Latest / Radio Baloney - The Richie Baloney Show! / ORWELLIAN Online Harms Bill Slammed By Atwood And Elon

Transcript

ORWELLIAN Online Harms Bill Slammed By Atwood And Elon · Radio Baloney - The Richie Baloney Show!

• 0:03
  So I've already made a number of videos about this dystopian bill, Bill C
• 0:06
  sixty three in Canada, a bill whose goal is to intimidate every Canadian into
• 0:13
  avoiding saying anything remotely politically incorrect in Canada. And this is so obvious that
• 0:20
  even arch feminist Margaret Atwood, author of The Handmaid's Tale, is sounding the
• 0:26
  alarm about it. Here's the headline Orwellian Margaret Atwood elon Musk sound alarm over
• 0:32
  Trudeau liberals Online Harms Act. It says Justin Trudeau has finally managed to unite
• 0:38
  people from across the political spectrum against his liberal government's Online Harms Act. And
• 0:44
  before we even get into the article, let me just give you a brief
• 0:47
  glimpse at how dystopian this bill is. So here's the future thought crime part
• 0:53
  of it. Fear of hate propaganda offense or hate crime. A person may,
• 0:58
  with the Attorney General's scent, lay in information before a provincial court judge.
• 1:03
  If the person fears on reasonable grounds, then another person will commit an
• 1:07
  offense that would be like a hate speech, whatever they consider that to be.
• 1:14
  I think we have a pretty good idea it's going to be anything that
• 1:18
  justin Trudeau and far left activists don't like. So that's anybody, by the
• 1:23
  way, anybody can drag you into court anonymously. Also anonymously, you'll never
• 1:27
  know who the person is. They can have you dragged into court, not
• 1:32
  for something you've done, for something that maybe you'll do in the future.
• 1:36
  They think, maybe that's right. They're employing mind reading now to see who's
• 1:41
  going to commit a future crime. And what would the future crime be free
• 1:45
  speech, of course, because you can't have that in Trudeau's Canada. And
• 1:49
  what might happen to you, Well, you'd get house arrested for twelve months.
• 1:53
  House arrested here we're an electronic monitoring device, return to and remain at
• 1:59
  their place of at specific times, abstain from the consumption of drugs, of
• 2:04
  alcohol, or any other intoxicating substance. So for something that you haven't done,
• 2:08
  which in a free society wouldn't be a crime. In any case,
• 2:12
  we're talking about speaking your mind. They can have you under house arrest for
• 2:16
  a year, tell you that you can't have a beer, and then of
• 2:20
  course they can tell you that you can't use the internet anymore, all kinds
• 2:23
  of They can basically just control your life for something that they think you might
• 2:29
  do, which, again, in a free society, would not even be
• 2:32
  a crime. In the first place. That was I want to set up
• 2:36
  was a digital safety commission, which can force you to be dragged into a
• 2:40
  human rights tribunal. This is not a court of law. This is not
• 2:44
  a criminal court. This is a civil court where there is no presumption of
• 2:46
  innocence. There is no guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Now it's preponderance of
• 2:52
  evidence. It's just basically whatever the drenal thinks. If they don't like your
• 2:55
  politics, well, I guess it's too bad for you. Oh by the
• 2:59
  way, my rates of conviction in human rights tribunals near one hundred percent.
• 3:05
  But if you get dragged into that from an anonymous complaint, could be anybody.
• 3:09
  Could be somebody who's just got a grudge against you, somebody doesn't like
• 3:13
  you at work, somebody who poured through your social media for the last ten
• 3:17
  years to find that one thing they can take out of context that might be
• 3:23
  that might be interpreted as hate speech. Well guess what can happen? You
• 3:28
  could end up having to pay that person, that anonymous person. Again,
• 3:31
  maybe it's somebody who just doesn't like you, maybe it's somebody who's got some
• 3:34
  financial troubles. Well, they can end up with compensation of up to twenty
• 3:38
  thousand dollars. And of course the government's gonna want to rob you during the
• 3:43
  soul process as well, so you might have to pay them fifty thousand dollars
• 3:46
  as well. And then of course there's the future thought crime part of it,
• 3:49
