Steven MacKinnon says Conservatives are “punching down” for wanting to review asylum benefits. That’s the Liberal playbook: dodge the question and attack the motive. Asking whether taxpayer-funded programs are sustainable isn’t cruel; it’s a basic responsibility. Canadians are stretched thin, from groceries to housing. Pretending budgets don’t matter doesn’t make you compassionate; it makes you reckless. If reviewing spending is offensive, no wonder deficits keep exploding. Accountability isn’t punching down; it’s governing.
This turns my stomach. Charging men for targeting kids, then cutting them loose, isn’t justice; it’s a weakness. Whatever this is, it’s not the Canada I grew up in, and it’s not something we should ever normalize or excuse.
Six men charged with trying to buy sex from children.
And then released.
I was born and raised in Canada, and these were never our standards. Even in the Canada I returned to when I moved back from Nashville 20 years ago would have never stood for this.
Please sign our petition, and send a message about the type of country you want Canada to be once again.
Demand accountability, denouncement, and deterrence. There are deep connections between Child Sexual Abuse Material and the accessing of children for sex.
https://t.co/BlpNABT0PQ
This is awful.
Absolutely awful. There is nothing inclusive about the left, and so many of them are “teaching” your children. Shameful @paulbrandt@NIMCAlly
Free speech isn’t being taken away.
It’s being slowly engineered out of public life.
• C-11 decides what content rises.
• C-18 tells platforms how they can share news.
• C-9 raises the legal risk of saying the wrong thing.
Look at the UK.
The pattern is already playing out.
Platforms over-correct.
Citizens stay quiet.
And honest conversations disappear.
This is not a glitch.
It’s the goal.
📱 Call your MP.
📧 Email your Senator.
✅ Protect speech before silence becomes the safer option.
Take care,
Shane
#BillC11 #BillC18 #BillC9 #SoftCensorship #Canada #Leadership #FreeSpeech
Report today that the Liberals are adding "femicide" to the Criminal Code.
Here are my thoughts.
Canada already has some of the most serious criminal offences on the books to address the unlawful killing of any person, including first- and second-degree murder and manslaughter. These offences apply regardless of the sex of the victim. Courts treat intimate-partner killings and patterns of violence as aggravating factors in sentencing, and in fact, this is mandated by s 718.2 of the Criminal Code.
My concern with creating a separate offence of “femicide” is that it risks fragmenting the Criminal Code along sex-specific or identity-specific lines without adding real protective value. The criminal law should apply equally and neutrally. Introducing new homicide categories based on the sex of the victim invites symbolic law-making rather than effective reform, and it could raise equality concerns under the Charter. If Parliament starts carving out separate homicide offences for particular groups, it becomes difficult to justify where that line stops.
There is also a risk that adding new labels obscures the real failures your investigation highlights, which largely relate to prevention, policing, bail, and mental-health system gaps. Those issues are not a result of a lack of criminal offences. We know that 83% of accused individuals in these types of cases had prior interactions with the justice or mental-health systems, the real issue is missed intervention points long before a homicide occurs. Creating a new Criminal Code label does not fix those systemic failures.
None of this minimizes the seriousness of the violence women face in Canada, particularly in intimate-partner contexts. Those threats are real and demand urgent attention. But the solutions lie in earlier intervention, improvements in policing and social-services response, and better protection for women at known risk, not in creating new homicide categories that duplicate existing offences.
https://t.co/nP7e57WOKG
Urgent Call to ACTION. Please sign and share far and wide.
Awareness + Action ends exploitation.
Protect Our Children: Reverse the Supreme Court Ruling on Child Sexual Abuse and Exploitation Material (CSAEM)
https://t.co/cQQOm8jVim
📣 #NotInMyCity proudly announces another NEW Partner, TCU Place, located in Saskatoon.
We welcome our new partner TCU Place in Saskatoon and appreciate the team’s commitment in taking the e-learning course on our website and displaying our yellow rose throughout their facility.
Thank you @WabKinew for your denunciation of the recent Supreme Court ruling on CSAM and for calling for the invocation of the notwithstanding cause. Miigwech.
Greatly respect your efforts and action on compassionate intervention for those with addictions as well. Many connections to exploitation and trafficking.
I'm excited to be in your province, performing in Winnipeg tomorrow, as well as meeting with law enforcement leaders while I'm here.
https://t.co/dNFiFnfZQ1
Not does Poilievre show moral clarity on this issue, he shows that he understands the case the judges were ruling on and their faulty logic that lead to the 5-4 decision.
Yes, 5 judges agreed and 4 disagreed.
What wonderful imaginations the justices on Canada’s Supreme Court have. They dreamt up a scenario that would almost certainly never happen in order to strike down mandatory minimum sentences for child pornography https://t.co/LlqO3LhqUR
A pallor of shame has discoloured the face of Canada today. Her children cry out:
“Invoke the notwithstanding clause.”
Contact your Premiers, write your MPs. Get loud on this, Canada. Our future depends on it. This is our one chance to regain footing from this decision of inevitable disasterous consequences.
Child sex trafficking and CSAM are deeply linked:
• Traffickers record abuse to create CSAM for sale or blackmail
• 29M+ CSAM reports in 2021 tied to trafficking & online grooming
• Vulnerable kids are prime targets CSAM isn’t just evidence—it’s a tool of control in modern slavery.
Report it, demand our legal system address it, and support mandatory minimums by demanding the invocation of the not-withstanding clause. Robust mandatory minimums bring justice, and protect children. #Section33
https://t.co/9MoBTiwkId
When our divisiveness means some are called traitors for not supporting the PM, I’m reminded of the old military saying: “lack of planning and prep by you is not going to be accepted as a crisis by me”. We had lots of warning.
Mark Carney is trying to tell you that his brand new and much bigger industrial carbon tax on the “big polluters” won’t have any impact on prices for you because you don’t use the stuff they make.
He’s not economically illiterate.
He’s just not telling you the truth, because the truth makes it hard to get elected.
A carbon tax is a tax and consumers end up footing the bill.
This is just wretched: a bunch of costly, bureaucratic, ineffective programs that as an economist he knows won't work, at a time when the economy is already struggling.
But that's where we are. Bipartisan consensus to do the stupidest possible thing — not just instead of carbon pricing, but in place of a pricing regime that was *already up and running.* Utter madness.
Mark Carney says he would immediately scrap Justin Trudeau’s consumer carbon price. Here’s what he’d replace it with
https://t.co/8YULfX93Lq
Rona Ambrose goes on a 3 minute schooling of Trudeau, the Liberals and the disaster they’ve created.
And she’s 1000% spot on.
I miss sane voices in Government.