Plain and Simple — Trudeau Hates Christians
Captain Airhead, Would You Please Go Now?
Throne, Altar, Liberty
The Canadian Red Ensign
Thursday, February 29, 2024
Captain Airhead, Would You Please Go Now?
Leap Day this year is the fortieth anniversary of Pierre Elliot Trudeau’s announcement that during a “walk in the snow” he had decided that he would step down and not lead the Liberal Party into the next Dominion election. He had been leader of the Grits for sixteen years since Lester Pearson stepped down in April of 1968. With the exception of the six month premiership of Joe Clark he had been Prime Minister all that time. His was the third longest premiership in Canadian history. The longest was that of William Lyon Mackenzie King who had been a different kind of Liberal leader. King, like Trudeau, had been a traitor to Canada, her history, heritage, and traditions, but in his case it was American-style capitalist liberalism to which he had sold us out. In the case of Pierre Trudeau it was Soviet and Chinese Communism that was his true master. Canada’s second longest premiership was also her first that of Sir John A. Macdonald. Sir John had been the leader of the Fathers of Confederation and never betrayed us. Nor did Canadians ever grow tired of Old Tomorrow. Shortly before his death in 1891 he won his sixth majority in that year’s Dominion Election by campaigning for “The Old Flag, the Old Policy, the Old Leader” against a Liberal Party that sought to move us closer economically and culturally into the orbit of the United States. By contrast by the time Trudeau took his famous walk Canadians had grown absolutely sick and tired of him. The Liberals were heading to defeat, Trudeau knew it, and in the interest of preserving his legacy and what was left of his reputation jumped off the ship before it sank.
The electorate’s having grown sick of Trudeau and his party should be regarded as the expected outcome when a Prime Minister remains in office for a long period of time. Sir John’s enduring popularity can be taken as the exception explainable by the fact that he was an exceptional statesman, identified with the country he led as no other Prime Minister could ever hope to be due to his central role in her founding, and a personable leader to whom people could relate. When a Sovereign, like Queen Victoria during whose reign Confederation took place or like our late Queen Elizabeth II of Blessed Memory, has an exceptionally long reign this is cause for celebration and rejoicing. It is the role of the Sovereign, after all, to embody the principle of continuity and everything that is enduring, lasting, and permanent in the realm. The man who fills the Prime Minister’s office, by contrast, is very much the man of the moment. Premierships, therefore, are usually best kept short.
Pierre Trudeau’s son, Captain Airhead, has been Prime Minister since 2015 and Canadians are now far sicker of him than they ever were of his father. Personally, I had had more than enough of him while he was still the third party leader prior to the 2015 Dominion Election. Why it took this long for the rest of the country to catch up with me I have no idea but here we are. It is 2024 and Canadians are divided on whether they would like Captain Airhead to follow his father’s footsteps and take a walk in the snow, whether they would like to see him suffer the humiliation of going down in defeat in the next Dominion Election or whether they would like to see him brought down in an act of direct divine intervention involving a lightning bolt that strikes the ground beneath him causing it to open up, swallow him whole, and belch out fire and brimstone. What unites Canadians is that we all wish that he would make like Dr. Seuss’ Marvin K. Mooney and “please go now.” Thermidor is rapidly approaching for Captain Airhead and his version of the Liberal Party as it eventually comes for all Jacobins.
The Canadian Robespierre seems determined, however, not to go to his inevitable guillotine without one last stab at imposing his ghoulish and clownish version of the Reign of Terror. On Monday the Liberals tabled, as they have been threatening to do since the last Dominion Election, Bill C-63, an omnibus bill that would enhance government power in the name of combatting “online harms.” A note to American readers, in the Commonwealth to “table” a bill does not mean to take it off the table, i.e., to suspend or postpone it as in the United States, but rather to put it on the table, i.e., to introduce it. Defenders of omnibus bills regard them as efficient time-savers. They are also convenient ways to smuggle in something objectionable that is unlikely to pass if forced to stand on its own merits by rolling it up with something that is desirable and difficult or impossible to oppose without making yourself look bad. In this case, the Liberals are trying to smuggle in legislation that would allow Canadians to sue other Canadians for up to $20 000, with the possibility of being fined another $50 000 payable to the government thrown in on top of it, over online speech they consider to be hateful and legislation that would make it possible for someone to receive life imprisonment for certain “hate crimes”, by rolling it up in a bill ostensibly about protecting children from online bullying and pornographic exploitation. As is always the case when the Liberals introduce legislation that has something to do with combatting hate it reads like they interpreted George Orwell’s depiction of Big Brother in 1984 as a “how-to” manual.
Nobody with an IQ that can be expressed with a positive number could possibly be stupid enough to think that this Prime Minister or any of his Cabinet cares about protecting children. Consider their response to the actions taken over the last year or so by provincial premiers such as New Brunswick’s Blaine Higgs and Alberta’s Danielle Smith to do just that, protect children from perverts in the educational system hell-bent on robbing children of their innocence and filling their heads with sex and smut from the earliest grades. Captain Airhead and his corrupt cohorts denounced and demonized these premiers’ common-sense, long overdue, efforts, treating them not as the measures taken in defense of children and their parents and families that they were, but as an attack on the alphabet soup gang, one of the many groups that the Liberals and the NDP court in the hopes that these in satisfaction over having their special interests pandered to will overlook the progressive left’s contemptuous disregard for the common good of the whole country and for the interests of those who don’t belong to one or another of their special groups.
