Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,134
- Points
- 1,260
Why is that quoting me ? I'm pretty sure that was someone else ?
Freedom Convoy protests [Split from All things 2019-nCoV]
- Thread starter Quirky
- Start date
Why is that quoting me ? I'm pretty sure that was someone else ?
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,134
- Points
- 1,260
I actually agree to an extent. Technology and the internet is a playing field our laws were never designed for for. So they need to be updated and brought up to speed.
What we have to be careful about is that freedom of expression is not curtailed.
- Reaction score
- 2,298
- Points
- 1,190
That's really weird? I was definitely quoting
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,134
- Points
- 1,260
Maybe the interwebs just wants us to talk more lol
- Reaction score
- 21,730
- Points
- 1,360
One more tool in the box. The amendment grants CRTC, a non-elected tribunal to update or introduce new regulation controlling conduct of broadcast material, including that currently exempted (as social media is…for now) from the bill’s current scope. The Commission is also granted the ability to impose monetary fines for non-compliance with its regulations (note these are not the same as fines IAW legislation approved by Parliament). Furthermore, the bill grants the Governor in Council the power to update the Commission’s regulatory powers without further legislation (think the firearms grab, etc.).
If anyone thinks that the PM (as GiC) is above playing fast and loose with the CRTC’s regulatory framework after C-11 amends the Communications Act, there is a level of naïveté in doing so that is questionable.
Consider the implication of the ‘system of systems’ that the current Government has fostered to deal with dissenting views. Some may truly sleep comfortably at night believing in their heart of hearts that independent bodies dissociated from the government are truly that…independent, but again…naïveté enters the chat.
Food for thought…how to deal with dissension? Stealth influence….and “re-training.”
Jordan Peterson: I will risk my licence to escape social media re-education
The college wants to send Jordan Peterson to a re-education camp — and this should concern everyone.
nationalpost.com
QV
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,134
- Points
- 1,010
My post history can be briefly summed up as:
- POTUS 45 was unfairly and unlawfully targeted by FBI/DOJ and MSM on behalf of the Dems
- The C19 vaccine mandates are wrong and the handling of the pandemic was terrible and political
- Trudeau's governance is harmful to Canada (economic and climate change actions and policies, introduction of new laws, EA, etc)
- MSM has failed in their duty to the people as the 4th estate
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 6,877
- Points
- 1,160
There are some good examples of why people might suspect some sort of duplicity from the government.
Liberals say they're not trying to ban hunting rifles. - 30 Nov 2022
Trudeau says firearms bill will go after 'some' hunting guns that are 'too dangerous in other contexts'- 19 Dec 2022
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,134
- Points
- 1,260
Jordan Peterson: I will risk my licence to escape social media re-education
The college wants to send Jordan Peterson to a re-education camp — and this should concern everyone.
I had heard something was going down with JP.
Genuinely scary stuff. We need to learn to stop punishing people for opposing political view points.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 6,237
- Points
- 1,040
All regulation and standards are maintained by 'non elected' bodies (ie public servants, or private entities like UL or NFPA). I'm not sure why you think this is new or unique, or that CRTC is the only one able to levy fines (Human Rights Tribunal, and the one for renters/landlord immediately comes to mind).One more tool in the box. The amendment grants CRTC, a non-elected tribunal to update or introduce new regulation controlling conduct of broadcast material, including that currently exempted (as social media is…for now) from the bill’s current scope. The Commission is also granted the ability to impose monetary fines for non-compliance with its regulations (note these are not the same as fines IAW legislation approved by Parliament). Furthermore, the bill grants the Governor in Council the power to update the Commission’s regulatory powers without further legislation (think the firearms grab, etc.).
If anyone thinks that the PM (as GiC) is above playing fast and loose with the CRTC’s regulatory framework after C-11 amends the Communications Act, there is a level of naïveté in doing so that is questionable.
Consider the implication of the ‘system of systems’ that the current Government has fostered to deal with dissenting views. Some may truly sleep comfortably at night believing in their heart of hearts that independent bodies dissociated from the government are truly that…independent, but again…naïveté enters the chat.
Food for thought…how to deal with dissension? Stealth influence….and “re-training.”
Jordan Peterson: I will risk my licence to escape social media re-education
The college wants to send Jordan Peterson to a re-education camp — and this should concern everyone.
Similarly, how many elected officials are actually qualified to understand their portfolios? The intro packages and BNs to ministers are written at a 10 year old level for a reason. The work on regulations is done by public servants and other experts in the field, not politicians. At best, they give general direction on the goal.
That's a lot of Machhivenlian nonsense to me which is way more complicated than they just want to impose Canadian content on streaming services and other big internet entertainment sources to update our laws. I think that maybe makes sense conceptually at the 30k foot level but is extremely complex in the details and they'll make a hamfisted mess out of it.
I don't think they are anywhere near competent enough to do what you are saying, but also don't think they want to anyway, or even need to. Both sides are already pretty good at using social media to their advantage, and I don't think they want big algorithms screwing with their dissemination of 'talking points'.
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 6,877
- Points
- 1,160
I think we should all agree on the importance of the government's ability to monitor and control Canadian online content with a view to ensuring only viewpoints and opinions that are deemed acceptable are tolerated.
We should not have to rely on offended American citizens faking being offended Canadian patients of Jordan Peterson to get him canceled. We should be able to cancel him ourselves if we don't like what he's saying.
