San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus Claims Video Was Satire, Makes It Public Again

The San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus recently put out a video, where very creepy men sing about “coming for your children”. They claim it’s about teaching kids not to hate, although the entire atmosphere gives off pedo vibes.

At a minimum, this was an incredibly tone-deaf stunt. Sensible parents, even open minded ones, are not going to want to subject their children to this. Is this how tolerance is taught?

But if this was just a joke, what exactly is the punch line? What were they aiming for? Or was this a way to manufacture victimhood? Did they never once stop to think how unsettling this is?

“The San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus was founded, in part, to fight discrimination and bigotry against all peoples. Today, our chorus members are facing death threats, vile attacks, false accusations, doxing, and other forms of harassment because of our satirical video performance “Message from the Gay Community.”

“We placed the video in private mode to quell the intolerance and hateful responses from mostly anonymous people. Upon reflection, we have made it live again for all to see the satirical and obviously tongue-in-cheek humor. We want everyone to judge for themselves. We will not allow ourselves, even in the face of death threats, to retreat or bow to attempts to twist our words, meaning, self-deprecation and humor.

“We are thankful for the efforts of the San Francisco Police Department and law enforcement for their quick response and assistance in handling these threats.

“The San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus is dedicated to being role models, teaching, and spreading the message of love, inclusion, humor, and celebration through our music. We believe, most fervently, in open dialogue , communication, and free speech. We will continue to do so through our music. We invite everyone to join us.”

The San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus performed a tongue-in-cheek song commissioned by an external arts organization which ironically had a simple message around teaching young people to speak out against anti-LGBTQ hate. The Chorus sings in harmony, ‘Someone’s got to teach them not to hate.’ As a result of manipulation from anti-LGBTQ media figures, the Chorus is now facing uncalled-for and disgusting threats of violence, as well as hate and harassment, across social media. As GLAAD’s Social Media Safety Index reported, hate and harassment too often goes unchecked on social media and the platforms need to act swiftly to address the hateful content directed at the Chorus, especially the threats of violence. The ugly anti-LGBTQ rhetoric just reinforces the need for LGBTQ visibility, community, and advocacy, all of which the SFGMC has exemplified in its 40+ year history.”

Now, a series of responses had compared some of the names against the California sex offender registry. While there were several matches, keep in mind, California has some 40 million residents. Therefore, it’s quite possible for many people to have the same names. While the video above is disgusting, these weirdos shouldn’t be mistaken for those — if the names are coincidental.

If this performance was just tone deaf, it would make sense to take it down. However, the Chorus seems to thing that this “should” be thrown in the faces of everyone.

Yes, tolerance for gays is declining. And antics like this are directly responsible for it happening. Say what you will about the Muslims, but they would never stand for such degeneracy.

(1) https://www.sfgmc.org/
(2) https://www.sfgmc.org/press-releases-1/2021/7/9/statement-from-san-francisco-gay-mens-chorus-july-9-2021
(3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INfxtSbh6Do

Bill C-36: Red Flag Laws In The Name Of Preemptively Combatting Hate Speech

Bill C-36 has been introduced into the House of Commons. It would be fair to describe portions of this as a “red flag” law. People can be subjected to Court restrictions simply based on the suspicion that they may engage in hate speech or hate propaganda.

Welcome to the Pre-Crime Unit, and the Minority Report

Fear of hate propaganda offence or hate crime
810.‍012 (1) A person may, with the Attorney General’s consent, lay an information before a provincial court judge if the person fears on reasonable grounds that another person will commit
(a) an offence under section 318 or subsection 319(1) or (2);
(b) an offence under subsection 430(4.‍1); or
(c) an offence motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or any other similar factor.
Appearances

(2) The provincial court judge who receives an information under subsection (1) may cause the parties to appear before a provincial court judge.

Adjudication
(3) If the provincial court judge before whom the parties appear is satisfied by the evidence adduced that the informant has reasonable grounds for the fear, the judge may order that the defendant enter into a recognizance to keep the peace and be of good behaviour for a period of not more than 12 months.

