CAFE Salutes 70th Rally of Shelburne Freedom Fighters

CAFE Salutes 70th Rally of Shelburne Freedom Fighters

CAFE supporters frequently join in the regular Saturday freedom rallies held in Shelburne, Ontario. On Saturday, October 5, CAFE Director Paul Fromm was invited to speak.

Mr. Fromm warned about federal efforts to gag free speech, especially Bill C-63. Also, the NDP has introduced a private member’s bill that would make denying or diminishing the still largely unproved harms of the residential schools (216 mass graves?) a criminal offence.

Mr. Fromm pointed to a recent news story.

“Canadian Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge is set to make history by becoming the first openly lesbian cabinet minister to take parental leave when her wife gives birth in the coming weeks.

“I’m not someone who really likes to talk about myself or my personal life either,” St-Onge said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

The Quebec MP said she decided to speak publicly about her parental leave because she has “a responsibility to continue the fight” for LGBTQ rights.” (Canadian Press, September 28, 2024)

When a society can’t get the basics right:that there are two sexes — man and woman; marriage is between a man and a woman, then this disordered state of mind and morality leads to other errors.

For instance, the Liberal elite is hopped up on LGBTQ ideology. Men can pretend to be women. Is it any wonder, he asked, that this same elite cannot and will not control the border and has allowed an invasion that has led to a massive housing crisis, a stressed medical system and impossible traffic gridlock in the GTA and Greater Vancouver areas?

Is it any wonder that these mixed-up people seek to destroy one of Canada’s greatest resources — the oil and natural gas industry — in pursuit of the World Economic Forum’s grim climate change fanaticism?



Canadians Must Stop Bill C-63 by Russ Cooper https://cafe.nfshost.com/?p=9958

Canadians Must Stop Bill C-63 by Russ Cooper – September 18, 2024

https://www.canadiancitizens.org/single-post/canadians-must-stop-bill-c-63

Editor’s note: In this article originally published in the National Post, Barbara Kay rips the façade off Bill C-63  (https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/online-harms.html) to expose it for the totalitarian, freedom-crushing piece of legislation that it is. Increasingly, Western countries are using hate speech legislation to silence criticism of poorly thought-out government policies on matters such as immigration and multiculturalism and to prevent citizen reporting about their consequences. Canada is positioning itself as a leader in this censorial trend.

The wrapping to make the horror show that is Bill C-63 more palatable includes regulations against child pornography and online bullying, among other items already covered by the criminal code or that could easily be included as amendments. But the meat of the bill is in the proposed regulations that would crush free speech by empowering the federal cabinet to bypass Parliament in creating legislation and encourage grievance-mongers to make frivolous and malicious accusations without consequence, all while  imposing draconian penalties on offenders, or people merely thought (by some anonymous person) to be likely to be an offender. Bill C-63 makes a mockery of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

We hope that readers of Barbara Kay’s article will sign our petition for Parliament to withdraw or (should it be passed) repeal this bill (it is now in second reading). We are currently seeking a member of Parliament to agree to authorize the online publication of our petition. We will notify our members when this has been done and also post the link to our petition on our website. We also invite you to write your member of Parliament and the prime minister to express your concerns. For Canadians who believe in freedom, now is the time to stand up.


Barbara Kay: Canadians can’t allow the online harms bill to snuff out free speechby Barbara Kay, National Post – September 8, 2024

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/barbara-kay-canadians-cant-allow-the-online-harms-bill-to-snuff-out-free-speech

Bill C-63 would punish mere expression and give draconian new powers to government. It’s unfit for a democracy

The sands of time were already running low for Justin Trudeau’s government. Jagmeet Singh’s just-announced withdrawal from their mutually supportive contract has widened the waist of the hourglass. Parliament resumes sitting on Sept. 16, and the Liberals will urgently seek to pass Bill C-63, the Online Harms Act, now in its second reading.

If passed in its present incarnation, this deeply flawed bill will drastically curtail freedom of speech in Canada (which, to be fair, is not an outlier on digital crackdowns in the West. Switzerland, of all places, just passed similar legislation).

