expression, starting with "leftist". I don't know what yours is, but my definition of a Leftist is clearly stated on this web site.

Then, what is "propaganda"? Propaganda comes in two forms. The most obvious is direct propaganda, like a children's songbook with songs of quasi-divine praise for Adolf Hitler (see example here above). A more subtle form is indirect propaganda (or "lying by omission", or "selective censorship"), which is currenly what the CBC does.

To understand "indirect propaganda", let's take a metaphor. Imagine that the National Hockey League was racist, and that it wanted to cast in a bad light players with black skin. the NHL could do direct propaganda, by calling them "dirty niggers". But if the NHL decided to proceed using indirect propaganda, it could:

- Make long reports on white players that are full of praise, showing slow-motion replays of their most beautiful goals;

- Never mention goals scored by black players;

- When a white player would give a "low blow" to another player, like hitting him in the face with his hockey stick, avoid talking about it, or hint that it was probably an accident;

- When a black player would give a low blow, show it in slow motion in all TV reports, associating the photo of his black face with words like "vicious blow" and "violent player".

Notice that with this method, there wouldn't be anything materially false in what the Hockey League would say. The goals scored by white players would be real goals, the low blows given by black players would be real low blows, etc. The lie would not be material, but formal.

This is roughly what the CBC does to give a bad reputation to Christians. Their "recipe" is simple:

- Never, ever, give a Christian live access to air time. Censorship requires scissors and time, you can't do that live.

- When you interview a Christian, he or she will probably be nice, so interview them for a very long time, ask them many trick questions designed to make Christians look bad, then cut out the worst thirteen seconds from that long interview, prepare the audience with some slander that will make them misinterpret that thirteen seconds, and only then air that little excerpt. Then, immediately change the topic, so viewers will absorb the negative emotions you've just associated with Christians, without having time to think about the lack of logical foundation for that association.

- If you can't even find thirteen seconds to present in a biased way, just pretend the interview never happened, and erase everything that Christian said.

And of course, when the CBC finds a Leftist who pretends to be a Christian (for example, Raymond Gravel or Justin Trudeau), they will give that Leftist plenty of air time, with long interviews, no trick questions, fawning introductions, good camera angles, etc., while all the time insisting that this is a very real "christian".

4) A few contacts I've had with the CBC

CBC Manure Spreader.

Because I organize a small pro-life demonstration every year, and because I've been running for the federal elections every time since 2006, I've been interviewed several times by CBC journalists. Here are my recollections:

Infoman (Jean-René Dufort)

4.1) Infoman (Jean-René Dufort). During the 2008 electoral campaign, Infoman came to interview me on my front lawn. It's a humorous program, and Jean-René was quite nice (his cameraman too). On the other hand, during the interview, he asked me a trick question, something like "Do you thing little marginal political parties have some use?" I answered with one question:

Let's imagine a country, a completely crazy country where 48% of citizens want to exterminate all Jews in concentration camps, 48% of citizens want to hang all Blacks, and 2% of the population considers that all men have the same inviolable human dignity, whether Jew, Black, etc.

If that imaginary country was a democracy, and you were part of that 2% that respects human dignity, how could you get elected?

I distinctly remember Jean-René "froze" for a moment, staring at me, then I had to supply the answer to him: the only solution is a long effort to educate the population, since getting elected in such conditions is impossible. He agreed. It was a crucial moment of the interview, a moment which would have made viewers think, but a moment which made Christians look good, and the CBC look bad. Guess what happened to that part? Censored!

Émilie Dubrueil.
Émilie Dubrueil.

4.2) The "Téléjournal" (Émilie Dubrueil). Once again during the federal 2008 electoral campaign, but this time it was the longest interview I've ever done. At least two hours, and with a full filming crew (Émilie, her producer Pierre Dehaies, and at least two other crewmembers for sound and video). They came to my house, and started by asking me if we could go to Saint-Anne-de-Beaupré (a good half-hour by car!), so they could interview me with the Basilica as a backdrop. I answered that first, the Basilica isn't even in my riding, and second, I don't see the connection between a catholic building, and Politics. I suggested we rather go to the "Montmartre Canadien", where they have a nice statue of Saint Joan of Arc, who herself did politics (on top of being a woman!). They accepted. We filmed for a long time at that location, which is right in front of the St-Laurence River. Speaking of rivers, Émilie's mouth was a flowing river of trick questions, to which Marie-Claude (my "political attachée") said I all adroitly answered. I also thought I had avoided all the pitfalls. Émilie also asked a question on abortion. I answered by a question, my standard question on the topic:

Start by putting both hands in front of you, one hand open (to imitate a baby), and the other hand holding the thumb of your open hand (to imitate the birth canal still enclosing the baby's left foot):

Kicking and breathing baby, but whose left foot is still inside the mother's birth canal.