We should not have to rely on offended American citizens faking being offended Canadian patients of Jordan Peterson to get him canceled. We should be able to cancel him ourselves if we don't like what he's saying.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,635
- Points
- 1,040
"Those guys have it, so why shouldn't those others" isn't really a good foundation for legislation. The case for any legislation is only satisfactory if it is made entirely on the merits : this is what is to be achieved, this is the way it will be achieved, these are obvious potential undesirable consequences, this is how we eliminate/mitigate the undesirable consequences. Of course in practice, most legislators leave out the last two and sometimes leave out the second one (eg. there isn't much connection between gun control proposals in Canada and actually reducing violent gun crime).
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,635
- Points
- 1,040
The obvious flaw with delegating restrictive authority is the existence of people misusing position to advance personal social and political aims. It has happened; it will continue to happen. The only prudent course of action is to never grant such authority.
- Reaction score
- 21,730
- Points
- 1,360
By ‘misusing’ I assume you mean certain people with power inappropriately enabling others outside of the structure of direct accountability, so as to forward their select group’s restrictive values against the larger society while deliberately using such a construct to reduce the ability of the larger society to withstand and justifiably question the appropriateness of the manipulation of originally good faith granted power to represent?
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,635
- Points
- 1,040
Come the revolution, ...
- Reaction score
- 5,949
- Points
- 1,260
The CRTC is fundamentally different, in too many important ways to enumerate - beginning with how and why commissioners are appointed, from the civil service. It has, ever since it was established in 1932 as the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission (which was both a content creator (it became the CBC in 1936) and the regulator of ALL broadcasting in Canada) been 95+% political.
Broadcast regulation remained in the CBC's hands until the Board of Broadcast Governors was established in 1958 because the CBC was deemed to be unable to fairly regulate private broadcasters without being in a conflict of interest.
The original intent of the BBG/CRTC (like the FCC in the USA) was to award over-the-air licences to competing interests. The engineers in DOT (Department of Transport) and later Industry Canada decided how many channels could be operated in any given area - city, town, region - but there needed to be some way to decide who got the licences ... for very good reasons the engineers said: "not our job."
There are only a few over-the-air licences being "completed" for in the 2000s because cable, the Internet, etc. (In fact, last time I looked the CBC had only 14 over-the-air TV stations in all of Canada - English and French. The CRTC could, very likely, be replaced by a small section within a government department ... but, like all bureaucracies it has ambitions and it is a useful political tool.
There might have been a valid reason to regulate content - remember Pierre Juneau and Canadian content rules in the 1960s? But I doubt there was ever any compelling need to regulate e.g. cable carriage; that was 100% political - governments (CPC and LPC) of the day paying off their friends.
Broadcast regulation remained in the CBC's hands until the Board of Broadcast Governors was established in 1958 because the CBC was deemed to be unable to fairly regulate private broadcasters without being in a conflict of interest.
The original intent of the BBG/CRTC (like the FCC in the USA) was to award over-the-air licences to competing interests. The engineers in DOT (Department of Transport) and later Industry Canada decided how many channels could be operated in any given area - city, town, region - but there needed to be some way to decide who got the licences ... for very good reasons the engineers said: "not our job."
There are only a few over-the-air licences being "completed" for in the 2000s because cable, the Internet, etc. (In fact, last time I looked the CBC had only 14 over-the-air TV stations in all of Canada - English and French. The CRTC could, very likely, be replaced by a small section within a government department ... but, like all bureaucracies it has ambitions and it is a useful political tool.
There might have been a valid reason to regulate content - remember Pierre Juneau and Canadian content rules in the 1960s? But I doubt there was ever any compelling need to regulate e.g. cable carriage; that was 100% political - governments (CPC and LPC) of the day paying off their friends.
They’re back, and they’re dumber than ever. This is golden, you can’t even make this stuff up.
“Clark also said supporters must unite against another “evil we are up against” that is worse than child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.
Clark said there were “code words” in music videos, on TV and spoken by politicians, including U.S. President Joe Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris, that promote pedophilia. “Ice cream”, for instance, is a secret code for male prostitutes, while “pizza” really means little girls, said Clark, who said it was all explained in a video that he would post.”
ottawacitizen.com
“Clark also said supporters must unite against another “evil we are up against” that is worse than child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.
Clark said there were “code words” in music videos, on TV and spoken by politicians, including U.S. President Joe Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris, that promote pedophilia. “Ice cream”, for instance, is a secret code for male prostitutes, while “pizza” really means little girls, said Clark, who said it was all explained in a video that he would post.”
'Freedom Convoy' reunion in Winnipeg going ahead despite infighting, one organizer says
Posts on social media reveal conflict among key people who had been working together to organize a one-year reunion of the "Freedom Convoy".
ottawacitizen.com
They’re back, and they’re dumber than ever. This is golden, you can’t even make this stuff up.
“Clark also said supporters must unite against another “evil we are up against” that is worse than child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.
Clark said there were “code words” in music videos, on TV and spoken by politicians, including U.S. President Joe Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris, that promote pedophilia. “Ice cream”, for instance, is a secret code for male prostitutes, while “pizza” really means little girls, said Clark, who said it was all explained in a video that he would post.”
'Freedom Convoy' reunion in Winnipeg going ahead despite infighting, one organizer says
Posts on social media reveal conflict among key people who had been working together to organize a one-year reunion of the "Freedom Convoy".
Meh, not even surprised.
But if you're gonna go full QAnon, might as well do it in Winnipeg in February.
Last I checked diesel doesn’t start very well in the cold so they’d better leave them running. And there are a couple ‘historically disadvantaged groups’ who like to hang out downtown and they like to steal cars for entertainment. A running vehicle is pretty easy to steal. This is going to be hilarious! I can’t wait! I’m gonna go get some storm chips
Similar threads