Nor could any Canadian capable of putting two and two together and who is even marginally informed about what has been going on in this country in this decade take seriously the Prime Minister’s posturing about hate. The leader of His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, Pierre Poilievre, when asked about what stance the Conservatives would take towards this bill made the observation that Captain Airhead given his own past is the last person who should be dictating to other Canadians about hate. Poilievre was referring to the blackface scandal that astonishingly failed to end Captain Airhead’s career in 2019. It would have been more to the point to have referenced the church burnings of 2021. In the summer of that year, as Captain Airhead hosted conferences on the subjects of anti-Semitism and Islamophobia that consisted of a whole lot of crying and hand-wringing and thinking out ways to get around basic rights and freedoms so as to be able to throw in gaol anyone who looks at a Jew or Muslim cross-eyed, Canada was in the midst of the biggest spree of hate crimes in her history. Christian church buildings all across Canada were targeted for arson and/or other acts of vandalism. Not only did Captain Airhead fail to treat this violent and criminal display of Christophobia as a serious problem in the same way he was treating these other types of hatred directed towards specific religions he played a significant role in inciting these attacks on Canada’s Christian churches by promoting a narrative in which all allegations against Canada’s churches and her past governors with regards to the Indian Residential Schools are accepted without question or requirement of proof. (1)
Clearly Captain Airhead does not give a rat’s rump about hate qua hate. If hatred is directed towards people he doesn’t like, like Christians, he shrugs it off even when it is expressed through violent, destructive, crime. If it is directed against people he likes, or, more accurately, against groups to which he panders, he treats it as if it were the most heinous of crimes even if it is expressed merely in words. While I am on principle opposed to all laws against hate since they are fundamentally unjust and by nature tyrannical (2) they are especially bad when drawn up by someone of Captain Airhead’s ilk.
Captain Airhead’s supposed concern about “online harms” is also a joke. Consider how he handles real world harms. His approach to the escalating problem of substance abuse is one that seeks to minimize the harm drug abusers do to themselves by providing them with a “safe” supply of their poison paid for by the government. This approach is called “harms reduction” even though when it comes to the harms that others suffer from drug abuse such as being violently attacked by someone one doesn’t know from Adam because in his drug-induced mania he thinks his victim is a zombie space alien seeking to eat his brain and lay an egg in the cavity, this approach should be called “harms facilitation and enablement.” Mercifully, there is only so much Captain Airhead can do to promote this folly at the Dominion level and so it is only provinces with NDP governments, like the one my province was foolish enough to elect last year, that bear the full brunt of it. Then there was his idea that the solution to the problem of overcrowded prisons and criminal recidivism was to release those detained for criminal offenses back into the general public as soon after their arrest as possible. Does this sound like someone who can be trusted to pass legislation protecting people from “online harms”?
Captain Airhead inadvertently let slip, last week, the real reason behind this bill. In an interview he pined for the days when Canadians were all on the same page, got all their information from CBC, CTV, and Global, before “conspiracy theorists” on the internet ruined everything. He was lamenting the passing of something that never existed, of course. People were already getting plenty of information through alternative sources on the internet long before his premiership and the mainstream legacy media became far more monolithic in the viewpoints it presented during and because of his premiership. What he was pining for, therefore, was not really something that existed in the past, but what he has always hoped to establish in the future – a Canada where everyone is of one opinion, namely his. This is, after all, the same homunculus who, back when a large segment of the country objected to him saying that they would be required to take a foreign substance that had been inadequately tested and whose manufacturers were protected against liability into their bodies if they ever wanted to be integrated back into ordinary society, called them every name in the book and questioned whether they should be tolerated in our midst.
Some have suggested that Bill C-63 is not that bad compared with what the Liberals had originally proposed three years ago. It still, however, is a thinly-veiled attempt at thought control from a man who is at heart a narcissistic totalitarian and whose every act as Prime Minister, from trying to reduce the cost of health care and government benefits by offering people assistance in killing themselves (MAID) to denying people who having embraced one or more of the letters of the alphabet soup, had a bad trip, the help they are seeking in getting free, deserves to be classified with the peccata clamantia. It took a lot of pain and effort for this country to finally rid herself of the evil Section 13 hate speech provision that Captain Airhead’s father had saddled us with in the Canadian Human Rights Act. Captain Airhead must not be allowed to get away with reversing that.
It is about time that he took a walk in the snow. Or got badly trounced in a Dominion election. Or fell screaming into a portal to the netherworld that opened up beneath his feet. Any of these ways works.
The time is come. The time is now. Just go. Go. GO! I don’t care how. Captain Airhead, would you please go now?! (3)
(1) Anyone who thinks the allegations were proven needs to learn the difference between evidence and proof. Evidence is what is brought forward to back up a claim. Proof is what establishes the truth of a claim. That the evidence advanced for the allegations in question simply does not add up to proof and moreover was flimsy from the onset and has subsequently been largely debunked is an entirely valid viewpoint the expression of which is in danger of being outlawed by the bill under discussion. In a court of criminal law the burden is upon the prosecutor to prove the charge(s) against the defendant. Not merely to present evidence but to prove the accused to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The same standard must be applied to allegations made against historical figures and past generations. They, after all, are not present to defend themselves against their accusers. To fail to do so is to fail in our just duty towards those who have gone before us. The ancients had a term for this failure. It is the vice of impiety.
(2) The folly of legislation against hate was best expressed by Auberon Waugh in an article entitled “Che Guevara in the West Midlands” that was first published in the 6 July, 1976 issue of The Spectator, and later included in the collection Brideshead Benighted (Toronto: Little, Brown & Company, 1986). Michael Wharton, however, writing as “Peter Simple” was second to none, not even Waugh, in ridiculing this sort of thing.– Gerry T, Neal
Lawfare By New York Radical Leftist Letitia James Targets Peter Brimelow and VDARE, Immigration Critics for Destruction h
Lawfare By New York Radical Leftist Letitia James Targets Peter Brimelow and VDARE, Immigration Critics for Destruction
Tucker Carlson recently interviewed Lydia Brimelow about New York Attorney General Letitia James’s attack on VDare.
