Bill’s C-10 & C-11. If we aren’t talking about it already, shouldn’t we be?

taxme

Council Member
Feb 11, 2020
2,233
946
113
I just don’t get all the fuss.. get a VPN!!

I use a VPN to surf the Internet and DishNetwork for TV

View attachment 14212

I am in agreement that getting a VPN would be great for anyone who does not want the communist government in Canada or the WEF globalist elite to know what you are doing or saying on the internet. I am still thinking about joining up. But for now, I have signed onto Rumble and Bitchute. On those two websites freedom of speech runs amok, and that is just the way I like it.

Rumble and Bitchute are free. I have to pay for a VPN service. I am to cheap to do so right now. When I decide to become a terrorist trucker one day than I will probably have to do so. LOL.
 

Dixie Cup

House Member
Sep 16, 2006
4,532
2,566
113
Edmonton
Sign first, then we’ll discuss the details.

Nobody would trust a real estate agent or used car dealership with that approach, but that’s how the Trudeau government is trying to sell its plan to regulate the internet.

The government is currently trying to rush new censorship legislation through Parliament at lightning speed. Through Bill C-11, the Trudeau government plans to hand the CRTC the power to control what content Canadians are exposed to online. This includes filtering feeds on popular apps like Netflix, YouTube and TikTok.

As if that wasn’t bad enough, the government is deliberately choosing not to disclose the scope of these new regulatory powers until after the bill becomes law.

Such an approach runs roughshod over the democratic process.

If the government wants to ram through new censorship powers, at a bare minimum we deserve to know just how aggressively the CRTC will be instructed to regulate what we see and share online.

The government can’t even get bureaucrats singing from its own hymnbook.

Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez has promised up and down that user-generated content, meaning content a typical Canadian might upload to YouTube or share on Twitter, will not be regulated through Bill C-11.

But Ian Scott, the chair of the CRTC, the entity that will be responsible for doing the regulation on the government’s behalf, says user generated content will be fair game.

Who should Canadians believe?
The government in Ottawa lies to Canadians on a regular basis so no, I don't believe them at all. Likely what the guy from CRTC is saying is correct. Trudeau is a coward and hides not only personally but politically as well. He's a con artist.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Serryah

taxme

Council Member
Feb 11, 2020
2,233
946
113
The government in Ottawa lies to Canadians on a regular basis so no, I don't believe them at all. Likely what the guy from CRTC is saying is correct. Trudeau is a coward and hides not only personally but politically as well. He's a con artist.

Marxist Turdeau is a lover of communism and of course himself. The Marxist just loves how communism in China works so he wants to try it here in Canada. The Marxist in Ottawa has done a pretty dam good job of doing so so far in trying to implement communism into Canada. Bills C-10 and C-11, and maybe a C-12 down the road, are just the beginning of his march towards trying to make Canada a great communist country. He is a Marxist con artist alright plus an arse hole too boot. Just saying. :D
 

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
6,816
1,244
113
New Brunswick
Sign first, then we’ll discuss the details.

Nobody would trust a real estate agent or used car dealership with that approach, but that’s how the Trudeau government is trying to sell its plan to regulate the internet.

The government is currently trying to rush new censorship legislation through Parliament at lightning speed. Through Bill C-11, the Trudeau government plans to hand the CRTC the power to control what content Canadians are exposed to online. This includes filtering feeds on popular apps like Netflix, YouTube and TikTok.

As if that wasn’t bad enough, the government is deliberately choosing not to disclose the scope of these new regulatory powers until after the bill becomes law.

Such an approach runs roughshod over the democratic process.

If the government wants to ram through new censorship powers, at a bare minimum we deserve to know just how aggressively the CRTC will be instructed to regulate what we see and share online.

The government can’t even get bureaucrats singing from its own hymnbook.

Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez has promised up and down that user-generated content, meaning content a typical Canadian might upload to YouTube or share on Twitter, will not be regulated through Bill C-11.

But Ian Scott, the chair of the CRTC, the entity that will be responsible for doing the regulation on the government’s behalf, says user generated content will be fair game.

