Public Safety Canada officials admitted in internal updates that the Freedom Convoy protests were peaceful and that no violence was taking place despite claims by the Minister Marco Mendicino.
According to Blacklock’s Reporter, daily reports described the demonstrations as peaceful, undisruptive and stable.
“The Freedom Convoy so far has been peaceful and cooperative with police,” an internal memo stated on Jan. 27.
Up until Feb. 11, officials monitoring the situation stated that there were “no major incidents,” that “no violence took place,” that “disruption to government activities” was minor, that “there (were) minimal people” on Parliament Hill, and that the “situation (remained) stable and planning” was ongoing.
“Since most government employees are working remotely, the disruption to government activities is so far minor. There is currently no known end time for the demonstrations,” the report states.
In contrast, key Liberal cabinet members including Mendicino and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau sought to paint the protestors as violent and even rapists.
“We cannot allow illegal and dangerous activities to continue,” said Trudeau. “Occupying streets, harassing people, breaking the law, this is not a peaceful protest.”
Mendocino said on Feb. 16 that “cases of violence” were at the centre of the movement, without any substantiating evidence.
“At the core of the movement is anger, animosity and in far too many cases violence,” claimed Mendicino.
At a House of Commons Public Safety Committee meeting in February, Mendocino also stated that Ottawa residents received “threats of rape” from convoy members. To this day, no reports of rape threats have been produced by the Liberals.
“There were Ottawans who were subjected to intimidation, harassment, threats of rape,” said Mendicino.
When he was pressed further on the allegation, the minister claimed that the “absence of criminal charges doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.” Mendocino is among over 60 witnesses called to testify before the Public Order Emergency Commission investigating the Liberal government’s use of the Emergencies Act to quash peaceful Freedom Convoy protestors.
Firearm owners in Alberta are struggling to renew their possession and acquisition licenses (PAL) due to federal delays lasting up to nine months.
According to CTV News, some gun owners are stuck not knowing whether they can use their firearms while the government struggles to process the renewals.
“Am I illegally possessing my firearms because I don’t have a PAL that’s current? Even though it’s in the application program?” 75-year-old hunter Don Holloway told the outlet.
“I mean, does that make me a criminal? Hunting season has started and without a PAL, you could be in hot water.”
Most PAL renewals are reviewed by the RCMP firearms centre in Miramichi, N.B.. According to Alberta’s chief firearms officer Teri Bryant, it’s taking up to nine months to process a renewal with 70,000 Albertans being impacted.
Bryant warns that those using a firearm without a valid license could face legal troubles.
“Well, you shouldn’t do it. According to the law, you do have a six-month grace period. But during that period, you’re not supposed to be doing anything with your guns,” said Bryant.
“This does put Alberta firearms owners in a very difficult spot, particularly if they’re hunters, and there’s a limited window of time when they can go out hunting.”
Alberta has taken proactive measures to speed up renewals including a $7 million plan for more RCMP staff with the goal of reducing waits down to three months for new applicants.
The delays come at a time when the federal government prepares the logistics of its gun buyback program after banning thousands of firearms from being legally owned.
A recent report by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) found that the Liberal government has already spent $7 million on the program without purchasing a single-firearm from Canadians.
“This is more evidence that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s gun ban and buyback is going to be another taxpayer boondoggle,” said CTF Federal Director Franco Terrazzano.
“The feds are spending millions of dollars before reimbursing a single gun owner, so it’s a good bet that this bill will keep ballooning.”
A vast majority of Canadians think Canada has a duty to export more oil to the world to decrease global dependence on Russian energy.
The poll conducted by Leger on behalf of SecondStreet.org found that 72% of Canadians agreed Canada should be working to develop and export more energy.
Broken down further, 49% of those polled said they strongly support more exports while only six percent were strongly against the idea.
“Developments around alternative energy sources are exciting for consumers, but studies suggest natural gas and oil will be used for decades to come,” said SecondStreet.org president Colin Craig in a news release.
“Policy makers would be wise to consider the positive role that Canada could play not only in displacing Russian oil and gas, but how the enormous tax revenues from such sales could be used to help develop technology to reduce emissions.”
