fbpx
Friday, July 11, 2025

House of Commons rejects Sloan’s motion to sanction Facebook and Twitter for censorship

Parliamentarians rejected a motion by Independent MP Derek Sloan to sanction Facebook and Twitter for censoring a press conference Sloan held last week.

During the conference, Sloan appeared with a number of medical health professionals who detailed ongoing attempts to silence and reprimand them for speaking out against the prevailing COVID-19 narrative. 

“Mr. Speaker, last week I hosted a Parliamentary press conference on the censorship of Canadian doctors and medical experts. Their testimony was truly shocking. Unfortunately, Facebook stopped my livestream in mid-conference. Despite this, the full press conference is now the most viewed video in history on CPAC‘s YouTube channel, with over 500,000 views,” said Sloan. 

“However, on Facebook and Twitter, they’re still restricting the sharing of this video on their platforms. Given the importance to democracy of Canadians seeing official parliamentary functions, does the minister denounce this censorship by Big Tech?”

In response to Sloan being censored, Liberal MP Jennifer O’Connell implied that Sloan was spreading “misinformation” by hosting the event. 

Eventually Sloan rose in the House of Commons on Tuesday to introduce his motion calling on the government to stand against social media censorship by tech giants. 

“The Government must strongly defend the rights of parliamentarians against the outside interference of social media companies such as Facebook and Twitter and (b) call on the Government to recognize that any potential suppression of information or censorship of parliamentary events such as official press conferences can not be allowed to happen, and to officially sanction Facebook and Twitter for their actions,” Sloan’s motion read. 

The motion did not receive the unanimous consent required for it to pass after a fellow MP rose to reject it. 

Sloan also held a separate press conference earlier this week on the Liberal government’s conversion therapy bill, C-6. Sloan appeared alongside mental health professionals and other witnesses to speak out against the legislation’s passing. 

According to Sloan and others, the broad definition of conversion therapy would target practitioners, particularly faith-based ones, whose therapy may not seek to change sexual orientation but might discourage certain sexual behaviours.

Medical school professor fired for questioning COVID-19 vaccinations for children

A surgeon and professor at the University of Saskatchewan has been fired after he questioned giving COVID-19 vaccinations to children and calling for informed consent.

According to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), Dr. Francis Christian has been suspended from all teaching responsibilities at the university and will lose his position by September.

The move came after Dr. Christian wrote a letter to fellow doctors that families and children should be aware of potential risks of COVID-19 vaccinations, noting that a patient should always be “fully aware of the risks of the medical intervention, the benefits of the intervention, and if any alternatives exist to the intervention.”

“This should apply particularly to a new vaccine that has never before been tried in humans… before the vaccine is rolled out to children, both children and parents must know the risks of m-RNA vaccines,” he wrote.

Dr. Christian spoke at a rally last week to share the same position. Christian, who says he is pro-vaccination, says currently available COVID-19 vaccination should not be issued to children as young as 12 like the province of Saskatchewan recommends.

Dr. Christian is fighting the action taken against him and is receiving help in his defense from the JCCF.

In a statement to Global News, the Dean of the College of Medicine Dr. Preston Smith said that Dr. Christian’s beliefs are so inappropriate that his suspension is justified.

“When somebody is saying things that are at such great variance with all of our experts and worldwide experts and public safety is involved and could be jeopardized through these differences of view, I think we have to recognize that that’s a special situation that requires urgent and extraordinary action and that’s our reason for acting at this time.”

On Wednesday, True North contributor Anthony Furey reported on how SickKids Hospital is noticing a handful of cases of myocarditis — inflammation of the heart — in youth following vaccination for COVID-19.

Health organizations around the world are investigating the side effects amongst youth who received the COVID-19 vaccine. In its June guidance, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends parents should hold off on vaccinating their children.

“More evidence is needed on the use of the different COVID-19 vaccines in children to be able to make general recommendations on vaccinating children against COVID-19,” the WHO writes.

Recently, multiple healthcare professionals have been punished for speaking out against official narratives around COVID-19 or COVID-19 vaccines.

According to JCCF Litigation Director Jay Cameron, any professional who questions the government narrative on COVID-19 puts their career in jeopardy.

