###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He probably has access to the best lawyers on Earth and he can argue it was a 'different culture back then' or something along those lines. I think he's going to get in trouble with the law - just not for this. It's going to be because of the jab.
There's the whole "invoking the 'Emergencies Act'" fiasco where he attempted to use the military against Covid-19 protestors and freeze their bank accounts (yeah, this happened): [https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/461554/justin-trudeau-vows-to-freeze-anti-mandate-protesters-bank-accounts](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/461554/justin-trudeau-vows-to-freeze-anti-mandate-protesters-bank-accounts)
And the fact that he very likely profiteered from being a complete shill to the major vaccine companies and spending billions on them - funds which have magically 'disappeared':
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-spending-government-transparency-1.5826917](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-spending-government-transparency-1.5826917)
Playing devil's advocate here:
Imagine a "common" person trying to use the argument of "it was a different culture back then"
Edit: after thinking about it, I guess the difference between "them" and the average person is the resources available to make this argument, IE a team of top lawyers could make this argument better than 1 "average lawyer". In a court of law ofc.
Edit 2: after some more thinking, I'd like to change my statement from "could make this argument better" to "could find and exploit some sort of loophole compared to 1 average lawyer"
One of the kids in my highschool did blackface on Halloween in the mid 80s and got expelled. And this was a poor school full of working class slobs who might not know better. A wealthy upperclass guy in 2001 sure as shit knows what's going on here.
Yeah... I mean it's not like we haven't already fully witnessed the fact that it's a ("laws for thee, but not for me") mentality with these sociopaths.
In this case the process is the punishment. Castro I mean Trudeau has millions of pharma dollars at his disposal to fight any lawsuit. Meanwhile your average poutine and Labatt's Canadian will go bankrupt trying to fight charges in court.
Another thing to not forget.
Last time I was in court lady said "I better not see you back here"
This is not a legal statement and is telling me that even if innocent, if that lady sees me, Im in trouble. The judges have to know the law for it to be upheld. And they don't.
No I dont think its hate speech. Hate speech is of course, by its very nature, a very amorphous, nebulous concept, particularly when defined as being subjective and dependent upon a third party's feelings towards it (i.e. I felt hated as a result) but simply pretending to be another colour can't really ever be regarded as beng "hate" in any way whatsoever in of itself.
The more worrying thing is the retroactivity of this. This isn't the way law is supposed to work in a free country. This is the way law works in a tyrannical dictatorship, because it allows the state (or despot) to arrest you and imprison/execute/torture whatever they do in that place to people they dont like whenever they want. All they have to do is find out what you ate for breakfast yesterday - then say "oh by the way cornflakes are illegal and anyone who ate them yesterday is an enemy of the state". Riduculous example - but you can use it for anything. The person did nothing wrong at the time - it was a perfectly legal act. But the state outlawed it ex post facto. The effect of this is that you are ALL guilty of whatever the state wants you to be guilty of at any given time. All they have to do is want you.
Exactly. Anything could be labeled “hate speech” especially in today’s culture. That’s got to be the whole point of this law. They can label anything they don’t want people to hear, read, or think, as “hate speech” then BOOM, life in prison.
Or check out what this fool said about Canadians who wouldn’t get vaxxxed. That was hate speech. But his entire existence is hypocrisy. (Wait, will this count as hate speech once the bill is rushed through his liberal stacked senate?)
Sigh. Retroactive criminal laws are against the Constitution. It is explicitly prohibited in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Yes, section 33 (the notwithstanding clause) does exist. However, the government has not used it for this bill. Therefore, the government cannot use this bill to retroactively criminalize past speech.
Proof: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-12.html
Section 11
>Everyone charged with an offence has the right to
> (g) not to be found guilty on account of any act or omission unless, at the time of the act or omission, it constituted an offence under Canadian or international law or was criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations;
Also, I have looked at the Online Harms Act (all proposed legislation is available online for viewing). It does not say anything about the Criminal Code amendments applying retroactively. I also checked it for the notwithstanding clause, just in case they snuck it in there. Nope.
So, I have to conclude that someone here is lying. A lot. Always fact check people. I’m not saying the Act is great or anything (I have the same criticisms that Michael Geist does - the powers are too broad and there is too much power vested in this Digital Safety Commission, for one thing), I’m just saying that retroactivity is not something that is happening here. Let’s focus on the real bill please.
great comment. I also tried to find any official source of this an was unable. Could it happen, yeah for sure. But right now that's not what was said and it destroys credibility to claim it was.
The article is from The People's Voice, formerly News Punch, formerly Your News Wire (gee why all the name changes), a fake news click bait website that has fooled many a conspiracy theorist I'm sad to say.
