Connect with us

Opinion

1 Million March 4 Children announces second event Saturday, Oct 21 – How should we feel about this?

Published

2 years ago

11 minute read

Emboldened by their first Canada-wide protest, the people behind 1 Million March 4 Children are planning a second event on Saturday, October 21.  That means Canadians will have another opportunity to decide how they feel about this protest and these protestors.
This might be a good time to take a look back on the 1 Million March 4 Children event held September 20 in towns and cities from coast to coast. Here’s what it looked like in Red Deer.
Protests can be prickly and sometimes even violent. Surely that’s what a lot of Canadians were expecting from the 1 Million March 4 Children. In the days leading up to September 20, there were no shortage of ‘warnings’ about the protestors.  This was the warning put out by “AntiHate.ca”
  • These protests are supported by a big tent of far-right and conspiratorial groups, including Christian Nationalists, COVID-19 conspiracy theorists, sovereign citizens, and anti-public education activists.

Sounds dangerous. Far-right and conspiratorial groups, Christian Nationalists, COVID-19 conspiracy theorists, sovereign citizens, all mixing it up with anti-public education activists.  No wonder I was afraid to go at first! Good thing I don’t depend on the AntiHate.ca website to plan my outings.

Come to think of it I’ve got a couple of questions for AntiHate.ca.

1) Are Christian Nationalists ‘far-right’ or ‘conspiratorial’?  Can they be just Christians who like their country a lot? If not, what do we call Christians who like Canada?  Just wondering.

2) Are the COVID-19 ‘conspiracy theorists’ the ones who correctly (if annoyingly) warned the lock downs / masks / 1, 2, 3, 4 doses of vaccine would not stop the pandemic? or were they the ones who incorrectly believed all those things would bring that pandemic to an end?  Can you see how that could be confusing in 2o23?

3) I didn’t know I had to be afraid of sovereign citizens and anti-public education activists. Can I let my children out of the house while they still exist in Canada?

It’s important there are groups like AntiHate.ca. It’s important Canadians always remember that no matter how much we disagree, almost every single person wants to live their lives in freedom and simply enjoy opportunities. When we descend into hatred, we take society down with us. So thank you AntiHate.ca for watching out for us.

Were there incidents at hate at the 1 Million March 4 Children?  AntiHate.ca found some examples. I did not see or hear of any incidents at the Red Deer event.  Part of the credit goes to the police.  They did a wonderful job of patrolling between the opposing sides in a very relaxed and friendly manner that certainly calmed the tension people would otherwise have felt.

Standing on the sidewalk as protestors streamed past me, I was struck by how different the 1 Million March 4 Children felt compared to other protests I’ve attended.

This was a protest of families. There were pregnant women, new mothers and fathers with their young children, and lots of grandparents. It also featured an intriguing and beautiful mixture of cultures. As protestors strolled past I was reminded of that feeling you get from the multi-cultural festivals that mark so many Canada Day Celebrations.

Fact: On September 20, 2023 a vast array of Canadians representing many cultures and beliefs united at Red Deer’s City Hall Park for the 1 Million March 4 Children.

But: Unlike Canada Day, it felt a little bit like we were going to get in trouble just for being here. Maybe that’s why very few politicians dared to come out in support of this group. I did see Red Deer South MLA Jason Stephan and Red Deer Catholic School Board Member Monique LaGrange. Jason has never been frightened of zagging where other politicians are zigging.  As for Monique, she’s been disciplined for expressing her opinion recently and probably felt she had nothing more to lose by being associated with the people AntiHate.ca is warning us about.

Canada’s Prime Minister is convinced the people streaming past me were “phobs”… Transphobs, homophobs, and biphobs (I think he may have invented the last one just as he was writing the post below).  According to our Prime Minister hundreds of Central Albertans and the tens or hundreds of thousands of Canadians who gathered on September 20 were there to ‘manifest their hatred’ of 2SLGBTQI+ people.  Here’s Trudeau’s post on X.

The Muslim Association of Canada strongly condemned Trudeau’s remarks and called for an apology that has yet to make it’s way into the line up of apologies PM Trudeau seems to make on a daily basis. Here’s part of their statement.