Then, move your open hand, as if it was a kicking and breathing baby, and ask the following question:

"Imagine a baby, breathing and kicking, but whose left foot is still inside its mother's birth canal. According to you, is that baby a human person?"

You should have seen Émilie's reaction! She started screaming: "CUT! CUT! You don't have the right to ask such questions!" She totally lost it for a few moments. Of course, the CBC censored that part!

Then, I suggested we go to Laval University, for a "vox pop" with random students. They were delighted! We went to Desjardins hall, in the lobby. I tried to speak to total strangers who were walking down the corridor, but without success. Émilie was tickled pink to see me rejected by everybody! I had never tried to speak to strangers, so I had no idea how to do it! Fortunately, Marie-Claude intervened. She started gently approaching students, explaining to them that it was a CBC program, and whether they would be interested to speak in front of the camera. Most, once approached that way, were delighted that someone wanted to have their opinion, and would rush toward me and the camera. We stayed for about a dozen students.

So I was able to start talking to students, but everytime Émilie would jump in and start harassing the student with biased questions like: "Don't you find little marginal political parties are useless?" I myself was stunned by the answers: almost all of these students, whom I didn't know, defended the "little marginal political parties", and with enthusiasm!

Guess what ended up in Émilie's report? The part where all students seemed to be rejecting me? Yes! The part where tamed students answered her questions? Yes also, but only the video feed, because she cut their voices, substituting her venomous comments for their youthful enthusiasm for little political parties!

And to top it all off, she went to interview people from the Rhinoceros Party, and she mixed both reports. So the Christan Heritage Party got two or three minutes, mixed in with the Rhinoceros Party's stupidities...

I even called the producer Pierre Dehaies, to ask him whether we could pay to get the raw footage, the two hours of filming we had done. No, he told me "would get strangled" if he did that. I think indeed he would have lost his job over it. Because if I had taken those two hours, put them on YouTube next to the "report" that the CBC did based on them, everybody would have seen that the CBC is just anti-Christian propaganda.

Protesters against Henry Morgentaler's Order of Canada.

4.3) Henry Morgentaler's Order of Canada. On 2008-July-01, Henry Morgentaler, abortionist and militant Atheist, received the Order of Canada. We protested just outside the entrance of the Citadel in Old Quebec, where the shameful ceremony occured.

At some point of time, a scrum of journalists surrounded me: there was the CBC French television, CBC English television, the French CBC radio (not TV) and their anglophone counterparts, on top of the TVA television station, the Le Soleil newspaper, etc. I answered their questions in English and French. At one point, I asked my standard question to an anglophone CBC journalist (he was of asian descent). He froze a few moments, then answered "Yes" (yes, it's a human person). I told him the Supreme Court of Canada disagreed with him, precisely concerning the rulings on Morgentaler. He was dumbfounded, and stopped talking. All those cameras, all those microphones, everybody heard and saw! And guess whether that ended up in a CBC report? Ha!

4.4) The 25th anniversary of the Supreme Court's ruling on Morgentaler. Around January 28, 2013 (maybe on that very day, I don't remember) a CBC journalist (sorry, I forgot her name) phoned me to ask for an interview to get the official reaction of "Pro-Life Quebec City" on the 25th anniversary of the Morgentaler ruling. I told her no problem, I'd be happy, but I explained my mistrust given my past experiences, and the usual technique of making long interviews then keeping only thirteen seconds or so. She admitted that's what they were planning on doing. I told her she should have told me, before. She said sometimes she would tell the persons she interviewed. Then I told her that if I only had about thirteen seconds, this standard question was the official reaction of the group I represented. (One of the advantages of that question, is that it shows everybody in the audience that almost all Canadian citizens, even after 25 years, think the Supreme Court made a huge mistake. Moreover, anybody can verify by themselves that fact, no need to believe me, nor the CBC.)

Of course she screamed! She said it was absolutely out of the question to talk about the "foetus". I emphasized that this thirteen seconds was the official reaction of the group I represented, and that it wasn't up to her to decide what our official reaction was. She repeated her refusal. "So you're censoring us?" I told her. "No, because we at the CBC do not do censorship"!, she answered with assurance, before hanging up. Guess what happened to that interview!

This source of «information» was also totally financed by the Government....
This source of "information" was also totally financed by the Government...