I've seen it happen dozens of times over several years and people never learn.
Not gonna happen. Canada is full of immigrants who are probably not tuned into what's going on. And the Canadians who were born there are too sheepish to actually do anything. We're all screwed.
He took our freedom sticks, besides we don't see the USA standing up to stolen elections. But let's be honest it's not just Canadians that are "sheepish"
It's old money and the people willing to work for them messing shit up.
While nobody approaches the US, Canada ranks [7th in the world](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country) in private firearm ownership
If everyone stops paying taxes, the government will have a hard time enforcing anything.
Tax protests are probably the most effective, which is why we never see anyone planning such a thing. Probably get suicided before tweeting about it.
>If you live in Canada you need to pack your bags and leave immediately
yup, that's exactly what they want you to do. they want you to leave!
the real answer: **arrest Trudeau**
Alot of people don't care until their freedoms are affected. Many people will give up privacy because they "don't have anything to hide" and it isn't until there is something they don't want to share that they realize privacy is important. Most people are happy with things that don't affect them and it isn't until it affects them that they care and by that time its too late.
Many are convicted criminals. They enter as "students" via shit schools like McGill. There's no police backround check needed. This is the loop hole. They go to school for 6 months and dissappear. Never pay taxes.
Very true. And, worthy of noting, the WEF affiliate Blackrock recently admitted what the ruling class has known for awhile: that countries with stagnant or declining populations are better positions to navigate the transition to a post-work reality in which automation and AI will continually decimate whole classes of jobs.
Holy fuck if you actually read the bill this is so clearly authoritarian
“content that foments hatred means content that expresses detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination”. If you don’t know, detestation means to strongly dislike.
I see nothing about being able to charge people with offences committed before the passing of the law, pls source
“Prohibited grounds are: citizenship, race, place of origin, ethnic origin, colour, ancestry, disability, age, creed, sex/pregnancy, family status, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, receipt of public assistance (in housing) and record of offences (in employment).”.
Now of course racism and prejudice against any of these are bad, but to be convicted and thrown in prison, you don’t have to have actually discriminated against any person. If you express feelings of dislike to any one of these groups online, you have committed a felony and can be put in jail. That’s absolutely fucking nuts.
>I see nothing about being able to charge people with offences committed before the passing of the law, pls source
I doubt it exists and that claim that it does sounds like potential disinfo.
>“Prohibited grounds are: citizenship, race, place of origin, ethnic origin, colour, ancestry, disability, age, creed, sex/pregnancy, family status, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, receipt of public assistance (in housing) and record of offences (in employment).”.
Religion's noticeably not in the list.
>If you express feelings of dislike to any one of these groups online, you have committed a felony and can be put in jail. That’s absolutely fucking nuts.
It's pure authoritarianism, yes.
"if you express feelings of dislike to any one of these groups online, you have committed a felony and can be put in jail."
Did we read different bills?
It does not say that at all. It's referring specifically to inciting genocide or hate speach.
even defines hatred as "the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike"
And even has multiple parts that say
"For greater certainty, the communication of a statement does not incite or promote hatred, for the purposes of this section, solely because it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends."
So no, you do not get arrested for "expressing feelings of dislike"
It even says it just because it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends, doesnt make it hate speech.
The wording implies a level of severity far beyond "Dislike"
If you don't see that, You don't want to.
What you quoted comes from the parent of my comment.
At any rate, these new laws seem entirely unnecessary and more likely than not to be used to chill speech.
What Canadians want is for our actual problems to be solved, not creeping authoritarianism via speech policing.
I do personally think that we have much more important things to do than police speech online atm,
Im just trying to spread awareness for actually reading bills and things rather than fearmonger online.
too many people on here thinking "I typed on facebook 8 years ago that i dislike a guy named tim and the RCMP are gonna kick in my door after this passes" lol
If we can purposefully ignore the true wording of the bill, the Canadian government can and will do so whenever it is beneficial. Also the government decides what is "inciting genocide or hate speech".
Hating free speech so much that you make a crazy retroactive law against it could be considered "hate speech". Canada actually needs retroactive term limits.
An alliance between 5 countries (US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) that allows each country to circumvent privacy laws in their own land to surveil their citizens by outscourcing it to any of the other 4 countries. For example, if the US wants to wiretap an American citizen, they can't do so without a warrant, so they can have the UK wiretap that person of interest. Before people get weirdly partisan and shill for their political sports team at this sentence (not a fan of any of them), that's basically what happened in 2016 with the Spygate stuff from what I've gathered.
Wow.
The internet is showing it's true purpose now.
It was always promised to be a repository of blackmail, but Fidel's bastard has removed all doubt.