  • By characterizing the peaceful protests of thousands of concerned parents as hateful, Canadian leaders and school boards are setting a dangerous precedent of using their position of influence to unjustly demonize families, and alienate countless students.
  • On Wednesday September 20th, thousands of Muslims, joined by other faith-based groups, protested to raise their concerns, calling for their rights as parents in relation to their children’s education. Their intent was to be heard, not to sow division. Parents should have the absolute right to advocate for the wellbeing of their children.

As I streamed through my social media feeds last week I could see some of my friends (who I did not see at the protest or counter protest) apparently agree with Trudeau.  The most common post was the “no space for hate” meme which is really a beautiful message even if it might be a bit too sarcastic when aimed at the vast majority of those who marched. (I’m OK with sarcasm. I think my family may have invented it.)

By using the word ‘hate’ they seem to be implying the protestors are hateful. Maybe they can come to the next march in October to see for themselves.  I did not see messages of hate from the protestors OR from the counter protestors in Red Deer. You can see excellent examples of the signage from both sides in the photos below which show the signs on opposite sides of the street (and the debate).

On top of the signs there were also competing slogans. Chants of “Leave our kids alone” from the protestors were so loud it was a bit difficult to hear the opposing chant. I thought I heard “I was born like this” from the counter protestors.

I heard another chant from the protest organizer on his megaphone. “Don’t interact with the counter protestors. They have a right to be here too.” All in all the Red Deer protest was a bit loud, but far more civilized than advertised. I guess it felt a little bit like democracy is supposed to feel like.

As the protest ended I even witnessed one protestor walk up to a group of 5 or 6 counter protestors. He said (I’m paraphrasing) “I may not agree with you about much, but I respect your right to be here and I just wanted to say thank you for expressing your opinions peacefully.” That was quite a moment for the counter protestors who all looked relieved as they were likely expecting a confrontation. I admit I was stunned. It caught me by surprise and I was unable to get a photo or video in time.

As I looked through the protest signs and briefly chatted with people streaming past me it was clear there was one overwhelming message. The protestors clearly want to be the ones to teach their children about gender ideology. Others are far more concerned about the idea that schools would be keeping secrets with students from their parents who pay the taxes that support the whole system.

I leave the final words to Tim Hoven. Tim is a politically active Central Albertan who tried to take on his local UCP MLA Jason Nixon in a nomination and then ran unsuccessfully as an Independent candidate against him when his nomination was disqualified. Hoven was the local organizer and the main speaker at the Red Deer version of 1 Million March 4 Children.

Related Topics:

After 15 years as a TV reporter with Global and CBC and as news director of RDTV in Red Deer, Duane set out on his own 2008 as a visual storyteller. During this period, he became fascinated with a burgeoning online world and how it could better serve local communities. This fascination led to Todayville, launched in 2016.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 2 days ago

Trump Tariffs are not going away. Canada needs to adapt or face the consequences

Duane Rolheiser / 2 weeks ago

Team Canada is driving us right into the arms of The Donald

Censorship Industrial Complex / 3 weeks ago

How America is interfering in Brazil and why that matters everywhere. An information drop about USAID

2025 Federal Election

Hong Kong-Canadian Groups Demand PM Carney Drop Liberal Candidate Over “Bounty” Remark Supporting CCP Repression

Published on March 31, 2025

By

Sam Cooper

Thirteen Hong Kong-Canadian organizations are calling on Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberal Party to immediately revoke the candidacy of MP Paul Chiang, alleging he “may have violated Canadian laws” after making explosive remarks that appeared to endorse a Chinese Communist Party bounty targeting a Toronto-area Conservative candidate.

The controversy centers on Chiang’s comments during a January meeting with Chinese-language media in Toronto, where the Markham–Unionville Liberal incumbent said, “If you can take him to the Chinese Consulate General in Toronto, you can get the million-dollar reward,” referring to Joe Tay, the Conservative candidate in Don Valley North who is wanted by Hong Kong authorities for running a pro-democracy YouTube channel in Canada.

The response from Mark Carney’s Liberals appears increasingly conflicted, especially in light of remarks made last year by the party’s top foreign affairs official concerning Chinese transnational repression targeting Hong Kong immigrants in Canada.

Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly issued a warning in December, stating: “This attempt by Hong Kong authorities to conduct transnational repression abroad, including by issuing threats, intimidation or coercion against Canadians or those in Canada, will not be tolerated.”

