Bill C-63 Online Harms Act Brings Warranted International Exposure To Trudeau’s Canada

“A Canadian law that aims to make social media platforms safer is getting flak for what some decry as “A Canadian law that aims to make social media platforms safer.(Fox News, March 13, 2024)

It is not at heart “A Canadian law that aims to make social media platforms safer”, nor is it only “some decrying” it as “Government overreach”.

“Introduced late last month, the Online Harms Act, or Bill C-63, would allow judges to imprison adults for life if they advocate for genocide. (Fox News)

“The law would also allow a provincial judge to impose house arrest and a fine if there were reasonable grounds to believe a defendant "will commit" an offense – a provision Wall Street Journal columnist Michael Taube likened to the 2002 film, The Minority Report.

“Maragaret (sic) Atwood, author of The Handmaid's Tale, has criticized the bill as "Orwellian."

"If this account of the bill is true, it’s Lettres de Cachet all over again. The possibilities for revenge false accusations + thoughtcrime stuff are sooo inviting! Trudeau’s Orwellian online harms bill," Atwood wrote on Twitter.

"Writing in Public, conservative author Stephen Moore called it the "most shocking of all the totalitarian, illiberal, and anti-Enlightenment pieces of legislation that have been introduced in the Western world in decades.” (Fox News)

“Citing a government spokesperson, the bill would increase the maximum penalty specifically for advocating genocide from 5 years to life imprisonment and from 2 years to 5 years, on indictment, for the willful promotion of hatred."

Problem is that it is a tyrannical Liberal Government who will decide who is guilty “for the willful promotion of hatred."

"Justice Minister Arif Virani, who introduced the bill, said, as a father, he was "terrified of the dangers that lurk on the internet for our children." (Fox News)

But the mutilation of children by transgender surgery and chemical castration gets a Minister Virani pass?

“He argued that laws exist regulating the safety of toys his kids play with, but not the "screen that is in our children’s faces.” (Fox News)

“Fox News Digital has reached out to Virani’s office for additional comment and will update this story accordingly.”

Let’s hope that they do follow through.

Read here what the PM Justin Trudeau-led Canadian Liberal Government is really up to:

‘Online Harms Act Is Using Child Safety as a Front to Assault Canadians’ Freedoms’ (Epoch Times, March 3, 2024)

“The Online Harms Act, in all its ominous incarnations, was always going to be all about saving the children.

"Except it was never just about that. It was really always about what has been revealed to be its core purpose: suppressing Canadians’ freedom of speech on the internet. The saving the children from exploitation by online predators part is just political exploitation. Either you agree with the bill entirely, its proponents will say, or you don’t want children protected.

“Too cynical? If only that were the case. When I wrote about this immediately following the tabling of this legislation on Feb. 26, one commenter pointed out—rightly—that I hadn’t covered all the truly extreme steps Justice Minister Arif Virani had taken with this legislation, which is enormous in both length and complexity. I don’t like to rush to judgment. I don’t like to be wrong and, frankly, some of the provisions were so bizarre they were difficult to believe without affirmation from legal experts.

"But affirmed they have been. So here we go. 

“Online Harms, a.k.a. Bill C-63, will actually make it possible in Canada for you to be placed under house arrest for something the police think you might be thinking about saying online.

“That’s right. The bill makes prior restraint possible when it comes to speech, giving anyone who “reasonably fears” you are about to post hateful content the ability to obtain a peace bond restraining you from doing so and confining you to your home. Yes, you’d have to get a judge to make the order, and yes, the attorney general would have to sign off, but what was once unimaginable in a modern liberal democracy not at war is about to become stark reality in Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s post-national Canada.(Epoch Times)

“…You will also soon be subject to being sentenced, under C-63’s revisions to the Criminal Code, to life in prison for something you say online. Yes, advocating or promoting genocide is a hideous and repellent thing to do, but it is very different from committing genocide or even inciting it.

“There are those within the current political climate, for instance, who consider pro-Palestinian chants of “from the river to the sea” to be calling for the genocide of Israelis. Highly reprehensible if that is the case, but life in prison? This is madness.

“The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) is aghast.

“The broad criminal prohibitions on speech in the bill risk stifling public discourse and criminalizing political activism,” the CCLA said in a statement.

“The bill imposes draconian penalties for certain types of expression, including life imprisonment for a very broad and vaguely defined offence of ‘incitement to genocide’, and 5 years of jail time for other broadly defined speech acts. This not only chills free speech but also undermines the principles of proportionality and fairness in our legal system. Bill C-63 also creates a new offence (‘offence motivated by hatred’) that risks misuse or overuse by police, and unfairness to accused persons in court.”

"In establishing an Online Safety Commission with what appear to be almost limitless powers, Virani has set the stage for that body to expand both its turf and its authority, a pair of behaviours to which public servants are notoriously inclined.

“The CCLA says C-63 allows government appointees “vast authority” to “interpret the law, make up new rules, enforce them and then serve as judge, jury and executioner.”

"If that isn’t enough to alarm you, the new Digital Safety Commission will be free to search electronic data without fussing with a warrant and otherwise violate citizens’ digital privacy.

“None of this is acceptable.

"Nor is the exploitation of children online by various creeps and charlatans luring them via Facebook or other platforms.

“So, as previously noted, the provisions in the Online Harms Act to impose duties of care on social media companies and establish oversight of them concerning the safety of children are entirely appropriate. They are in fact in alignment with what I called for two years ago in a paper for the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.

"But this government couldn’t stop there. Quite despicably, it has built a Trojan horse from children’s safety and stuffed it with an overwrought assault on its citizens’ most basic freedoms.

“Which is why Bill C-63 must be dismantled or defeated.”

And Canadians caught up in the octopus arms of deadly Bill C-63 cannot count on any relief from the Canadian justice system.

Folks who read about it thought the latest announced Supreme Court of Canada ruling was a joke or just another tasteless SNL skit, but it is real:

“The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that it is "problematic" to refer to a female victim of sexual assault as a "woman," saying that people should say “person with a vagina" instead.

Hard to believe, but so nightmarishly true.

What kind of justice could possibly be found from Supreme Court of Canada justices who now want “woman” defined as “a person with a vagina”?

S.O.S. to all Canadians: The Trudeau Government is leading you into a nightmarish, Klaus Schwab-designed Hell on Earth.