Duration extended
(4) However, if the provincial court judge is also satisfied that the defendant was convicted previously of any offence referred to in subsection (1), the judge may order that the defendant enter into the recognizance for a period of not more than two years.

Refusal to enter into recognizance
(5) The provincial court judge may commit the defendant to prison for a term of not more than 12 months if the defendant fails or refuses to enter into the recognizance.

Conditions in recognizance
(6) The provincial court judge may add any reasonable conditions to the recognizance that the judge considers desirable to secure the good conduct of the defendant, including conditions that
(a) require the defendant to wear an electronic monitoring device, if the Attorney General makes that request;
(b) require the defendant to return to and remain at their place of residence at specified times;
(c) require the defendant to abstain from the consumption of drugs, except in accordance with a medical prescription, of alcohol or of any other intoxicating substance;
(d) require the defendant to provide, for the purpose of analysis, a sample of a bodily substance prescribed by regulation on the demand of a peace officer, a probation officer or someone designated under paragraph 810.‍3(2)‍(a) to make a demand, at the place and time and on the day specified by the person making the demand, if that person has reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant has breached a condition of the recognizance that requires them to abstain from the consumption of drugs, alcohol or any other intoxicating substance;
(e) require the defendant to provide, for the purpose of analysis, a sample of a bodily substance prescribed by regulation at regular intervals that are specified, in a notice in Form 51 served on the defendant, by a probation officer or a person designated under paragraph 810.‍3(2)‍(b) to specify them, if a condition of the recognizance requires the defendant to abstain from the consumption of drugs, alcohol or any other intoxicating substance; or
(f) prohibit the defendant from communicating, directly or indirectly, with any person identified in the recognizance, or refrain from going to any place specified in the recognizance, except in accordance with the conditions specified in the recognizance that the judge considers necessary.

Conditions — firearms
(7) The provincial court judge shall consider whether it is desirable, in the interests of the defendant’s safety or that of any other person, to prohibit the defendant from possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, prohibited ammunition or explosive substance, or all of those things. If the judge decides that it is desirable to do so, the judge shall add that condition to the recognizance and specify the period during which it applies.

Surrender, etc.
(8) If the provincial court judge adds a condition described in subsection (7) to a recognizance, the judge shall specify in the recognizance how the things referred to in that subsection that are in the defendant’s possession shall be surrendered, disposed of, detained, stored or dealt with and how the authorizations, licences and registration certificates that are held by the defendant shall be surrendered.

Reasons
(9) If the provincial court judge does not add a condition described in subsection (7) to a recognizance, the judge shall include in the record a statement of the reasons for not adding it.

Variance of conditions
(10) A provincial court judge may, on application of the informant, the Attorney General or the defendant, vary the conditions fixed in the recognizance.

Other provisions to apply
(11) Subsections 810(4) and (5) apply, with any modifications that the circumstances require, to recognizances made under this section.

-A person can be ordered to appear before a Provincial Court
-A Judge can order a person to enter into a Recognizance for 12 months
-That Recognizance can last for 24 months if there is a prior conviction
-A person can be jailed for 12 months for refusing a Recognizance
-A person can be ordered to wear an electronic monitoring device
-A person can be subjected to a curfew
-A person can be ordered to abstain from alcohol
-A person can be subjected to drug/alcohol testing
-That drug/testing can be ordered at regular intervals
-A person can be subjected to a no contact order (of 3rd parties)
-A person can be prohibited from going to certain places
-A person may be subjected to other conditions

Keep in mind, all of these conditions can be imposed, simply because of the SUSPICION that a hate crime will be committed, or hate propaganda will be distributed.

Not only is the Canadian Criminal Code to be amended, but the Canadian Human Rights Code will be as well, to implement fines and cessation orders. There doesn’t seem to be real standard for what counts as hate speech.

Canadian Human Rights Act
Amendments to the Act
2013, c. 37, s. 1
12 Section 4 of the Canadian Human Rights Act is replaced by the following:
Orders regarding discriminatory practices
4 A discriminatory practice, as described in sections 5 to 14.‍1, may be the subject of a complaint under Part III and anyone found to be engaging or to have engaged in a discriminatory practice may be made subject to an order as provided for in section 53 or 53.‍1.
.
13 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 12:
Communication of hate speech
.
13 (1) It is a discriminatory practice to communicate or cause to be communicated hate speech by means of the Internet or other means of telecommunication in a context in which the hate speech is likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.
Continuous communication
.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a person who communicates or causes to be communicated hate speech continues to do so for as long as the hate speech remains public and the person can remove or block access to it.