Tay had remained silent since the revelations broke Friday. But on Sunday evening, he made his first public statement in a post on X.

“This is the most challenging time in our lifetime, and we must give it everything we’ve got to protect this place we call home. A fourth term for the Liberals is not an option,” Tay wrote.

About the same time, Paul Chiang posted his own statement on social media, offering a direct apology to Tay.

“Today, I spoke with Joseph Tay, the Conservative candidate for Don Valley North, to personally apologize for the comments that I made this past January. It was a terrible lapse of judgement. I recognize the severity of the statement and I am deeply disappointed in myself. As a 28-year police veteran, I have always strived to treat people with respect and dignity. In this case, I failed to meet that standard. I know better and it will never happen again.”

Despite the apology, a Carney campaign spokesperson told reporters Sunday that the party would not remove Chiang from the ballot.

Now, leading Hong Kong Canadian advocacy groups are intensifying pressure, saying Chiang’s comments amount to a tacit endorsement of Beijing’s foreign repression network — a growing concern for Canadian authorities, especially after Ottawa’s diplomatic expulsion of a Chinese official last year over threats to MP Michael Chong’s family.

“The integrity of Canada’s democratic elections has been damaged,” the groups wrote in a joint statement. “Paul Chiang’s actions may have violated Canadian laws, including the Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act and the Canada Elections Act.”

Meanwhile, as the chorus of political condemnation grew beyond criticism from Conservative Party leaders, NDP MP Jenny Kwan — herself a victim of targeted Chinese interference, according to testimony at the Hogue Commission — stood with NDP leader Jagmeet Singh and several candidates in Vancouver and addressed the Chiang scandal directly.

“He is a police officer, and he ought to know that when the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] went out and put a bounty on anybody, including Canadians, that cannot be acceptable. That is intimidation at its worst,” Kwan said.

“And yet, he played right into it. He advocated for people to bring [Tay] to the Chinese consulate to collect the bounty. In what universe is this normal?”

Kwan added the remarks are especially damaging while Canada is facing “active, sophisticated foreign interference activities targeting Canada’s democratic institutions.”

The Hong Kong Canadian groups described Chiang’s apology as “insincere” and “a tactic to downplay the seriousness of his outrageous comments.” They argue that any politician “truly sympathetic to oppressed Hongkongers” would never suggest delivering a Canadian citizen to a hostile foreign government’s diplomatic outpost.

“Chiang’s remarks legitimize foreign interference and potentially threaten Tay’s safety,” the statement reads. “This is not just about an offhand comment — it’s about whether our elected officials are willing to stand up to transnational repression or not.”

The joint release also cites findings from a national survey showing that 85.4% of Hongkonger-Canadian respondents are deeply concerned about transnational repression and infiltration in Canada, while 40.9% reported reducing public political engagement due to safety fears.

“Chiang’s remarks exemplify how foreign interference continues to cast a shadow over Hong Kong immigrants’ lives in Canada,” the groups said, emphasizing that more than 60% of respondents are alarmed by Canada’s handling of relations with China, particularly the influence of Chinese diplomatic institutions operating within Canadian borders.

“The Liberal Party must send a clear message that intimidation or threats against political candidates will not be tolerated,” the statement continues. “Canadians — particularly those who fled authoritarian regimes — deserve a democracy free from foreign interference.”

The Bureau has contacted the Liberal Party for further comment. This is a developing story. More to follow.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Support a public interest startup.

We break international stories and this requires elite expertise, time and legal costs.

Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

Welcome to Britain, Where Critical WhatsApp Messages Are a Police Matter

Published on March 30, 2025

By

logo

By Cam Wakefield

“It was just unfathomable to me that things had escalated to this degree,”

“We’d never used abusive or threatening language, even in private.”