We already have hate-crime laws in the Criminal Code that address advocacy for genocide, incitement of hatred and the wilful promotion of hatred. Apart from its laudatory intentions in removing online content that sexually victimizes children, Bill C-63 seeks to curb all online hate speech through unnecessary, inadvisable and draconian measures inappropriate to a democracy.

The law would create a new transgression: an “offence motivated by hated” which

would raise the maximum penalty for advocacy of genocide from five years to life

imprisonment. What kind of mindset considers the mere expression of hateful ideas as equivalent in moral depravity to rape and murder? Such instincts call to my mind the clever aperçu by anti-Marxist pundit David Horowitz that “Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out.”

Another red flag: The law would give new powers to the federal cabinet to pass

regulations that have the same force as legislation passed by Parliament, and that

could, say, shut down a website. Unlike legislation, regulations created by cabinet do not require debate, votes or approval of Parliament. They can be decided in secrecy and come into force without public consultation or debate.

Yet another is the restoration of the “communication of hate speech” offence to the

Canadian Human Rights Act, a provision similar to the one repealed in 2012. Frivolous or malicious complaints could be made against persons or organizations, granting complainants significant potential for financial reward at no personal cost, win or lose. Moreover, under this law, a complainant’s sense of injury from published words would trump a defence of objective truth. This is an open invitation for myriad social malcontents and grievance-mongers to swarm the system, with no regard for the inevitable harm done to those who they target.

One group experiencing alarm for their survival under Bill C-63’s proposed strictures is the Canadian Citizens for Charter Rights and Freedoms (C3RF). C3RF educates Canadians about their Charter rights and freedoms, and proposes legislation and regulatory frameworks that guard freedom of expression. They have published numerous critical articles on topics such as gender ideology, critical race theory and vaccine mandates: hot-button issues that are sure to offend some person or group, and that a human rights tribunal might well deem hateful under the online harms law, worthy of punishment sufficient to shut them down altogether.

I’m a fan of C3RF’s founder and director, Royal Canadian Air Force Major (ret’d) Russ Cooper, a decorated CF-18 combat pilot, and an expert in the field of post-9/11 civil aviation security. Cooper came to my attention in 2017, when the House of Commons passed M-103, a non-binding motion, after some controversy. M-103 called for a “whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia.”

The government was eager to pass it quickly, but a significant number of concerned citizens balked at their unwillingness to define “Islamophobia.” Was it hatred of Muslims, or of Islam? If it was bigotry against Muslims, why wasn’t “anti-Muslim” good enough? The difference is existential.

As the Liberals’ stonewalling on the definition continued, it became clear to a significant swath of the population that if M-103’s wording was accepted in future legislation, the Trudeau government would effectively have facilitated an Islam entitlement, similar to others in Europe granted by the European Court of Human Rights to preserve “religious peace” (except it hasn’t). Cooper moved so swiftly and competently to harness their collective energy that Conservative MPs received upwards of 900,000 critical emails within a few days of the M-103 vote.

Since then, C3RF’s membership has swelled to tens of thousands embedded within a network of other like-minded freedom- and truth-seeking organizations. As Cooper told me in an email, “If there is one good thing you can say about the draconian measures foisted upon the regular folk of Canada in the days since M-103, it’s that these vexations have unified a whole new cadre of discerning citizens, tired of being pushed around and taken for granted.”

C3RF, in conjunction with allies like Veterans for Freedom and Act! for Canada, are

working on a House of Commons petition calling for the cancellation of Bill C-63. Once a parliamentary sponsor seizes that baton and sets it in motion, I will be sure to alert readers. It would be wonderful if it were signed by every one of the 32 per cent of Canadians a

Monika Schaefer Shows the Way to Lobby Your MP on the Freedom Crushing Bill C-63

July 18, 2024

to: Mr. Bob Zimmer 

Member of Parliament for Prince George – Peace River – Northern Rockies

Dear Bob,

Thank you for taking the time on Monday July 15th, 2024 at the Beanery in McBride to have a conversation with me. I noticed that some of the things I said were surprising and unfamiliar to you. I can assure you that I have reached my conclusions after a great deal of research and inquiry, combined with personal experiences which have proven to me that many of my conclusions were correct. I am always open to learning and to changing my mind if presented with evidence which shows that I erred. 