4.5) Cardinal Ouellet's press conference. I was interviewed by CBC journalists at least twice more, once at Cardinal Ouellet's press conference at the Quebec diocese offices, when he announced his departure for Rome (I was "hired" by LifeSiteNews.com to be their "journalist". And yes, I know it's weird that a "journalist" ended up being interviewed by other journalists after a press conference).

To understand what happened next, you have to know that while he was Bishop of the Quebec Diocese, Cardinal Ouellet was savagely berated by the Quebec media for being a little bit pro-life, while the other French-Canadian Bishops stayed very quiet and were left alone by the media. Moreover, I often criticized Cardinal Ouellet during these years, among others because his "pro-life" position was so diluted and weak compared to the official position of the Church.

So, having all these CBC journalists around me again, with plenty of tape recorders humming, I opened fire on all Quebec Bishops for their scandalous dereliction of duty in the battle to save the unborn children (except for Ouellet, the least bad of the gang). I attacked long and hard, explaining the true position of the Church, and saying among others that the Quebec Bishops should rip up their paychecks and go work for Tim Horton instead of pretending to be Bishops.

A few days later, a priest in the former Eastern Europe phoned a collegue here in Quebec City to talk about that CBC report where he saw this young man saying "nice things" about Cardinal Ouellet (and nothing else, that is all the CBC report contained)! Yes, another example of the CBC's "magic scissors"! The perverse "Catholic" Bishops are always protected, and the official teachings of the Church are always obscured!

Typical CBC coverage of the Covid-19 «pandemic».
Typical CBC coverage of the Covid-19 "pandemic".

4.6) Trudeau at the funeral for victims of the Burkina Faso jihadists. On 2016-February-06 around 11h00 at the Saint-Thomas-d'Aquin church in Quebec City, I went to hand out a flyer. There were at least three TV crews, among others TVA and the CBC. The CBC journalist (I don't have her name, but she was fairly young, short-legged and plump) barked at me, telling me something like "we are the CBC, so we don't do propaganda). I had my hands both frozen and full of flyers, so I asked her for a pen so I could add "/cbc" at the bottom of the flyer, where there was the address of my web site (since if you write "www.jesus-eucharistie.org/cbc", you end up on this text). She almost screamed her refusal. Then I told her, raising my voice, that I had had many interactions with several CBC journalists, and that I had proof that the CBC did propaganda, and all she needed to do was to go read up on it, but "NO, I WILL NOT GO SEE! WE ARE THE CBC, WE HAVE OUR CODE OF ETHICS AND WE DON'T DO PROPAGANDA!"

Well, in that case, go read a few minutes, M'aam, and you'll see. "NO! I DON'T WANT TO GO SEE!" So there. Nothing I can do. She had "blind faith" in the CBC's purity! No proof, no document, no reasoning could shake her faith, since she had chosen to blindly believe!

Another funny aspect of that encounter was that I was very polite during the whole time, and that my flyer is exactly what is needed to prevent more similar tragedies in the future (we need to start being more realistic about the true nature of Islam), and on top of that at one point of time some poor mother asked for my help because she couldn't get up the stairs with her big stroller with a baby in it. So here I was, the "Big Nasty Inquisitor" with his "hate-filled" flyer, gently carrying a baby up the stairs, in front of three TV crews with their cameras! Of course, if I had been handing out flyers in favor of women's ordination or "gay marriages" in Catholic churches, all cameras would have filmed this, and the reporters would have fawned about "how gentle and helpful this guy is, on top of being so brave to hand out his flyers", and so on!

5) Conclusion: You too can have fun with the CBC!

Guess what the CBC will say!

Of course, my personal experiences are only proof for me. You were not there, so you do not have evidence. Moreover, I did not take notes of my run-ins with the CBC, I didn't have any video or audio recording equipment handy in those days, and my memory is not improving with age.

But the good news is that you don't need to take my word for it. Perform some scientific experiments! Gather some friends, and make two groups: one group will pretend to be official representatives for some Leftist organisation, and the other will pretend to be the equivalent, but for some non-Leftist organisation. Then, calculate how many assertions each side manages to get past the CBC, and into the ears and eyes of the people who pay for the CBC.

For non-Leftist assertions, you could try facts about sodomy, facts about the Koran, facts about the logical consequences of Atheism, facts about the rational foundations of laws, facts about the current Canadian legal vacuum on abortion, etc., etc.


Just remember to bring along your own cameraman when the CBC comes to interview you. Actually, a hidden cameraman, because the CBC will probably refuse to be filmed while they are filming. It would make their Leftist propaganda too easy to see.

| Home >> Politics