New Cybersecurity Bill Would Let Government Secretly Cut Canadians’ Internet and Phone Access
The CCF has serious concerns with Bill C-8, the federal government’s proposed cybersecurity legislation, which would allow the minister of industry to secretly order telecommunications service providers to cease providing services to individual Canadians. According to the bill, the government would be able to shut down phone and internet access if it has “reasonable grounds to believe that it is necessary to do so to secure the Canadian telecommunications system against any threat, including that of interference, manipulation, disruption or degradation.” These orders would remain secret indefinitely, with the minister required only to present an annual report to Parliament on the number of orders made and their opinion on their necessity, reasonableness and utility. The CCF fears this law could be weaponized to silence critics of the government at the whim of the minister, under the guise of vaguely posing some kind of “threat” to Canada’s telecom system. If you’re concerned by this alarming expansion of state power and the associated threats to civil liberties, use this form to write to your MP to demand changes to Bill C-8 and Bill C-2 (the Liberals’ recent “border security” bill).
Bill C-8, now before Parliament, would hand Ottawa sweeping new powers over Canadians’ internet access. Buried within the bill is a clause amending the Telecommunications Act, which hands the industry minister—now Mélanie Joly—the authority to order telecom giants like Rogers or Telus to cut off internet access for “any specified person.” No warrant, no court approval, no oversight before the fact. A citizen could be cut off from the online world entirely on the minister’s say-so, with judicial review only possible after the order is executed.
The Carney government justifies the bill as a tool to defend against cyber-attacks, hackers, and foreign interference. Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree argues it’s about stopping ransomware and hostile state actors. But the scope goes far beyond that. The bill allows the government to direct telecoms to “do anything or refrain from doing anything,” wording critics say could be used to impose mass surveillance, weaken encryption, or force companies to hand over data on Canadians without their knowledge.
This is not an isolated measure. Bill C-8 follows a series of Liberal-championed laws that have steadily tightened federal control over the digital sphere:
The Online News Act (2023) forced social media platforms into deals with news outlets and led Facebook to ban news sharing in Canada altogether.
The Online Streaming Act (2023) put podcasts, YouTubers, and streaming platforms under Canadian content rules — requiring platforms to artificially boost some content while burying others.
While Canada has signed international declarations that internet access is a fundamental human right and even helped found the Freedom Online Coalition to oppose state restrictions, the government is now moving in the opposite direction—claiming emergency powers to decide who can access the internet at all.
Bottom line: Bill C-8 isn’t just about cybersecurity. It’s about control. By granting ministers unilateral authority to pull internet access and compel telecoms to cooperate in secret, the bill creates a framework for surveillance, censorship, and political targeting. It puts the very foundation of digital freedom in Canada at risk, and it does so under the guise of “protecting” Canadians.
Canada’s First Holocaust Heretic Flung in Prison for 9 Months
In 2022, after years of agitation by anti-free speech lobby B’nai Brith to make holocaust denial (whatever that is exactly) a crime, Trudeau snuck just such a measure into his budget. Not a single MP opposed it. Thus, Canada adopted a state religion. It was not Christianity or Buddhism or Hinduism, It was holocaust.When you cannot discuss or debate a belief system you have an imposed religion. Religion is irrational. This is not meant as an insult. You either believe or do not believe. It is a matter of faith. I cannot PROVE that Jesus was God. History, on the other hand, is susceptible of argument, discussion and dissent. Was Gen. Robert E. Lee a great general? Many would argue yes, with evidence, but some may dissent. Since 2022, Canada has had a state religion. You must BELIEVE in the holocaust, or keep your mouth shut. No dissent.
Well, the holocaust theocracy has claimed its first victim. Another Jewish anti-free speech lobby group the Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre was delighted. “In a historic legal decision, a North Bay man has been sentenced to nine months in jail after being found guilty of promoting hatred and denying the Holocaust through dozens of disturbing social media posts and videos promoting hate and violence against the Jewish community.
It marks the first-ever conviction in a Canadian court for Holocaust denial, according to Crown prosecutors.