Rather than try to persuade you of this or that, I would like to leave you with a few questions, as stimulus and food for thought. I do not expect you to provide me with answers to these questions as I do not believe that you have answers just yet, from what I gathered during our conversation on Monday. My hope is that the questions will be the seeds which will germinate one day soon. Perhaps some of these questions will prompt you to do your own research into these matters. Once you really see what is going on in the world, you cannot unsee it. Nor will you want to, even if the truth is uncomfortable at times – at least that is my personal experience. This old saying is apt: The Truth will set you Free. 

I simply ask that you please send me acknowledgement of having received and personally read this emailed letter (not just one of your staff members). Here are my questions for you to ponder:

  • Why are there many countries, including Canada, which enshrine history into law? Is it possible for past events to be forced into existence by laws? Can events of the past be altered by the stroke of a pen today?
  • Why do we not leave history for historians, scholars, researchers and archaeologists to decipher and revise as new evidence emerges?
  • If there are laws forbidding us to question the Holocaust, why are there no similar laws criminalizing the questioning of the Holodomor? Or the Armenian genocide? Or any number of other genocides?
  • Why is evidence forbidden in “Holocaust trials” in Germany? (The defendant can be charged a second time – or a third and fourth time and so forth – for presenting evidence during the trial – I know this to be true because it happened to my brother.)
  • Why do lawyers go to jail for defending their client in these “speech crime” trials? (Just as an example, research Sylvia Stolz, a German lawyer who went to jail for doing her job too well while defending her client.)
  • Why were Jews expelled from countless nations, states, and regions during the past several thousand years? Are Gentiles simply born with an “anti-Semitic” gene that makes them want to evict Jews after having welcomed them in? Or is it possible that the behaviour of the Jews caused the Gentiles to evict them?
  • What exactly is “anti-Semitism”? Is it an emotion? Is it words? Perhaps words which state uncomfortable facts? And why are there laws criminalizing these words and emotions?
  • When I spoke to you about geo-engineering (i.e. chem-trails), you asked why they would do this. That is a good question. Why indeed? And what are they spraying us with? Why are there so few insects anymore?
  • Perhaps on a related note, why do they call CO2 a dangerous gas, a pollutant which must be reduced, when in fact it is the stuff of life? Why do green-house operators pump more of this “dangerous gas” into their greenhouses?
  • Did you know that we are actually at a very low level of atmospheric CO2 when viewed in the long historical record? And did you know that average temperatures in the distant past have been significantly higher than they are now, and that the earth was teeming with life during those times?
  • You did acknowledge that the many fires in Alberta in 2023 started all at once, indicating that they were man-made. Yet we never stopped hearing about “climate change” in relation to the fires. Why would these man-made fires be conflated with the “climate change” narrative?
  • Why have so many food processing plants mysteriously or “accidentally” burnt down over the last few years?
  • Why are so many small family farms being attacked by way of ever-increasing government rules and regulations, and orders to kill their livestock due to some invisible non-existent virus or too much “greenhouse gas” emissions or any number of other invented and invisible threats?
  • Why did they tell us the “vaccine” was “safe and effective”, when in reality it was never “safe” nor “effective”? (now by their own admission)
  • Are you aware that the jab was an “experimental” gene-modifying “therapy”? (also by their own admission)
  • Why were we coerced (fired from jobs, not allowed into universities, prevented from travelling, shamed and blamed, etc) into taking this “experimental” injection?
  • Is there any evidence to substantiate the serious allegations about the mass murder – or even a single murder – of Indigenous school children in Canadian residential schools? Why have none of the alleged “unmarked graves” been dug up? Why the resistance to investigate?
  • Do you know and understand the contents of Bill C-63, Canada’s Online Harms Act? Do you know that it includes provisions to make a court order against a person for “hate” speech which they are suspected they might do in the future? Do you know that the penalties section of Bill C-63 includes life in prison for certain “speech crimes”? (I realize that your party is opposing this bill – that is great – but still, I would ask why every single Member of Parliament is not screaming from the rooftops about this tyrannical bill. My online search in the parliamentary records of your spoken words did not yield results for this particular Bill – but I stand to be corrected if I err.)
  • Have you ever heard about the Bolshevik revolution? 
  • Did you know that the Bolshevik leaders were predominantly Jewish?
  • Are you aware that tens of millions of Russians were murdered, tortured, starved and terrorized under Bolshevik rule during the previous century?
  • Are you aware that there were laws in the Soviet Union against “anti-Semitism”, prior to and during the reign of terror? Are you familiar with Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada, the “hate speech” law? Can you connect the dots?