Who should Canadians believe?

I can't help but think this is a 'good idea' in very, very broad theory, but the actuality is an absolute shitshow and somehow Trudeau is a moron if he believes it won't be.

The reason I do think it's a 'good idea' in a very, very broad way, is that when you consider what IS online, SOMEONE has to be responsible, or held so, with the content that instills hate, violence and promotes both. And who promotes exploitation - sexual or otherwise - terrorism and so on. The reason it has to be someone is because individual people are fucking assholes and don't give a shit when it comes to online issues like that. They post it, because the "Internet is Free (and for porn :p )" I think the idea if putting such "restrictions" and "regulations" off on internet providers and companies who give platforms (TY, TikTok, etc), I think that their hope is that maybe, at least, the bullshit will lessen and at most, if it's shoved off further into the 'darker' corners, the exposure will be limited further and the police an be more able to catch/deal with the dangerous parts of that area (exploitation, trafficking, etc).

But I agree that the way it's being done is NOT the way to go, and we SHOULD be able to know just exactly how much push/aggression the CRTC is going to deal/regulate things. And there's too many goddamn holes that it makes a Golf-course and Swiss cheese jealous.

Overall this is bullshit, I don't like/agree with it but something does have to be done.

And I probably missed it, but what would you suggest that could be done to deal with the issue trying to be managed with this bullshit bills?
 
  • Like
Reactions: taxslave

Dixie Cup

House Member
Sep 16, 2006
4,532
2,566
113
Edmonton
I can't help but think this is a 'good idea' in very, very broad theory, but the actuality is an absolute shitshow and somehow Trudeau is a moron if he believes it won't be.

The reason I do think it's a 'good idea' in a very, very broad way, is that when you consider what IS online, SOMEONE has to be responsible, or held so, with the content that instills hate, violence and promotes both. And who promotes exploitation - sexual or otherwise - terrorism and so on. The reason it has to be someone is because individual people are fucking assholes and don't give a shit when it comes to online issues like that. They post it, because the "Internet is Free (and for porn :p )" I think the idea if putting such "restrictions" and "regulations" off on internet providers and companies who give platforms (TY, TikTok, etc), I think that their hope is that maybe, at least, the bullshit will lessen and at most, if it's shoved off further into the 'darker' corners, the exposure will be limited further and the police an be more able to catch/deal with the dangerous parts of that area (exploitation, trafficking, etc).

But I agree that the way it's being done is NOT the way to go, and we SHOULD be able to know just exactly how much push/aggression the CRTC is going to deal/regulate things. And there's too many goddamn holes that it makes a Golf-course and Swiss cheese jealous.

Overall this is bullshit, I don't like/agree with it but something does have to be done.

And I probably missed it, but what would you suggest that could be done to deal with the issue trying to be managed with this bullshit bills?
Did you not know that spewing hate & violence is ILLEGAL?? Are you seriously that ignorant? The laws are already on the books sweetie!! We don't need any more laws, just enforcement of the ones exist.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: taxme and Serryah

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
6,816
1,244
113
New Brunswick
Did you not know that spewing hate & violence is ILLEGAL?? Are you seriously that ignorant? The laws are already on the books sweetie!! We don't need any more laws, just enforcement of the ones exist.

Yes, it's illegal... and yet so many are NOT charged with it.

Because those laws focus more on the 'real world' NOT online.

Because enforcing the law online brings up complications that you obviously are ignorant of.

1. WHO do you charge is the biggest one. The person? The platform? The ISP? There's reasons for charging ANY of those.
2. Someone posts something, then deletes it; what then? Can they still be held accountable?
3. In the "darker" parts of the web, IP's can be masked (VPN) so sometimes you CAN'T hold the actual person accountable. What do you do then? If a terrorist threat is made? What do you do?

So you see, NOT so easy is it, sweet cheeks?
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,327
113
Vancouver Island
I can't help but think this is a 'good idea' in very, very broad theory, but the actuality is an absolute shitshow and somehow Trudeau is a moron if he believes it won't be.

