In Light of Albertan’s determination to choose their own path much has come to light.
Lead by the governing liberals is a tell tale swath of communist vitriol against the fundamentals of democracy and self determination.
We see the Premiers of B.C. and Ont calling the independence movement in AB treasonist while they are, in essence, the ultimate practitioners of democracy,
More disturbing is the tripe out of the AB NDP party, attempting to shame Albertans for participating in this utmost democratic function. No surprise from a group who radicalized the public services union for political purposes.
Ottawa, meanwhile, prepares to push bills to criminalize aspects of religion, ban freedom of speech, remove accountability of ministers for new laws that may breach the charter of rights and freedoms.
Canada is increasingly being ruled from abroad, imported policies from unelected groups ranging from the monarchy, the UN to the WEF. Marx Carney is stripping Canada of democratic functions from a high on the pulpit of democracy. What you are allowed to see is not what you will get.
By the power of the precious blood and in the holy name of Jesus Christ, I now command the demons of censorship afflicting my country to the foot of the cross to receive the just sentence for their works.
Archangel Michael, please cast the demons of censorship afflicting the Liberal Party of Canada back to hell where they belong.
Oh good...more unelected and unapproved edicts to completely ignore which is what the Liberals do...not taking 5-6 mRNA shots, if any at all. Not obeying the lockdowns. The hypocrisy just keeps getting easier to see as the liberal BS that they don't believe in . So much BS vs. the honesty of everyday citizens. So many reasons to never ever listen to or be a Liberal in the first place. Bozos.
I mean, we have police so I guess this is accurate, but by ALL credible measures we are one of the freest nations on the planet. What stops us from being amongst top 3 to 5? Consolidation of media and devolving political discourse (both courtesy of the CPC).
This would be great as satire. I fear that it's not and some poor folks accept this as truth.
There is no credibility to the claim that Canada is weeks away from the “end of free speech.” None. Zero. It is beyond fantastical thinking.
This article conflates multiple, distinct bills, misstates their contents and penalties, attributes sweeping powers that do not exist in law, and presents speculative or hypothetical outcomes as imminent facts.
While debates about online harms, platform regulation, and privacy are legitimate, Canada’s Charter framework, judicial review, and legislative process remain intact. This piece is advocacy-driven and alarmist rather than an accurate legal or policy analysis. It appears designed to keep the rage levels up for those without the time or inclination to actually understand the intent of the referenced legislation or how government works.
We have had legislation and limiting certain forms of expression since before confederation. And all liberal democracies are still trying to find ways to deal with the online environment.
Key fallacies and errors
Slippery slope – Asserts that platform regulation inevitably leads to a police state. No evidence.
Straw man – Recasts bills as criminalizing dissent or criticism when they clearly do not.
False equivalence – Equates Canada’s framework with authoritarian regimes or the UK.
Conflation – Blends unrelated bills (C-9, C-11, C-18, C-27, C-63) into one conspiracy narrative.
Appeal to fear – Emphasizes extreme penalties and hypothetical abuses.
Selective quotation – Uses Charter excerpts without proportional legal context.
Unsupported assertions – Claims of “life imprisonment,” “thought crimes,” and mass house arrest lack any basis in reality.
Ad hominem / motive fallacy – Dismisses opposing views as paid-off or corrupt.
False dichotomy – Frames regulation vs. freedom as mutually exclusive.
Post hoc reasoning – Attributes platform decisions solely to censorship laws.
What I find is that your post, which is what I was responding to, was very true to the report. After looking at the report itself, nothing in it materially changes my position:
The report is clearly written from an advocacy perspective. It frames government legislative action as a systemic threat to freedom, which reflects an ideological stance rather than a balanced legal analysis. This seems to be consistent for them and I assume all their reports reach a similar conclusion.
Their work conflates multiple separate pieces of legislation into a narrative of an alleged “police state,” and attributes legal effects (e.g., extreme criminal penalties, thought-crime enforcement) that are not found in the text of current Canadian law.
