Transcription
Ladies and gentlemen, I have been saying for a long time that Canada is on the highway to hell. Some might even call it the, I don't know, autobahn to hell. Speaking of German words, it is an absolute tyrannical state up in Canada. And people seem to think that, you know, because you can still criticize the government for now. And the fact that you can walk out of your houses whenever you want, although you couldn't do that during COVID for a good five and a half months in Quebec.
People think that because it's not full tyranny like North Korea, like, I don't know, 1930s Germany, like, I don't, I, I, I, some people tell me it's even freer in China than it is in Canada. I actually have a high school friend who lives in China. He's like, "Everything you've heard about China is wrong. Uh, and it's actually almost freer than it is in Canada." To which I say, "Dude, I'll take your word for it because I'm never going to China. I'm pretty sure I'm on a list and I'm not interested in testing that theory in real life." Uh, and I also don't believe it, but set that aside.
Canada is full-blown tyranny. It's a full-blown nanny state. It's full-grown Karen governments that micromanage every aspect of the lives of the lowly plebs who are too stupid, who are too weak, frail, and vulnerable to understand what is good for them and what is dangerous to them. And the government needs to come in and say, "Social media, you got to license for that." I don't know why we have British accents up in Canada.
The latest tyranny of the day is a proposed piece of legislation that would ban social media for under 16s. And this is reading the headline, but we're going to get into the legislation from The Guardian, which reads as follows: "Canada's social media ban for under 16s goes to Parliament. Legislation would exempt platforms that can prove they have safeguards for children in place." I've got, I don't want to spoil the punchline for this, and so you're going to have to wait for the end of it, at which point you're going to have to make sure that you have liked, shared, and subscribed. Wait for the punchline of this.
If you follow me on X at the Vivafry or you're a member of our vivablaw.locals.com community, you probably know what the punchline is already. But won't someone please think of the children? As a pretextual justification for this bull crap piece of legislation, Canada's government has introduced legislation, back to the article, to Parliament that could ban children younger than 16 from having social media accounts unless the companies show they can make their platforms safe.
Ottawa is joining a growing global effort to put you in jail, to take all your rights, and to treat you like a lowly pleb that has no god-given rights, but has only government-issued privileges. That's, sorry, that's not what the article said. Let me get back to the article. Ottawa is joining a growing global effort to tighten online safety. Canadian government officials said social media platforms can obtain an exemption if they have put in place sufficient safeguards. "We are failing our children. Enough is enough," said Mark Miller. Remember Mark Miller? You guys who are not into Canadian politics won't know Mark Miller was the white dude who was in charge of indigenous affairs at one point in time and spelled his name out in indigenous language and wore an indigenous scarf on his face. On, he's, they are all flipping frauds. But don't let that get in the way of their suicidal empathy. And it's not even suicidal empathy at this point. To quote Gad Saad, it's homicidal, it's tyrannical empathy.
But Lewis Carroll had the greatest expression or the greatest, uh, quote of all time, which is, "These tyrannical busybodies always cloak their tyranny in benevolence." That's how they get it through. Benevolence and emergencies. Because when you're in a state of panic, in a state of an emergency, real or manufactured, mostly manufactured when it comes to government, you're not making the right decisions. You're not making rational thoughts. You are deferring to the authority who are promising to keep you safe in the context of these manufactured bogus emergencies.
Tyranny never comes in the form of, "We're going to lock you up, you little piece of [ __ ]." No, it comes in, "You're at risk if you leave the house. So for your own good, we have to legislate that you be held down on a curfew for five and a half months because a co-virus is more transmissible or is potentially transmissible when you are alone outside at night."