The conviction was a result of a seven-month-long investigation into a hate crime by the North Bay Police Service’s Criminal Investigation Section.
Kenneth Paulin, 51, was sentenced to nine months in jail and two years of probation on September 18 for the wilful promotion of hate against Jewish people and the wilful promotion of antisemitism by condoning, denying, or downplaying the Holocaust, according to a release from the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies (FSWC). ….
Paulin was arrested and charged on Friday, June 20, following the investigation into his antisemitic online content.
“His posts vilified the Jewish community, promoted blood libels and conspiracy theories, incited hate and violence against Jews, and repeatedly mocked and denied the Holocaust,” says the release.” (Bay Today, October 1 2025)
Dear Reader,Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts in our survey on Free Speech in Canada. With input from over 4,000 respondents, we’re sharing the current findings with you.
Current Survey Results1 A recent study found three-quarters of Canadian university students censor themselves on campus on topics of politics, religion, race, and gender.Do you think it has become harder to speak your mind freely on social and political issues in Canada? Strongly agree73%Somewhat agree14%Somewhat disagree5%Strongly disagree7%Not sure3%2 Students say they often stay silent because they fear social or academic consequences.
Should it be generally acceptable for students to face academic consequences for expressing their views?Strongly agree12%Somewhat agree7%Somewhat disagree11%Strongly disagree66%Not sure4%3
Have you ever held back your views or opinions on social or political issues in the following settings?Totals may exceed 100% due to multiple answer choicesWith friends49%With family39%At work50%At school or university18%With neighbours50%On social media or online51%Never16%Other (please specify)5%T
4. Which of these do you find most concerning as signs of declining free speech in Canada?Totals may exceed 100% due to multiple answer choicesLosing jobs over views51%Fear of speaking openly63%Families and friends divided45%Debate shut down in schools49%Public shaming / cancel culture60%Media bias and self-censorship62%Social media censorship54%Intimidation and violence53%Government overreach68%Public / academic figures censored44%None of the above3%Not sure2%Other (please specify)5%
5 What do you think are the main causes of the growing challenges to free speech in Canada?Totals may exceed 100% due to multiple answer choices
Increased intolerance43%Political polarization59%Social media reinforcing one-sided views60%Influence of authoritarian and communist ideologies55%Politicians fuelling intolerance through their messaging59%Media bias and partisanship64%Universities limiting or stifling diverse opinions51%Government overreach61%Decline in moral values51%Other (please specify)6%6
What do you see as a reasonable limit to free speech, if any?Totals may exceed 100% due to multiple answer choices.No limits — all speech should be allowed22%If it promotes violence or killing69%If it spreads hatred toward certain groups39%If it spreads false or harmful information43%It’s hard to define9%Not sure2%Other (please specify)5%
7 What do you see as the biggest problem with Canada’s media when it comes to free expression?Totals may exceed 100% due to multiple answer choices, Self-censorship to avoid backlash38%Bias and partisanship71%Silencing or ignoring dissenting voices61%Over-reliance on government funding62%Giving space only to “acceptable” views69%Other (please specify)6%
A B.C. Conservative Party staffer who called the orange Survivors’ flag — which honours residential school survivors — a “disgrace” and a “fake flag” on social media has been fired.
Lindsay Shepherd, who had worked as a communications officer for the B.C. Conservative caucus, faced widespread criticism after her posts on the social media platform X late last week.
Last Thursday, several NDP, Conservative and Green MLAs raised the Survivors’ flag on the front steps of the legislature in Victoria, ahead of National Day for Truth and Reconciliation on Sept. 30.
The next day, Shepherd wrote on social media: “The Orange Shirt and the Orange Flag perpetuate untruths about Canadian history, such as the grandest lie of all that 215 children’s graves were unearthed in Kamloops.
“It is a disgrace that this fake flag flies in front of the provincial parliament buildings, and it is a disgrace to see the shirt of lies framed prominently and permanently beside the coat of arms so that locals and tourists cannot view our insignia without having their eye drawn and redirected to the Orange shirt,” the post continued.