Complaint substantiated — section 13
53.‍1 If at the conclusion of an inquiry the member or panel conducting the inquiry finds that a complaint relating to a discriminatory practice described in section 13 is substantiated, the member or panel may make one or more of only the following orders against the person found to be engaging or to have engaged in the discriminatory practice:
(a) an order to cease the discriminatory practice and take measures, in consultation with the Commission on the general purposes of the measures, to redress the practice or to prevent the same or a similar practice from recurring;
(b) an order to pay compensation of not more than $20,000 to any victim personally identified in the communication that constituted the discriminatory practice, for any pain and suffering that the victim experienced as a result of that discriminatory practice, so long as that person created or developed, in whole or in part, the hate speech indicated in the complaint;
(c) an order to pay a penalty of not more than $50,000 to the Receiver General if the member or panel considers it appropriate having regard to the nature, circumstances, extent and gravity of the discriminatory practice, the wilfulness or intent of the person who is engaging or has engaged in the discriminatory practice, any prior discriminatory practices that the person has engaged in and the person’s ability to pay the penalty.
Award of costs
53.‍2 A member or panel conducting an inquiry into a complaint filed on the basis of section 13 may award costs for abuse of process in relation to the inquiry.

According to the revisions in the Act, “hate speech” will be ongoing as long as the material is available publicly, and could be removed. A person can also be ordered to be $20,000 to each victim, and $50,000 to the panel itself.

Problem with all of this, “hate speech” is disturbingly vague. It could be applied subjectively, depending on the politics of the parties involved.

(1) https://www.parl.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&billId=11452710
(2) https://parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/43-2/bill/C-36/first-reading
(3) https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-69.html#docCont
(4) https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-91.html#h-122977

Bit Of History: WHO Wrote Paper On “Implied Consent” For Vaccinations In 2014

Several years ago, the World Health Organization published a paper on various levels of “consent” required for vaccinating children. It also introduces the idea of “implied consent for children”. Apparently, just going to school after a notice has been given will suffice.

Approaches to obtain informed consent:

  • 1. Written consent
  • 2. Verbal consent
  • 3. Implied consent

It’s the third type that is the most nefarious.

3. An implied consent process by which parents are informed of imminent vaccination through social mobilization and communication, sometimes including letters directly addressed to the parents. Subsequently, the physical presence of the child or adolescent, with or without an accompanying parent at the vaccination session, is considered to imply consent. This practice is based on the opt-out principle and parents who do not consent to vaccination are expected implicitly to take steps to ensure that their child or adolescent does not participate in the vaccination session. This may include not letting the child or adolescent attend school on a vaccination day, if vaccine delivery occurs through schools.

Implied consent procedures are common practice in many countries. However, when children present for vaccination unaccompanied by their parents, it is challenging to determine whether parents indeed provided consent. Therefore, countries are encouraged to adopt procedures that ensure that parents have been informed and agreed to the vaccination. Comprehensive data on whether the approach countries use to deal with consent has changed or evolved over the last decades is not available.

Based on concepts of vaccines as a public good, or on public-health goals of disease elimination and outbreak control, some countries identify one or more vaccines as mandatory in law, or in their policies. Vaccination may, for example, be made a condition for entry into preschool or primary school, or to enable access to welfare benefits. Whether consent is needed for mandatory vaccination depends on the legal nature of the regulations. When mandatory vaccination is established in relevant provisions in law, consent may not be required. If the mandatory nature of vaccination is based on policy, or other forms of soft law, informed consent needs to be obtained as for any other vaccines. Some countries allow individuals to express non-consent (opt-out) and obtain an exemption for mandatory vaccines. This may come with certain conditions, like barring unvaccinated children from attending school during disease outbreaks

Have to cringe at how getting informed consent, or having the parents involved, is seen as an inconvenience. Then again, many concerned parents would put a stop to such things.