There are many more questions I could pose, but that is enough for now. I truly hope that these questions will cause you to pause and reflect, why nothing really makes sense in the world as seen through the prism of the mainstream narrative being prescribed for us. Our very existence depends on enough of us waking up to the truth about who is doing what to us.

Thank you for reading this. I am copying a few other MPs and I am also sending this letter by blind copy (bcc) to many other people. It is, in effect, an open letter.

sincerely, 

Monika Schaefer

McBride, British Columbia, Canada

A Country Invaded, A People Gagged: The Dominion of Canada Today — A Talk Given By Paul Fromm to Pastor Tom Robb’s Faith and Freedom Conference in Harrison, Arkan

A Country Invaded, A People Gagged: The Dominion of Canada Today — A Talk Given By Paul Fromm to Pastor Tom Robb’s Faith and Freedom Conference in Harrison, Arkansas
https://ugetube.com/watch/gunQZdTQpC9A89G

I don’t want to spend LIFE in prison .., But if Trudeau has his way …


But if Trudeau has his way… 
my being sent away for life is prison could become a very real possibility. Please help stop this from happening. That’s what this month’s Druthers cover story is about.

Have a peek… it has a cartoon of black face Trudeau on it 😉 See it here.

Are you familiar with Bill C-63? The government has proposed that anyone who speaks out-of-line is a criminal worthy of life in prison! Wow. If this bill passes, it will be a massive blow to the freedom community and to freedom of speech in general, in Canada. It would also deliver a big blow to my own personal freedom because I publish Druthers.

Please… we cannot let this happen!

How do we stop it? The first big step is raising more awareness about this insane bill. I find most Canadians aren’t even aware of Bill C-63 and the extreme tyrannical powers it would grant the government. But, when enough people know about it, I am confident people WILL stand up and strongly say NO to the passing of this bill. If it passes, we are ALL at risk of life in prison.

This is no joke. We need more people to be aware of this insanity in order to stop it.

If you haven’t already, please consider ordering a bundle of 100 copies of this month’s papers that you can distribute into your own community as you see fit.

Or, an even easier way is to order our Neighbourhood Mail service and effortlessly have Druthers stuffed into the mailboxes in your own local community, or any Canadian community of your choosing. This has been a super popular option and delivery has been very reliable as we use Canada Post to deliver Druthers.

Since we started offering Neighbourhood Mail service in September of 2022, we have delivered an extra 800,000 copies of Druthers directly into people’s mailboxes in communities all across Canada! That’s incredible.

We are many, they are few. We have all the power, if we step up and claim it.

Let me know if you have any questions, or if you have ideas on how we can make this stop this even more assuredly, I would love to hear about it. I don’t really want to spend the rest of my life behind bars, all because I publish Druthers. Please help.

I love you all. Stay strong!!
WE. WILL. WIN.

Shawn

CAFE Attends Shelburne Freedom Rally — Lynne Brooks Interviews Political Prisoner Bill Whatcott

On April 6, a number of CAFE associates took part in the bi-weekly freedom rally in Shelburne, Ontario. Videographer Lynne Brooks did an interview with political prisoner Bill Whatcott (at 14 minutes in the video).

Axe the carbon tax and opposition to Internet censorship Bill C-63 were major themes.