The poll was conducted via an online survey of 1,535 Canadians between Sept. 30 and Oct. 2.
In August, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doubted whether there was a “worthwhile business case” to export Canadian energy to Europe from the east coast while entertaining a visit from German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
“We are looking right now — and companies are looking — at whether or not, in the new context, it makes it a worthwhile business case, to make those investments. … It needs to make sense for Germany to be receiving LNG directly from the east coast,” said Trudeau.
The comment immediately led to criticism from proponents of Canadian energy.
When polled on the matter, 54% of Canadians sided with the energy industry over 16% who agreed with the government on whether Ottawa was standing in the way of exports to Europe.
“Imagine if the world had a choice,” said Craig. “Buy Russian oil and gas and their government would continue to use the money to buy tanks and rockets or you could buy from Canada and the government would use some of the money to help develop technology to reduce emissions.”
Last month, the energy advocacy group the Modern Miracle Network sent an open letter to Trudeau slamming his government’s attitude towards oil and gas producers.
“While we remain well-positioned to supply Europe’s energy needs, years of government interference and politicized restrictions have prevented our sector from building the infrastructure needed to export large volumes of LNG,” the group wrote.
The Alberta NDP is in meltdown mode after Premier Danielle Smith acknowledged the discrimination unvaccinated Canadians have faced over the last two years.
In her first press conference, just hours after being sworn in as premier on Tuesday, Smith said the unvaccinated have experienced the most discrimination any group has faced in her lifetime.
NDP leader Rachel Notley now claims that Smith’s comments will turn people away from the province and hurt Alberta’s ‘economic future.’
“We’re trying to draw people to Alberta. We want their ideas, their innovation, their investment,” Notley wrote on Twitter.
“The ignorant, harmful comments about vaccines made by the new premier hurt our reputation and, by extension, our economic future. She must apologize immediately.”
Provinces across Canada, including Alberta, implemented vaccine passports barring the unvaccinated from their places of work and places of entertainment, like restaurants and movie theaters.
The federal government also barred the unvaccinated from public sector employment and from boarding planes or trains.
Smith said she isn’t dismissing the seriousness of other forms of historical discrimination, but said unvaccinated individuals experienced the worst discrimantion over the last year.
“I don’t think I’ve ever experienced a situation in my lifetime where a person was fired from their job, or not allowed to watch their kids play hockey, or not allowed to go visit a loved one in long-term care or a hospital, or not allowed to get on a plane to either go across the country to see family or even travel across the border,” the premier said Tuesday.
On Wednesday, Smith released a statement clarifying her comments, but not apologizing. She said her intent was to underline the mistreatment of unvaccinated individuals, not to trivialize the discrimination of marginzalied communites.
NDP MLA Janis Irwin took to Twitter to criticize the new premier for not apologizing.
“There are words in this statement. But not the words ‘I’m sorry,’” Irwin wrote on Twitter.
Notley’s attacks come amid her efforts to attract voters who feel left behind in a Danielle Smith government ahead of a spring general election.
On Friday, one day after the results of the United Conservative Party leadership race, Notley began reaching out to voters concerned about healthcare, job opportunities and those tired “of the division and the drama.”
“I offer you the alternative,” Notley wrote on Twitter.
“An Alberta NDP government will be stable, responsible and focused on delivering results for you and for your family.”
At Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s first press conference, she condemned vaccine discrimination and vowed that Alberta will never return to lockdowns or segregation based on vaccine status.
This comes the same day a Pfizer executive admitted the drug company had to release the vaccine “at the speed of science” and thus didn’t study its effect on transmission.
True North’s Andrew Lawton says the vaccine passport regime was based on a premise that has crumbled. Also, a look ahead at the Public Order Emergency Commission’s upcoming hearings.
The CBC Ombudsman ruled that he was “disappointed that programmers” linked Russia to the Freedom Convoy during a Power & Politicssegment with Liberal Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino in January.
The Oct. 6 review by Ombudsman Jack Nagler followed a complaint against CBC news anchor Nil Koksal by viewer James Sali. During that episode, Koksal asked without any substantiating evidence whether “Russian actors” were involved in organizing the convoy.
