In one of the most insane stories of the year so far, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's liberal government is actually defending an element of their new online harm's bill, Bill C-63, that would have Canadians placed under house arrest in a peace bond because they might commit a hate-based offense. And so the Justice Minister now, Arif Arani, is defending this as something that will help de-radicalize people.
00:00:00.000In one of the most insane stories of the year so far, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's liberal government is actually defending an element of their new Online Harms Act, Bill C-63, that would have Canadians placed under house arrest in a peace bond because they might commit a hate-based offense.
00:00:19.980A hate-based offense being something the liberals still haven't even clearly defined in which it's so abstract you could basically go to prison for saying something discriminatory, and now you can be placed under house arrest for potentially saying something discriminatory.
00:00:35.040Not that you might have actually said it and they're placing you under house arrest until they determine that. No, no, no, you haven't even said anything wrong yet according to the liberals, but you could say something wrong.
00:00:46.620And so the justice minister now, Arif Arani, is defending this as something that will help de-radicalize people.
00:00:55.200Yeah, like, it's preposterous. It is absolutely authoritarian and insane, but these people are so delusional. They're so in their own bubble.
00:01:04.740They believe that doing this is going to cause good. And make no mistake, yes, the liberals are authoritarians. Yes, they are professional clowns.
00:01:13.280At the same time, they don't understand that they're clownish wannabe dictators. They are people who actually think that they are doing good in the world.
00:01:21.520That's what makes them so dangerous. Bad people who know they're doing bad things are easy to expose because they don't tend to be very careful at hiding it.
00:01:28.920These guys actually think that what they're doing is helping people, that basically crushing people with a government boot might save their lives.
00:01:36.560This is why these people are dangerous. They are true believers in their nonsense. They're not just opportunists.
00:01:43.480They are using the opportunities they have, but they genuinely believe that they're going to somehow crack down on hate.
00:01:50.060But I just want to get to this Globe and Mail article now where Arif Arani was responding to the criticism of Bill C-63.
00:01:57.780The media is actually going after them because even they think this is insane.
00:02:01.240And when confronted about this peace bond element of 63, he says that they are carefully calibrating this element of it to make sure that it doesn't get abused, but so that it helps de-radicalize people.
00:02:15.020Because obviously there's ways of not abusing a power of locking people up for crimes they haven't committed, a crime that isn't even a real crime.
00:02:22.600It's just a stupid thought crime that the liberals believe should be punishable with prison time fines and other sorts of things.
00:02:28.600And when he was confronted about this by the media, he said that on why this restriction was needed and why they should also be able to ban certain people from using the internet or social media,
00:02:43.700he says that would help to de-radicalize people who are learning things online and acting out in the real world violently, sometimes fatally.
00:02:52.080If people are acting out in the real world violently or fatally, you should be arresting them for the violence they're committing.
00:02:59.580He's being a weasel here and pretending like he can just sort of throw out the words violently and fatally in order to justify locking someone up for potentially saying something wrong in real life.
00:03:11.460It's not something wrong being a vague term that the liberals have meant like have taken to mean anything from calling for genocide,
00:03:19.820which is obviously already illegal, all the way to saying something discriminatory.
00:03:23.960And because they can tie that vaguely to the idea that you might act out violently or fatally, they're allowed to lock you up in your home.
00:03:30.980I want to move on to this. And he said when he was people asking about the striking of balance between free speech and, you know, combating hate,
00:03:40.320because even the media in criticizing this bill still has to give credence to the idea of hate crimes.
00:03:45.620He says there's a lot of bad stuff out there, but this is not about this, the bad stuff.
00:03:50.220This is about something much higher. Well, why is the bill going after discriminatory behavior?
00:03:55.120Because if discriminatory behavior, like they've said in the bill, is a part of that much higher stuff, that scares me a little bit.
00:04:02.880Because what does he define as just generically bad stuff?