Transcript:
Tucker [00:00:00] Illegal immigration into the United States is at its highest levels ever. Tens of millions of people have come here illegally over the past 15 years, and none of them will ever leave. Mostly they come from the poorest countries on the planet. We don’t know anything about them, really. We don’t know if they’re pro-America. We don’t know if they’re hostile to the people who already live here. We don’t know, in the case of the recent arrivals, what they’re going to do for a living as robotics eliminate low-skilled jobs. So what’s happening right now at the border that what’s often mentioned on TV is really undersold as a story. This is changing America forever, and almost certainly for the worse as we’re watching it. And no one is doing anything about it. The governor of Texas occasionally makes noises about it — it’s over his border that this human wave is flowing, and yet he’s taken no real steps to stop it. There are some media outlets that let you know that it’s happening in general terms, but they don’t seem particularly outraged by it. We’re sitting here as our country is destroyed and no one’s responding, and at some point you have to ask why? Are the majority of Americans in favor of this? Of course not. In fact, no one’s in favor of this. No one will defend this in public. No one will explain why we need it. Why it’s a good idea. How it’s going to help this country. How your grandchildren will live in a better place because of it. People are just silent, like it’s not even happening. And again, you have to ask why. And the answer, of course, is really simple because they’re afraid, they know they’ll be punished if they say anything about it. The story of Peter and Lydia Brimelow explains why they’re afraid. Peter Brimelow has been a journalist for 50 years. Worked at a whole bunch of what are now called mainstream publications. Was an editor — Barron’s, Forbes, National Review, Dow Jones, a legitimate old school journalist. And in the late 90s, he began to ask questions about our immigration scheme. Is this really good idea, is it helping America? And of course, no one could answer those questions because the answer is obvious. No, it’s destroying America; as it destroyed California, so it will destroy your state. That’s certain. But for asking that question, he was fired from his jobs and shunted off into what we call the fringes. But he didn’t stop. He started a website called VDARE. He runs it now with his wife, Lydia.
And for the crime in the supposedly free country of opposing the immigration system currently in place — not the official system, but the actual system — where anyone from the poorest parts of America [sic] with no skills whatsoever can come here and immediately go on welfare. That’s our current system. For saying that that’s a bad idea, powerful forces have just tried, to destroy their lives, not just their lives, the lives of their family, using the justice system to do it. And needless to say, you probably guessed, using something called the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is nothing to [do with] the South or poverty. It has to do with shutting down free speech in this country. They have descended on the Brimelows and have really kind of tried to destroy them. That’s not an overstatement, but you judge for yourself because Lydia Brimelow, who helps run VDARE, joins us now to explain what’s happened to her. Lydia, thanks so much for coming on.
Lydia Brimelow [00:03:13] Thank you so much, Tucker. It’ll be very nice to have our story told.
Tucker [00:03:18] So I have known your husband, sort of, since he was not a controversial figure at all. And he became a controversial figure when he began to say things like, hey, why are we doing this? And he was immediately called a white nationalist, a white supremacist. And I remember very well his response, which is, no, I’m not. And if I was, I’d say so. But that kept up and he wound up publishing with you, VDARE online. That would seem not a particularly controversial thing to do in a free country. But for your family, it’s been, a very risky thing to do. So I hope that you would explain to us what the government, we’ll start with the government, is trying to do to you for daring to oppose the immigration system.
Lydia Brimelow [00:04:03] Yeah, absolutely. So it’s hard to believe everybody who hears the story says it’s completely incredible. Peter founded VDARE Foundation, which has [as] its main project VDARE.com, back in the late 90s. As you said, we’re in our 25th year now, and I joined about ten years ago. I do the fundraising and the back office work, and he handles everything that goes up on the website VDARE.com. We’re a nonprofit journalism enterprise. So everything that we do, all of our people are paid through generous donations from individuals. I can tell you we don’t get any government grants or big foundation grants either. It’s all just grassroots. And we’re veterans of cancel culture at this point. So we’ve been kicked off a lot of mainstream services that most people use to distribute the media that they produce. And that is nothing compared to what we’re facing right now, which started about two years ago, originating out of the hate crimes division in the state of New York. A series of subpoenas were issued by Letitia James first, to Facebook, which I can explain a little bit in a minute. And then to us and our board members, at VDARE Foundation, with no clear trigger, they have refused to tell us what they’re investigating. It’s been two years of us just being crushed under this burden of investigation. The subpoenas were, like, 47 points each.
They want us to turn over essentially every document that we have interacted with, since 2016. And for a small organization, you know, at our peak, we had four full time employees. Right now we have two. That’s Peter and myself. This has just been an absolutely crushing burden. And I will say the Facebook subpoena was interesting because we had actually been kicked off of Facebook, years previous. So we had not even been on Facebook to interact with Facebook in many years, and they were asking for all of the data that VDARE had ever accumulated, created, while we were on Facebook, which we had incidentally, also requested. VDARE was kicked off of Facebook the same day that every one of the people involved in our organization was kicked off, including myself. I had never posted anything political online, at all, but they took all my baby pictures. The video of my daughter’s first steps, which was not saved anywhere else. Facebook still has that. They have, in fact, told my lawyers that we are too dangerous to get our data back, including my daughter taking her first steps. So that was the first subpoena that Letitia James’s hate crimes division issues.
Tucker [00:06:43] May I ask you to pause for one moment and just clarify something. So Facebook is calling you too dangerous to possess your own baby pictures? Has VDARE ever committed violence? Is there something we’re missing? Terrorism? Insurrection. Killing people?
Lydia Brimelow [00:06:59] Never.
Tucker [00:07:00] Okay, okay. Sorry. I just want to clarify that.
Lydia Brimelow [00:06:59] We’ve never even been accused of doing that, right? I mean, people use these scare smear words all the time, white nationalists, white supremacists, racist, xenophobe, whatever the flavor of the day is.