Paul Fromm Interviewed by James Edwards for American Free Press

What follows is an interview conducted by James Edwards with Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression. It was originally published by the American Free Press.

James Edwards: As one of Canada’s most internationally well-known dissident activists, you have spent a lifetime fighting at the intersection of free speech and immigration reform. How did you first arrive at this destination?

Paul Fromm: Forty years ago, I saw planned massive Third World immigration as a policy to replace Canada’s European founding/settler people. In 1965, just as immigration laws were changing in Canada and the United States, the Canadian government began to consider “anti-hate” legislation. I could see that, among other things, as Canadians woke up to what was being done to them, it would be used to quell or silence opposition to the great replacement. Thus, for over 20 years, I’ve introduced myself to audiences as being about free speech and immigration: not enough free speech and too much immigration. The Canadian Jewish Congress had lobbied Ottawa for several decades for a “hate law”; that is legislation, to mute or silence criticism of them. By 1965, their lobbying power pushed then Prime Minister Lester Pearson to strike a Royal Commission to inquire into “hate” propaganda. It was stacked so that it would deliver the desired opinion. Its chairman was Dean Maxwell Cohen of McGill University Law School, a former head of the Canadian Jewish Congress, and Saul Hayes, also a former head of the Canadian Jewish Congress. A third member of the seven-man Royal Commission was a then-obscure leftist professor from Montreal, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, an admirer of both Mao and Castro, who would become Prime Minister in 1968. In 1965, the newly created Canadian Nazi Party gained a lot of headlines and short-lived notoriety. It was heavily influenced by operatives from the Canadian Jewish Congress. The Cohen Commission had trouble finding much “hate propaganda” in Canada. So, the sudden appearance of a “Nazi” party with young Canadians, not old European immigrants, was convenient to provide a “justification” for limiting free speech. The Cohen Commission’s report provided the outline of what would become the “hate law” (Sec. 318 & 319) of the Criminal Code which would be introduced as legislation by Pierre Trudeau and passed into law in 1971.

Edwards: A particularly alarming and Orwellian piece of legislation has been proposed in Canada. What is the so-called Online Harms Bill?

Fromm: John Carpay, Director of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, calls this proposed law “a full-on frontal assault on free expression, the worst in Canadian history. Full stop.” Current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has longed to further censor the Internet. He blamed the Internet as a source of misinformation. He was outraged at the Trucker’s Freedom Convoy protest which lasted for three weeks in Ottawa in early 2022. The Liberal elite despises working class Canadians and describes White working-class men and women as “deplorables”, backward, bigoted ignorant people. That these much-despised people organized such a formidable protest drove the globalist elite crazy. They invoked the Emergencies Act (a war measures act) piece of legislation which stripped people of their civil rights and allowed the tyrants to freeze bank accounts. Trudeau saw that much of the organizing occurred over the Internet. Also, both the Zionist lobby and the increasingly shrill Moslem lobby are complaining of “hate” on the Internet. The Online Harms bill seeks to make Internet service providers responsible for censoring people. The Act adds Stalinist era punishments for online “hate”. In Stalin’s Soviet Union anti-semitism was punishable by death. Canada pretends to be more civilized. So, advocacy of “genocide” – whatever that is – can get you up to life imprisonment for mere words! Also, any branch of the Criminal Code, say assault, if motivated by hate against a privileged group (but not Whites), religion (but not Christianity), sex, or sexual orientation can increase the sentence to up to life in prison.

Edwards: This bill has received global attention and a significant amount of pushback. Has this surprised you and, in your opinion, how likely is it that this might become law?

Fromm: International attention is welcome. Many foreigners are surprised how, under Trudeau, who like his father also admires Red China, Canada has become such a totalitarian state. The likelihood of passage is a good question. Groups like my own Canadian Association for Free Expression, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association are determined to fight it right from the get-go. The Parliamentary agenda is crowded, and the hope is that, if we can alert enough freedom-minded Canadians, the bill may never get to a vote.

Edwards: In what ways would this potential law further stifle free speech and expression in Canada?

