Trudeau’s Internet Censorship Proposal Includes Entry Into Private Homes

Herein lies the rub– in the name of the protection of the public, the rights and freedoms of Canadians are being incrementally stripped away.

The idea that public interest is the impetus for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s internet censorship legislation is a misnomer. The protection is surely directed toward the Liberal government itself.

“The Digital Safety Commissioner of Canada would be in charge of enforcing rules requiring online platforms to remove illegal content. Its authority would include the ability to send inspectors into workplaces and homes in search for documents, software, and information such as computer algorithms.”

Once again, the fine art of subterfuge rears its draconian head. The listed categories of censorship are as follows: “terrorist content, content that incites violence, hate speech, intimate images shared non-consensually, and child sexual exploitation content.”

No question these are legitimate areas of concern. Yet out of the pack, it is the area of hate speech which remains the most nebulous. How will hate speech be defined– as well as judged–  within what is nothing short of an “internet revolution.”

“While all of the definitions would draw upon existing law, including current offences and definitions in the Criminal Code, they would be modified in order to tailor them to a regulatory – as opposed to criminal – context,” says the National Post.

In practical terms, the Liberals propose to expand violations beyond  the parameters of the law. This change will likely shift jurisdiction to a newly formed Canadian Human Rights Commission, who will apply arbitrary rulings on a case-by-case basis.

“The Liberals have proposed a new definition of hate speech based on Supreme Court decisions in Bill C-36, introduced to tackle online hate by amending Canada’s Criminal Code and Canadian Human Rights Act.”

Distilling this down to its essence, what we have is action to transition “hate crime” definitions away from the law, and place it under “private” jurisdiction.

Those who recall the Salem Witch trails in 18th century New England, take heed. Perhaps a slight exaggeration it is–but not by much.

READ MORE: Should Western Canada Separate Itself From Trudeau’s Globalist Take-Over?

 

Our elderly generation may recall a period in American history referred to as the McCarthy era. “McCarthyism” was the practice of making unfounded accusations of treason, especially when related to communism. It was characterized by heightened  persecution of left-wing individuals, and a campaign of spreading fear of alleged communist and socialist influence on American institutions.

Try this quick experiment– replace the word “communism” with the word “racism.” Has Canada entered into a “witch hunt for racists” era? If so, does this not suggest an incremental move toward replication of totalitarian societies?

Obviously, these are rhetorical questions. Any long term reader of Cultural Action Party writing will know we adhere to these ideas.

In regards to law enforcement busting a move into the living rooms of Canadians, executive director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation,  Joanna Baron, has the following to say:

“This looks like a possible section 8 right against unreasonable search and seizure violation.”

Extent to which this will impact the passing of Bill C-36 falls between zero and nothing. Readers may want to consider the degree to which PM Trudeau and team wish to implement internet censorship hate speech legislation. In terms of a pending election, this initiative could well be “number one with a bullet.”

Regarding internet censorship, Let patriots remain clear-headed in regards to internet censorship and hate crime legislation– it will happen, as sure as Canada was born in 1867.

Turns out Justin Trudeau does not simply admire China. Imitation being the greatest form of flattery, our prime minister is in the process of replicating the Great Internet Firewall of China as we speak.

— Brad Salzberg, CAP Founder (Est. 2016)

14 thoughts on “Trudeau’s Internet Censorship Proposal Includes Entry Into Private Homes”

  1. Well, as it turned out, McCarthy was absolutely correct about communism being installed in North America, and had we heeded his warnings then, we would not be looking at a Canada and US transformed into communist countries, complete with dictators, state media, and one-party politics.

    But when mainstream media of the day finished spinning McCarty into what we think of him today, we missed the message. Mainstream media is still suppressing all discussion about the CCP installing communism in North America…gee, it seems we will never learn.

    Now, about the hate speech/censorship issue …if they start by prosecuting all the Muslims who vowed in their writings and sermons to kill the infidels (like me), then it will be worth tolerating it.

    Reply
  2. If that bill passes it will be the beginning of the end for Canada. I can’t believe there are so many Liberal politicians that follow Trudeau’s agenda, are they all sheep without a conscience and can’t think for themselves? A beautiful country getting closer to a dictatorship.

    Reply
    • Politicians aren’t supposed to think for themselves. In theory, they represent us. THEORETICALLY.

      There is only one guaranteed way Canadians can prevent a Liberal Trudeau dictatorship, and I don’t even need to say it. It is clear that he is deliberately pushing us to that step. In a bizarre way, I wish I had no family and suffered from a terminal illness.

      Reply
  3. When you constantly miss use The word Communism, as you do every day, you reclassify yourself and your content into The Category of “Uses emotionally charged words incorrectly to gain effect”. That is a subset of the broad category in common use Known as BULLSHIT. Perhaps the author of this piece actually does not know the meaning of the word communist, or cannot spell totalitarian which can replace most if not all instances where the word communism is used under the C.A.P. banner.

    Don’t get me Wrong, electing Treasondeau is the worst mistake the electorate of Canada has ever made. I am completely amazed that P.O.S. got into office at all, & re-elected???? I did not think there were that many Canadians that were quite that clueless.

    Back to misuse of the word “Communism”. Pick a dictionary AT RANDOM then pick another 4 again at random. All will Go to communal ownership of the property and means of production. NONE of them will CONNECT SENDING INSPECTORS INTO YOUR HOME. In the future, if you intend to ever aquire Integrity, with the people that can correctly use the words communism, socialism, TOTALATARIAN( the word that would usually be correct where you wrongly use the word communism),

    Best you learn the meanings of the words you are using. If you read MY posts, it will be clear which of the pedals on the floorboards of my truck I would hammer if Sockboy stepped in front of said truck.

    Reply
  4. A lyric from the 1974 Billboard Top 100 (#1) Canadian group Bachman-Turner Overdrive: (BTO.) “…You ain’t seen n-n-n-nothin’ yet.” It’s quiet right now. Wait until after the next election.

    Reply
      • If you want further elaboration on how right McCarthy was, and how wretched the media smear on him was. For instance, the blacklisting and communist screaming was actually the result of HUAC or House Committee on Un-American Activities, which was led by a Democrat controlled House of representatives, and had nothing to do with McCarthy who was a senator.

        McCarthy, and the senate hearings didn’t care about communism in public life, but communist, and specifically Soviet infiltration in high levels of government, such as the State Department.

        For a light read on the subject, read Ann Coulter’s Treason, which touches on the subject in some depth, but as a portion of a broader context on a long timeframe. The book that she references, Blacklisted by History is far more in-depth and comprehensive, though a much drier read on the subject.

        Ironically, it was the Democrats who actually performed “McCarthyism”

        Reply
  5. Ah, but there is that word again: “unreasonable” search and seizure violations. Those in power define what is the meaning of unreasonable.

    Imagine the former Soviet Union for a moment. “Sir, we have found the Josef Plotsky has been saying unfavorable things about the local commissar, and distributing articles filled with the same rhetoric that threaten our regime.

    Well, then, officer, a dawn raid and civil confiscation of all offending materials would be in order as control must be maintained at all costs.

    And throw in a civil forfeiture of this felon’s property as it must also be guilty by association”. That was reasonable for the Soviet Union – just ask Solzhenitsyn.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

*

code