It presents hypothetical worst-case scenarios as though they are imminent certainties, without acknowledging the Charter review process, judicial checks, and political debate that are central to how Canadian law actually operates.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, the organization behind the report, does engage in litigation, but despite the formal name it is widely recognized as a socially conservative advocacy group, not an independent or neutral constitutional research institution. It is led by a disbarred civil litigation lawyer John Carpay - who previously worked for other similar advocacy groups. Reports and commentary from the JCCF reflect that advocacy stance and while they are not reasonably considered objective third-party legal analysis, it is presented as such in the report and your post. As such, I thought it worth while to ensure it's clear, for those that read beyond the report - that it should not be construed in any way as anything more than it is.
While your passion on these issues is clear, the alarming predictions in the report are not grounded in the actual legal text or the Canadian constitutional framework as it exists today. They are something else.
C-9 sentencing imprisons ppl for life. Watch Sean Fraser explaining it. It is in the article. New incoming c-63 replacement will be the same. Sorry this is alarming but this is happening with this web of laws whether you like it or not. Read the law descriptions yourself we have linked to most of them in the article.
I haven’t seen a clip where Sean Fraser says speech offences carry life imprisonment. Ministers may reference existing Criminal Code maximums when explaining sentencing generally, but that is clearly not the same thing as creating new life-sentence speech crimes. If you can point to the specific provision — section and subsection — that does what you’re claiming, I’m happy to look at it. Likewise, if you can point directly to the video of a minister directly explaining such.
Otherwise, I'm going to assume there is a reason that legal scholars and others across the country do not share your alarm - and I would respectfully request you stop ringing this false alarm.
I suspect yours is an honest misinterpretation of an explanation of how a defined hate motivation, evidenced by hate speech, can potentially result in the underlying offence that already carries a life sentence maximum (e.g. second degree murder) increasing to life in prison. Most plausibly, it would effect parole eligibility.
This is substantially different than going to jail for life just for something you said, which, despite the absolutely unsupported claims above, cannot happen.
Not many have tried to stop it. I wrote a policy paper for committee and only one media request. All other media ignored C9 have have downplayed what it actually means.
Asserting our right to free speech looks like what? Do we march on Parliament hill like the Freedom Convoy? Will our elected Conservatives lead us in the March or are they afraid to be abused and arrested by masked/helmeted armed police? Will our bank accounts (what little is left in them) be frozen? Will we need clubs and pitch forks? I’m sure the twice failed Minister Sean Fraser and his colleagues, including Carney, don’t give a damn about free speech or the Canadian Charter. This proposed legislation is one of many nails destined for the Canada Coffin.
There never were any "Rights", or "Freedoms" guaranteed to us. Governments are not built that way.
Government's sole purpose is "Self perpetuation" by any means! That means 'they will kill us to stay in power'! The various "Partys" are just different faces on the same puppet.
Citizens only have Rights if they will assert them.
"If Freedom is not worth defending, why mourn it????" (Paul Repstock 2024)
Oh, I do care very deeply. But, I will act only in my own interests. I will not martyr myself on behalf of others who do not 'care' enough to "Act" on their own behalves"!
The government can write all the laws they want. It is just paper and hot air, until they infringe on my Freedom. And I certainly won't "Protest" or Hire Lawyers to fight them in the Court which the Government employs.
"Future"?? There is no Future in a Globalist World.
"You will own nothing, and You will be HAPPY!" Or else....
People don't like what I say. And that is OK. Each person has the agency to chose their own path. But, don't whine if no Savior comes to save your sorry ass. The "Savior" is within yourself.
It’s already ended. Unless of course it’s virulent anti Trump stuff. And the anti conservative influencers paid for by liberals are infecting conservative threads all over the net. Facebook bad Threads worse. It’s classic liberal disinformation characterized as goodly Canadians speaking up
I blame the great unwashed for facilitating this evil 👿
In Light of Albertan’s determination to choose their own path much has come to light.
Lead by the governing liberals is a tell tale swath of communist vitriol against the fundamentals of democracy and self determination.
We see the Premiers of B.C. and Ont calling the independence movement in AB treasonist while they are, in essence, the ultimate practitioners of democracy,
More disturbing is the tripe out of the AB NDP party, attempting to shame Albertans for participating in this utmost democratic function. No surprise from a group who radicalized the public services union for political purposes.
Ottawa, meanwhile, prepares to push bills to criminalize aspects of religion, ban freedom of speech, remove accountability of ministers for new laws that may breach the charter of rights and freedoms.