So we get accused of being those things all the time, which we would argue we are not. But violence is something we have never been associated with. We’re even careful to talk about the national divorce because of what implications that might have. I mean, we’re living in a very high-tension environment right now politically. And I think it’s important that people choose their words very carefully and choose their actions very carefully. I think it’s entirely justified that a large portion of the American population feels drawn to activism right now, but it needs to be chosen very carefully. And once you destroy something, you can’t take it back. And our enemies should remember that too. Once they destroy us, what are they going to do then?
But to go back to the subpoenas, we have our mainstream, you know, when I say mainstream, what I mean is like in normal times when VDARE is just surviving cancel culture and putting out this message that demography is destiny and that America is legitimate and real, that we’re a true culture and we have a national identity that’s worth defending, and that immigration has massive negative effects that nobody’s talking about.
Our operation is about $800,000 a year. In the last 12 months, about, we’ve had to spend half a million dollars just complying with the subpoenas.
The full, 37-minute interview is available at Tucker Carlson’s website.
See also: James Edwards Q and A w/ Peter Brimelow
Post navigation
Previous Previous post: Race Ruins Everything
Next Next post: Former GOP Senate Nominee Lauren Witzke Speaks Candidly
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Comment *
Name *
Email *
Website
Christianity becoming illegal in Canada attending Mass to carry criminal penalties? Just another excuse to jail opposition
“ Christian persecution is about to be introduced in Canada: If passed, Bill C-367 could land Christians in jail for quoting the Bible or expressing a faith based opinion if the Canadian government deems it “promotion of hatred or antisemitism”. This is an absolute disgrace.”
Christianity illegal? Long-running government campaign to stir hate reaching end goal
A government hate campaign against Christianity that WND first documented some 16 years ago when Canada’s discriminatory speech limits first started affecting Christian ministries there, is reaching its end game now.
It’s a plan to “criminalize Christianity, with Bible reading and prayer considered ‘hate speech’ – a ‘crime’ punishable with prison time,” according to a new re
he report explains, in blunt terms, “Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s World Economic Forum-controlled government is planning to outlaw Christianity with the introduction of an amendment to the Criminal Code that could see believers face jail time for expressing historic Christian teachings.”
The problems are found in Canada’s Bill C-367 that “will make it illegal to reiterate parts of the Bible, stripping away the ‘good faith’ defense for what is deemed by the state as ‘hate speech’ or ‘antisemitism.'”
Christianity illegal? Long-running government campaign to stir hate reaching end goal
New plan predicted to ‘overtly persecute’ faith members ‘with the force of criminal law’
By Bob Unruh
Published February 29, 2024 at 4:31pm
The problems are found in Canada’s Bill C-367 that “will make it illegal to reiterate parts of the Bible, stripping away the ‘good faith’ defense for what is deemed by the state as ‘hate speech’ or ‘antisemitism.'”
Explained the report, “Traditional Christian practices such as celebrating Christmas or attending church service will be considered crimes that carry severe penalties.”
The procedure is simple. The changes in the law will remove a defense to hate crimes charges that allow statements if individuals “genuinely believe in and were merely expressing religious teaching” from the Bible.
The legislative scheme states its plan specifically: “The enactment amends the Criminal Code to eliminate as a defense against wilful promotion of hatred or antisemitism the fact that a person, in good faith, expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion or a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text.”
The result if ratified will be the willful and knowing persecution of Christians in Canada, an expert said
The procedure is simple. The changes in the law will remove a defense to hate crimes charges that allow statements if individuals “genuinely believe in and were merely expressing religious teaching” from the Bible.
It was Joseph Boot, chief of the evangelical think tank Ezra Institute, who said, “If ratified, Canada’s anti-Christian legal apparatus created over the last decade will overtly persecute Christians with the force of criminal law.”
He warned heavy fines or jail time will be imposed on those participating in “evangelism, preaching, counseling, statements in the workplace, on social media, and in books that condemn homosexuality or transgenderism on biblical grounds.”
And, the report said, Gab CEO Andrew Torba warned, “Christians who maintain traditional orthodox perspectives about Jews – views that have been part of our faith for 2,000 years, are the primary obstacle to the Ruling Regime.”
The bill, while still pending in parliament, is expected ultimately to pass.
WND’s original reporting on the issue first arose in 2008 when an official with the National Religious Broadcasters Association warned about Canada’s “hate crimes” laws targeting Christians.
At that time, what used to be called MacGregor Ministries, which offered lessons on how to recognize and eliminate “faulty fads” in Christian churches, made a forced move into the U.S. and created another name because of government threats in Canada.
A spokeswoman for the ministry said, then, “When a group such as Jehovah’s Witnesses said of our doctrine we’re worshipping a freakish three-headed God (the Trinity), we should be able to respond. We say, ‘Here’s the doctrine of the Trinity and here is where it is in the Scripture.'”
But those opinions, she explained, would be found in violation of Canada’s hate crimes laws.
The spokeswoman said the government ordered a complete change, or a shutdown, so the ministry moved.
“There was nothing we could do that would please them,” the spokeswoman said. “They wanted us every time we criticized something to say, ‘So Christianity is equal to Buddhism, Islam, Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses… Just decide for yourself.'”
At the same time, WND discovered the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family, one of the largest Christian publishing and broadcasting organizations in the nation, was reviewing and editing its broadcasts to avoid offending Canadian “hate crimes” censors.
The ministry stated, “In particular, our content producers are careful not to make generalized statements nor comments that may be perceived as ascribing malicious intent to a ‘group’ of people and are always careful to treat even those who might disagree with us with respect. Our Focus on the Family content creators here in the U.S. are also careful to consult with Focus on the Family Canada whenever questions arise. Focus on the Family Canada, in turn, monitors the content produced in the U.S. and assesses this content against Canadian law.”