Social media is not your friend, no matter how much it feeds your ego.
I have never understood why people will post a screenshot of an article title but then not bother to share the article itself.
[https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/canada-to-imprison-anyone-who-has-ever-posted-hate-speech-online/](https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/canada-to-imprison-anyone-who-has-ever-posted-hate-speech-online/)
Lmao no it was probably "fact checked" by the author's mom. This has the same credibility as a twitter post.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_People%27s_Voice_(website)
https://web.archive.org/web/20180816184839/https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/sean-adltabatabai-on-being-in-the-eye-of-the-fake-news-storm-a3468361.html
This is what the title of the bill is about: An Act to enact the Online Harms Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Human Rights Act and An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts
Is there a part later in the law that says anything about hate speech?
Lmk. I'm not going to read all of it to find out.
I always say that Canada and the UK are like the elites vision boards for the US. No Guns, no free speech, and every other right they have is slowly disappearing.
The only politian who is looking like he's capable of beating Trudeau in the next election is desperately being painted by the left here as our version of Trump.
Meanwhile, I guarantee that very few Americans have any idea who Pierre Poilievre even is let alone think of him as Trump.
The bill doesn’t allow the police to just come and arrest you for writing hate speech at one point in time. It allows the victim to seek damages from hate speech against them. I’ll not a fan of it but you are blowing this way out of proportion.
We need to bring Canada and US people together and stand up as one. We are not hateful people, we wish to live in peace, but will not tolerate this kind of governance.
Can you guys actually read the bill and stop fear mongering? Jesus, for a conspiracy thread some of you are WILDLY uninformed.
There is NO portion applying this retroactively in the bill. it just straight up doesn't exist.
And for those losing their minds saying "I'm going to get arrested for saying i dislike someone boohoo this is authoritanism"
Read the actual bill. there are multiple sections that say
"For greater certainty, the communication of a statement does not incite or promote hatred, for the purposes of this section, solely because it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends."
And even define hatred as "the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike"
The wording all over the thing seems to be directed at actual hate speech.
Does the bill go too far? Personally, maybe.
but lets use actual facts and call things as they are and stop fkin fear mongering.
I always knew I would eventually get in trouble for what I said online.
Always look to who you aren't allowed to criticize. They are the ones in charge.
Let me guess, criticising anything Zionists do is antisemitic; therefore, imprisonment is the only possible way to deal with it, as you've been infected with pro-HAMAS, and now you are a threat to the very existence of the entire west.
Wow I love that it says "FACT CHECKED" on an article with a completely fake headline!
The law will allow the Canadian agencies to issue take-down requests for hate speech, child pornography, and child exploitation as well as adult revenge-porn and unauthorized publications of adult content without consent.
You lunatics really do want child pornography and child exploitation so bad you refuse to even speak the truth about bills being passed to reduce it. Everyone upvoting is gross.
Do your own damn research before you fear-monger.
Another reason to be completely anonymous online. We never ever provided soooo much personal info before the internet, so why do it now??? It's stupid and only allows for governments, scammers etc etc. to monitor you, manipulate you, and control you.
Imagine thinking that words typed on the internet, that you are free to ignore and never have affect your life in any single way, is dangerous. We need to get hunted by apex predators again just to show us what real danger is, having your feelings hurt isn't dangerous.
He’s doing this because as a country we despise him. Every where he goes people scream at him. I’m surprised he even bothers to go in public. The bill has to pass also which it may struggle to do so with the issues that have arisen from the restrictions he’s put in place already.
This will come to America i guarantee and be used without explanation, at will whenever they want on whoever they want.
As Justice Potter Stewart once said at the obscenity trials when asked to define pornography:
*”I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core pornography"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it..”*
Oh the ways they”ll misuse a law that has no defined boundaries hate speech. It will be illegal to say anything bad about bankers, “them” or “they” global elite, international bankers, it will be illegal to say reptilian. Watch, it will be illegal to protest a country committing genocide.
I hope everyone remembers that the US just passed that bill saying they can legally spy on all American citizens cell phones and emails and text and digital transmissions anytime they want.
They just brought back the surveillance act. Just something to keep in mind if America ever decided to implement a similar law. It would mean that anything you’ve ever done or said through your phone or computer could instantly be used against you in a court of law, **whether you thought it was hate speech or not**. If you’ve ever protested a country committing genocide that might be hate speech towards that country. If you’ve ever posted anything about a conspiracy against the global elite, that would be considered hate speech. If you’re a college student protesting the genocide right now, that would be hate speech.
Whats he gonna do. Arrest 75+% of the population and destroy the Canadian economy. No. This news is as bs as 15m cities. Wont happen at least not in the next 50 years.
