Latest / Radio Baloney - The Richie Baloney Show! / Trudeau's Tyranical Online Harms Bill

Transcript

Trudeau's Tyranical Online Harms Bill · Radio Baloney - The Richie Baloney Show!

• 0:03
  So it's another day. It's another attempt by the Trudeau government to crush free
• 0:07
  speech in Canada and to intimidate Canadians from being able to speak out about things
• 0:13
  that concern them. And so what we have here is a trojan horse bill,
• 0:18
  Bill C. Sixty three. But what is Bill C sixty three.
• 0:22
  Well, it says it's an act to an Act, the Online Harms Act,
• 0:26
  to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Human Rights Act, and an
• 0:31
  Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet
• 0:38
  service, and to make consequential and related amendments to other acts. Now,
• 0:43
  of course, the abusive content regarding children is already illegal in Canada and everybody's
• 0:50
  against that anyway, and that should be voted on separately from the rest of
• 0:54
  this. So I'm not going to go into those parts of this bill.
• 0:58
  We're going to go into the parts of this that are going to intimidate and
• 1:00
  punish people for making dissenting political statements online. Now, the reason for packaging
• 1:07
  this all in together in one bill is an extremely cynical and slimy tactic from
• 1:11
  a very cynical and slimy government to be able to smear anybody who has any
• 1:18
  problem with any part of this bill as being pro you know want. It's
• 1:23
  absolutely disgusting and of course I expect no less from the Trudeau government. Well,
• 1:27
  this is interesting. It amends the Criminal Code to create a hate crime
• 1:33
  offense of committing an offense under that Act or any other Act of Parliament that
• 1:38
  is motivated by hatred based on certain factors. B Create a recognisance to keep
• 1:45
  the peace relating to hate propaganda and hate crime offenses. And of course a
• 1:49
  recognissance or peace bond is to prevent serious harm by imposing conditions upon a person
• 1:57
  which may restrict their movement or behavior to reduce the risk of them committing a
• 2:01
  future offense. SE define hatred for the purposes of the new offense and the
• 2:07
  hate propaganda offenses, and d increase the maximum sentences for the hate propaganda offenses.
• 2:15
  And more on all of that in the moment. Part three amends the
• 2:20
  Canadian Human Rights Act to provide that it is a discriminatory practice to communicate or
• 2:24
  cause to be communicated hate speech by means of the Internet or other means of
• 2:30
  telecommunication in a context in which the hate speech is likely to foment detestation or
• 2:38
  vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground
• 2:45
  of discrimination. So it says in a context in which the hate speech is
• 2:50
  likely to foment detestation or vilification. And we'll get into what that could possibly
• 2:55
  mean in a minute too but likely too not as but might isn't this pre
• 3:02
  crime? Isn't this convicting you for something that you haven't actually done. It
• 3:07
  authorizes the Canadian Human Rights Commission to deal with complaints alleging that discriminatory practice,
• 3:15
  and authorizes the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to inquire into such complaints and order remedies.
• 3:23
  The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. So you might have been thinking that you
• 3:27
  had a real chance to defend yourself in a real court with a presumption of
• 3:30
  innocence and a beyond a reasonable doubt standard. No, but I'm afraid not.
• 3:36
  You're going in front of a parallel legal system called the Human Rights Tribunal.
• 3:40
  So what's that The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decides whether a person or organization
• 3:46
  has engaged in a discriminatory practice as defined under the Canadian Human Rights Act.
• 3:53
  The tribunal statutory mandate is defined in the Act, the purpose of which is
• 3:58
  to protect individuals from discrimination. It states that all Canadians have the right to
• 4:02
  equality, equal opportunity, fair treatment and an environment free of discrimination. H
• 4:09
  somebody should mention that to all those universities that are posting jobs for non whites
• 4:13
  only. It says, independent and impartial tribunal members hard not to laugh,
• 4:20
  apply these principles and consider the legislation and evidence before them to render decisions on
• 4:27
  the complaints referred to the tribunal by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. The tribunal
• 4:32
  is similar to a court of law, but it's less formal, and only
• 4:36
  here's cases related to discrimination. It's similar to a court of law, but
• 4:41
  it's less formal. Jeez, that's not very comforting to me. Well,
• 4:45
  what does this say here a burden of proof? Under the Ontario Human Rights
• 4:48
  Commission, a claimant must show a human rights tribunal that, on a balance
• 4:54
  of probabilities, there appears to be a contravention of the code. A balance
• 4:59
  of probabilities, not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, just balance of probabilities.