Fromm: Well, a person who fears that another person may commit a “hate crime” can go before a judge and seek an order that could force house arrest, the wearing of an electronic bracelet, prohibition of drugs or alcohol, forced testing for such substances, and restriction on movement. This would all be preemptive. We know the anti-Whites portray themselves as endlessly afraid and vulnerable. This could result in massive abuse of our liberties. In addition to the Criminal Code provisions, the Canadian Human Rights Commission could now receive complaints about online expressions of “hate” as being a discriminatory practice. At human rights tribunals, really kangaroo courts, where the appointed member (judge) is chosen for a special sensitivity to human rights (they don’t include freedom of speech), and the truth is no defense, the victim has little chance. Also, if the accuser is fearful of retaliation, his/her/its identity may be kept secret from the defendant and the press. In other words, a millennium of Anglo-Saxon individual rights – in this case, the defendant’s right to face his accuser – would be tossed out the window.

Edwards: How would you compare punishment for so-called “hate speech” violations in the United States and Canada, and even European nations like the United Kingdom and Germany, where dissidents receive harsh prison sentences for having politically incorrect points of view?

Fromm: When it comes to speech, America is still a largely free country in terms of legal sanctions. Canada is now attempting to join wretched thought-control regimes like Germany in its eagerness to jail dissidents.

Edwards: Immigration is your other signature issue. Compared to the United States, how advanced has the Great Replacement become in Canada?

Fromm: America is worse off than Canada but we’re catching up. Our population is still 78% White, but massive Third World immigration engineered and enabled from the top is replacing us fast. Toronto, 98% White in 1960, is now majority Third World, as is Vancouver. This is the result of a cold-blooded and deliberate policy of replacement, collaborated in by all political parties except the populist People’s Party of Canada, and by big businesses and banks which have eagerly adopted the anti-White policies of diversity (fewer Whites hired), equity (inferior results and mediocrity), and inclusion (but not of White Christians).

Edwards: What interests drive the open border policies of the United States and Canada?

Fromm: There are several motives. One cabal wants to see Whites replaced. Greedy businessmen always bemoan a labor shortage. They mean a cheap labor shortage. They don’t care whether the potential worker is legal, illegal, Black, Yellow, or Purple, as long as he’s cheap.

Edwards: Though 90% of the population lives within an hour of the border, to many Americans, Canada still appears to be the Great White North. Does homogeneity exist in some of the more remote provinces of your expansive continent more so than in places like multicultural Toronto?

Fromm: Rural areas and small towns are still relatively White, especially in Quebec and the Maritimes. Most of the Third Worlders flock to the big cities – Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver, Hamilton, Calgary, and Edmonton.

Edwards: I read that the Canadian courts recently ruled that many of the overreaches during the Covid-era were unconstitutional. What can you tell us about that?

Fromm: Yes, in a stunning pro-freedom ruling, the Federal Court ruled that many of the federal government’s COVID restrictions were a violation of individual rights.

Edwards: As an avid observer of American politics, what are your thoughts on the upcoming elections in the United States?

Fromm: I pray for the election of Donald Trump to make America great again. I hope he has learned from his first term the bitter opposition and vile tactics of the deep state and will move swiftly and with determination to build that wall and deport, as Dwight Eisenhower did, millions of illegal aliens.

This article was originally published by American Free Press – America’s last real newspaper! Click here to subscribe today or call 1-888-699-NEWS.

Paul Fromm is Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression.

Transgendered, Calls Bill C-63 “An Orwellian

Amy Hamm, Victimized for Her Views on the
Transgendered, Calls Bill C-63 “An Orwellian

Nightmare”

Amy Hamm, Victimized for Her Views on the
Transgendered, Calls Bill C-63 “An Orwellian

Nightmare”

Speaking at a gathering of Reality Based Women Unite! in
Toronto on March 8, International Women’s Day, Amy
Hamm, whose case is discussed below warned: “The Online
Harms bill will criminalize speech. We can be punished without
even opening our mouths, for Internet postings. Bill C-63 is an
Orwellian nightmare,” she added. “It is the last desperate attempt
by a failed regime to silence its critics. Free speech has been in
peril in Canada for many years. Freedom of speech must involve
freedom from consequences like huge legal bills, job loss and
public mockery.” Noting that Bill C-63 will allow anonymous
complaints to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, she
argued: “It’s difficult to fight against a group (complainant) that
cannot be named.”