The reason I do think it's a 'good idea' in a very, very broad way, is that when you consider what IS online, SOMEONE has to be responsible, or held so, with the content that instills hate, violence and promotes both. And who promotes exploitation - sexual or otherwise - terrorism and so on. The reason it has to be someone is because individual people are fucking assholes and don't give a shit when it comes to online issues like that. They post it, because the "Internet is Free (and for porn :p )" I think the idea if putting such "restrictions" and "regulations" off on internet providers and companies who give platforms (TY, TikTok, etc), I think that their hope is that maybe, at least, the bullshit will lessen and at most, if it's shoved off further into the 'darker' corners, the exposure will be limited further and the police an be more able to catch/deal with the dangerous parts of that area (exploitation, trafficking, etc).

But I agree that the way it's being done is NOT the way to go, and we SHOULD be able to know just exactly how much push/aggression the CRTC is going to deal/regulate things. And there's too many goddamn holes that it makes a Golf-course and Swiss cheese jealous.

Overall this is bullshit, I don't like/agree with it but something does have to be done.

And I probably missed it, but what would you suggest that could be done to deal with the issue trying to be managed with this bullshit bills?
Wee bit of a conundrum isn’t it?
a lot of it is the digital equivalent of one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s traitor. Also some of the proposed rules would be much like book burning. That is something I am opposed to under any circumstances. Most because once it starts there will be no stopping. Each new ruler will ban something else that doesn’t fit the dogm@ of the day.
 

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
6,816
1,244
113
New Brunswick
Wee bit of a conundrum isn’t it?
a lot of it is the digital equivalent of one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s traitor. Also some of the proposed rules would be much like book burning. That is something I am opposed to under any circumstances. Most because once it starts there will be no stopping. Each new ruler will ban something else that doesn’t fit the dogm@ of the day.

Overall I agree with you on this.

But again the question is, WTF do we do about it?

Because if we DON'T do anything, things will continue to happen and there is no price paid for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: taxslave

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,327
113
Vancouver Island
If I had the answers I would be yelling it loud and clear. I know most of what I have read I don’t like. I also don’t trust bureaucrats enough to let them decide what is not OK.
I also don’t have the technical knowledge to fully understand how much of it can work. I once got put in facistbook jail because I suggested some criminals should be executed. Apparently that is promoting hatred to them. I fear that is the mentality of the people that would ultimately be in control of the internet.
 

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
6,816
1,244
113
New Brunswick
If I had the answers I would be yelling it loud and clear. I know most of what I have read I don’t like. I also don’t trust bureaucrats enough to let them decide what is not OK.

Pretty much ditto for me.

I also don’t have the technical knowledge to fully understand how much of it can work. I once got put in facistbook jail because I suggested some criminals should be executed. Apparently that is promoting hatred to them. I fear that is the mentality of the people that would ultimately be in control of the internet.

I've yet to be put in FB jail, though I do have a 'warning' for 'bullying' (which is BS but whatever, it's FB).
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,023
3,783
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Overall I agree with you on this.

But again the question is, WTF do we do about it?

Because if we DON'T do anything, things will continue to happen and there is no price paid for it.
WTF do we do about what things that would continue on? What things are happening that don’t already have a legal & financial pee-pee whack attached to their consequences without Justin’s minions deciding what is fake news or misinformation or not?

I keep thinking back to the lies surrounding the SNC Lavatory fiasco and Trudeau stating the Globe&Mail was spreading disinformation until the truth came out that the Globe&Mail was the truth & Trudeau and his ilk where the misinformation and disinformation. If Bill C-11 was in place already, would that criminal shenanigans that Trudeau tried to bury along with Wilson Raybould have been thrown under the bus legally with the truth buried? Would the G&M have been punished?

I don’t Facebook so I’ve avoided Facebook jail, but here on this forum many years ago when I was still a mod, in an attempt to build a bridge of common desires on an Omar Khadr thread, when he was still in Guantánamo Bay and the argument was to bring them home or leave him with the other terrorists….I suggested bringing him home, then putting a noose around his neck, and tossing him over the side of the stairs for the airplane.