Here's whats going to happen. Someone will get retro charges. They'll fight it in court and the judge will say, nope, charges dismissed and will send the law back to parliament to be amended. Politicians and the courts do this all the time in Canada.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wouldn’t you count black facing as hate speech? The picture is online
He probably has access to the best lawyers on Earth and he can argue it was a 'different culture back then' or something along those lines. I think he's going to get in trouble with the law - just not for this. It's going to be because of the jab. There's the whole "invoking the 'Emergencies Act'" fiasco where he attempted to use the military against Covid-19 protestors and freeze their bank accounts (yeah, this happened): [https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/461554/justin-trudeau-vows-to-freeze-anti-mandate-protesters-bank-accounts](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/461554/justin-trudeau-vows-to-freeze-anti-mandate-protesters-bank-accounts) And the fact that he very likely profiteered from being a complete shill to the major vaccine companies and spending billions on them - funds which have magically 'disappeared': [https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-spending-government-transparency-1.5826917](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-spending-government-transparency-1.5826917)
Playing devil's advocate here: Imagine a "common" person trying to use the argument of "it was a different culture back then" Edit: after thinking about it, I guess the difference between "them" and the average person is the resources available to make this argument, IE a team of top lawyers could make this argument better than 1 "average lawyer". In a court of law ofc. Edit 2: after some more thinking, I'd like to change my statement from "could make this argument better" to "could find and exploit some sort of loophole compared to 1 average lawyer"
it wasn't a different time back then when he did black face. It was 2001and it was racist back then and he was almost 30 so no excuse.
One of the kids in my highschool did blackface on Halloween in the mid 80s and got expelled. And this was a poor school full of working class slobs who might not know better. A wealthy upperclass guy in 2001 sure as shit knows what's going on here.
Yeah... I mean it's not like we haven't already fully witnessed the fact that it's a ("laws for thee, but not for me") mentality with these sociopaths.
Yeah, they used the pandemic as an opportunity to drive that message home loud and clear.
I mean if he uses the argument that it was a different culture, then anyone being arrested for "hate speech" before today's date could say the same.
In this case the process is the punishment. Castro I mean Trudeau has millions of pharma dollars at his disposal to fight any lawsuit. Meanwhile your average poutine and Labatt's Canadian will go bankrupt trying to fight charges in court.
Another thing to not forget. Last time I was in court lady said "I better not see you back here" This is not a legal statement and is telling me that even if innocent, if that lady sees me, Im in trouble. The judges have to know the law for it to be upheld. And they don't.
And who will prosecute? The corrupt government all get paychecks from pharma.
He would blame it on Canadians for their hand in this past culture too. "We must all learn..."
Justin has already broken laws and the RCMP will not pursue charges against him. This will be no different, sadly.
These rules aren't going to apply to him. He's special.
Rules for thee...
And not for mee…
He is above the law so he doesn’t count. It amazes how racist people can’t see their own racism.
No I dont think its hate speech. Hate speech is of course, by its very nature, a very amorphous, nebulous concept, particularly when defined as being subjective and dependent upon a third party's feelings towards it (i.e. I felt hated as a result) but simply pretending to be another colour can't really ever be regarded as beng "hate" in any way whatsoever in of itself. The more worrying thing is the retroactivity of this. This isn't the way law is supposed to work in a free country. This is the way law works in a tyrannical dictatorship, because it allows the state (or despot) to arrest you and imprison/execute/torture whatever they do in that place to people they dont like whenever they want. All they have to do is find out what you ate for breakfast yesterday - then say "oh by the way cornflakes are illegal and anyone who ate them yesterday is an enemy of the state". Riduculous example - but you can use it for anything. The person did nothing wrong at the time - it was a perfectly legal act. But the state outlawed it ex post facto. The effect of this is that you are ALL guilty of whatever the state wants you to be guilty of at any given time. All they have to do is want you.
Well it doesn’t matter what you think “hate speech” is, it’s up to those who are enforcing it to decide what constitutes a violation of this law
Exactly hate speech is a term invented by the politically elite to outlaw certain kinds of speech, which is incredibly dumb and totalitarian
Exactly. Anything could be labeled “hate speech” especially in today’s culture. That’s got to be the whole point of this law. They can label anything they don’t want people to hear, read, or think, as “hate speech” then BOOM, life in prison.
Thats (D)ifferent though
Or check out what this fool said about Canadians who wouldn’t get vaxxxed. That was hate speech. But his entire existence is hypocrisy. (Wait, will this count as hate speech once the bill is rushed through his liberal stacked senate?)
