Censorship Industrial Complex
Desperate Liberals move to stop MPs from calling Trudeau ‘corrupt’
From LifeSiteNews
Conservative MP Corey Tochor argued the term “corrupt” is an accurate description of Trudeau and his government.
“If you ask the Ethics Commissioner about all of the infractions that the Prime Minister has been charged and convicted with on corruption, you will find the truth to be that this is a corrupt government and Prime Minister”
Liberals are pushing for the word “corrupt” to be banned in Parliament amid ongoing ethics scandals within the Trudeau government.
On April 19, Liberal Member of Parliament (MP) Mark Gerretsen moved to prohibit MPs from referring to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government as “corrupt,” arguing it is disrespectful towards the Liberal government.
“My point is that, today, during question period, the member for Regina—Wascana referred to the Prime Minister as ‘corrupt’ and to the government as ‘corrupt,’” he told the House of Commons.
“Although he did it today, it has been done a number of times in the House,” he continued. “I would say that terminology specifically goes against Standing Order 18.”
The House of Commons’ Standing Order 18 regulates speech within the House to ensure that MPs do not use disrespectful or offensive language.
“No member shall speak disrespectfully of the Sovereign, nor of any of the royal family, nor of the Governor General or the person administering the Government of Canada; nor use offensive words against either House, or against any member thereof,” it states. “No member may reflect upon any vote of the House, except for the purpose of moving that such vote be rescinded.”
“I would encourage the Chair, during this time of reflection over that week that he indicated he was going to do that, to consider my comment on this and to weigh into whether or not this is actually,” Gerretsen added before being interrupted by Conservative MPs calling for a debate.
However, Gerretsen refused to debate his suggestion, instead pushing for Conservatives to be censored. Gerretsen’s recommendation was supported by Bloc Quebecois MP Martin Champoux.
“I would like to build on what my colleague just said,” Champoux said. “I actually raised a point of order about this yesterday with the Speaker, who was in the chair at the time, to ask him to once again set out strict rules and clear guidelines for members to follow.”
“That would help us to better understand how far we can go,” he argued. “Right now and for the past few months, there has been a lack of consistency in the way freedom of expression is interpreted in the House and in the way measures are applied when members cross the line or do not follow the guidelines, which, again, are not exactly clear.”
However, Conservative MP Corey Tochor argued the term “corrupt” is an accurate description of Trudeau and his government.
“If you ask the Ethics Commissioner about all of the infractions that the Prime Minister has been charged and convicted with on corruption, you will find the truth to be that this is a corrupt government and Prime Minister,” he declared.
Indeed, between the ArriveCAN app scandal, alleged Chinese election meddling and the SNC-Lavalin affair, Canadian MPs seem well within their rights to call, or at least remain concerned, that Trudeau and his government are “corrupt.”
So, why are Liberals moving to have the term banned?
It appears Trudeau and his government prefer Canadians remain unaware of past and ongoing corruption scandals, preferring to silence those who remain unconvinced by Liberal Party propaganda.
In the last few years of Trudeau’s near-decade reign, the prime minister and his Liberals have become increasingly intolerant of opposing views, infamously labelling their critics during the COVID-era as “right-winged extremists” and a “small fringe minority.”
Unfortunately, it seems this trend is only going to continue.
As LifeSiteNews recently reported, law professor Dr. Michael Geist warned that the Trudeau government is “ready” to “gaslight” opponents of Bill C-63, a proposed law that could lead to jail time for vaguely defined online “hate speech” infractions.
While the banning of the word “corrupt” in Parliament may not yet be implemented, who is to say that if Bill C-63 is passed that the Trudeau government won’t decide to consider such accusations of corruption as meeting the definition of online “hate speech.”
Indeed, perhaps the Liberals’ move to ban the word “corrupt” should be considered a sign that they know they’ve lost the public’s trust and are acutely aware silencing opposition is their only option.
In fact, it would appear that Trudeau’s only response to dismal polling figures with respect to his scandal-plagued government’s popularity is to double down on censorship, rather than consider why citizens feel the way they do.
As the late U.S. President Harry S. Truman warned: “Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”
Business
Telegram founder Pavel Durov exposes crackdown on digital privacy in Tucker Carlson interview
From LifeSiteNews
By Robert Jones
Durov, who was detained in France in 2024, believes governments are seeking to dismantle personal freedoms.
Tucker Carlson has interviewed Telegram founder Pavel Durov, who remains under judicial restrictions in France nearly a year after a surprise arrest left him in solitary confinement for four days — without contact with his family, legal clarity, or access to his phone.
Durov, a Russian-born tech executive now based in Dubai, had arrived in Paris for a short tourist visit. Upon landing, he was arrested and accused of complicity in crimes committed by Telegram users — despite no evidence of personal wrongdoing and no prior contact from French authorities on the matter.