A screengrab sent out by the B.C. NDP shows a tweet by B.C. Conservative Party staffer Lindsay Shepherd on the raising of the Survivors flag outside the B.C. Legislature Buildings on Sept. 25, 2025. (Screengrab/B.C. NDP)
Shepherd deleted the post shortly after it was posted, but a screengrab was shared by Rohini Arora, NDP MLA for Burnaby East.
Arora said the Conservative caucus did the right thing in firing Shepherd, and credited Conservative MLAs “who stand up to bigotry inside their party.”
“Far-right extremism is tolerated and even welcomed in the B.C. Conservatives – until it becomes public,” she said in a statement.
On Wednesday, Shepherd said on X that B.C. Conservative Leader John Rustad had fired her because of the social media post.
“I am a mother of two young children, and I am 32 weeks pregnant — I was about to go on maternity leave,” she wrote.
“I had been an elected board member with the party since 2022,” she added. “It’s very sad that it ended up this way.”
CBC News has reached out to the B.C. Conservative Party for a comment on this story.
‘Toxic behaviour’
Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, had urged Rustad to fire Shepherd over the comments.
“It’s shocking, it’s absolutely disgusting. It’s astonishing that there can be that level of ignorance in this modern day,” he said.
“Residential school denial is a terrible, racist sickness that is given public expression with impunity in this province and in this country.”
Former Green Party MLA Adam Olsen said he felt for his relatives who had to have their history questioned. (Michael McArthur/CBC)
Former B.C. Green MLA Adam Olsen, a negotiator for the Tsartlip First Nation, called the comments “vile.”
“These kinds of attacks on the true history of our province is really troubling. It’s really toxic behaviour,” Olsen said.
“I feel for all our relatives who have the confront these kind of messages and have their entire history questioned in such a mean-spirited way.”
The Survivors’ flag is raised outside the B.C. Legislature buildings in Victoria on Sept. 28, 2025. A Tory staffer who called the flag a disgrace has now been fired. (Government of B.C.)
In May of 2021, the Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc First Nation shared that preliminary findings from a ground-penetrating radar survey found some 200 potential unmarked graves on the grounds of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School.
That announcement was the beginning of a nationwide movement as First Nations across the country began their own searches of residential school sites and many non-Indigenous Canadians began to comprehend the significance of the harms perpetrated at those institutions.
Canada is turning into an authoritarian hell hole right before our eyes. It appears the killing of 400 ostriches is imminent unless someone steps in to stop it. RCMP and the [Canadian Food Inspection Agency CFIA which is a criminal organization of Canada… have ordered the killing of about 400 ostriches at Universal Ostrich Farm near Edgewood, B.C.
Bill C-9 is one of three censorship bills. It allows life in prison for a meme and gun owners thought they had it tough.
As I’ve said before to deaf ears about the advance of cultural Marxism, you can’t die slowly or painfully enough letting this cat out of the bag. This is the mark of the beast system of Satan himself.
There was a Canadian film called Virus around 1980. You are the ostriches. This is a trial run. — Nattanya Anderson
Watch Out for The False Flag: Sometimes the Enemies of Free Speech Fly A Swastika (fresh out of a package at the Truckers’ Convoy in Ottawa) or Flash a Hitler Salute
Late last year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) ordered the culling of nearly 400 research ostriches at Universal Ostrich Farm in British Columbia, citing concerns over H5N1 bird flu.
In December 2024, the CFIA claimed that two deceased ostriches—which had been lying outside for over 16 hours—tested positive for H5N1 via PCR testing. Just 41 minutes after receiving these results, the CFIA signed an order to cull the entire flock.
Today, all of the ostriches remain healthy, fully recovered, and have developed natural immunity against H5N1 bird flu. Their antibodies are critically important for future research efforts. The severity of the situation even prompted RFK Jr. to issue a plea to halt the cull order a few months ago:
After months of stay orders and reversals, the CFIA formally seized the ostriches last week, taking control of the farm.