Online harms act makes hate speech akin to murder
: Online harms act makes hate speech akin to murder
Promoting genocide would carry a maximum penalty of life in prison, but no one can agree on what genocide actually means
Published Feb 28, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 4 minute read
When I was a kid, we used to say that, “Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt.” Nowadays, offensive speech is considered violence. Silence is violence. And those whose words are deemed by the state to be most egregious will be treated like serial killers.
“All of us expect to be safe in our homes, in our neighbourhoods and in our communities,” said Justice Minister Arif Virani, after tabling Bill C-63, the online harms act, in the House of Commons on Monday. “We should be able to expect the same kind of safety in our online communities.”
Except many Canadians don’t feel safe in their communities anymore. Last summer, Statistics Canada reported that the police-reported crime rate in 2022 had increased by five per cent compared to a year earlier. The homicide rate rose for the fourth consecutive year, reaching its highest level since 1992.
Rather than focusing on the type of crime that puts Canadians’ property and physical safety at risk — the “sticks and stones,” if you will — the government has chosen to focus on the words being transmitted to our smartphones and laptops.
To accomplish this, the Liberals propose burdening “social media” platforms with heavy-handed regulations; creating a giant censorship bureaucracy to force compliance; and re-empowering kangaroo courts to persecute people for thought crimes.
Bill C-63 establishes a new digital safety commission, digital safety ombudsperson and digital safety office (to assist the commission and ombudsman), which will be responsible for ensuring revenge porn and child pornography are taken offline within 24 hours. (Though child porn is already taken seriously by social media platforms and, if history is any indication, it won’t be long before the new bureaucracy’s mission expands).
Platformed
This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays)
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
Websites will be responsible for ensuring they have tools that allow users to flag posts and systems in place to determine whether they meet the definition of “harmful content,” which includes “content that induces a child to harm themselves,” “content used to bully a child,” “content that foments hatred,” “content that incites violence” and “content that incites violent extremism or terrorism.”
While social media companies will be required to submit data on the volume of harmful content found on their sites to the new digital safety commission, enforcement will be punted to the courts and the human rights tribunal, where the penalties are much steeper than merely having a post arbitrarily deleted.
The bill would reinstate parts of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which will once again put decisions over what constitutes online hate speech in the hands of the quasi-judicial Canadian Human Rights Commission (HRC) and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
It would also increase the penalty for anyone who “advocates or promotes genocide” to a maximum of life in prison — the same sentence, it should be noted, as was handed to Robert Pickton, one of Canada’s most prolific serial killers and rapists. And it specifically prohibits website operators from notifying users when they have been reported to law enforcement.
Although the Criminal Code uses the standard definition of genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group,” there is no longer any consensus — within government or society — on what the term “genocide” actually means. This could have profound implications for how the online harms act is enforced.
Even the strict legal definition could be muddied by the fact that Trudeau accepted the conclusions of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, “including that what happened amounts to genocide” — even though what took place doesn’t meet the legal definition of genocide.
As law professor Bruno Gelinas-Faucher told The Canadian Press in 2021, “A court could say … that the state has accepted responsibility under international law for the crime of genocide” — which is “a big deal.”
Even though prosecuting and enforcing penalties for the crime of promoting genocide would be left to the courts, vindictive users looking to punish those whose views they disagree with will be empowered to flag content, which websites will then have a responsibility to investigate (and possibly incentivized to censor in order to look as though they’re complying with the spirit of the law), and to submit frivolous complaints with the Human Rights Commission.
Do we trust the ideologues working for the HRC or the left-wing activists churned out by universities and scooped up by tech companies to determine whether any given social media post or online video meets the strict legal definition of promoting genocide? How could we, given that the term has been so watered down, no one seems to agree on what it means anymore?
Since Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre, Jews and other supporters of Israel have been claiming that protesters chanting “from the river to the sea” are advocating genocide because a Palestinian state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean would necessitate the destruction of the Jewish state. On the other side are people who erroneously claim that Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza and that anyone who supports its war against Hamas is therefore advocating genocide.
I’ll let you decide which group is more likely to end up on the wrong side of Trudeau’s new censorship regime.
Warning to America
Warning to America:Trudeau’s Online Censorship Bill will,when it becomes law, stifle the growing chorus of anti-immigration voices just in a nick of time. Cheap labour employers, the home building industry and developers are depending on it. Billions of dollars are at stake. Let the Great Replacement proceed!
By Tim Murray on 1 March 2024
America, this is what happens to countries (like mine) which do not have the equivalent of a Second Amendment:
Liberals’ “online hate” bill contains $70K fines for speech and life imprisonment for hate crimes, True North, 26 February 2024.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a half-assed document that attempts to trade off free speech with other “rights”, as if free speech is not the one right upon which all other rights depend. In other words, Canadian constitutional law is based on a deeply flawed understanding of what makes a democracy work.
If the issue is “harmful” speech, then the good old fashioned Criminal Code of Canada sufficed. Speech that incites violence is prohibited. That litmus test was understood and accepted across the political spectrum.
But then, consensus was easily achieved in a largely homogeneous society, which bicultural Canada was. In the early 70s, well over 90 percent of us were of European origin.
Then along came mass immigration and a change in immigration selection criteria that ensured that nine in ten migrants would come from “non-traditional” (ie. non-European) sources. Over time, a nation of “Two Solitudes”, British and French, eventually became 200 solitudes (and more. Hello “vibrant diversity”, goodbye cohesion and comity.
Subsequently the game became “We have to keep the peace among rival ethnic and religious groups”. The remedy? Suppress free expression that would exacerbate tensions. As Lee Kwan Yu concluded, ethnic and religious harmony must come at the expense of free speech. When famed Canadian journalist George Jonas came to Canada as a Hungarian refugee in 1956, he reported that the most common phrase he heard in his adopted land was “Everyone is entitled to his opinion.” But 40 years later it was “I am offended”.