• 5:05
  I wonder how that's going to go in a far left kangaroo court, which
• 5:10
  is what the human rights tribunals are. Yeah, it's not comforting to me,
• 5:14
  and it should not be comforting to you either. So let's find out
• 5:16
  what they mean by hatred. Here means content that expresses detestation or vilification of
• 5:24
  an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination
• 5:30
  within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act, and that, given the
• 5:32
  context in which it is communicated, is likely to foment detestation or a vilification
• 5:40
  of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of such a prohibited ground.
• 5:45
  So hatred means content that expresses detestation or vilification. So I don't know.
• 5:49
  That doesn't really help much because I'm not sure I really trust the human
• 5:54
  rights tribunals interpretation of that. So harmful content means, well, it's content
• 6:00
  victimizes kids, and we all agree that we don't want that. But then
• 6:03
  we have content that foments hatred whatever that means. Content that incites violence again,
• 6:10
  whatever that means, content that incites violent extremism or terrorism, whatever that's
• 6:15
  actually going to mean in a human rights tribunal. Again, here we have
• 6:18
  hatred means the emotion that involves detestation or vilification, and that is stronger than
• 6:25
  disdain or dislike. What does that mean? What is it going to mean
• 6:29
  in a human rights tribunal, which is essentially a kangaroo court, you call
• 6:33
  this star chamber whatever. Well, thankfully, here we've got a clarification for
• 6:39
  greater certainty. The communication of a statement does not incite or promote hatred for
• 6:45
  the purposes of this section solely because it discredits, humiliates, hurts, or
• 6:49
  offends. Again, what does this really mean? What will this really mean
• 6:56
  in a human rights tribunal? This hardly clarifies any after all. They call
• 7:01
  any questions on immigration, say mass immigration, hatred. They call any question
• 7:08
  about radical gender theory hatred. They say that, you know, forgetting somebody's
• 7:13
  pronouns is denying their existence. This clarification doesn't put me at ease. Now,
• 7:19
  get this. Anyone who commits an offense under this Act or any other
• 7:24
  Act of Parliament, if the commission of the offense is motivated by hatred based
• 7:29
  on race, national or ethnic origin, language, color, religion, sex,
• 7:32
  age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity or
• 7:38
  expression, is guilty of an indictable offense and liable to imprisonment for life.
• 7:46
  That's in the bill. You're actually seeing that right now on your screen with
• 7:50
  your own eyes. Now, they also have this advocating genocide. Every person
• 7:57
  who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offense and liable to imprisonment
• 8:03
  for life. Yes, you're really seeing this in a Canadian bill, something
• 8:09
  that may become law. Probably will. And if you think this isn't going
• 8:13
  to be applied politically, you're out of your mind. I mean, a
• 8:16
  lot of people think from the River to the Sea is a genocidal statement.
• 8:20
  But do you think that anybody is going to be sent to prison for a
• 8:24
  second, never mind for life, for shouting that, for chanting that,
• 8:28
  for writing it online. Of course not. But in the meantime, there's
• 8:33
  a lot of people saying that if you don't supply sex changes for kids on
• 8:37
  demand, that's genocide. They actually say that this is just complete and utter
• 8:43
  insanity. Then you do not want your life in these people's hands. Now
• 8:48
  back to the pre crime part of this, fear of hate propaganda offense or
• 8:54
  hate crime. A person may, with the Attorney General's consent, lay an
• 8:58
  inform before a provincial court judge if the person fears on reasonable grounds that another
• 9:05
  person will commit and these are the hate crimes we've already gone over. So
• 9:09
  if that happens in the judge decides that there's reasonable grounds for fear, not
• 9:16
  that you've done anything. No, you might do something in the future.