  so you might end up in house arrest after that for a year as
• 3:52
  well. And let me make this clear, any person can anonymously make a
• 3:57
  complaint against you, you'll never find out who who it is, and be
• 4:00
  personally rewarded with up to twenty thousand dollars for their trouble. Plus you've got
• 4:05
  to pay for your lawyer's fees. How many thousands of dollars is that going
• 4:09
  to be? And this is all going to happen to you in a progressive,
• 4:13
  far leftist dominated human rights tribunal which is going to find you guilty.
• 4:17
  And let me just ask you, are you sure there's nothing in your long
• 4:21
  social media history that wasn't fine when you said it, but now by today's
• 4:27
  standards, makes you new Hitler? Are you sure? So? Yeah?
• 4:30
  This is all totally dystopiate, and Margaret Atwood is quite right, this is
• 4:34
  Orwellian, and kudos to her for being a principled liberal. She said,
• 4:40
  If this account of the bill is true, it's letters de Cachet all over
• 4:44
  again. And what is that letters to Cachet. Well, that's like a
• 4:46
  letter signed by the king, I think, pre French Revolution. But a
• 4:50
  letter signed by the king too. Just imprison somebody who's inconvenient. Yeah,
• 4:55
  and there's that millions of Canadians right now that Trudeau thinks are really incon venient.
• 5:00
  But anyway, the possibilities for revenge, false accusations plus thought crime stuff
• 5:05
  are so inviting. Trudeau's or Wellian Online Harm's Bill Jordan Peterson said about this,
• 5:13
  if even the mother of progressive feminists in Canada thinks that Bill C sixty
• 5:17
  three is dangerous, then perhaps the rest of us might think twice as well.
• 5:23
  Yeah, that'd be a good idea. And there's a and there's a
• 5:26
  petition I'll show you at the end of this that you might want to sign
• 5:28
  up for. Elon Musk said this is insane, replying to a Not the
• 5:33
  Bee story on it. This is truly an insane draconian orwellian bill. It
• 5:40
  will destroy free speech in Canada if passed. The bill would amend the Canadian
• 5:45
  Human Rights Act to make it so anyone spreading hate speech. And what is
• 5:48
  hate speech in this bill? Well, it says that hate speech means the
• 5:51
  content of a communication that expresses detest, station, or vilification of an individual
• 5:59
  or group of indieals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination. So
• 6:03
  what does that mean expresses detestation or vilification? Well, it means whatever the
• 6:10
  Human Rights Tribunal wants it to mean, and spoiler alert, it's gonna mean
• 6:14
  a lot. But here, thank goodness, we've got a clarification for greater
• 6:18
  certainty. The content of a communication does not express detestation or vilification for the
• 6:25
  purposes of sub Section eight, solely because it expresses disdain or dislike, or
• 6:30
  it discredits, humiliates, hurts, or offends. So what exactly is the
• 6:36
  difference between detestation and humiliating or hurting, vilification and dislike. This is just
• 6:46
  totally subjective and this is going to be left in the hands of activists.
• 6:50
  This will be in the hands of woke progressive activists to interpret. Frankly,
• 6:57
  I personally don't trust them. Before I go go check out Justice Center for
• 7:01
  Constitutional Freedoms that they have a petition and you can say no to censorship by
• 7:09
  signing. Their petition says no Canadian should face an anonymous human rights complaint for
• 7:14
  what they have said. No Canadian should be hauled before a court or punished
• 7:17
  merely because somebody fears they will say something hateful. No Canadian should face life
• 7:25
  imprisonment for their expression. Yes, that's another part of it, life in
• 7:29
  prison for hate speech. Canadian's online expression should not be censored unless it violates
• 7:34
  the Criminal Code. Canadians are calling upon Minister of Justice, an Attorney General
• 7:40
  of Canada A REFERRANI, and all parliamentarians to stop the Online Harms Act.
• 7:46
  So yeah, it is time to let your voice be heard, at the
• 7:48
  very least just for the sake of the Senate who will have to put their
• 7:53
  okay on this before it actually becomes law. Because if it does become law,
• 7:57
  that's the end of free speech in Canada. Anyway, Please subscribe,
• 8:01
  like and share. Subscribing really helps me out. I thank you for that.
• 8:03
  I will see you next time.