“We are seeing a clear pattern of highly competent and skilled medical doctors in very esteemed positions being taken down and censored or even fired, for practicing proper science and medicine,” he said.

The majority of Canadians reject the idea that our country is racist

Is Canada a racist country? According to a recent study from the Angus Reid Institute, a clear majority of Canadians say no.

That’s pretty remarkable given the constant diet of Canada-bashing from our political and media elite. Since the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis last summer, nearly every public political figure has pushed the notion that Canada is a “systemically racist” country and has used this as a pretext to force woke ideology into every aspect of our society.

True North’s Candice Malcolm says the Angus Reid study is great news – a clear majority of Canadians don’t care what the elites in Ottawa and on the CBC have to say.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE CANDICE MALCOLM SHOW.

Trudeau government wants court to prevent disclosure on rogue scientists

The Trudeau government wants the Federal Court to intervene and prevent the disclosure of documents regarding the firing of two federal scientists accused of collaborating with China. 

Prior to the censure of Public Health Agency of Canada president Iain Stewart on Tuesday, court filings show that Attorney General David Lametti submitted an application declaring that the documents contained “information which if disclosed would be injurious to international relations or national defence or national security.”

House of Commons Speaker Anthony Rota was named as the respondent in the application and the matter could eventually reach a public hearing. 

The Conservatives have been pressuring Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to disclose a trove of files related to the removal of Xiangguo Qiu and Kending Cheng from the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg. 

Prior to Monday’s censure, Stewart had refused to obey three prior government orders by the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations to disclose the documents. 

Liberal Health Minister Patty Hajdu has also refused to oblige fellow parliamentarians claiming that national security reasons prevent the government from releasing the files. 

Both scientists were escorted out of the federal facility following an RCMP raid in 2019. 

The government has refused to reveal the exact nature of Kending and Xiangguo’s dismissal but claim that it does not have to do with the scientists sending samples of deadly viruses like Ebola and Henipah to the Wuhan Institute of Virology upon request. 

According to media reports, several scientists employed at the lab also collaborated with researchers tied to China’s People’s Liberation Army. 

Guelph man who tried to join ISIS walks free due to time served

23-year-old Ikar Mao was sentenced by a federal court to serve 49 months in prison and a 12 month probation period on Wednesday. However, due to his pre-trial detention, the accused will not spend a single day further behind bars. 

Mao pleaded guilty to joining the violent terrorist organization ISIS in 2019. As a result of his guilty plea, Crown prosecutors agreed on Monday to drop a second charge against Mao and separate charges against his wife Haleema Mustafa. 

“Mao undertook the trip to Turkey in July 2019 with the express purpose of crossing the border into Syria, and eventually moving to ISIS controlled territory,” court documents claim. 

“Mao did this with the intention of making himself available to ISIS and/or for the benefit of ISIS.”

Mao and Mustafa were arrested after flying to Turkey in July near the country’s border with Syria. It is believed that Mustafa arranged the trip and paid for the plane tickets which the couple used to fly out of Toronto. 

According to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, charges against Mustafa were dropped after considering “her role, the evidence against her, and the public safety protection assessment.” 

Evidence submitted to the court shows that Mao had downloaded an ISIS manual which guided budding extremists on how to migrate to the so-called Islamic State. 

Additionally, Mao had purchased several items recommended by the guide before embarking on his journey. 

Upon returning to Canada in 2019, Mao was apprehended by RCMP officers and had his electronic devices seized. ISIS propaganda was found on the devices.

According to Public Safety Canada, there are approximately 250 Canadian Extremist Travellers (CETs) currently abroad and within Canada.

“Of the estimated 190 CETs currently abroad, nearly half have travelled to Turkey, Syria and Iraq. The remaining CETs are located in Afghanistan, Pakistan and parts of North and East Africa. These individuals have travelled to support and facilitate extremist activities and, in some cases, directly participate in violence,” writes the Government of Canada.

Civil liberties group urges Liberals to end use of facial recognition tech

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) is calling on the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) to immediately end its practice of using facial recognition technology to verify the identities of voters during the nomination process. 

According to the Globe and Mail, the CCLA sent a letter to Liberals asking them to “cease and desist” their use of the invasive technology. 