“I do ask that because, you know, given Canada’s support of Ukraine in this current crisis with Russia, I don’t know if it’s far-fetched to ask – but there is concern that Russian actors could be continuing to fuel things as this protest grows, but perhaps even instigating it from the outset?” claimed Koksal on Jan. 28.
Sali’s complaint argued that Koksal had “no facts backing up the claim” and was attempting to “misrepresent the protest” which was a grassroots movement with key organizers originating in Alberta.
CBC did issue a clarification note after the fact on Youtube and their website.
“At 4:15, there is a question about the possibility Russian actors could be fuelling or instigating a truck convoy protest headed to Parliament Hill. The question should have referenced experts’ concerns that during the current tension over Ukraine, Moscow could use its cyber and disinformation capabilities to “sow confusion” among Ukraine’s allies during a crisis,” the note reads.
Although satisfied with the clarification, Nagler claimed that it came too late – five days after the broadcast was aired.
“The fundamental flaw, in my view, was the use of a speculative question when it was not called for,” wrote Nagler.
“Instead, Power & Politics presented its question without attribution. It was not clear to viewers whether anyone was offering evidence that Russia was involved in the convoy – or why they would have such a concern. Asking the question in this way left room for people to surmise that CBC believed such evidence existed.”
According to Koksal, program producers at the CBC “decided in advance” to include the question to Mendicino.
“These questions, as phrased, did not meet the standard to ‘clearly explain the facts’ or ‘contribute to the understanding of issues of public interest’,” Nagler wrote in reference to CBC’s Journalistic Standards and Practices (JSP).
“While I agree that it was a breach of the JSP, I disagree with any suggestion that this was an act of disinformation,” ruled Nagler.
“I am disappointed that it took others to point out to CBC that the question was “off” – it should have been caught before broadcast. I am also disappointed that programmers were not more sensitive in advance to the perils of speculating on subjects such as the convoy, or Russian interference in Canadian affairs.”
National Newspaper Week came to a close this past Saturday, as print-form newspapers continue to predictably die all around us.
Soon there will have to be an obituary.
It used to be, before the Internet began changing the world with its “information superhighway,” that newspapers were licences to print money—filled with flyers mid-week which advertised and produced coupons for weekend grocery shopping and had its classified ads at the back which promoted yard sales.
In the middle was the news.
They would arrive at your door with a thud.
Today newspapers are as thin as carpaccio, with their death notices being a prime reason for their continued existence among the aging and diminishing Boomer Generation spawned by the joys associated with the end of the Second World War.
The Millennials, meanwhile, glued endlessly to their uber-important smartphones, wouldn’t be caught dead with an old-fashioned newspaper in their possession.
It would be too humiliating.
In virtually every newspaper across Canada, however, half-page ads were run preaching why National Newspaper Week should be supported.
The text never varied. “Newspapers are an essential part of Canadian culture, communities and democracies, delivering vital information to Canadians each and every day while connecting local communities from coast-to-coast-to-coast,” the ads read.
“It’s hard to express just how important local independent journalism is to our country, which is why we come together each year to celebrate and honour our local news media providers during National Newspaper Week.”
Nowadays, it’s the tech-savvy youth who are primarily responsible for undoing the anachronistic tradition of buying a printed newspaper.
But is also the case of the old dogs in the industry failing to learn any new tricks to curb the downward spiral of newspapers.
Here’s a look at the at the top five reasons via Listverse why not all traditions are timeless, and particularly why the newspaper industry is failing.
1. It’s made by and aimed at old people. Most successful business models do not rely on a client base who remember when things used to cost a nickel. Not only do newspapers adopt poorly to the Internet model, they also seem to be completely clueless about what appeals to younger demographics.
2. There’s a lack of passion. There is rarely any narrative beyond the regurgitation of what is one the tape recorded, with to attempt to go beyond the who, where, what, when, why and how,
3. There’s no journalism in the journalism. “What should matter most is how much a story resonates with us as humans, not so much as how a story appeals to our lowest instincts to draw us in,” Listverse writes. In other words, it shouldn’t appeal just to those on the “inside of the slant.”
4. It’s impractical and inconvenient. The internet is just easier, especially when it comes to archival searches. Per Listverse, who wants to “dig through a compost pile of newspapers to ascertain a news story from last year”?
5. It costs money. As the old adage goes, why pay for something that’s free? The paper industry is like the music industry in this regard. Like pirated music, news is very much available for free on the internet, largely from websites pertaining to major city newspapers.
It should be no surprise then that the newspaper industry has shed more than half its jobs since 1990 when the internet first reared its head, losses which have only been partly offset by gains in online media.
It is no wonder, therefore, the need for an annual National Newspaper Week across North America.
The industry may be grasping at straws, but straws are all it has.
A leading global food security organization warned parliamentarians at the end of September that Liberal government fertilizer emission reduction targets could lead to an unintended loss of trust in the agriculture sector.
At a Sept. 28 meeting of the House of Commons Agriculture Committee, industry experts painted a picture of farmers being stuck between a rock and a hard place when it comes to meeting the voluntary targets while pocketbooks are impacted by skyrocketing fertilizer prices.
CEO of Global Institute for Food Security Steve Webb said that while the “intention of the policy” was good, it was too narrow and did not consider economic and social spheres.
“The approach is only being looked at in the context of the emissions standard. We need to take that holistic production intensity approach to ensure that we have a policy framework that delivers economic, environmental and social outcomes that lead to sustainability,” said Webb.
Should farmers fail to meet the arbitrary targets set by the federal government, that could in turn lead to a loss of trust in the sector, explained Webb.
“Not doing so will paint an inaccurate picture of how sustainable Canadian agriculture is and will lead to public mistrust of our resilient and sustainable agriculture system. This will in turn negatively impact export opportunities,” he said.
According to Webb, there needs to be more pride in how far Canadian farmers have come when it comes to reducing the use of nitrogen fertilizer and other sustainability practices.
“Canada is one of the world’s most sustainable producers of food. We need to be proud of the strides we have made and how far we’ve come,” explained Webb. “Remarkably, on a production intensity basis, farmers in western Canada have decreased nitrogen fertilizer use by 28% per bushel per acre over the last 30 years.”
Webb also stressed that farmers have already achieved a 22% increase in land used in production while reducing fertilizer application at the same time.
Meanwhile, the executive director of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, Scott Ross, pointed to the fact that farmers face fertilizer scarcity at a time of historically high costs given global geopolitics and other factors.
“For example, farmers across eastern Canada continue to experience uncertain access to fertilizer and recognize that scarcity of this essential input is potentially a reality for years to come,” said Ross. “Policies like the tariff on Russian fertilizer only contribute to higher prices for essential inputs, as producers already contend with historically high operating costs.”
Canada implemented a 35% tariff on fertilizer imported from Russia and Belarus earlier this year as a response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russia is the world’s second top producer of fertilizer following Canada.
In 2022, Ontario farmers faced a shocking 238% increase in fertilizer prices.
“Fertilizer is one part of that price: Shortages were real, right up to the time of planting. Retailers were rationing fertilizer because shipments were blocked by sanctions put in place in Canada.
This year, Ontario farmers paid 238% more than they did in the spring of 2020,” Chairman of the Grain Farmers of Ontario told the House of Commons International Trade Committee on Sept. 23.
Earlier this month, MLAs in the Manitoba Legislative Assembly called on the federal government to immediately scrap its fertilizer reduction targets citing growing grocery costs and global food insecurity.
Former Waterloo ESL teacher Caroline Burjoski is suing the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB) to try to deter other school boards from “silencing” teachers and parents who may have a different ideology than woke bureaucrats and trustees.
“What happened to me shows how far our school board has fallen,” she told attendees at a recent speaking engagement in Waterloo called Education at the Crossroads.
“We must recover our democratic right to speak without fear of intimidation,” she said to a packed conference room with an equal number of people listening online.
One purpose of the conference was to educate parents about the kind of indoctrination that is occurring at Ontario school boards with the full approval of woke trustees – and to suggest there are candidates running in the October 24 election who are fighting for positive change.
Woke trustees have also been successful to date silencing those colleagues and other educators like Burjoski who have endeavored to expose the almost obsessive focus on gender ideology and Critical Race Theory (CRT).
In May Burjoski filed a $1.7-million defamation suit against WRDSB chairman Scott Piatkowsk and the board after they made widespread claims she was “transphobic” and had engaged in “hate speech” when she appeared before the board in January.
She alleges in her lawsuit that – while she was silenced and unable to defend herself – Piatkowski made defamatory statements to the media following the meeting. He claimed she was “disrespectful” to trans people in her presentation and that her words would cause them to “be attacked.”
Burjoski barely made it through four minutes of her deputation – in which she read from what she felt were highly sexualized books contained in elementary school libraries – when Piatkowski abruptly stopped her and expelled her from the meeting.
The former teacher, who retired at the end of January, has also filed a request for a judicial review of the WRDSB’s decision to cancel her deputation.
Since then, she’s come out swinging.
She showed the crowd an Early Years document provided by the board to teachers in which they are encouraged to teach kids as young as five that they “get to decide” if they’re a boy, girl, or something else (that the child has agency.)
“Telling children they can choose whether they’re a boy or girl will confuse them,” Burjoski said.
“Ideas about gender are being taught to younger children by teachers who see themselves as activists.”
She added that school boards are instructing teachers and administrators not to advise a student’s parents if they wish to change their gender, their name and their pronouns.
She says this policy “puts teachers in an ethical dilemma” and is an “outrageous breach of parental rights.”
David Haskell, a Wilfrid Laurier professor and leader of the Waterloo chapter of the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism (FAIR), said because CRT has been getting a lot of bad press, school boards are now couching the theory in “anti-racism” education.
CRT, which has its roots in Marxist ideology, claims racism against blacks is embedded in all institutions, including the school system.
According to this dangerous policy, that creates an uneven playing field for black students, who are oppressed by those with white privilege.
But Haskell says the empirical data he’s collected shows that racism is not the reason for differences in academic achievement and that racist sentiment in the U.S. is “at its lowest.”
He said that it is clear from the research there are many factors involved in differences in outcomes beyond racism.
“Research shows that students of colour – especially those taught to believe that their personal actions drive their success – will succeed,” Haskell said.
He notes that CRT instruction has been banned in 35 states following considerable pushback from parents and students.
“It (CRT) treats black people as if they’re not self-sufficient,” Haskell said.
He added that the problem is that “most” school boards in Ontario (and in other parts of Canada) have been “hijacked by activists” who have no regard for empirical evidence or facts.
The bottom line is that parents have to start paying more attention to what is happening in their schools.
As Haskell noted, the pushback is already going strong south of the border.
But in Canada the woke propagandists are still winning the information war.
It starts with paying more attention to who is running for trustee, their policies and their voting records (if they’re incumbents).
A new report by the Fraser Institute on pandemic spending found that approximately 40% of federal deficits incurred during the pandemic “had nothing to do” with Covid-19.
From 2020 to 2021, around 60% of deficits posted related to healthcare spending, transfers and pandemic income support.
“Canadians may be surprised to learn that a significant percentage of Ottawa’s huge spending increases during COVID, which produced large deficits and much more debt, had nothing to do with the pandemic,” Fraser Institute senior fellow Livio Di Matteo said in a press release.
“As a result of Ottawa’s massive spending increase during the pandemic, the federal government will have a larger footprint in the Canadian economy now and for many years to come.”
The report is titled Storm Without End: The Economic and Fiscal Impact of COVID in Canada and it investigated federal and provincial pandemic spending.
Broken down further the federal government boosted spending by 73% to the tune of $644.2 billion in 2020-2021. A year later that spending declined by 21% to $508.2 billion.
Debt also grew by 41.4% reaching $1.15 trillion in 2020-2021, ballooning even further the following year by 12.4% to a whopping $1.3 trillion.
Fraser Institute called the trend a “permanent, long-term increase” to federal spending habits.
Despite the massive growth in spending and debt, the federal Liberals have committed to massive new undertakings including a $2.5 billion sales tax rebate for low-income earners and $700 million to develop a dental-care plan promised to the NDP.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told Canadians last month that his government’s new spending proposals would not impact inflation.
“We are retaining fiscal firepower and at the same time ensuring that those who need support don’t get left behind,” said Trudeau.
“(This spending is) sufficiently targeted that we are confident they will not contribute to inflation.”
