Canada’s Hate Speech Goes Where No Tyrants Have Gone Before! By Charles Taylor (Florida)
An Orwellian new law called the Online Harms Bill C-63 has been introduced by the Trudeau regime. This will give the police the power to retrospectively search the internet for examples of so-called hate speech, and to prosecute people, who made various claims even before the law was in place. This is completely contrary to the Western legal tradition, of not having committed an offence if the activity was done, being legal with the laws at the time.
If this law survives court challenge, it will create as whole new realm of tyranny, where laws can be passed, retrospectively making any past activities, crimes. Nothing is safe, so the present law needs to be shown to be fundamentally contrary to human rights.
"The Trudeau regime has introduced an Orwellian new law called the Online Harms Bill C-63, which will give police the power to retroactively search the Internet for 'hate speech' violations and arrest offenders, even if the offence occurred before the law existed. This new bill is aimed at safeguarding the masses from so-called "hate speech".
Revolver.news reports: The real shocker in this bill is the alarming retroactive aspect. Essentially, whatever you've said in the past can now be weaponized against you by today's draconian standards. Historian Dr. Muriel Blaive has weighed in on this draconian law, labeling it outright "mad." She points out how it literally spits in the face of all Western legal traditions, especially the one about only being punished if you infringed on a law that was valid at the time of committing a crime.
The Canadian law proposal is outright mad. It is retroactive, which goes against all our Western legal tradition, according to which you can be punished only if you infringed a law that was valid at the time when you committed a crime: "And it isn't just stuff you've posted after the new law comes into force you can get into trouble for – oh, no – but anything you've posted, ever, dating back to the dawn of the internet. In other words, it's a gold-embossed invitation to offence archaeologists to do their worst, with the prospect of a $20,000 reward if they hit paydirt. The only way to protect yourself is to go through all your social media accounts and painstakingly delete anything remotely controversial you've ever said."
And there is worse!
"Although, that won't protect you from another clause in the bill – and this is where it trips over into as yet unimagined dystopian territory. If the courts believe you are likely to commit a 'hate crime' or disseminate 'hate propaganda' (not defined), you can be placed under house arrest and your ability to communicate with others restricted. That is, a court can force you to wear an ankle bracelet, prevent you using any of your communication devices and then instruct you not to leave the house. If the court believes there's a risk you may get drunk or high and start tweeting under the influence – although how is unclear, given you can't use your phone or a PC – it can order you to submit regular urine samples to the authorities. Anyone who refuses to comply with these diktats can be sent to prison."
By externalizing the defense of free speech to the right and extreme right and by endorsing repression, the liberal left is playing a very dangerous game here. For those of us who are NOT on the right and extreme right, this is rather disheartening… The left is actually shooting itself in the foot and will come back whining, 'amazed' that ordinary people are so 'ungrateful.' Indeed, it seems to have forgotten that the rule of law implies to solve disagreements in the voting booth rather than by silencing those who disagree with us. How can it hope to get the support of the public for this insanity?
An online X user recently shared that his wife wrote a letter to every Canadian MP concerning this chilling bill, and only one MP responded. He posted MP Rachel Thomas's reply, which many are now calling one of the most insightful and well-crafted summaries on this alarming issue."
Comments