What does this have to do with sustainable population policy? Everything.
Seventy percent of Canada’s population growth is driven by immigration, and the percentage is growing. Now the three major parties favour an annual immigration intake of 500,000+ in pursuit of an insane population target of 100 million (up from our present 40 million!). Trudeau’s agenda of stringent internet censorship and extreme punishment for thought crimes makes any challenge to this immigration policy risky to say the least. Especially when Canada’s version of the SPLC, the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, is looking for a xenophobe / Islamophobe / transphobe under every bed. In addition to the criminal charges that Trudeau’s proposed changes would involve, human rights charges under the various civil provincial codes could be applied.
It should be remembered that under the federal and provincial Human Rights code, the legal costs incurred by a complainant are picked up by taxpayers, however frivolous or absurd the change. Meanwhile, typically the defendant has to mortgage his house to mount a defence. In other words, a complainant has no incentive not to file a complaint and financially ruin you. How’s that for fair play?
What transpires over the next year or half a year is critical to the country’s future. At long last there are mainstream voices calling for a halt to over-immigration madness. Trudeau and his puppeteers on Bay Street understand that these voices must be stifled NOW. The backlash against hyper-immigration proposals must be nipped in the bud. Billions of dollars are at stake. Cheap labour employers, developers, the homebuilding industry and the major banks are counting on the windfall that will fall into their laps as runaway population growth proceeds.
I am very alarmed.
Related
Freedom Events in the Okanagan, February 29 – March 15: David Lindsay’s Appeal; Rally, March 2; Professor Bruce Pardy
 |
“It Ain’t Over”
Freedom activists are critical thinkers!
Our society is so dumbed down and indoctrinated that anyone who is a
critical thinker is labeled as a Conspiracy Theorist.
Did you know: The term ‘conspiracy theorist’ was first coined and
used by the CIA to ridicule anyone who opposed the
gov’t narrative?
————————————–
————————————–
The closer the collapse of an Empire, the crazier its laws.
Marcus Tullius Cicero
Truly, those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities
Voltaire
Kelowna Courts
Falsified assault charge
Kelowna Courthouse
R v David Lindsay s. 266 Criminal Code Assault
Next Provincial Court Hearing Date: April 12, 2024 – Sentencing
I will provide more specifics and updates in the coming weeks. Not much happening until then, except the Crown Persecutor, David Grabavac, wants two years in jail, three years probation, a firearms weapons ban, and a DNA sample. Unbelievable. From those who have seen the video, this is nothing more than political harassment and intimidation by Mr. Grabavac who is abusing his powers and should be removed from the office of a Crown Prosecutor immediately.
——————————
CONVICTION APPEAL
Next Supreme Court Hearing Date: April 22, 2024
Notice of Conviction Appeal
In the B.C. Supreme Court on Jan. 29, 2024, I appeared before Justice Weatherill. I was ordered to file my Constitutional Challenge to the payment of transcripts fees, and s. 265 of the Criminal Code (assault – as being far too broad), and serve them on the AG of Canada and BC, by April 5, 2024. Next hearing date is simply to see how to proceed with the appeal after that.
City of Kelowna v David Lindsay et al
Petition to Stop Rallies
ORIGINAL hearing date – The week of Feb. 20, 2024
ADJOURNED – LACK OF JUDGES!!!
In response to the City of Kelowna’s Petition for a permanent injunction banning our rallies from downtown Kelowna unless we pay for an obtain a permit from the very people we are protesting against, we have filed a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) Application, seeking to have the Petition dismissed on the basis that it is either intended to stifle and stop freedom of expression or will have that effect – or both. The City and Province has tried for two years now to stop our rallies (protests/demonstrations) against COVID-19, vaccinations, and upcoming threats to our freedoms.
Public visibility is hated by these govt’s who do not want their activities becoming public unless they control the narrative.
This was originally set down for a three (3) day hearing this past week. In Kelowna, they use this archaic “Assize” system to set hearing dates in the Supreme Court, where the schedulers call you late on Friday afternoon the week prior to your hearing, to tell what days you will be heard on. This presents numerous obstacles and burdens upon all parties, from lawyers having to leave a whole week open to may be heard on one day, to litigants who are self represented having to tell employers at the last minute that they cannot work, to the public who have a Constitutional right of access to watch court proceedings and must also try and reschedule all their plans to be heard at the last minute.
As a result of there being no available judges, this hearing has now been pushed back to the week of JUNE 17, 2024 to be heard over three (3) days.
I will not be notified until Friday June 14, 2024 what specific days of the following week we will be heard, and who the judge will be.
My documents in this case are located on our website at:
All City of Kelowna documents and pleadings are now placed on our website for public viewing: https://clearbc.org/city-of-kelowna/
————————————–
Attorney General of Canada v Canadian Civil Liberties Association, et al
Emergencies Act Notice of Appeal
On Feb. 22, 2024, the Attorney General of Canada filed its appeal from the decision of the Federal Court, striking its orders under the Emergencies Act. The Respondents are the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Edward Cornell and Vincent Gircys, and the Canadian Constitutional Foundation.
Additionally, the Canadian Frontline Nurses and Kristen Nagle have also filed an appeal from the decision of the Federal Court Judge refusing to give them standing.
A copy of these appeals can be found on our website at: https://clearbc.org/emergencies-act-appeal/
————————————–
Bruce Orydzuk — March 19, 2024 – 9:30 a.m. – Judgment
Cause Disturbance at Vaccine Protest – s. 175(1)(a) Criminal Code
Bruce has been a committed activist for freedom the entire COVID-19 Con and continuing to the present against ongoing threats to our rights and freedoms.