A few days ago, however, the Supreme Court of Canada granted a stay on the planned cull, ordering that the CFIA retain custody of the birds while prohibiting the farm from “interfering” with federal oversight. The agency has been given until October 3 to file its response, after which the farm will have two days to reply.
To get a better idea of the current insane situation on the ground, please read the following update by Theresa Joy, posted on the Universal Ostrich Farms Facebook group:
THE OSTRICHES are now IN THE DEATH PEN.
The CFIA has completely ignored the Stay of Order since the day they took CUSTODY of both the FARM and the OSTRICHES (draconian). They have moved forward with atrocity after atrocity.
• Built a massive death pen to kill the healthy ostriches
• Cut all cameras so the public cannot witness conditions inside.
• Resurrected walls and black tarps to hide what’s happening on the farm.
• Threatened arrest for using drones to check on the birds.
• Fed the ostriches their own CFIA feed instead of the family’s feed, even though they were ordered not to.
• Refused to let the family test the feed they were giving the ostriches.
• Refused to let the family see the ostriches they have cared for 45+ years.
• Baited the two owners — telling them they could feed the ostriches, then arresting them when they tried.
• Dehydrated an injured ostrich with a broken leg caused by CFIA’s drones.
• Lied to the owner: promised to record the ostrich being given electrolytes if he handed over his phone, then returned his phone empty with no video.
• Made the owner wait hours with electrolytes while the ostrich suffered, then refused to let him administer them himself.
• Mishandled electrolytes because CFIA staff are not trained in ostrich care — leaving everyone to wonder if the bird is even alive.
• When Katie went up on the scissor lift this morning, instead of seeing 400 ostriches, she saw maybe 10% of the flock. The rest are ???? ….
• A closed, unmarked semi-truck entered the farm at 3 a.m. nights ago under cover of darkness, with CFIA agents shining huge lights into onlookers’ eyes so no one could see what was happening. Said it was port o potties.
• Terrified the birds with hazmat suits and drones, causing broken legs and panic injuries.
• Cut feed from 25 buckets down to 6 cups thrown on the ground, food the ostriches won’t eat.
• Tried to buy bobcats and tarps to dig mass graves right on the farm.
• Seized custody of the ostriches from the family who loved and cared for them.
• Wasted $500,000 of taxpayer money per day on this operation.
• Formed a social media task force to spread lies, bots, and attacks against farm supporters.
And here is the bigger picture of their actions overall:
• Ordered the mass killing of 400 healthy ostriches — without proof of bird flu.
Here is Katie Pasitney of Universal Ostrich Farms issuing a final plea as deliberations to mass exterminate the healthy birds reach a critical point:
If the CFIA proceeds with this barbaric cull, it will go down as one of the most reckless and shameful acts in Canadian history. Destroying hundreds of healthy, immune birds with critically important antibodies is not science — it is cruelty and corruption disguised as “public health.”
The world is watching. And if Canada allows this atrocity to happen, the country will forever be remembered as the place where bureaucratic arrogance and evil triumphed over truth, decency, and life itself.
But Canadians are rising up, fighting to stop this madness:
We urge Canada’s leaders to immediately halt this disaster, spare the ostriches, and restore integrity before it is too late.
FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse) is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Professor Widdowson at the University of Winnipeg, being harassed by what looks like a wreck of fetal-alcohol syndrome and anti-white hatred.
Woke Watch Canada is a reader-supported publication. Please consider becoming a paying subscriber or making a one-time or recurring donation to show your support.
The following is just a gut-reaction to the events in Winnipeg involving Professor Francis Widdowson. No research went into this, so the guy who commented on my last post saying something to the effect that James is just not a good writer anymore because he rambles like Trump, you won’t like this one either.