CCLA executive director Michael Bryant and privacy and surveillance program director Brenda McPhail noted that the Liberal’s “use of the controversial technology takes unfair advantage of its exemption from Canadian privacy laws, and sends the wrong message to municipal, provincial and federal election officials that this technology is ready for prime time.”

“By using it for the purposes of nominating candidates for federal election, LPC is tacitly endorsing an unreliable, racist technology,” the letter read. 

Currently the Liberal Party’s official website does not make any mention of facial recognition technology or how identities are verified. 

“As soon as a nomination voter is verified, associated information is deleted immediately and automatically, and not retained,” Liberal Party spokesperson Braedan Caley told the Globe and Mail.

The facial recognition technology that the party employs is executed by the California-based company Jumio. 

According to Bryant, there is a lack of clarity and transparency when it comes to how the information is collected, stored and used. 

“This is the problem: there are so many unanswered questions and unknowns because this is an entirely unregulated technology,” Bryant told the Globe and Mail. 

“Its so private, its so unique, it works because it creates a code that identifies you, just like a finger print is a code that identifies.” 

Senator pledges to stop Bill C-10 following Liberal “kangaroo court” vote

Senator Pamela Wallin pledged on Tuesday to do everything within her power to stop Bill C-10 from being rushed through the Senate and becoming law before parliamentarians go on summer recess.

“At 1:30 am this morning the House of Commons passed Bill C-10. Now, with just two days left on the calendar the Senate is being asked to pass it. No scrutiny, no oversight- we haven’t even seen the secret amendments they passed. ‘Kangaroo court’ would be an understatement,” tweeted Wallin. 

“The government has had 6 years to pass legislation it wants. It is not our job in the Senate to rubber stamp and give up our constitutional responsibilities just because they want fodder for an election- especially if it means killing free speech.” 

Bill C-10 passed its third reading in the House of Commons with 196 votes for the legislation and 112 votes against. Liberal MPs were joined by their NDP, Green Party and Bloc Quebecois colleagues in supporting the motion while Conservative MPs opposed the bill. 

“I will do everything I can to make sure this bill isn’t rammed through. Standing up to Bill C-10 is standing up against censorship and standing up for free speech. If we don’t say NO now, it will be too late,” continued Wallin.

During a heated debate on the legislation in the House of Commons, Conservative MPs accused the Trudeau government of politicizing the law and threatening the free speech rights of Canadians. 

“The bill had several flaws and we were in a hurry to find common ground, but sadly, the government amended it along the way. I believe that is where the problem lies. The government, without notice and despite a pretense of collaboration, was paving the way so that social media could become official broadcasters with all the consequences that could have,” Conservative MP Alain Reyes told the House of Commons. 

“Even worse, the government’s willingness to play partisan politics, by framing the issue as being between freedom of expression and the artists themselves, offended many people. Under no circumstance could we let the Liberals get away with that. We will always work to protect freedom of expression.” 

Other senators including Conservative Senator Leo Housakos have indicated that they do not intend to oblige the Liberals and rush the bill into law. 

Iran elects a mass murderer as president

After a sham election in which all the candidates were essentially chosen by the Iranian ayatollah, Iran has “elected” a mass murderer as its president. In 1988, Ebrahim Raisi was responsible for the execution of thousands of political prisoners after minutes-long trials, and has continued to engage in actions that have been characterized by NGOs and other actors as crimes against humanity. Shahin Gobadi of the National Council of Resistance of Iran joins to discuss what this means for the Iranian people, and the global community.

Watch the latest episode of The Andrew Lawton Show.

Liberals plan to introduce new hate speech bill before summer break

The Liberals plan to release a new bill targeting online hate speech before the House of Commons breaks for the Summer.

According to the National Post, Justice Minister David Lametti plans to table a bill that will “amend the Criminal Code and the Canadian Human Rights Act and to make related amendments to another Act (hate propaganda, hate crimes and hate speech).”

It is not immediately clear if the legislation will include regulation of internet content or only cover types of hate speech which the government consulted on last year.

The proposal comes as the Liberals try to pass the controversial internet regulation bill, C-10, which has been attacked for limiting free speech online.