Please support Bruce at court when judgment is delivered by Judge Ruse. Those who have witnessed this proceeding will, again, agree that no disturbance was caused and the Crown is simply prosecuting for improper purposes.
————————————–
Sunday Paper Delivery
Next delivery day:
March 3, 2024
(Weather Permitting)
Add your name to the delivery list and make sure to check your email on Sunday mornings for confirmation that our paper delivery will take place that day
Make sure you arrive before the designated time so we can all get going ASAP!
Every Sunday at 11:30 am
March 3, 2024
- Sign-up on the Newspaper Delivery list so that you get an email confirming the deliveries for each Sunday. With winter in mind, we will only do this if roads are bare and it’s not snowing. The advantage of delivering this time of year is that nobody is hanging out in their front yards except for the odd snowman.
- We meet at the Capri parking lot between A&W and De Dutch Pannekoek House
- Bring a large bag for carrying the papers if you want
- Grab a free small Kelowna mapbook that can help you get situated. Your cell phone will be tracking and tracing you. Learn how to read maps again
- You will be provided with a printed google map of the area you will be delivering to. Bring a yellow marker to indicate which streets you completed. You may run out of papers or you may end up with extra
- We ask that with every paper you deliver, you remove the inserts and place them in the mailbox in front or behind the paper. That way, someone who may hastily throw out the paper will still be forced to see each individual flyer
- Please deliver only one paper per mailbox, regardless if you have different papers (we usually have a combination of different papers and editions). Some houses may have up to 4 mailboxes; put one paper in each as they are for different tenants
- Sign up as a Volunteer to participate in one of the many focus groups we are working to organize. Most people are too busy to commit to fighting for freedom. I guarantee you will have plenty of extra time after Canada becomes a full-fledged communist country and your jobs & businesses are gone. Time to add freedom-fighting to your list of priorities. Much of the help needed can be done at home and even one hour per week will be helpful. Even if you don’t want to join a specific group, maybe you have something you can offer to help out. Let us know!
- Contact Linda at CLEAR
3 Simple Things Freedom Activists can do to WIN this War:
1. Spread the Word by delivering papers and flyers everywhere. Knowledge is power!
2. Replace your cell phone with a flip phone. Think of your apps as TRAPS!
3. Use CASH: Hand out the “Use cash cards” and “pay cash” business posters.
REMINDER
New Credit Card Fees & Lack of Privacy
It is starting – Use cash as much as possible – use credit cards or digital only if there is no other alternative.
Companies will not use digital currency if we are not using digital currency! It will cost them too much in lost business.
Here is an awesome poster you can distribute to all businesses to put on their entrance doors, advocating for the use of cash. Print on 8 1/2 x 11 glossy hard stock for best results.
BC Transit launches tap payment in Victoria
Use cash for all transit!!!!
For Business owners:
The dangers of digital gov’t ID and currencies are here… you need to use cash as much as possible. As recognized by Freedom Rising, there are many inherent dangers of using digital currency. What do you do, not if, but when:
The internet is down
There is a power outage
The card reader malfunctions
Your phone battery dies or doesn’t work for other reasons
WE SUGGEST YOU CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING AS WELL:
Your phone is stolen
Your passwords are co-opted
Your credit/debit card strip is damaged – needs replacing
There are errors in relation to the quantum of $$ on your card
Gov’t limits your purchases/CRA liens the balance on your card
AND MANY OTHER DANGERS
CLEAR has promoted the non-use of digital currencies and credit/debit cards as much as possible, for years.
Suggestion:
Withdraw money on Saturday/Sunday from the bank or bank machine, and then leave your money at home if you are scared to carry it with you, and just carry the amounts of cash for each day’s purchases for the week.
NO MORE CARDS!!!! NO EXCUSES!
USE CASH $$$$$$$$$
Do you want to be the next person to be “unbanked” because of your political beliefs???
Get these cards below at the CLEAR booth to give out everytime you use cash – or print your own to hand out!
Make Business sized cards to hand out at all your cash purchases!
Thanks Nadia for this link:
Find out which institutions near you
The Digital ID System is being supported by a rapidly growing number of provincial and federal governments, financial institutions, networks for payments and for identity verification, technology service providers, strategy and integration experts to name a few…
————————————–
Ed Kallio
————————————–
Since January 8th 2024 the German farmers are protesting. Almost all European countries have joined and make their voices heard. Germans help Poland and blocked the border, French and Luxemburg farmers broke through the blockade around the European Parliament. And the protests continue. European farmes are holding the line.
————————————–
CLEARBITS:
Freedom of expression threats coming from the Municipal Governments now
Edmonton City Council was proposing a Bylaw that would fine people for participating in or organizing a protest without a permit if 50 or more people attend. More inspiration for us to win our case here in Kelowna….the Provincial and Federal Governments are using the local governments to use their Bylaws to shut down freedom of expression…or severely curtail and limit it to being non-effective.
————————————–
Nova Scotia
Help Druthers
 |
Druthers #40 It’s hard to believe that we have been doing this every month for 40 months now. Wow, time flies! And wow, people are waking up faster and faster! So exiting to see 🙂 Plus, what’s even more incredible is, this project is entirely funded by concerned Canadians who wish to make a difference. With no government funding or corporate sponsors, they have no influence on what we print. It is vitally important to keep independent media, independent. We have a day and a half to raise $10k more for the 225,000 copies of Druthers that are being printed right now for March. Please help if you can. =========== Etransfer to: admin@druthers.net Or visit our fundraising page to use a credit card or payal. https://donorbox.org/druthers =========== Three years in and these papers are still costing just 10 cents each for printing and shipping them on skids all across the country. That means for every $100 raised, we print AND distribute 1000 newspapers all over the country through our massive & passionate volunteer team. Your donations are very efficiently and effectively used for helping wake up more of our fellow Canadians and inspire them to stand for what is right. It’s working. We are making a difference, and it really is because of you. We must keep planting these seeds of thought. Please give what you can, IF you can. P.S. I know many are struggling with finances these days and if that is you, please know, this message is not for you. Please don’t send us your rent or food money. This message is for those who are able to use some of their available resources to help save this country. Much Love to you ALL <3 Shawn Jason  DONATE HERE |
| You receive this email because you have joined the website newsletter druthers.net With the a |
Elected P.E.I. Councillor Challenges Being Suspended and Fined From Elected Job for A Sign Critical of Residential School Hysteria
.