(1) https://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/policies_strategies/consent_note_en.pdf
(2) WHO Schools And Implied Not Direct Consent
(3) https://www.sott.net/article/424625-WHO-now-says-your-childs-presence-in-school-counts-as-informed-consent-for-vaccination-parental-presence-not-required

Aruna Khilanani, Anti-White Forensic Psychiatrist/Psychoanalyst, Doubles Down

Considering that Khilanani claims her words were taken out of context, it’s best to show the entire video here. She did a follow up interview after the initial talk.

On April 6, Aruna Khilanani, a forensic psychiatrist and psychoanalyst gave a talk at Yale University, where she spoke of violent fantasies about killing white people.

Statement from YSM
On April 6, a speaker who is not affiliated with Yale gave a Child Study Center Grand Rounds talk, with the provocative title “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind.” After the event, several faculty members expressed concern to the Yale School of Medicine’s Office of Academic and Professional Development and the Office of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion about the content of the talk.

Based on these concerns, School of Medicine leaders, including Dean Brown and Deputy Dean Latimore, in consultation with the Chair of the Child Study Center, reviewed a recording of the talk and found the tone and content antithetical to the values of the school. Because Grand Rounds are typically posted online after the event and in consideration of Yale’s commitment to the right of free expression, school leaders further reviewed the Report of the Committee on Freedom of Expression at Yale.

In deciding whether to post the video, we weighed our grave concern about the extreme hostility, imagery of violence, and profanity expressed by the speaker against our commitment to freedom of expression. We ultimately decided to post the video with access limited to those who could have attended the talk — the members of the Yale community. To emphasize that the ideas expressed by the speaker conflict with the core values of Yale School of Medicine, we added the disclaimer: “This video contains profanity and imagery of violence. Yale School of Medicine expects the members of our community to speak respectfully to one another and to avoid the use of profanity as a matter of professionalism and acknowledgment of our common humanity. Yale School of Medicine does not condone imagery of violence or racism against any group.”

Instead of outright condemning this, Yale decided to post it, but limit the access of who could watch it. One can only imagine the outrage if the races had been reversed in this case. She now claims she was using metaphors, and wasn’t calling for overt violence.

Khilanani tries to spin this as some sort of social justice mindset, instead of overtly calling for violence. It comes across as incredibly condescending when she tries to “explain” it.

Khilanani has since doubled down, claiming both: (a) that she wasn’t quoted in full context; and (b) justifying how such views would be shaped. See the video at the top. She appeared on BNC news on June 16.

Apparently, white people got triggered (pardon the pun) for Khilanani saying that she fantasized about shooting whites in the head and walking away. She mocks whites for being offended by her words. Despite an initial impression, this woman doesn’t appear to be trolling. She seems to mean the anti-white hatred she spits out.

Also, if the West was built by whites oppressing and slaughtering others, is Khilanani not benefitting from this? Is she not enjoying a Western lifestyle created from the blood and bones of others? There’s no indication she’s about to abandon that life here and move elsewhere.

Treating everyone else just as people isn’t enough, in her mind.

This is racial hatred cloaked as psychological methods and research. Her choice of hosts for a “clarification” interview is interesting as well.

(1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o20tk-QrZiE
(2) https://twitter.com/marclamonthill/status/1405491706842292225
(3) https://medicine.yale.edu/childstudy/education/rounds/
(4) https://yalecollege.yale.edu/get-know-yale-college/office-dean/reports/report-committee-freedom-expression-yale

BC Covid Modelling: Open Source Software Hosted By GitHub (Microsoft’s People), Run By SFU/UBC Academics

Ever get the feeling that the Government in British Columbia just makes it up as they go along? Suspect that there really is no rational or scientific basis for anything that they do?

As for the term “Bayesian”, it refers to: being, relating to, or involving statistical methods that assign probabilities or distributions to events (such as rain tomorrow) or parameters (such as a population mean) based on experience or best guesses before experimentation and data collection and that apply Bayes’ theorem to revise the probabilities and distributions after obtaining experimental data. (From Merriam)

By itself, a Bayesian approach isn’t too bad. The problem is when garbage data and assumptions go in, the inevitable result is garbage outcomes.