I figured all sides would have achieved their goals and the bridge past bickering would have Been achieved. Would the forum as a whole & myself an individual (& a Mod even as a representative of the forum) been punished?
 
  • Like
Reactions: taxslave

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
6,816
1,244
113
New Brunswick
WTF do we do about what things that would continue on? What things are happening that don’t already have a legal & financial pee-pee whack attached to their consequences without Justin’s minions deciding what is fake news or misinformation or not?

That's a fair point really.

I keep thinking back to the lies surrounding the SNC Lavatory fiasco and Trudeau stating the Globe&Mail was spreading disinformation until the truth came out that the Globe&Mail was the truth & Trudeau and his ilk where the misinformation and disinformation. If Bill C-11 was in place already, would that criminal shenanigans that Trudeau tried to bury along with Wilson Raybould have been thrown under the bus legally with the truth buried?

That's why I don't like the bill myself, either. While I don't believe it would be buried, then again, how do we know it wouldn't be?

Would the G&M have been punished?

Exactly.

I don’t Facebook so I’ve avoided Facebook jail, but here on this forum many years ago when I was still a mod, in an attempt to build a bridge of common desires on an Omar Khadr thread, when he was still in Guantánamo Bay and the argument was to bring them home or leave him with the other terrorists….I suggested bringing him home, then putting a noose around his neck, and tossing him over the side of the stairs for the airplane.

Uh huh... not going to comment on that because let's just say I don't agree with you at all for a lot of reasons....

I figured all sides would have achieved their goals

and... fuck it.

All sides achieved their goals... by murdering someone? Kay... meanwhile those of us who didn't agree with that choice are what... not part of your group of people?

and the bridge past bickering would have Been achieved.

Would have moved on to what right was there to murder him?

Would the forum as a whole & myself an individual (& a Mod even as a representative of the forum) been punished?

There's opinion - which yours was - but then outright stating it in a way to provoke people TO do your suggestion.

Therein is the difference.

Unless your opinion WAS also meant to provoke such a response, then yeah, IMO your ass should be held accountable for instigating and be punished for it. As for being a Mod; IMO it should equal instant removal, but no penalty to the board as a whole unless it was agreed to by all. (Considering some posters here... well yeah, the board would be gone by now)
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
31,941
2,258
113
The Trudeau government is on a quest for censorship
Through Bill C-11, the Trudeau government plans to hand the CRTC the power to control what content Canadians are exposed to online.

Author of the article:Jay Goldberg
Publishing date:Jun 20, 2022 • 22 hours ago • 3 minute read • 79 Comments

Sign first, then we’ll discuss the details.


Nobody would trust a real estate agent or used car dealership with that approach, but that’s how the Trudeau government is trying to sell its plan to regulate the internet.

The government is currently trying to rush new censorship legislation through Parliament at lightning speed. Through Bill C-11, the Trudeau government plans to hand the CRTC the power to control what content Canadians are exposed to online. This includes filtering feeds on popular apps like Netflix, YouTube and TikTok.

As if that wasn’t bad enough, the government is deliberately choosing not to disclose the scope of these new regulatory powers until after the bill becomes law.

Such an approach runs roughshod over the democratic process.


If the government wants to ram through new censorship powers, at a bare minimum we deserve to know just how aggressively the CRTC will be instructed to regulate what we see and share online.

The government can’t even get bureaucrats singing from its own hymnbook.

Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez has promised up and down that user-generated content, meaning content a typical Canadian might upload to YouTube or share on Twitter, will not be regulated through Bill C-11.

But Ian Scott, the chair of the CRTC, the entity that will be responsible for doing the regulation on the government’s behalf, says user generated content will be fair game.

Who should Canadians believe?

If the CRTC says it will have the power to regulate user-generated content through Bill C-11, and they’re the ones tasked with implementing it, Canadians should listen to the CRTC.