• 9:20
  Maybe, well, this can happen to you. You can be ordered into
• 9:24
  recognissance to keep the peace and be of good behavior for a period of not
• 9:28
  more than twelve months. So you've spoken your mind about something politically incorrect online,
• 9:35
  somebody has complained, and now you've got an ankle monitor for twelve months.
• 9:39
  Now, if you've been previously convicted of any of these hate crimes,
• 9:43
  suppose it hate crimes, then you can go into recognisance for two years.
• 9:48
  Way are an electronic monitoring device, return to and remain at their place of
• 9:54
  residence at specific times. Abstain from the consumption of drugs except in accordance with
• 10:00
  medical prescription, of alcohol or of any other intoxicating substance. And look that
• 10:05
  this doesn't even require that you've done anything, broken any laws, done anything.
• 10:09
  It just means that somebody can complain about you anonymously, and if they
• 10:16
  decide that you might do something bad, something bad in the future. They
• 10:22
  can put you through this. Here, you've got to provide blood samples so
• 10:26
  they can make sure you're not having a beer after work. Here they're going
• 10:30
  to tell you who you can and can't communicate with or where you can go.
• 10:35
  Oh and by the way, you'll never know who actually did all of
• 10:37
  this to you because they can be completely anonymous through the whole thing. And
• 10:41
  this could be a single person or a group of individuals, which is kind
• 10:46
  of incredibly creepy. Right, And if that's not enough, this anonymous person
• 10:52
  can get twenty thousand dollars out of you if the Kangaroo Court rules so,
• 10:56
  and as spoiler alert, they're going to rule so. And on top of
• 11:01
  that, of course, the government's going to take a cut, so there
• 11:03
  can be an additional fifty thousand dollars added on top that goes to the government.
• 11:07
  So lots of incentive all around to well, I guess, ruin your
• 11:11
  life. So this bill is an utterly insane mess. If some random anonymous
• 11:18
  person out there gets mad at you, well maybe you get a year of
• 11:22
  house arrest. Maybe you get that plus a seventy thousand dollars fine maybe you
• 11:26
  get life in prison. I don't know. I guess it all makes sense
• 11:30
  to Trudeau because after all, this is going to make people afraid of saying
• 11:35
  what they think online, and I think that's exactly what Justin Trudeau wants.
• 11:43
  Now we'll end it off with this. It says every operator. An operator
• 11:46
  is a social media company that commits an offense under Subsection one is liable on
• 11:52
  conviction on indictment to a fine of not more than eight percent of the operator's
• 11:58
  gross global rev or twenty five million, whichever is greater. And what's subsection
• 12:05
  one? Contravenes an order of the Commission, contravenes an undertaking that it entered
• 12:09
  into with the Commission, or a person authorized to enter into undertakings, contravenes
• 12:16
  a requirement imposed by the Commission, obstructs or hinders the Commission. It makes
• 12:20
  a false or misleading statement orally or in writing to the Commission. So a
• 12:24
  lot of that's up to interpretation. And frankly, the whole thing just seems
• 12:28
  completely insane. I mean, look, a fine of eight percent of gross
• 12:33
  global revenue because some little penny anti commission in Canada told him to pay up.
• 12:39
  That's just utterly bizarre, and I have to wonder, is the goal
• 12:43
  here to just get like Twitter, Facebook, the rest of them, to
• 12:48
  just block access in Canada, to just say this is all just too much
• 12:52
  trouble. We're just not going to do business in Canada. Is that the
• 12:56
  goal? I mean, we just had Trudeau talking about how he's pining for
• 13:00
  the days when there was only CBC and CTV news, and of course we
• 13:05
  know why he's pining for those days. Yeah, this whole Trojan Horse Bill
• 13:11
  is just about control. That's it. And I wouldn't expect anything less from
• 13:16
  Justin Trudeau anyway. That's all I'm going to say about that. Please like,
• 13:18
  share, and subscribe. Subscribing really helps me out. I thank you
• 13:22
  for that. I will see you next time.