Canada is increasingly being ruled from abroad, imported policies from unelected groups ranging from the monarchy, the UN to the WEF. Marx Carney is stripping Canada of democratic functions from a high on the pulpit of democracy. What you are allowed to see is not what you will get.
By the power of the precious blood and in the holy name of Jesus Christ, I now command the demons of censorship afflicting my country to the foot of the cross to receive the just sentence for their works.
Archangel Michael, please cast the demons of censorship afflicting the Liberal Party of Canada back to hell where they belong.
Oh good...more unelected and unapproved edicts to completely ignore which is what the Liberals do...not taking 5-6 mRNA shots, if any at all. Not obeying the lockdowns. The hypocrisy just keeps getting easier to see as the liberal BS that they don't believe in . So much BS vs. the honesty of everyday citizens. So many reasons to never ever listen to or be a Liberal in the first place. Bozos.
WEF Agenda Carney puppet liberals
No such thing.
Already rigjt a crime to threaten someone
🇨🇦 How to Save Canada (Without Burning It Down)
A Call for a System with Real Consequences
This essay is about why participation stopped changing outcomes, where power actually moved, and why that matters before people give up entirely -
https://goodbuzz.substack.com/p/how-to-save-canada
Canada is already a police state
I mean, we have police so I guess this is accurate, but by ALL credible measures we are one of the freest nations on the planet. What stops us from being amongst top 3 to 5? Consolidation of media and devolving political discourse (both courtesy of the CPC).
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/freedom-index-by-country
This would be great as satire. I fear that it's not and some poor folks accept this as truth.
There is no credibility to the claim that Canada is weeks away from the “end of free speech.” None. Zero. It is beyond fantastical thinking.
This article conflates multiple, distinct bills, misstates their contents and penalties, attributes sweeping powers that do not exist in law, and presents speculative or hypothetical outcomes as imminent facts.
While debates about online harms, platform regulation, and privacy are legitimate, Canada’s Charter framework, judicial review, and legislative process remain intact. This piece is advocacy-driven and alarmist rather than an accurate legal or policy analysis. It appears designed to keep the rage levels up for those without the time or inclination to actually understand the intent of the referenced legislation or how government works.
We have had legislation and limiting certain forms of expression since before confederation. And all liberal democracies are still trying to find ways to deal with the online environment.
Key fallacies and errors
Slippery slope – Asserts that platform regulation inevitably leads to a police state. No evidence.
Straw man – Recasts bills as criminalizing dissent or criticism when they clearly do not.
False equivalence – Equates Canada’s framework with authoritarian regimes or the UK.
Conflation – Blends unrelated bills (C-9, C-11, C-18, C-27, C-63) into one conspiracy narrative.
Appeal to fear – Emphasizes extreme penalties and hypothetical abuses.
Selective quotation – Uses Charter excerpts without proportional legal context.
Unsupported assertions – Claims of “life imprisonment,” “thought crimes,” and mass house arrest lack any basis in reality.
Ad hominem / motive fallacy – Dismisses opposing views as paid-off or corrupt.
False dichotomy – Frames regulation vs. freedom as mutually exclusive.
Post hoc reasoning – Attributes platform decisions solely to censorship laws.
Its from a report. Did you READ it?
Hi David.
No, I had not read it but I have now - quickly.
What I find is that your post, which is what I was responding to, was very true to the report. After looking at the report itself, nothing in it materially changes my position:
The report is clearly written from an advocacy perspective. It frames government legislative action as a systemic threat to freedom, which reflects an ideological stance rather than a balanced legal analysis. This seems to be consistent for them and I assume all their reports reach a similar conclusion.
Their work conflates multiple separate pieces of legislation into a narrative of an alleged “police state,” and attributes legal effects (e.g., extreme criminal penalties, thought-crime enforcement) that are not found in the text of current Canadian law.
It presents hypothetical worst-case scenarios as though they are imminent certainties, without acknowledging the Charter review process, judicial checks, and political debate that are central to how Canadian law actually operates.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, the organization behind the report, does engage in litigation, but despite the formal name it is widely recognized as a socially conservative advocacy group, not an independent or neutral constitutional research institution. It is led by a disbarred civil litigation lawyer John Carpay - who previously worked for other similar advocacy groups. Reports and commentary from the JCCF reflect that advocacy stance and while they are not reasonably considered objective third-party legal analysis, it is presented as such in the report and your post. As such, I thought it worth while to ensure it's clear, for those that read beyond the report - that it should not be construed in any way as anything more than it is.