Apart from BC Provincial Health Officer Bonnie Henry’s repeated admissions of there being no scientific basis, the BCCDC has also revealed that information. They really do just make it up, and no one in the mainstream press bothers to call out any of this.

And what about the modelling that Bonnie is referring to? Who’s cooking up the models that are being used to strip away the rights of Canadians?

Previously On BC Government Reporting…..

Thank you for your email of March 11, 2021. The Honourable Adrian Dix, Minister of Health has asked me to respond to your email regarding COVID-19 modelling. I am pleased to respond on his behalf. I apologies for the delayed response.

COVID-19 modelling in British Columbia (BC) is undertaken by the BC Centre for Disease Control (BCCDC). BCCDC projections for COVID-19 are done using a dynamic compartmental model fit to reported case data using a Bayesian Framework:
• Published model: Anderson et al. 2020. PLoS Comp. Biol. 16(12) e1008274 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008274
• Publicly available software: https://github.com/seananderson/covidseir
• Model enhancements incorporating vaccination and variants of concern (VoC) are currently being prepared for publication

The BCCDC generates provincial and regional model fits to current data and projected numbers of new cases, hospitalizations, and deaths; and provincial and regional time-varying estimates of average daily transmission rate (Rt). Projections incorporate the current BC vaccination schedule and variable rates of contact and susceptibility by age. Vaccination is modeled using the current proposed one dose schedule by age group, with all eligible age groups vaccinated by end of June 2021, adjusting for age-dependent impact on transmission. A 15 percent vaccine hesitancy is assumed for all age groups.

According to the results of a freedom of information request, BC’s “Covid modelling” comes from a group of academics, primarily from the University of British Columbia, and Simon Fraser University. They also use open-source software from GitHub, which can be freely accessed.

The BCCDC tacitly admitted there was no science behind any of the measures they implemented. Instead, they deflected as it being “a rational approach”. But how rational can it be when there’s no hard science to support it?

While the software seems to be hosted on GitHub, bought in 2018 by Microsoft, it’s unclear who actually developed it, since the specific program isn’t listed. In any event, GitHub is a forum where software can be given a platform.

Who Are The People Running GitHub?

Many of the people running GitHub have ties to Microsoft and Google. Not too shocking since the $7.5 billion acquisition. That is quite interesting indeed, considering their respective roles in the “pandemic”. Both companies are part of VCI, the Vaccine Credential Initiative, and Microsoft helped launch ID2020 back in 2016. Same company that wants to give everyone a digital ID is also pushing the doomsday modelling to help justify the measures.

What else is GitHub up to? Here are just a few of their recent projects:
-An app to track vaccination bookings
-A notification system for vaccination bookings
-A vaccine passport app
-More on a vaccine passport
-A contact tracing app for Switzerland
QR codes to prove vaccination status
QR decoder for Quebec contact tracing app

It’s interesting that the modelling software is open source. Just a theory, but perhaps it’s done in order to drive business to the more lucrative side projects.

Who Are The “Experts” Doing The Modelling?

  • Sean C. Anderson – Pacific Biological Station, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
  • Andrew M. Edwards – Department of Biology, University of Victoria
  • Madi Yerlanov – Department of Mathematics, Simon Fraser University
  • Nicola Mulberry – Department of Mathematics, Simon Fraser University
  • Jessica E. Stockdale – Department of Mathematics, Simon Fraser University
  • Sarafa A. Iyaniwura – BCCDC, Department of Mathematics, University of British Columbia
  • Rebeca C. Falcao – BCCDC, Department of Mathematics, University of British Columbia
  • Michael C. Otterstatter – BCCDC, School of Public Health, University of British Columbia
  • Michael A. Irvine – British Columbia Children’s Hospital Research Institute
  • Naveed Z. Janjua – BCCDC, School of Public Health, University of British Columbia
  • Daniel Coombs – Department of Mathematics, University of British Columbia
  • Caroline Colijn – Department of Mathematics, Simon Fraser University

In the link provided in the FOI response, these are the people involved in conducting the computer modelling. University professors. People who spend their lives in institutions (and not the real world), produce predictions that the Government uses to justify medical tyranny.