And now, a brief pause from this video for a word from our sponsor, The Wellness Company. People, Americans love sushi. Over the last two decades, raw fish consumption has exploded. Sushi bars are everywhere. Grocery stores, gas stations, and millions of people now eat raw fish weekly. But there's a hidden risk most people don't think about: parasites. Salmon is one of the most popular fish worldwide, but it naturally contains more than 70 parasites. Most are tiny and nearly impossible to see, and they are making their way into the human body. Once inside, parasites can hide for years while frequently laying eggs before any symptoms appear. This is why many physicians are raising awareness about parasite exposure. Dr. Peter McCullough recommends doing a parasite cleanse at least once a year as a preventative measure. And The Wellness Company offers a hard-to-access RX parasite cleanse, USA compounded ivermectin and mebendazole. Ivermectin paralyzes the parasite's nervous system while mebendazole starves them. Each capsule contains 25 milligrams of ivermectin and 250 milligrams of mebendazole. Lab tested for quality. You can get a more budget-friendly 45-capsule option that costs $250 less, giving you two 21-day parasite cleanse cycles. Same formula as the original, just a smaller quantity. Head over to twwc.health/viva and use code viva to save $35 off plus free shipping. This is for US residents only. That is TWWC.health, the promo code. Thank you, The Wellness Company, for sponsoring this video. And now, back to the vlog.
They've got to have you in a state of panic, and they've got to cloak their tyranny in benevolence. "We're failing our children. We need basic protection in place." The legislation covers seven types of harmful content, including content that introduces children to harm themselves, content that incites violence. It's funny, we already have laws against all of these things, and fomenting hatred and non-consensual intimate images. We already have laws for all of that.
A digital safety commission will be created. Oh, here you go. The government's going to create a commission, a Kafka-esque government-run administrative body that's going to determine, adjudicate what privileges they give you and what privileges you're not capable of handling. Criteria for what exceptions, exemptions would look like will be announced at a later date. Miller said setting up the regulator could take up to 18 months. Miller said the platforms will need to prove that they are safe. Age verification will also be established. What's that? What? They just, they just throw that in there. Age verification will soon be established. Once you understand that the goal of this is not to protect children, but to monitor adults and have their information, their biometrics, their details, you'll appreciate the ultimate end goal of this was never the protection of the children but the de-anonymizing of social media of the internet. But I digress.
We can get into the article. It goes over it. I, I want to pull out a couple of the highlights. One of the highlights is the actual stated objection, stated objective of the legislation itself. When all else fails, go to the law, people. And it's long, convoluted, [ __ ] Bill C-34, an act to enact the Digital Safety Act and the Digital Safety Commission of Canada Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts. Recommendation: Her Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the guise of yada yada yada in the manner and for the purposes set out in a measure entitled an act to enact the Digital Safety Act and the Digital Safety Commission of Canada Act to make consequential amendments to other acts. I mean, if it weren't so consequential and so absurd, it would be funny. Unfortunately, it is consequential, it's absurd, and it's not funny. And, a, some people don't care, b, some people actually usher it in, but c, the majority of people are just too busy living their lives and trying to survive to even follow what's going on with this.
Summary: Part one enacts a Digital Safety Act whose purpose is, among other things, to promote the safety of persons in Canada, particularly children, reduce harms caused to them as a result of harmful conduct content online, and ensure that the operators regulate social media services, regulated chatbot services, and other unregulated online services are transparent and accountable with respect to their duties under the act.
Let's go to social media services and get the definition. You got to go to the definitions, right? Social media service. Here we go. Regulated service means a regulated social media service, a regulated chatbot service, or a regulated online service. Regulated social media service means a social media service referred to in section 61. Social media service means a website or application. I'm going to read this thoroughly and slowly. Social media service means a website or application that is accessible in Canada, the primary purpose of which is to facilitate interprovincial or international online communication among users of the website or an application, by enabling them to access and share content. On. What is it? Your, your guess is as good as mine, dudes. What is it? I, it seems like it's pretty much everything, uh, everything online except maybe, you know, CBC News and state-funded news. Facebook, Twitter, X, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, what else? YouTube, Rumble. Remember the, the, it's nationalizing the internet effectively.
Just read it one more time. Social media service means a website or application that is accessible in Canada. What's going to happen is it'll just cease being accessible in Canada, the same way Rumble is not accessible in Brazil. That's accessible in Canada. The primary purpose of which, primary purpose. So is that to say if the secondary or tertiary or alternative purposes, I, is online? Well, then they'll make exceptions. So, you know, I don't know, I don't know if what CBC or Radio Canada, the state-funded media, has by way of social media accounts, but, you know, well, their primary purpose is not to facilitate interprovincial or online communications, it's to facilitate spreading of the news. So to the extent it's not their primary purpose, they'll be exempt. Just throwing out a hypothetical. By enabling them to access and share content. They, they want to shut down the internet for children in Canada, period, for under 16, you know, because, uh, you got to reduce the harm to kids.