Professor Widdowson upset the poor aboriginal children (who are adults by all appearances). Shame, their feelings were hurt again, so recently in Winnipeg, there was screaming, and temper-tantrums, and uncivilized behaviour all around. What a mess. I am done with calling a clown show something that is actually a horror show. There is nothing funny about this crap. The entire West is falling apart, and in Canada, the University of Winnipeg – who according to Professor Widdowson is “off the charts in terms of (their) inability to function as an academic institution” – seems to be ground zero for the worst excesses of hostile aboriginal, rent-seeking, myth-believing, anti-social activism.
Activists are not a special class. They are everyone, or at least it can seem so on college campuses across the West. Just this week two young white conservative men brought a debate set-up, similar to what Charlie Kirk used to do, to Tennessee State University (TSU), a historically Black college and university. The men were chased off by an uncivilized mob of almost all black students who had no interest in debate or exchange. Students swarmed around and screamed at the brave young conservatives, security barely prevented them from being assaulted. At the University of Winnipeg activists swarmed Professor Widdowson and her supporters, disrupted proceedings, screamed at her, and threw paint and some other sticky substance on her (they physically assaulted her and her supporters).
But I guarantee if Professor Widdowson would have acted appropriately and screamed back at them, “Step Off You Fucking Filthy Savage,” then there would have been severe charges of anti-aboriginal racism. But since, as per usual, there were no white-perpetrators of anything foul, only the aborigines were foul, no attention whatsoever will be given to the incident.
Some of the people, white men I believe, who accompanied Professor Widdowson were also physically assaulted. In a video posted to Youtube after the event, Professor Widdowson told us that Professor Daniel Page was punched in the face. And writer/commentator, Michael Melanson, was at one point surrounded by over 40 aggressive activists. He was lucky to get out unhurt (at least I hope he was unhurt).
Is anyone feeling reconciled to any of this bullshit yet? Or, how about the latest church arson, this time a historic Ukrainian Orthodox church in a rural Alberta– to add to the long list of anti-Christian terrorism that has unfolded in Canada since the childish aboriginals had their feelings hurt right bad by a false story of murdered indigenous kids who never were. Let’s face it, they believe their stories because they reflect badly on white people, who they hate more than anything. The entire world is jealous and hateful of white people.
I’m going to write the most important part again: the world is jealous and hateful of white people.
But yet white people refuse to govern themselves accordingly. White people are reaping what we sow. It is only white people who exercise the notion of multiculturalism. We should never have entertained aboriginal grievances for five seconds. From the beginning it should have been assimilate or fuck off. We gave you civilization and a far better life, you undeserving ungrateful pre-barbarians. If we don’t get to a place soon where we feel emboldened enough to position our faces one half inch from the primitive face of an aboriginal savage, and say with full voice: assimilate or fuck off, then white people will soon be no more. We can’t possibly survive being attacked from practically every single non-white direction. We must strike back.
Let’s be clear, the place where the savages should go, and every other non-white who hates and harms whites, can and should be prison. White people can build the best prisons, we can build enough for all the aboriginals and non-white violent criminals if they refuse to shed their anti-social savagery. All the white race-traitor types, the Leftists, the BLM supporters, ANTIFA, and trans and queer activists can join them there. It is those white Leftists who so admire non-white savagery, so why not lock them up in a situation where they truly get to experience it?
I think it is a waste of time to try and debate black or aboriginal savages who hate white people. Do we honestly think we are going to argue our way into them liking us and not wishing harm and cultural erasure on us? Nonsense. Ugh…I have to do that thing now that is expected of me because I’m a lowly white: Of course not all blacks and aboriginals are savages, blah, blah, blah, blah —- See there it is, not racist, I made my nice white boy disclaimer and admitted that not all non-whites are the problem. But guess what? My disingenuous nice white boy mandatory ritual disclaimer thingy doesn’t change a damn thing considering that the exigency of the anti-white hatred has not by any slight degree been made less dire. White people gain nothing by being so…nice. I wish we’d knock it off.