As the government attempts to give itself sweeping new powers, it is worthwhile to ask why the government wants bureaucrats to have these new powers in the first place.

The government claims it wants to do so to ensure that Canadians are exposed to enough Canadian content online.

But this raises serious questions.

First, is the government competent to decide what should count as Canadian content?

As of right now, the CRTC’s process in making that determination is flawed. A biopic of the Trump presidency, entitled Gotta Love Trump, is considered by the CRTC as Canadian content, while the Handmaid’s Tale, based on legendary Canadian writer Margaret Atwood’s famous novel, is not.

On the competence question, the answer clearly is no.


Second, what happens if the government decides it wants to use the CRTC’s new powers to influence what we see and share online based on standards other than Canadian content?

It’s easy to foresee mission creep. Today, the government wants to promote Canadian content. But tomorrow, with the CRTC’s powerful new tools to regulate the internet, Bill C-11 could easily be repurposed to quiet dissent or promote favourable narratives. Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino, for example, has mused about the government pursuing new regulatory measures for the sake of “social cohesion.”




With these clear risks, it is worth asking whether this legislation is even needed, as the government claims, to ensure Canadian content gains adequate exposure.

The truth is that Canadian content is thriving like never before. In 2020 alone, Canada’s film and television industry enjoyed $6 billion in foreign investment, up 5% from the year prior. And Canadian films and shows are easy to find on streaming services like Netflix.

If the sole rationale of Bill C-11 is to have Canadian content thrive and succeed online, then present data demonstrates that the legislation simply isn’t needed. The government could just scrap Bill C-11 and call it a day.

The fact that Rodriguez and the Trudeau government are still aggressively pushing Bill C-11 in light of these facts demonstrates that the government’s motive is not, as it claims, to promote Canadian content. Rather, it is all about control.

— Jay Goldberg is the Ontario director at the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
 

taxme

Council Member
Feb 11, 2020
2,233
946
113
Did you not know that spewing hate & violence is ILLEGAL?? Are you seriously that ignorant? The laws are already on the books sweetie!! We don't need any more laws, just enforcement of the ones exist.

In other words, it is called communism. (n)
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,023
3,783
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
The NDP & The Liberals are the same party for all intents & purposes since long before Justin & Jagmeet came out’a the closet with their “non-coalition coalition.” They couldn’t not come out of the closet after the trucker rally thing in Ottawa because it became so evident that they had the same speech writer for the same slander and stories going into February 2022. There was no more hiding this from their parents any longer.
1655869351225.jpeg
They’re in bed together & married until at least 2025. They’re the same! Any criticism from the NDP of the Liberals is self criticism at best & outright hypocrisy in reality. If Jagmeet & the crew of orange don’t support the liberal shenanigans then just stop freaking supporting the liberals!!!
1655869257039.jpeg
1655869195337.jpeg
 

taxme

Council Member
Feb 11, 2020
2,233
946
113

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,023
3,783
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Singh accepted his own failure when he made a pact with Trudeau in March. The NDP tried to convince the public that this deal was really a strategy to “push the Liberals.” But Chrystia Freeland put them in their place last week, reminding the NDP that their deal only required dental care for a small number of Canadians and a paltry $500 cheque for homebuyers.

Despite Freeland’s comments, Singh continues to fall in line. This week, the NDP unanimously voted in favour of Trudeau’s censorship legislation, Bill C-11, which will give unelected bureaucrats in the federal government power to determine what Canadians can say on social media platforms.


The NDP must be aware of Singh’s betrayal. And that’s why they don’t want to talk about Bill C-11. “The NDP and Jagmeet Singh seem to have gone out of their way to avoid being associated with this bill. You’ll see no mention of it on any of their social media accounts.”

It’s not just conservatives who want to challenge Trudeau on this issue. “A lot of Canadians on the left have been voicing opposition to C-11 online because they know it’s an enormously regressive piece of legislation driven by special interests. I can understand why supporting such a bill would be embarrassing to the NDP and why they’d be so eager to hope no one notices their support of it.” The rest at the link….