But to fully understand just how insane this is, I, I pulled out a couple of the highlights from the law so that we don't have to go through this tedious, uh, rubbish in too thorough detail. I'm going to go through it, uh, you know, a little bit more because it's long, it's confusing, you want to understand the essentials, you want to understand the exceptions, you want to understand what the hell they're proposing, but understand the backdrop and context in which they are proposing it. This is a tweet that I put out on the subject: "Canada proposed banning 'social media services' to children under 16. Social media is so toxic to developing minds, they must be shielded from its indoctrinating effects. But they can consent to a COVID jab without parental consent. In fact, even if the parent refuses, the state has now determined that they are the ones who determine what's in the child's best interest. It's no longer parental supremacy in Quebec, at least. That was one of my red lines to get the f out of that pro-province. They can consent to the jab without consent. They can change their genders and they can be exposed to trans and drag queen book reading. Oh yeah, this has nothing to do with protecting kids, but rather regulating and gathering data on the adults who will now have to prove their age to access social media services. Canada mutilates children, euthanizes its citizens, blocks news outlets, criminalizes speech, freezes bank accounts, jails political dissidents, and now wants to regulate social media services. A perfect combination of Germany 1930s and modern-day North Korea and China."
Someone actually said, "Viva, you missed a big one there. You know, access to safe injection sites." That's accessible to, I don't know, there was some disagreement or at least some refusal to admit whether or not it was accessible to people under 16, but pretty much so. Now we have the definition of social media services. I got to get out of there. Hold on one second because my screen is, is not working. Okay, we got definition of social media services. We're going to have to go escape here. The heck is the problem? Uh, we got definition that one we saw already. Here we go. Exclusion of service. Let me make sure that we're still looking at the same thing here. Exclusion of service, section 10. For the purposes of this act, a service is not a social media service if it does not enable a user to communicate content to the public. So that presumably would be things that allow for private messaging individual to individual, unless it allows you to private message to more than one individual. Interpretation. For the purposes of subsection one, a service does not enable a user to communicate content to the public if it does not enable the user to communicate content to a potentially unlimited. So if there's a potential to communicate to an unlimited number of users not determined by the user, then it's social media. That sounds like you're going to lose, uh, signal. Telegram. Very interesting. Exclusion of private messaging feature. The duties imposed under this act on the operator of a regulated social media service or a regulated online service do not apply in respect of any private messaging feature of that service. It'll apply to that service, but all you'll be able to use Facebook for is direct messaging, or you'll be able to use the direct messaging app unless it allows you to communicate content to a potentially unlimited number of users not determined by the user. Definition of private messaging feature. Okay, we can get out of that.
Now, let's go a little bit, uh, to the right over here. Let's go see what the next one is. Obligation, minimum age. This is where, you know, it starts to get thorny. This is, this is where you might want to start paying attention. Sub. Okay, this is paragraph 27. Subject to section 29, an operator must, with respect to every regulated social media service specified by regulation made by the Governor in Council under subsection five that it operates, implement adequate that it operates. Okay, so let's do this again. They make it not just unreadable, not just, uh, unable to be understood, deliberately so, so they can then use it and interpret it in ways that were always intended but never stipulated. That's good. Write that one down.
Subject to section 29, an operator must, with respect to every regulated social media service specified by regulations made by the Governor in Council under subsection fund that it operates, implement adequate age verification or age estimation measures designed to prevent a person under the age of 16 from being able to have an account with or otherwise be registered or otherwise register with the service. Adequacy of measures. In order to determine whether the measures implemented under subsection one are adequate, the commission must be satisfied that the measures are effective. Do not involve the collection or use of personal information other than for age verification or age estimation purposes. We're talking about corporations now that have already gathered everything on you out there. Provide the destruction. Yeah, these are the protective measures. And then there was one last one. I'm fairly certain. No, there wasn't. That was it.