In the interview, Durov said Telegram has always complied with valid legal requests for IP addresses and other data, but that France never submitted any such requests — unlike other EU states.
Telegram has surpassed a billion users and over $500 million in profit without selling user data, and has notably refused to create government “backdoors” to its encryption. That refusal, Durov believes, may have triggered the incident.
READ: Arrest of Telegram founder Pavel Durov signals an increasing threat to digital freedom
French prosecutors issued public statements, an unusual move, at the time of his arrest, fueling speculation that the move was meant to send a message.
At present, Durov remains under “judicial supervision,” which limits his movement and business operations.
Carlson noted the irony of Durov’s situating by calling to mind that he was not arrested by Russian President Vladimir Putin but rather a Western democracy.
Former President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev has said that Durov should have stayed in Russia, and that he was mistaken in thinking that he would not have to cooperate with foreign security services.
Durov told Carlson that mandates for encryption “backdoors” endanger all users, not just suspects. Once created, such tools inevitably become accessible to hackers, foreign agents, and hostile regimes.
“In the US,” he commented, “you have a process that allows the government to actually force any engineer in any tech company to implement a backdoor and not tell anyone about it.”
READ: Does anyone believe Emmanuel Macron’s claim that Pavel Durov’s arrest was not political?
Durov also pointed to a recent French bill — which was ultimately defeated in the National Assembly — that would have required platforms to break encryptions on demand. A similar EU proposal is now under discussion, he noted.
Despite the persecution, Durov remains committed to Telegram’s model. “We monetize in ways that are consistent with our values,” he told Carlson. “We monetized without violating privacy.”
There is no clear timeline for a resolution of Durov’s case, which has raised serious questions about digital privacy, online freedom, and the limits of compliance for tech companies in the 21st century.
Censorship Industrial Complex
Alberta senator wants to revive lapsed Trudeau internet censorship bill
From LifeSiteNews
Senator Kristopher Wells and other senators are ‘interested’ in reviving the controversial Online Harms Act legislation that was abandoned after the election call.
A recent Trudeau-appointed Canadian senator said that he and other “interested senators” want the current Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney to revive a controversial Trudeau-era internet censorship bill that lapsed.
Kristopher Wells, appointed by former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau last year as a senator from Alberta, made the comments about reviving an internet censorship bill recently in the Senate.
“In the last Parliament, the government proposed important changes to the Criminal Code of Canada designed to strengthen penalties for hate crime offences,” he said of Bill C-63 that lapsed earlier this year after the federal election was called.
Bill C-63, or the Online Harms Act, was put forth under the guise of protecting children from exploitation online.
While protecting children is indeed a duty of the state, the bill included several measures that targeted vaguely defined “hate speech” infractions involving race, gender, and religion, among other categories. The proposal was thus blasted by many legal experts.
The Online Harms Act would have in essence censored legal internet content that the government thought “likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group.” It would be up to the Canadian Human Rights Commission to investigate complaints.
Wells said that “Bill C-63 did not come to a vote in the other place and in the dying days of the last Parliament the government signaled it would be prioritizing other aspects of the bill.”
“I believe Canada must get tougher on hate and send a clear and unequivocal message that hate and extremism will never be tolerated in this country no matter who it targets,” he said.
Carney, as reported by LifeSiteNews, vowed to continue in Trudeau’s footsteps, promising even more legislation to crack down on lawful internet content.
Before the April 28 election call, the Liberals were pushing Bill C-63.
Wells asked if the current Carney government remains “committed to tabling legislation that will amend the Criminal Code as proposed in the previous Bill C-63 and will it commit to working with interested senators and community stakeholders to make the changes needed to ensure this important legislation is passed?”
Seasoned Senator Marc Gold replied that he is not in “a position to speculate” on whether a new bill would be brought forward.
Before Bill C-63, a similar law, Bill C-36, lapsed in 2021 due to that year’s general election.
As noted by LifeSiteNews, Wells has in the past advocated for closing Christian schools that refuse to violate their religious principles by accepting so-called Gay-Straight Alliance Clubs and spearheaded so-called “conversion therapy bans.”
Other internet censorship bills that have become law have yet to be fully implemented.
Last month, LifeSiteNews reported that former Minister of Environment Steven Guilbeault, known for his radical climate views, will be the person in charge of implementing Bill C-11, a controversial bill passed in 2023 that aims to censor legal internet content in Canada.
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
LA Mayor Karen Bass Makes New Demands Of Trump At Monday Night Press Conference
Natural gas pipeline ownership spreads across 36 First Nations in B.C.
RFK Jr. purges CDC vaccine panel, citing decades of ‘skewed science’
Letter Shows Biden Administration Privately Warned B.C. on Fentanyl Threat Years Before Patel’s Public Bombshells
Leftists devastate Los Angeles with fiery riots against Trump immigration policy