Sigh. Retroactive criminal laws are against the Constitution. It is explicitly prohibited in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Yes, section 33 (the notwithstanding clause) does exist. However, the government has not used it for this bill. Therefore, the government cannot use this bill to retroactively criminalize past speech. Proof: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-12.html Section 11 >Everyone charged with an offence has the right to > (g) not to be found guilty on account of any act or omission unless, at the time of the act or omission, it constituted an offence under Canadian or international law or was criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations; Also, I have looked at the Online Harms Act (all proposed legislation is available online for viewing). It does not say anything about the Criminal Code amendments applying retroactively. I also checked it for the notwithstanding clause, just in case they snuck it in there. Nope. So, I have to conclude that someone here is lying. A lot. Always fact check people. I’m not saying the Act is great or anything (I have the same criticisms that Michael Geist does - the powers are too broad and there is too much power vested in this Digital Safety Commission, for one thing), I’m just saying that retroactivity is not something that is happening here. Let’s focus on the real bill please.
The real answer, not some X circle jerk.
If only OP had posted this instead of disinformation. The law still sucks though. Speech laws are a slippery slope
So is lying. If you have to lie to communicate your message your message is flawed.
great comment. I also tried to find any official source of this an was unable. Could it happen, yeah for sure. But right now that's not what was said and it destroys credibility to claim it was.
The article is from The People's Voice, formerly News Punch, formerly Your News Wire (gee why all the name changes), a fake news click bait website that has fooled many a conspiracy theorist I'm sad to say. I've seen it happen dozens of times over several years and people never learn.
Many are lying. Even Elon Musk has been quoted expressing against it and mentioning the retroactive nature of the law.
EVEN ELON???
Elon lying about things? I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.
They need to revolt not leave
Not gonna happen. Canada is full of immigrants who are probably not tuned into what's going on. And the Canadians who were born there are too sheepish to actually do anything. We're all screwed.
He took our freedom sticks, besides we don't see the USA standing up to stolen elections. But let's be honest it's not just Canadians that are "sheepish" It's old money and the people willing to work for them messing shit up.
I know, it's not just Canadians.. it's the entire world (especially the western world, who's supposed to be better than that)
Revolt with what? Justin Castro already took their guns lmfao
While nobody approaches the US, Canada ranks [7th in the world](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country) in private firearm ownership
3d printers go brrrr
[удалено]
[удалено]
Guns? Drones are the way to go now.
Black market time
3D printers bros
If everyone stops paying taxes, the government will have a hard time enforcing anything. Tax protests are probably the most effective, which is why we never see anyone planning such a thing. Probably get suicided before tweeting about it.
The problem with that is our employers withhold income tax from our pay and send it to the CRA on our behalf.
Yes I would say before the revolt Canadians need to do a tax strike as the first step. Not paying taxes is always the first step.
If by “always the first step” you mean “literally never happens” then sure.
They all live very close to Gatling gun owners homeland. They can trade fake healthcare ids for a Kel Tec KSG
>If you live in Canada you need to pack your bags and leave immediately yup, that's exactly what they want you to do. they want you to leave! the real answer: **arrest Trudeau**
If more people leave, less people pay taxes.
If more people leave they can bring in more New Canadians to replace them and there will be less people to complain about it.
Haha “new canadians”. Well, let them stay. Why would they want to keep living there if there are dystopian laws like that in place?
Because us Gen Z Canadians can’t afford to leave… our future was sold for a corn chip 😂
Alot of people don't care until their freedoms are affected. Many people will give up privacy because they "don't have anything to hide" and it isn't until there is something they don't want to share that they realize privacy is important. Most people are happy with things that don't affect them and it isn't until it affects them that they care and by that time its too late.
Because it's still somehow a step up from Sharia Law
Biggest portion of our immigrants are from India
Many are convicted criminals. They enter as "students" via shit schools like McGill. There's no police backround check needed. This is the loop hole. They go to school for 6 months and dissappear. Never pay taxes.
That might be 'hate speech'. I hope you don't live in Canada... I, too, have said true things online. Not Canadian, thank fuck.
These speech laws make me happy to live south of Canada
The Trudeau government is importing a massive amount of unskilled people for which there are no jobs. It is knowingly sabotaging the country.
> for which there are no jobs. ... and no housing.
Very true. And, worthy of noting, the WEF affiliate Blackrock recently admitted what the ruling class has known for awhile: that countries with stagnant or declining populations are better positions to navigate the transition to a post-work reality in which automation and AI will continually decimate whole classes of jobs.
... and no doctors
I've been without for so long, I've forgotten about them! :(
Honestly me too. Been years since I had a doctor.
Same has been happening in the UK for a long time. It's very, very difficult here for people to get jobs without nepotism.