Amy Hamm said: “We live in a culture that is hellbent on
silencing the voices of dissenting women. The state funded
media does the bidding of a man who loves power as does our
national intelligence service.” She said CSIS has been corrupted
and now classifies those opposed to the LGBTQ agenda as
“potential terrorists” and violent. [Several CAFE associates attended this event.]

New Westminster Nurse Amy Hamm, the Latest
Victim of Professional Persecution
As Canada becomes more and more a Cultural Marxist, woke
controlled society, professional bodies are increasingly used to
punish their members for their political opinions. The
persecution of media star and author Jordan Peterson by the
Ontario College of Psychologists comes to mind. He was
sentenced to re-education sessions to be paid out of his own
pocket. Now, there’s British Columbia nurse Amy Hamm. CBC
(November 23, 2023) reports: “A B.C. nurse accused of making
numerous ‘derogatory and discriminatory’ public statements
about transgender people took the stand in her discipline hearing
on Friday, telling the panel considering her case that she is not
transphobic. During a hearing at the B.C. College of Nurses and
Midwives, Amy Hamm of New Westminster testified that her
advocacy on social and other platforms is meant to protect
women and children from what she described as dangerous
infringements into sex-segregated spaces. ‘I’m not transphobic. I
don’t have any issue with trans people — it’s the infringement on
women and children’s rights,’ Hamm told the college disciplinary
panel. She said she is fighting against what she described as a
‘fringe’ movement of activists influencing official positions on
transgender rights and access to gender-affirming care.
‘It’s a movement that is infringing on the rights of women and
pushing institutions to adopt what are false and delusional
beliefs,’ she said. Hamm faces allegations of unprofessional
conduct for making “discriminatory and derogatory statements
regarding transgender people” while identifying herself as a
nurse, according to a citation from the college. 
Hamm frequently refers to transgender women as ‘men’ in social
media posts, videos and podcasts, implying they pose a danger to
cisgender [that’s woke-speak for normal] women and children.
She has referred to the disciplinary proceedings as a ‘witch trial’
and suggested the college ‘would love for me to suicide myself.’
…. She told the panel she is particularly concerned about
transgender women having access to women-only spaces
including prisons and change rooms. She pointed to examples
like Madilyn Harks, a transgender woman with a history of
sexually assaulting young girls who has been housed in women’s
correctional facilities. ‘It makes me extremely, extremely angry,
and it feels as though people don’t seem to care what happens to
these women,’ she said of female inmates. She said she
completely rejects the concept of gender identity, calling it ‘anti-
scientific, metaphysical nonsense.’”
Political Prisoner Leslie Bory Not

Bill C-63, Trudeau Wants to Implement the Globalist Goal of Silencing Critics

I am genuinely frightened and deeply distraught by the federal government’s latest bill and its impact on YOUR Freedom of Speech and Expression.

Your Freedom of Speech and Expression is at stake, starting with censoring your voice on the Internet.

One “wrong” post on the Internet, and you’re silenced… forever…

Just last week, Justin Trudeau’s (In)Justice Minister Arif Virani introduced Canada, and the world, to Bill C-63, the “Online Harms Act”. 

He is calling for a chilling piece of legislation aiming to reduce online “hate” and “hate speech.” 

The implications are far-reaching and frightening since this bill will not just force social media and big tech giants to merely terminate your social media account. 

It’s social media jail incarnate, where you will pay the physical price for sharing the “wrong” opinions by going to ACTUAL JAIL.

FOR LIFE!

Sign the petition and DEMAND all our elected Members of Parliament (MPs) to resoundingly vote NO! to Bill C-63, the “DEATH of Free Speech.”