Elected P.E.I. Councillor Challenges Being Suspended and Fined From Elected Job for A Sign Critical of Residential School Hysteria
Voters’ choice is under attack by woke elected bodies. It’s happened to at least two school trustees in Ontario and others in Alberta and Manitoba. The elected official makes a statement the leftists on council or the school board don’t like and they suspend him, thus denying the voters the services of the person THEY hired. Only the voters, at the next election, should be able to dismiss an elected official. The latest example is Murray Harbour Councillor John Robertson in P.E.I. The Canadian Press (February 23, 2024) reports: “Between late September and early October last year, coinciding with the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, the councillor displayed a sign on his property with the message, “Truth: mass grave hoax” and “Reconciliation: Redeem Sir John A.’s integrity.” The thought police on council nuked him. “The councillors then decided to impose a $500 fine and suspend him from his municipal post for six months. Robertson, elected in November 2022, was also removed as chair of the maintenance committee and ordered to write an apology to the mayor, council and the Indigenous community.” To his credit, Councillor Robertson has taken the matter to court and is seeking judicial review, arguing that the other councillors’ actions infringed on his right to freedom of speech, expression and belief. — Paul Fromm
P.E.I. councillor punished for posting sign questioning Indigenous unmarked graves seeks judicial review
Murray Harbour Coun. John Robertson claims fellow councillors exceeded their authority and violated his Charter rights by fining and suspending him
Author of the article:
The Canadian Press
Michael MacDonald
Published Feb 23, 2024 • 3 minute read
A makeshift memorial is seen outside the former Kamloops Indian Residential School in Kamloops, B.C., after the possible discovery of 215 unmarked graves on the property in May 2021.Photo by Cole Burston/AFP via Getty Images/File
CHARLOTTETOWN — A village councillor in Prince Edward Island is asking a court to quash sanctions imposed on him after he displayed a sign on his property questioning the existence of unmarked graves at former residential schools.
In documents filed last week with the P.E.I. Supreme Court, Murray Harbour Coun. John Robertson claims fellow councillors exceeded their authority and violated his rights on Nov. 18, 2023, when they decided he had breached the council’s code of conduct.
The councillors then decided to impose a $500 fine and suspend him from his municipal post for six months. Robertson, elected in November 2022, was also removed as chair of the maintenance committee and ordered to write an apology to the mayor, council and the Indigenous community.
The councillor’s application for judicial review, dated Feb. 16, says those sanctions were unreasonable because they failed to account for his fundamental rights to freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, as guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Robertson argues that he shouldn’t be punished for stating personal opinions that have nothing to do with his role as an elected member of council.
Between late September and early October last year, coinciding with the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, the councillor displayed a sign on his property with the message, “Truth: mass grave hoax” and “Reconciliation: Redeem Sir John A.’s integrity.”
Macdonald, Canada’s first prime minister, is considered an architect of the residential school system because he championed policies of assimilation and violence toward Indigenous people.
In May 2021, the Tk’emlups te Secwepemc First Nation announced that ground-penetrating radar had revealed the possible remains of as many as 215 children around the former Kamloops Indian Residential School in British Columbia’s interior. Since then, many other First Nations across Canada have searched for unmarked graves at school sites in their territories.Recommended from Editorial
“The subject of Mr. Robertson’s impugned statements included questioning the reliability of news reports of a political nature and providing an opinion respecting a political figure and did not relate to any function undertaken by Mr. Robertson as a member of council,” the application says, arguing the other councillors employed an “overboard interpretation” of the code of conduct.
The document says Robertson has resisted requests to resign, “asserting that the expression of his personal opinions on political topics were not properly the subject of the council’s oversight.” Terry White, mayor of Murray Harbour, population 282, could not be reached for comment Friday.
Bill C-63– Trudeau’s Internet Censorship Bill
| The fight is on! Justin Trudeau and his Liberal Party just tabled their latest censorship law, Bill C-63. It’s a shocking piece of legislation that claims to target “hate speech” and “hate propaganda,” but in reality, it’s just another attempt by Trudeau to seize control of the Internet and silence his critics. While Jagmeet Singh and the NDP continue to prop up the Liberals, there’s a good chance this bill will become law — and that could be the end of Rebel News and independent journalism in Canada. Click here for the latest and help us fight back! What exactly is “harm” and “hate speech” according to Trudeau? They’re not real crimes — they’re thought crimes — a way to shut down and punish anyone who questions the official government narrative. And there’s nothing Trudeau hates more than prickly journalists willing to ask him tough questions. We all know about his admiration for Communist China’s “basic” dictatorship. And as we saw during the Freedom Convoy, he won’t hesitate to act like a tyrant when given the opportunity. (Imagine what would have happened to the Freedom Convoy if Rebel News wasn’t there to tell the other side of the story.) We’re prepared to fight this in court all the way. In fact, we’re already working behind the scenes with our lawyers to prepare for what could be one of our biggest fights yet. That’s why we need your help. This is a matter of survival — we’re up against the full resources of the state. So if you can spare $5, $50, or $500, we promise to put everything we have into winning this fight. If you can donate towards our legal fees, please do. Simply click here or go to StopTheCensorship.ca. Yours truly, Ezra Levant Rebel News |