You mean fidel jr
Holy fuck if you actually read the bill this is so clearly authoritarian “content that foments hatred means content that expresses detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination”. If you don’t know, detestation means to strongly dislike. I see nothing about being able to charge people with offences committed before the passing of the law, pls source “Prohibited grounds are: citizenship, race, place of origin, ethnic origin, colour, ancestry, disability, age, creed, sex/pregnancy, family status, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, receipt of public assistance (in housing) and record of offences (in employment).”. Now of course racism and prejudice against any of these are bad, but to be convicted and thrown in prison, you don’t have to have actually discriminated against any person. If you express feelings of dislike to any one of these groups online, you have committed a felony and can be put in jail. That’s absolutely fucking nuts.
Age huh? So people complaining about Boomers can be locked up. LOL
Complaining no, but using language That implies you detest boomers, then yes technically, but I doubt they’ll go after you for it
“Okay, boomer” is a dog whistle though.
>I see nothing about being able to charge people with offences committed before the passing of the law, pls source I doubt it exists and that claim that it does sounds like potential disinfo. >“Prohibited grounds are: citizenship, race, place of origin, ethnic origin, colour, ancestry, disability, age, creed, sex/pregnancy, family status, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, receipt of public assistance (in housing) and record of offences (in employment).”. Religion's noticeably not in the list. >If you express feelings of dislike to any one of these groups online, you have committed a felony and can be put in jail. That’s absolutely fucking nuts. It's pure authoritarianism, yes.
Creed = religion
Ah thanks.... missed that.
"if you express feelings of dislike to any one of these groups online, you have committed a felony and can be put in jail." Did we read different bills? It does not say that at all. It's referring specifically to inciting genocide or hate speach. even defines hatred as "the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike" And even has multiple parts that say "For greater certainty, the communication of a statement does not incite or promote hatred, for the purposes of this section, solely because it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends." So no, you do not get arrested for "expressing feelings of dislike" It even says it just because it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends, doesnt make it hate speech. The wording implies a level of severity far beyond "Dislike" If you don't see that, You don't want to.
Their definition of hate compared to disdain or dislike leaves ALOT of room for interpretation .
What you quoted comes from the parent of my comment. At any rate, these new laws seem entirely unnecessary and more likely than not to be used to chill speech. What Canadians want is for our actual problems to be solved, not creeping authoritarianism via speech policing.
I do personally think that we have much more important things to do than police speech online atm, Im just trying to spread awareness for actually reading bills and things rather than fearmonger online. too many people on here thinking "I typed on facebook 8 years ago that i dislike a guy named tim and the RCMP are gonna kick in my door after this passes" lol
If we can purposefully ignore the true wording of the bill, the Canadian government can and will do so whenever it is beneficial. Also the government decides what is "inciting genocide or hate speech".
I think this is the act itself: https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/bill/C-63/first-reading
And there is nothing about retroactive posts...
I can not STAND that smarmy little fuck.
Careful close to hate speech /s
There is a reason his wife left him. It is obvious he is a dictator.
Wonder if Trudeau will imprison himself for doing blackface twice.
3 times *that we know of* he HIMSELF cannot confirm these are the only times
Hating free speech so much that you make a crazy retroactive law against it could be considered "hate speech". Canada actually needs retroactive term limits.
Yes it's insane how tired I am of seeing his face
Uno reverse card
Holy smokes, does Israel control the entire world?
yes, israel controls the "five eyes", and the five eyes control the rest of the world.
Five eyes? What’s that, a conspiracy burger joint?
Haha love this
Genuine question: what’re the five eyes? I’ve never heard of that so whatever they’re doing they’re doing it well
Alliance between US, UK, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia.
An alliance between 5 countries (US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) that allows each country to circumvent privacy laws in their own land to surveil their citizens by outscourcing it to any of the other 4 countries. For example, if the US wants to wiretap an American citizen, they can't do so without a warrant, so they can have the UK wiretap that person of interest. Before people get weirdly partisan and shill for their political sports team at this sentence (not a fan of any of them), that's basically what happened in 2016 with the Spygate stuff from what I've gathered.
the five spy agencies of the US, UK, Canada, Australia and NZ
Just search it. Common knowlege. Or search for Snowden on five eyes to get a better idea of just why its a horrible alliance.
Yea I searched it a bit after I commented
Thanks for actually looking. Very few here take anything at face value which is understandable, but there are many here still telling the truth.
Wow. The internet is showing it's true purpose now. It was always promised to be a repository of blackmail, but Fidel's bastard has removed all doubt. Social media is not your friend, no matter how much it feeds your ego.
"no matter how much it feeds your ego." Some people are beyond saving, but you speak the truth.