And what do they use? Open source software hosted by a company owned by Microsoft and with Google associates. Hard data is lacking, and is replaced by assumptions.

(1) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Bayesian
(2) https://github.com
(3) https://github.com/about/leadership
(4) https://www.linkedin.com/in/natfriedman/
(5) https://archive.is/bqaEE
(6) https://www.linkedin.com/in/erica-anderson-54b5878/
(7) https://archive.is/XoBay
(8) https://www.linkedin.com/in/keithba/
(9) https://archive.is/yvcHx
(10) https://www.linkedin.com/in/dawnbeatty/
(11) https://archive.is/DQZyD
(12) https://www.linkedin.com/in/ebrescia/
(13) https://archive.is/m8WxT
(14) https://www.linkedin.com/in/thomas-dohmke-24855b10/
(15) https://archive.is/H97o2
(16) https://www.linkedin.com/in/tylerfuller/
(17) https://archive.is/nrmYN
(18) https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-hanley-b6508913/
(19) https://archive.is/DPd5x
(20) https://www.linkedin.com/in/laura-heisman-comms/
(21) https://www.linkedin.com/in/shankuniyogi/
(22) https://archive.is/XSZqS
(23) https://www.linkedin.com/in/max-schoening/
(24) https://news.microsoft.com/2018/06/04/microsoft-to-acquire-github-for-7-5-billion/
(25) https://archive.is/debwV
(26) https://github.com/yashwanthm/cowin-vaccine-booking
(27) https://github.com/ayushi7rawat/CoWin-Vaccine-Notifier
(28) https://github.com/SwissCovid/swisscovid-app-android
(29) https://github.com/vax-me/vaccine-passport-app
(30) https://github.com/vaccine-passport/docs
(31) https://github.com/minvws/nl-covid19-testvac-qr-core
(32) https://github.com/fproulx/shc-covid19-decoder
(33) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-37j-bccdc-admits-no-science-behind-restricting-peoples-freedoms-just-models-assumptions/
(34) https://id2020.org/

London Hit-And-Run: Heinous Crime, Or Well Funded Anti-Racism Psy-Op?

Around this time last year, we had the George Floyd racism psy-op. Trudeau took part in protests, despite making a complete mockery of the CV psy-op. Understandably, a lot of people were confused by this. Even Theresa Tam supported such protests, as long as people wore masks. How things change.

The novel coronavirus is responsible for destroying economies everywhere (we are told), but as long as woke causes are being protested, it stays away. How considerate.

Now, in the wake of 4 people being killed in London, ON, Doug Ford and Justin Trudeau have apparently both showed up to a crowded vigil. This comes in the middle of (what they call) the 3rd wave of a deadly pandemic. However, people are not dropping dead.

Conservative Party Leader Erin O’Toole also saw fit to attend this memorial.

Disclaimer: while there is a lot that still needs to be shared publicly, everything about this incident so far seems to be off. That said, things could actually be exactly as they reported.

CBC staff typically go out of their way to avoid mentioning details about the background of a suspect in a crime. However, that isn’t the case here.

Doug Ford has imposed what are possibly the greatest restrictions to civil rights anywhere in North America. However, he’s quite fine with making exceptions to gatherings when it comes to a public memorial and condemnation of white supremacy and white violence.

Apparently, the deadliest virus in history is respectful enough not to attack helpless people at such vigils. That is one smart virus.

Now, this is giving some strange vibes. What could possibly be causing doubt of the official narrative?

Remember this? A few years back, an 11 year old girl and her 8 year old brother staged a hate crime. Who comes up with such an idea for a hoax? This was perpetuated in the media long after it had been exposed as a hoax, in order to drum up racial tensions in Canada.

