Justin Trudeau responds to China corruption claims with China-style censorship

Start your free trial

Access exclusive members only RebelNews+ shows, event footage, and documentaries

Subscribe

In tonight's episode of the Ezra Levant Show, Ezra discusses the damning proof of China corrupting Justin Trudeau that has emerged. However, the Prime Minister's response to this revelation has raised eyebrows, as he called for China-style censorship of his enemies.

It is a concerning trend that raises questions about the Canadian government's commitment to free speech. Trudeau's announcement of a $5.5 million plan to combat "misinformation and disinformation" online is part of this trend.

PM Trudeau is giving $5.5 million of taxpayer dollars to "combat disinformation" in response to CSIS leaks that show the Chinese Communist Party interfered with Canadians elections.https://t.co/odt7BBkbKO pic.twitter.com/jRI4GwNqz6

— Rebel News (@RebelNewsOnline) March 6, 2023

While the terms "hate" and "racist" are often dismissed by some, the new buzzwords of "misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation" are gaining traction. But what exactly is malinformation? It refers to truthful information that is inconvenient or unfavorable to certain parties.

32. In one remarkable email, the Virality Project recommends that multiple platforms take action even against “stories of true vaccine side effects” and “true posts which could fuel hesitancy.”

None of the leaders of this effort to police Covid speech had health expertise. pic.twitter.com/UUd50ZaghG

— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) March 9, 2023

This notion of censoring inconvenient truths was exemplified in a remarkable email from the Virality Project, which recommended that multiple platforms take action against "stories of true vaccine side effects" and "true posts which could fuel hesitancy." It is concerning that none of the leaders of this effort to police Covid speech have any health expertise.

Trudeau's government has also been embracing the "fake fact-checking industry" represented by organizations like NewsGuard. NGOs like the Global Disinformation Index and Newsguard not only seek to moderate content but also apply subjective "risk" or "reliability" scores to media outlets, resulting in reduced revenue. It begs the question: do we want the government to be in this role?

25. Some NGOs, like the GEC-funded Global Disinformation Index or the DOD-funded Newsguard, not only seek content moderation but apply subjective “risk” or “reliability” scores to media outlets, which can result in reduction in revenue. Do we want government in this role? pic.twitter.com/s9tobM9rf8

— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) March 9, 2023

This trend towards censorship is not just talk; it is happening. Bills C-11 and C-18, as well as other police powers, have been put forward by the government. For example, Minister Lametti identified the need for legislative amendments to the Emergency Act itself to make it more responsive to pandemics and health emergencies. While this may seem reasonable, the modernization of the Act's language to address online harms such as violent online rhetoric and financing raises concerns about the potential for government overreach.

The problem with censorship is that it is often difficult to draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not. Trudeau's government claims to be fighting against "hate speech" and "disinformation", but who gets to decide what constitutes these things? The danger lies in the fact that the government's definition of hate speech or disinformation may not be the same as that of the public, leading to the suppression of legitimate discourse.

Furthermore, the government's tendency towards censorship could have a chilling effect on free speech, as individuals and organizations may self-censor to avoid government scrutiny. This could lead to a narrowing of the public discourse and a decrease in the exchange of ideas, which are essential for a healthy democracy.

Trudeau's embrace of censorship is a concerning trend that threatens the fundamental right to free speech. While the government may claim to be fighting against "hate speech" and "disinformation", the danger lies in the potential for government overreach and the suppression of legitimate discourse. It is essential that the public remains vigilant against these trends and pushes back against any attempts to curtail free speech.