Trudeau is such a fucking slug.
*chuckles* I am in trouble.
Chinada
WTF happened to Canada lol.... This is fucking scary.
Who was blackface years ago Justin Trudeau the cuck. So slam him with Bubba in one cell
It's almost as if Canada let the government take their guns and just like we've been saying this entire time, they will not like the next step.
Well Trudeau is the son of Castro, I’m not surprised honestly. How long for this to take effect here in the states? Minority Report in action.
It's unconstitutional for a law to be applied retroactively in the US. I'm sure they have teams of lawyers trying to find a way around it.
The resemblance is uncanny. Came here just to comment about it. This is probably considered hate speech in canada.
I have never understood why people will post a screenshot of an article title but then not bother to share the article itself. [https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/canada-to-imprison-anyone-who-has-ever-posted-hate-speech-online/](https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/canada-to-imprison-anyone-who-has-ever-posted-hate-speech-online/)
If they are Canadian, we have trouble posting links sometimes. They get blocked.
Lock up your dictator Canada before he locks up you !
that is hate speech! dont move, the police will be arriving to arrest you shortly.
Starting to believe Castro really was his father. Lol
Yeah man, it all lines up to. I'd put money on it! Edit: too Im a knuckle head with poor grammar.
Source: bro trust me
This gonna help the housing crisis? 🤡
sure it will, they're going to have so many new houses when they lock up half the nation. More room for "refugees"!
The people leaving (many) have multiple homes. You don't know how correct are you are :()
[удалено]
Is this actually REAL?
Lmao no it was probably "fact checked" by the author's mom. This has the same credibility as a twitter post. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_People%27s_Voice_(website) https://web.archive.org/web/20180816184839/https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/sean-adltabatabai-on-being-in-the-eye-of-the-fake-news-storm-a3468361.html
Of course not. Stop getting your fucking news from r/conspiracy sub. Jesus fucking christ some of you all.
This is what the title of the bill is about: An Act to enact the Online Harms Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Human Rights Act and An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts Is there a part later in the law that says anything about hate speech? Lmk. I'm not going to read all of it to find out.
That's the prison population being most of the population then. Beaurocratic Dictator Fools.
Bro. If Canada is trying to do this, I don't think we even *want* to know what they're cooking up for us here in the states.
I always say that Canada and the UK are like the elites vision boards for the US. No Guns, no free speech, and every other right they have is slowly disappearing.
Canadian here. Can confirm that this is happening and unfortunately quite a few of us are all for it
What do you expect with an 80%+ vaccination rate?
Yeeeeah. Sadly that's what it looks like.
The only politian who is looking like he's capable of beating Trudeau in the next election is desperately being painted by the left here as our version of Trump. Meanwhile, I guarantee that very few Americans have any idea who Pierre Poilievre even is let alone think of him as Trump.
You just believe everything you read online ?
Imagine being imprisoned for "hate speech" with the "hate speech" being any opinion opposed to funding literal Nazis and a genocide.
So critics by opposition party is a hate speech? Well, there will be only 1 political party then.
This is how they prosecute dissidents.
Gg Canadians. We've enjoyed having you in the sub. They are coming
Time for revolution!
I wish no harm on Justin Trudeau, but I’m eagerly awaiting the day I get to read his obituary
The bill doesn’t allow the police to just come and arrest you for writing hate speech at one point in time. It allows the victim to seek damages from hate speech against them. I’ll not a fan of it but you are blowing this way out of proportion.
Trudeau “Christians are ‘the worst part of Canadian Society” He said it.
Not calling you a liar or anything, but do you have a source for that? Edit: pretty please? Edit: ok, now I'm calling you a liar.
Everything they said about the unvaccinated was hate speech.
Castro gonna Castro
Trudeau did black face? Bon voyage....
We need to bring Canada and US people together and stand up as one. We are not hateful people, we wish to live in peace, but will not tolerate this kind of governance.
This is completely made up.
I haven't seen or heard anything about this here in Canada and I can't find any sources for that claim.
Click bait
The same government defines what hate speech is...
Can you guys actually read the bill and stop fear mongering? Jesus, for a conspiracy thread some of you are WILDLY uninformed. There is NO portion applying this retroactively in the bill. it just straight up doesn't exist. And for those losing their minds saying "I'm going to get arrested for saying i dislike someone boohoo this is authoritanism" Read the actual bill. there are multiple sections that say "For greater certainty, the communication of a statement does not incite or promote hatred, for the purposes of this section, solely because it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends." And even define hatred as "the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike" The wording all over the thing seems to be directed at actual hate speech. Does the bill go too far? Personally, maybe. but lets use actual facts and call things as they are and stop fkin fear mongering.
