We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Remember the Scottish ‘Hate Speech’ law that went into effect on April 1 this year? We remember, and that’s the perfect date for it. Scottish police were immediately overwhelmed the first week with anonymous complaints of so-called ‘hate speech,’ many of them filed against First Minister Humza Yousaf, presumably in protest of how Orwellian the law is. 

Advertisement

Things are going so swimmingly in Scotland trying to punish speech that Yousaf resigned before the month was out. But the law is still in effect … for now.

Only Canada’s Justin Trudeau could look at what was happening with thoughtcrime in Scotland and say, ‘Hold my Tim Horton’s coffee.’

As hard as it is to believe, crazy as Scotland’s law is, the law that the Trudeau regime has proposed — C-63 or the Online Harms Act — is WAY worse. 

Both laws incentivize people to report their friends and neighbors, both allow for anonymous complaints, and both allow for rampant abuse. But, worst of all, both include potential prison penalties and massive fines for people who say the wrong things.

But Canada is slithering under even that low bar, with a provision in C-63 that could make policing and punishing speech RETROACTIVE. You read that correctly. If you said something years before the law passed,  you could still be subject to criminal prosecution.

The issue is a little complicated. The tweet above got Community Noted, but not because it mischaracterized the provisions in C-63, only because the bill is not a law yet, as the tweet states. There is no certain date yet for Online Harms to become law. 

Recommended

Advertisement

But just the prospect of this bill becoming law was enough to get the attention of Elon Musk, who asked Community Notes to verify the claim. 

As we mentioned, the ensuing Community Note did not dispute the assertion, just the terminology. 

The leftist media and hacks like Brian Krassenstein have tried to dispute it, claiming that the bill doesn’t explicitly state anywhere that you can be prosecuted for past speech.

Well, duh. Of course, it doesn’t explicitly state that. But it does seem to allow for it. In response to Musk, the Twitter account Viva Frei, a former litigator, explained how.

Ezra Levant, publisher of Rebel News in Canada, also affirmed this. 

Advertisement

The clause Viva Frei and Levant highlighted in their screenshots is the ‘continuous communication’ clause in C-63. Put simply, this is how it works: 

Suppose you wrote a tweet five years ago that contained what C-63 would consider ‘hate speech.’ No, the commission isn’t likely to go combing through your account arbitrarily to find that tweet. But then assume you did not delete it (most people don’t delete old tweets) and it is still out on Twitter. If someone else retweets that content after the law is passed, it is considered ‘continuous communication.’ The person who retweeted it can be prosecuted for it and, yes, YOU can be prosecuted for it. Because you never deleted it and it is still ‘public.’

Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, who himself is being forced to undergo ‘re-education’ in Canada, also weighed in. 

Advertisement

As we said, it is the Scotland bill on 1984 steroids. 

To Communist China survivor Xi Van Fleet, it sounds not as much like Orwell as it does Mao Zedong and the Cultural Revolution. 

She concludes that tweet by writing, ‘Trudeau is a good student of Mao.’ That point is difficult to dispute. 

Ex post facto laws are also illegal in Canada, according to Section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 

But that sure didn’t stop the Trudeau regime from putting the continuous communication clause in its bill, did it?

Of course, if C-63 does become law, don’t expect that law to be applied equally.

Canada technically doesn’t have a Democrat Party, but we’ll say it anyway: ‘It’s (D)ifferent when they (D)o it.’

Advertisement

Oh, we forgot that gem in the Online Harms Act. 

Yes, not only does it permit the government to prosecute you retroactively for speech, but it also allows the government to punish you if they think you might commit hate speech or hate crimes IN THE FUTURE. 

Welcome to Minority Report. For real.

And there’s even more bad news. 

Wow. Warrantless searches. We sure are glad here in the U.S. that we don’t live in a country that allows such a thing. 

Oh, wait …

Some of it is already here. 

When you think about it, it’s not all that difficult to imagine a time in Canada, in the not-too-distant future under the Online Harms Act where you could get convicted of ‘hate speech,’ then diagnosed by a government organization with a ‘mental disorder,’ and then get steered directly into the MAID program.

Advertisement

Sound crazy? It shouldn’t. The Soviet Union used to do basically the same thing. 

Because policing speech comes down to the same thing no matter which country does it. It is Marxism. That’s all. And Marxism has no problem with imprisoning and murdering hundreds of millions of people. Some modern-day Marxists, like the climate cult, might even encourage such a culling, you know, ‘for the planet.’

Canada has a chance to defeat this and reverse the country’s recent trend towards Marxism. With any luck Pierre Poilievre will become Prime Minister soon. Polling indicates it could be a massive conservative victory in the next Canadian election. 

Let’s hope for all our sakes, not just Canadians, that they vote wisely.