This grim reality is something straight out of science fiction, or at the very least, an online censorship law directly imported from an authoritarian regime like China, Iran, or North Korea.

If the Trudeau Liberal government gets away with it, this will be the new normal in Canada.

Here’s what authoritarian Justice Minister Virani’s “DEATH of Free Speech” law proposes:

  1. Update the Criminal Code of Canada (CCC)‘s definition of “hate speech” and “hatred” to include ambiguous terms like “incites violent extremism or terrorism,” “incites violence,” and “foments hatred” (specifically section 318 and 319 of the CCC).
  2. Expand the federal bureaucracy by instituting a “Digital Safety Commission” (aka Canada’s very own Ministry of Truth) and a “Digital Safety Ombudsperson” to receive complaints about “hate speech” and enforce speech “standards” on internet platforms (Facebook, Twitter/X, YouTube, Instagram, Twitch, Rumble, etc.).
  3. Grant even more power to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, allowing them to force content removal and impose fines up to $70,000, with a maximum of $20,000 to the offended anonymous complainants.The same commission that labeled Christmas as “racist” last December.
  4. Raise the maximum punishments for “hate propaganda” to life imprisonment.
  5. Enact “protective measures” enabling a judge to act on anonymous reports of hate crimes by requiring accused individuals to wear an electronic monitoring device, undergo house arrest, be banned from public spaces, or have a restraining order against them.

The definitions of “hate” and “hateful speech” are so vague that they could include almost anything: 

Critical opinions, political commentary, even memes. 

The type of content produced by people like Tucker Carlson, Ezra Levant, The Babylon Bee, and CitizenGO.

Add your name and call upon our MPs to stand firmly against Bill C-63, the bill that threatens the very existence of Free Speech here in Canada.

It’s unclear how these claims of “hate crimes” will be verified, opening the floodgates for anonymous complaints from anyone, anywhere in the world.

Does this sound familiar? It should.

This is eerily similar to the current legal case CitizenGO’s own Eduard Proels is facing in Germany, who is facing charges for sharing a meme on Facebook. 

Or Päivi Räsänen, a Finish MP, who is still being persecuted by a vengeful prosecutor for sharing her Christian beliefs online despite already winning her case in court, not once but twice.

If this bill passes, we could see individuals like Dr. Mark Trozzi, Jordan Peterson, Pastor Artur Pawlowski, and Josh Alexander jailed FOR LIFE for sharing their opinions that go against the radical globalist elite’s favorite politically “correct” narratives.

Pro-lifers, pro-family advocates, and pro-freedom supporters could also face similar fates, like the countless freedom convoy supporters who suddenly had their bank accounts unconstitutionally FROZEN for showing their support behind our brave truckers.

The passage of Bill C-63, “DEATH of Free Speech,” would bring the Trudeau Liberals’ vision of turning Canada into a so-called “basic dictatorship” one step closer to becoming an actual-livable reality.

But in this dark time, there is still a glimmer of hope.

We’ve seen the massive public backlash against The Liberal government’s failed attempts to pass similar censorship bills over the last several years.

This is why I am asking you to act now. If you don’t, you will lose the ability to openly discuss and debate important issues, first online and then in person.

Only with your help can we successfully defend all Canadians from authoritarianism and preserve YOUR fundamental human right to Free Speech and Expression!

Join the movement demanding Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Pierre Poiliverve, Jagmeet Singh, Yves-François Blanchet, and our Members of Parliament to say “NO!” to Bill C-63’s assassination of Free Speech!

With hope and determination,

Gregory Tomchyshyn and the entire team at CitizenGO

P.S. This fight is one of the most important fights, if not the most important fight, myself and the entire CitizenGO team is engaged with right now.

Bill C-63 would not only silence me but also you and your voice.

If your fundamental freedoms and democracy is going to survive in Canada, I personally need your help rallying a massive army of voices against this authoritarian proposal before it becomes law.

It takes only a few seconds to sign and then share this petition with everyone you know: https://citizengo.org/en-ca/pt/12377

Only with your involvement can we mount the largest defense ever seen defending your guaranteed human right to Free Speech.