While your passion on these issues is clear, the alarming predictions in the report are not grounded in the actual legal text or the Canadian constitutional framework as it exists today. They are something else.
C-9 sentencing imprisons ppl for life. Watch Sean Fraser explaining it. It is in the article. New incoming c-63 replacement will be the same. Sorry this is alarming but this is happening with this web of laws whether you like it or not. Read the law descriptions yourself we have linked to most of them in the article.
Yeah, I’ve seen the clip a few times…it’s definetly there!!
I haven’t seen a clip where Sean Fraser says speech offences carry life imprisonment. Ministers may reference existing Criminal Code maximums when explaining sentencing generally, but that is clearly not the same thing as creating new life-sentence speech crimes. If you can point to the specific provision — section and subsection — that does what you’re claiming, I’m happy to look at it. Likewise, if you can point directly to the video of a minister directly explaining such.
Otherwise, I'm going to assume there is a reason that legal scholars and others across the country do not share your alarm - and I would respectfully request you stop ringing this false alarm.
I’ve seen it a few times…he definetly said it!
I suspect yours is an honest misinterpretation of an explanation of how a defined hate motivation, evidenced by hate speech, can potentially result in the underlying offence that already carries a life sentence maximum (e.g. second degree murder) increasing to life in prison. Most plausibly, it would effect parole eligibility.
This is substantially different than going to jail for life just for something you said, which, despite the absolutely unsupported claims above, cannot happen.
Not many have tried to stop it. I wrote a policy paper for committee and only one media request. All other media ignored C9 have have downplayed what it actually means.
There is a coalition now. In report. You should try to connect with them.
https://www.lgballiance.ca/news/bill-c-9-policing-thoughts-and-words-rather-than-actual-crimenbsp
It can also be found on the government website, ie JUST Committee page for C9 under briefs.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6301455bea314d36e3d2a02a/t/6930d4bc8fc5e0455da05191/1764807868284/C-9+Policy+Brief+LGB+Alliance+For+Statement+Purposes.pdf
Asserting our right to free speech looks like what? Do we march on Parliament hill like the Freedom Convoy? Will our elected Conservatives lead us in the March or are they afraid to be abused and arrested by masked/helmeted armed police? Will our bank accounts (what little is left in them) be frozen? Will we need clubs and pitch forks? I’m sure the twice failed Minister Sean Fraser and his colleagues, including Carney, don’t give a damn about free speech or the Canadian Charter. This proposed legislation is one of many nails destined for the Canada Coffin.
We need to March yes, and demand opposition repeal all these laws when elected. Need a party to have a clear mandate for freedom.
Canadians are now in an orwellian state
There never were any "Rights", or "Freedoms" guaranteed to us. Governments are not built that way.
Government's sole purpose is "Self perpetuation" by any means! That means 'they will kill us to stay in power'! The various "Partys" are just different faces on the same puppet.
Citizens only have Rights if they will assert them.
"If Freedom is not worth defending, why mourn it????" (Paul Repstock 2024)
So you don't care
Oh, I do care very deeply. But, I will act only in my own interests. I will not martyr myself on behalf of others who do not 'care' enough to "Act" on their own behalves"!
The government can write all the laws they want. It is just paper and hot air, until they infringe on my Freedom. And I certainly won't "Protest" or Hire Lawyers to fight them in the Court which the Government employs.
So you don't care about your children's future.
"Future"?? There is no Future in a Globalist World.
"You will own nothing, and You will be HAPPY!" Or else....
People don't like what I say. And that is OK. Each person has the agency to chose their own path. But, don't whine if no Savior comes to save your sorry ass. The "Savior" is within yourself.
You got that right, I feel the same.
It’s already ended. Unless of course it’s virulent anti Trump stuff. And the anti conservative influencers paid for by liberals are infecting conservative threads all over the net. Facebook bad Threads worse. It’s classic liberal disinformation characterized as goodly Canadians speaking up