I’m not even sure what white people gain from including non-white people in our societies at all. I also don’t think non-white societies gain much from including whites. See, again not racist. It’s a two-way street. People should really only mix cultures to a minimal degree. When you pluralize the word “culture,” you create a synonym for incompatibility. Canada, the United States, and all other Western nations, need to promote a single culture, the founding white Christian culture. Period. And regardless if it burns the non-white asses of jealous savage haters, white people must honour their ancestors and preserve and protect our own cultural heritages.
White people, white-allied Christians of all colours, good people who just want a peaceful prosperous society, must band together and fully reject the pre-civilizational horror show occurring in Canada. It’s coming from the Left, they are all colours, they scream at people, they block free speech, they burn churches, and they are turning Canada into a shit-hole.
The silent masses, the normies, the complacent, the confused; Canada needs you. The white majority, which makes Canada what it is (what it could not be without it), needs your help. If you are non-white, but actually like white people and the societies they create, take this as your cue that we need your help, we need your voice.
Anyway, I am angry and feel like rambling. Maybe even like Trump. I really don’t care if anyone has a problem with this. I ramble for me first, readers second. Got it?
Last thought. Leftists, both non-white and white, don’t want to discuss a damn thing with anyone who isn’t a Leftist. I recommend Professor Widdowson stop doing Street Epistemology at Universities, because I fear she will get hurt. I don’t think it is worth it to risk getting hurt in this case, because the people she is trying to reach are riddled with fetal-alcohol syndrome, they are backwards, grossly under-developed, and yes in the worst cases, they are uncivilized, anti-social and savage.
The fight should be taken to the white people. The Leftist race-traitor white people. They also like to act uncivilized, anti-social, and savage, however, because they are white, they don’t have the same privilege to be violent and awful the way non-whites do. Plus, the Leftist whites are the ones who weaseled their ways into power. Getting them fired, will actually bring about positive change. Whereas, street level savages on campuses are comparatively powerless. Why bother with them, why risk your safety for them?
The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) is concerned that key aspects of the Carney government’s proposed hate crimes legislation would unduly infringe on freedom of expression.
Among other changes to the Criminal Code, Bill C-9 would establish a standalone hate crime provision that would allow for up to life in prison for committing an act motivated by hatred, would create new intimidation and obstruction crimes related to buildings used for religious worship or primarily by identifiable groups, and would establish a new crime of wilfully promoting hatred by displaying certain symbols such as terrorist flags or Nazi swastikas in a public place.
The CCF has identified the following concerns:
Overbreadth of the hate-symbol provision (s. 319(2.2)): It could chill legitimate speech in cases where it is unclear whether a symbol is “principally associated with a terrorist group” or “resembles a symbol” outlawed under the provision;
Extreme sentencing under the new hate crime offence (s. 320.1001): A person who commits mischief against property motivated by hatred could face up to seven years in prison, rather than the current two years;
Removal of Attorney General oversight: The bill would allow police to charge a person with hate speech without receiving the Attorney General’s consent, which is an important safeguard for freedom of expression that has been part of Canada’s law for decades; and
Lowering the threshold for “hatred”: The definition of “hatred” added as a new section 319(7) appears to lower the bar for hate speech set by the Supreme Court of Canada in cases like R v Keegstra and R v Whatcott, which could chill speech and public debate.
CCF Executive Director Joanna Baron questioned the need for parts of the bill considering Canada already has “robust hate propaganda laws.”
“Creating new offences for hate-motivated crimes and lowering safeguards like Attorney General oversight is unnecessary and invites excessive prosecutions,” she said.
“The new hate symbol offence only targets displays done with the intent to promote hatred, but without Attorney General consent as a safeguard, there is a real risk that people using these symbols in art, journalism, or protest will be charged first and vindicated later,” Baron added.
CCF Counsel Josh Dehaas said that while he’s pleased to see that the federal government has tailored its provisions on intimidation and obstruction of places of worship to capture criminal conduct rather than protected speech and protest, he is concerned that the new definition of “hatred” will chill legitimate expression.
“I’m also very wary that banning hate symbols could be a slippery slope,” Dehaas said. “In free countries, we ought to criminalize violence, not speech, so this sets a worrying precedent.”