00:04:06.060Because he has not left a lot of room between normal speech of just saying hi to your friend and saying something discriminatory.
00:04:13.720There's not that much between there. If you misgender someone, this bill could put you in prison because you're trying to like mentally harm people.
00:04:21.840That is where this bill is obviously going for. And you could say, well, there's nothing in the bill that specifically says they're doing that.
00:04:29.940Well, then why don't they define their terms closer? It's so they can move towards ridiculous nonsense and trying to criminalize it.
00:04:38.880Moving on to something else he said. He said what's really critical is that it gives the judge a wonderful range of sentences.
00:04:46.460Imagine using the word wonderful in regards to this bill. Sorry, moving on.
00:04:51.000He said this is not a mandatory minimum of life sentence.
00:04:54.560This is just a larger range, including what would be the maximum sentence.
00:04:58.440And in that case, there is a maximum sentence of potentially life in prison, 25 years until parole.
00:05:05.700If you say certain things under Bill C-63, the Online Harms Act, yes, they said, well, it's for people who are calling for genocide or whatever.
00:05:14.720Even then, I don't think that's exactly something you can put a life sentence on.
00:05:19.360Well, calling for genocide is a violent call to action.
00:05:22.000That is not protected free speech because you are actively saying go kill these people.
00:05:26.680That's how you end up putting mob bosses behind bars because you're not allowed to order other people to kill people.
00:05:32.440And calling for genocide would do that.
00:05:37.060So why are we instituting maximum sentences for things that already have harsh sentences if we are not trying to weasel our way into applying those extremely harsh sentences to people who did something far short of calling for violence on other people?
00:05:56.060I remember that was completely ridiculous.
00:05:57.280Oh, yeah, this is actually a very good point that the Golden Mail makes, which is funny because the Golden Mail is not usually good at making good points.
00:06:07.660They said, Mr. Verrani said, as Justice Minister, he is sworn to uphold the Constitution, which includes freedom of expression.
00:06:13.820Quote, of course, I'm concerned about the chilling of freedom of expression.
00:06:17.700I heard those concerns to a great extent, and yet you didn't really open your ears enough to take them seriously.
00:06:24.600So now we have a bill that could put people behind bars or put them under house arrest for discriminatory language because those words might lead to actions.
00:06:37.200This is just minority report type pre-crime.
00:06:40.340If anything can be tied to a potential action, I can basically put someone behind bars for anything.
00:06:48.380This is exactly the sort of mentality, the worldview behind that quote from that Soviet, I think it was Cheka at the time, not quite the KGB, but the head of the Cheka in the Soviet Union, Joventy Beria, when he said, show me the man and I'll show you the crime.
00:07:06.520Do you think you can't find someone who hasn't said something offensive that the liberals would claim could lead to violence?
00:07:13.280They've claimed things that the conservative opposition has said could lead to violence that was just reporting on liberal party corruption.
00:07:20.700Do you think that they're not going to try and define going after corruption as being discriminatory or hateful based on some arbitrary elements of the criticism?
00:07:29.640They will do that because these people are clowns.
00:07:32.080And Mr. Verrani said, time is of the essence and we know how horrible material can go on very, very quickly.
00:07:39.660Well, I'm just going to let Verrani know there's no current genocide taking place because of online activity.
00:07:46.520There's no mass spate of violence in Canada because of online activity.
00:07:50.820Yes, and if anything, a lot of the misinformation that is quite dangerous is coming from left-wing elements.
00:07:57.280Look at all the communists and Islamists going around harassing Jewish people in major cities and spreading lies about a fake genocide taking place in Gaza,
00:08:05.840which is really just these really military fighting Hamas in which there has really not been that many casualties overall for something that's apparently a genocide.
00:08:13.420These people are the ones actually spreading around hate, and this is why, like, SIGIA, it's a Jewish advocacy organization in Canada, usually goes after anti-Semitism.