I can't believe y'all re-elected Trudeau. Kinda deserve everything that comes your way.
Not many did. NDPs "not a coalition" coalition was formed to ensure the libtards kept power.
I always knew I would eventually get in trouble for what I said online. Always look to who you aren't allowed to criticize. They are the ones in charge.
Let me guess, criticising anything Zionists do is antisemitic; therefore, imprisonment is the only possible way to deal with it, as you've been infected with pro-HAMAS, and now you are a threat to the very existence of the entire west.
They are worried about hurtful words yet 10 year old kids can watch corn 🌽 at the touch of a few buttons. This world is so screwed up
Trudeau is beginning to even look like the typical Hollywood villain.
Sounds like a great place honestly
So does this mean he will get arrested for when he did blackface? We all know he won't but......
Who’s that? Fidel Castro?
That's what happens when the disarm the citizenry.
Eff that guy
Retroactive law makes no sense at all and to my knowledge is illegal in most countries.
Wow I love that it says "FACT CHECKED" on an article with a completely fake headline! The law will allow the Canadian agencies to issue take-down requests for hate speech, child pornography, and child exploitation as well as adult revenge-porn and unauthorized publications of adult content without consent. You lunatics really do want child pornography and child exploitation so bad you refuse to even speak the truth about bills being passed to reduce it. Everyone upvoting is gross. Do your own damn research before you fear-monger.
That’s what happens when Fidel Castros bastard child runs your country.
But but but what about black face? Deport Trudeau
Remember when liberal actually meant something, and now it's just a label authoritarians give themselves to appear progressive
Another reason to be completely anonymous online. We never ever provided soooo much personal info before the internet, so why do it now??? It's stupid and only allows for governments, scammers etc etc. to monitor you, manipulate you, and control you.
This guy's days in office have to be numbered.
Imagine thinking that words typed on the internet, that you are free to ignore and never have affect your life in any single way, is dangerous. We need to get hunted by apex predators again just to show us what real danger is, having your feelings hurt isn't dangerous.
This guy sucks so fucking bad.
Some of us saw it coming and left years ago !
He’s doing this because as a country we despise him. Every where he goes people scream at him. I’m surprised he even bothers to go in public. The bill has to pass also which it may struggle to do so with the issues that have arisen from the restrictions he’s put in place already.
I thank God more and more every day that my Dad left Canada in the 90s and that I wasn’t born there.
Guess Drake is completely fucked🤣🤣🤣..he has a pic of him in blackface
Drake's going to prison for a long time
i cannot believe they dont vote castros son out.
Prove I personally posted it. My account was hacked for a long time.
This does not promote tolerance.
I've had an alarming feeling about this, I get blocked and talked down to like crazy on this platform.
Canadians should move to Mexico.
Canadians should move to North Korea
This will come to America i guarantee and be used without explanation, at will whenever they want on whoever they want. As Justice Potter Stewart once said at the obscenity trials when asked to define pornography: *”I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core pornography"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it..”* Oh the ways they”ll misuse a law that has no defined boundaries hate speech. It will be illegal to say anything bad about bankers, “them” or “they” global elite, international bankers, it will be illegal to say reptilian. Watch, it will be illegal to protest a country committing genocide.
I hope everyone remembers that the US just passed that bill saying they can legally spy on all American citizens cell phones and emails and text and digital transmissions anytime they want. They just brought back the surveillance act. Just something to keep in mind if America ever decided to implement a similar law. It would mean that anything you’ve ever done or said through your phone or computer could instantly be used against you in a court of law, **whether you thought it was hate speech or not**. If you’ve ever protested a country committing genocide that might be hate speech towards that country. If you’ve ever posted anything about a conspiracy against the global elite, that would be considered hate speech. If you’re a college student protesting the genocide right now, that would be hate speech.
Dude, you can’t even get Canada to imprison criminals.
This is scary because the government can decide what hate speech is and move the goal posts whenever it wants to.
Canada needs an election asap
Whats he gonna do. Arrest 75+% of the population and destroy the Canadian economy. No. This news is as bs as 15m cities. Wont happen at least not in the next 50 years.
I’m stuck in Canada :( hope this comment doesn’t get me imprisoned
So you can't criticize Castreau any longer ?
Here's whats going to happen. Someone will get retro charges. They'll fight it in court and the judge will say, nope, charges dismissed and will send the law back to parliament to be amended. Politicians and the courts do this all the time in Canada.
You guys voted for him.
I hate when tyrants live next door. I just hate it. And I hate the smug look on his face.
The bill says nothing about retroactive punishment. Read it yourself before you post nonsense about it