Now, for those who, uh, are not aware, there are certain states now that have, um, made, uh, pornographic material not illegal, but you have to age verify. It is, I, I got to tell you, it is the ultimate deterrent because if anybody feels comfortable, you know, sending in a picture of their face so they can be of age and not operate on the basis that someone within the government would access that and use it as blackmail material, well, then you don't understand the arguments for anonymity when it comes to personal things like that. However you feel about porn on the internet, although as the famous song from Avenue Q went, "The internet was made for porn." It's going to be no different with this. They're going to have your face. You're going to scan your face so that you can have access to a social media account.
The one thing I do want to know, and I haven't yet been able to verify, is what are going to be the penalties for parents who open up accounts for their children? I, I haven't seen that. And I don't know if that's going to be criminal, if they're going to start taking kids away because, you know, now the government knows what's best for the kids, especially since they've eliminated parental supremacy as the overarching principle of the Youth Protection Act. I don't know what the penalties are if a parent does this for their kids. We'll see. I'm going to look into it. They want to know and they want to have access to you, your social media account. It'll make it easier for them to show up at your front door to arrest you if it's, if, if someone's posting anonymous so-called threats. If someone's posting anti-MMIW2SLGBTQIA+ ideology in Canada, someone posts that through an anonymous social media account, it ain't anonymous anymore. But they did it to protect the kids.
You know what was the opening provision of the, uh, of the legislation, the, the what they call the preamble? Whereas, you know, here, here they went to, they just went with the summary. Whereas the purpose of this act is, among other things, to promote the safety of persons in Canada, particularly children, reduce the harms caused to them as a result of harmful content online. I said, wait for the punchline at the end of this. You want to protect the children. You got to protect them from harmful content online. And you want to go after the big bad social media companies for harming children by exposing them to improper content online. You know this already if you've been around the channel for a little bit. This is an actual clip from the CBC literally indoctrinating your kids >> with trans drag ideology. But remember people, they need your face. They need age verification so you can have access to Facebook if this law passes. Meanwhile, this is what the state-funded CBC is pushing on your children, grooming them, sexualizing them in real time, exposing them to sexual deviancy. But they need to make sure that children under 16 don't have access to social media. So, scan your faces and goodbye internet anonymity. This is what the CBC pushes on your kids. >> Yeah. Are you feeling a little shy? How old are you? >> I'm 10. >> How old do you think I am? >> How do I get rid of that bar on the bottom? >> Yeah, I feel a little shy. >> Feeling a little shy. >> How old are you? >> How old are you? >> I'm 10. >> How old do you think I am? >> How old do you think I am? >> Is this your first time seeing a drag queen? >> Yes. >> Can you imagine you're watching a man dressed as a woman asking a kid how old he is? Is this your first time? I, I, in an ordinary sane universe, that man would probably be in jail or at least charges levied against that man by the parents of these children. But in a world of endless suicidal empathy, to use Gad Saad's term again, parents sacrifice their children at the altar of this rubbish sexualizing of their children. And it's empowering to allow adult men dressed as women to groom your kids. How does that make you feel? >> Uh, I'll fight it but a little bit nervous. >> How does it make you feel? I'll fight it but a little bit nervous. That is the literal definition of grooming children. Putting them in sexually inappropriate positions that make them feel uncomfortable and getting them to get over it to normal. That's the definition of grooming. I'm going to shut my mouth for the rest of this. >> Anyone can do drag. That's what's so special. >> I'm a little bit nervous. Why are you nervous? The best way to get less nervous is just to ask us a question. Do you do you wear rings sometimes? >> No. Not really. >> You're too young. Would you agree that makeup is for everyone? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Where do you buy your drag clothes? >> Do you have like a favorite drag performer? >> Well, I haven't really seen too like many. Can I be your favorite drag performer since I'm the first one? >> Give me your children. By the way. Oh, the, the kids too young for rings, but not too young to be asked to be a drag queen's favorite. Oh, by the way, where do you buy your drag clothes? I mean, that question looked about as authentic and natural as saccharine.
So, uh, that's what the Canadian government is doing to protect your children. On the one hand, effectively eliminating anonymity of the internet so they can go after the adults, while simultaneously using state-funded media that they take your tax dollars to pay for to groom and sexualize your children. That is Canada, people.