You’d think that in Britain, the worst thing that could happen to you after sending a few critical WhatsApp messages would be a passive-aggressive reply or, at most, a snooty whisper campaign. What you probably wouldn’t expect is to have six police officers show up on your doorstep like they’re hunting down a cartel. But that’s precisely what happened to Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine — two parents whose great offense was asking some mildly inconvenient questions about how their daughter’s school planned to replace its retiring principal.
This is not an episode of Black Mirror. This is Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, 2025. And the parents in question—Maxie Allen, a Times Radio producer, and Rosalind Levine, 46, a mother of two—had the gall to inquire, via WhatsApp no less, whether Cowley Hill Primary School was being entirely above board in appointing a new principal.
What happened next should make everyone in Britain pause and consider just how overreaching their government has become. Because in the time it takes to send a meme about the school’s bake sale, you too could be staring down the barrel of a “malicious communications” charge.
The trouble started in May, shortly after the school’s principal retired. Instead of the usual round of polite emails, clumsy PowerPoints, and dreary Q&A sessions, there was… silence. Maxie Allen, who had once served as a school governor—so presumably knows his way around a budget meeting—asked the unthinkable: when was the recruitment process going to be opened up?
A fair question, right? Not in Borehamwood, apparently. The school responded not with answers, but with a sort of preemptive nuclear strike.
Jackie Spriggs, the chair of governors, issued a public warning about “inflammatory and defamatory” social media posts and hinted at disciplinary action for those who dared to cause “disharmony.” One imagines this word being uttered in the tone of a Bond villain stroking a white cat.
Parents Allen and Levine were questioned by police over their WhatsApp messages.
For the crime of “casting aspersions,” Allen and Levine were promptly banned from the school premises. That meant no parents’ evening, no Christmas concert, no chance to speak face-to-face about the specific needs of their daughter Sascha, who—just to add to the bleakness of it all—has epilepsy and is registered disabled.
So what do you do when the school shuts its doors in your face? You send emails. Lots of them. You try to get answers. And if that fails, you might—just might—vent a little on WhatsApp.
But apparently, that was enough to earn the label of harassers. Not in the figurative, overly sensitive, “Karen’s upset again” sense. No, this was the actual, legal, possibly-prison kind of harassment.
Then came January 29. Rosalind was at home sorting toys for charity—presumably a heinous act in today’s climate—when she opened the door to what can only be described as a low-budget reboot of Line of Duty. Six officers. Two cars. A van. All to arrest two middle-aged parents whose biggest vice appears to be stubborn curiosity.
“I saw six police officers standing there,” she said. “My first thought was that Sascha was dead.”
Instead, it was the prelude to an 11-hour ordeal in a police cell. Eleven hours. That’s enough time to commit actual crimes, be tried, be sentenced, and still get home in time for MasterChef.
Allen called the experience “dystopian,” and, for once, the word isn’t hyperbole. “It was just unfathomable to me that things had escalated to this degree,” he said. “We’d never used abusive or threatening language, even in private.”
Worse still, they were never even told which communications were being investigated. It’s like being detained by police for “vibes.”
One of the many delightful ironies here is that the school accused them of causing a “nuisance on school property,” despite the fact that neither of them had set foot on said property in six months.
Now, in the school’s defense—such as it is—they claim they went to the police because the sheer volume of correspondence and social media posts had become “upsetting.” Which raises an important question: when did being “upsetting” become a police matter?
What we’re witnessing is not a breakdown in communication, but a full-blown bureaucratic tantrum. Instead of engaging with concerned parents, Cowley Hill’s leadership took the nuclear option: drag them out in cuffs and let the police deal with it.
Hertfordshire Constabulary, apparently mistaking Borehamwood for Basra, decided this was a perfectly normal use of resources. “The number of officers was necessary,” said a spokesman, “to secure electronic devices and care for children at the address.”
Right. Nothing says “childcare” like watching your mom get led away in handcuffs while your toddler hides in the corner, traumatized.
After five weeks—five weeks of real police time, in a country where burglaries are basically a form of inheritance transfer—the whole thing was quietly dropped. Insufficient evidence. No charges. Not even a slap on the wrist.
So here we are. A story about a couple who dared to question how a public school was run, and ended up locked in a cell, banned from the school play, and smeared with criminal accusations for trying to advocate for their disabled child.
This is Britain in 2025. A place where public institutions behave like paranoid cults and the police are deployed like private security firms for anyone with a bruised ego. All while the rest of the population is left wondering how many other WhatsApp groups are one message away from a dawn raid.
Because if this is what happens when you ask a few inconvenient questions, what’s next? Fingerprinting people for liking the wrong Facebook post? Tactical units sent in for sarcastic TripAdvisor reviews?
It’s a warning. Ask the wrong question, speak out of turn, and you too may get a visit from half the local police force.

Reclaim The Net needs your help

Make a one-time donation
Continue Reading

Trending

X