Speaking at the Banff World Media Festival, Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault hinted at the forthcoming legislation, going so far as to admit the bill will be divisive.

“Now, this is going to be controversial. People think that C-10 was controversial. Wait till we table this legislation,” he said.

Lametti’s bill has the potential of reviving an extremely controversial former law — Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Section 13 was heavily criticized for going beyond hate speech, effectively prohibiting speech online that was perceived as offensive. At the time, the section was widely condemned by civil rights groups.

Section 13 was repealed in 2013 thanks to a private member bill from a Conservative MP, but Lametti’s parliamentary secretary, Arif Virani, confirmed that the Liberals are examining the section to see if any of it should be returned to.

True North fellow and free speech expert Lindsay Shepherd says government hate speech laws inevitably end up censoring legitimate free speech which some find offensive, adding that social media platforms already censor dissenting opinions.

“It all goes back to this: we don’t want the government defining online hate, because it will inevitably cast too wide of a net. We know that a Reddit forum for gender critical feminism was banned. A pro-life news site called LifeSiteNews had their YouTube channel banned. Rebel News was kicked off of PayPal,” she said. 

“This shows us that if the views you’re expressing fall outside the liberal-progressive orthodoxy, you can and will be shut out — and with a return of section 13 or some other similar online hate speech law, Canadians who express non-politically correct opinions could potentially face fines or legal trouble.”

In 2019, Shepherd testified at the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights on regulation of hate speech online.

Derek Sloan joined by medical experts, witnesses to oppose conversion therapy bill

Independent MP Derek Sloan held a press conference on Tuesday to share stories from experts and people with lived experiences concerned with the Trudeau government’s bill banning conversion therapy.

If it becomes law, Bill C-6 will amend the Criminal Code to criminalize the practice of conversion therapy. However, the bill has been criticized by Sloan and others for having a broad definition of conversion theory that would target practitioners, particularly faith-based ones, whose therapy may not seek to change sexual orientation but might discourage certain sexual behaviors, including if a patient sought out therapy for that reason.

Hours after the press conference, the bill passed through the House of Commons 263-63, though it must still be passed by the Senate and receive Royal Assent.

Among those appearing virtually alongside Sloan were Free to Care communications director Jose Ruba, Christian psychotherapist Ann Gillies, clinical psychologist Laura Haynes and others who said therapies from which they benefited as former patients would be banned under C-6.

“I’m a professionally trained Canadian psychotherapist, and I want counselors to be able to help their clients, the government will put people like me in jail,” said Gillies. 

“Gender expression counseling to simply reduce unwanted sexual behavior is going to be criminalized. And this means LGBTQ Canadians would be prevented support.”

Ruba pointed out that the conversion therapy definition in C-6 is broader than those used in other jurisdictions, which refer to conversion therapy specifically as treatments designed to change a patient’s sexual orientation, because it extends to “sexual behaviour.”

“The conversion therapy definition, even in that U.N. report, as well as those used by the United Church of Canada, even LGBTQ activists and organizations themselves to conversion therapy, is orientation change. When they do mention behavior like the Canadian Psychological Association mentions behavior, it’s in the context of orientation change, not independent of it, because Bill C-6 actually defines conversion therapy as a change in orientation or a reduced reduction or repression of non-heterosexual behavior,” said Ruba. 

“It actually bans counseling reduced behavior. So there’s still problems with the bill apart from that. But this bill makes it so much more draconian and so far different from any conversion therapy ban that has passed anywhere in the world except in Canada.”

One speaker, Jeremy Sire Williams, who was born as intersex, spoke out against the bill saying that politicians were ignorant of the issues at hand and the the law would put people like him at risk. 

“It astounds me that ignorant and uneducated politicians think that it is their right to prevent sound medical and scientific knowledge and force parents and professionals to choose between their freedom and honest and proper diagnosis of my condition,” said Williams. 

“If passed, a parent could face a minimum of three years in prison and have their child kidnaped by the state because they sought medical treatments for their own flesh and blood.”

Sloan has been a vocal critic of Bill C-6 in the past. In a blog post on the legislation, Sloan expressed that the bill could unfairly target religious practices and legitimate therapies and interventions. 

Related stories