ORGANIZATION YEAR AMOUNT
Acte D’Amour Mar. 1, 2021 $12,000
Afro-Canadian Caribbean Society Of Hamilton Mar. 26, 2021 $30,000
Angels of Hope Against Human Trafficking Mar. 3, 2021 $196,880
Aroha Fine Arts Apr. 9, 2021 $10,500
Association Francophone De Brooks Feb. 20, 2021 $6,200
Bluff Productions Mar. 1, 2021 $7,500
Calgary Police Service Mar. 23, 2021 $18,200
Canadian Council Of Business Leaders Against Systemic Anti-Black Racism Mar. 30, 2021 $10,000
Canadian Society For Yad Vashem Apr. 8, 2021 $10,000
Carrefour Communautaire Franophone De London Feb. 25, 2021 $34,000
Carrefour Jeunesse Emploi De Cote Des Neiges Feb. 1, 2021 $10,000
Centre Francophone De Toronto Mar. 6, 2021 $30,000
Compagnie Theatre Creole Apr. 1, 2021 $10,000
Cumberland African Nova Scotian Association Feb. 25, 2021 $34,000
Ethnik Festivals Association Feb. 20, 2021 $19,000
Francophones For Sustainable Environment Feb. 26, 2021 $17,610
Hot Doc’s Apr. 29, 2021 $25,000
Inter-Cultural Association of Greater Victoria Mar. 30, 2021 $19,800
Legacy Of Hope Foundation Apr. 1, 2021 $96,000
Legal Assistance Of Windsor Mar. 1, 2021 $269,709
Maybellearts Apr. 1, 2021 $10,000
Multicultural Health Broker’s Init. Apr. 1, 2021 $303,000
Nigerian Canadians for Cultural, Educational & Economic Progress Mar. 9, 2021 $25,000
Oromocto Special Care Home Mar. 31, 2021 $7,771
Overture With The Arts Feb. 1, 2021 $18,000
Overture With The Arts Feb. 1, 2021 $6,000
Overture With The Arts Feb. 1, 2021 $5,800
Regina Open Door Society Feb. 1, 2021 $1,690
Réseau d’action pour l’égalité des femmes immigrées et racisées du Québec Apr. 1, 2021 $453,746
Shoe Project (The) Mar. 7, 2021 $30,218
Silk Road Institute Mar. 1, 2021 $14,000
Skills For Change Of Metro Toronto Mar. 9, 2021 $30,000
Toronto Black Film Festival Mar. 11, 2021 $29,347
Vues D’Afrique Apr. 1, 2021 $25,000

A lot of taxpayer money is being spent to reinforce the idea that Canadians are racist. Of course, as long as such money is forthcoming, the problem is unlikely to disappear.

Keep in mind, these are only some of the recent grants provided by the Federal Government. Provinces and Municipalities are almost certainly kicking in large amounts of money as well.

As if on cue, Trudeau is pledging to fight “far right” groups, which is essentially anyone he ideologically disagrees with. How convenient this anti-Muslim attack gave him an excuse to go after such groups.

Waight told the news conference it wasn’t certain if the accused was affiliated with any specific hate group.

Never mind that this person isn’t alleged to be part of any hate group, but why should that get in the way of a good story? Perhaps there will a corresponding crack down on free speech to prevent the radicalization of such people in the future.

The Nova Scotia mass shooting in 2020 was used as an excuse to do a mass gun ban. It seems likely that this will be used for similar purposes.

(1) https://twitter.com/CBCAlerts/status/1401981291784986636
(2) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/muslim-family-hit-run-targeted-1.6056238
(3) https://globalnews.ca/news/7930493/premier-doug-ford-london-attack-statement/
(4) https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/hijab-attack-claim-a-hoax-toronto-cops
(5) https://twitter.com/CPHO_Canada/status/1267623514258976768
(6) https://twitter.com/CPHO_Canada/status/1267623515311747076
(7) https://twitter.com/CPHO_Canada/status/1267623516389736455
(8) https://twitter.com/CPHO_Canada/status/1267623517362814976
(9) https://twitter.com/680NEWS/status/1402413060808118274
(10) https://twitter.com/erinotoole/status/1402434857301692425
(11) https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/canada-act-dismantle-far-groups-144551326.html
(12) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(13) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/?sort=agreement_start_date_s%20desc&page=1&search_text=racism

%d bloggers like this: