Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Dan Knight

Climate Fears and Political Smoke Screens

Published

15 minute read

This article is from The Opposition With Dan Knight substack.

Unmasking the Political Smoke and Mirrors Amidst Flames, Arson, and Fear

Good Morning my fellow Canadians! You know, the more things change, the more they stay the same, especially in our political landscape. Here we are, amid rising temperatures and heated debates, and as the wildfires burn brighter, so do the Twitter feuds among our politicians. Now, polls indicate that Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative Party is edging into majority territory, and well, that’s triggered a full-blown meltdown from the usual quarters.

First in line, Harjit Sajjan, Minister of Emergency Preparedness. He tweeted, ‘Canadians can’t afford leaders who refuse to believe climate change is real,’ citing our worst wildfire season on record. It’s a brilliant strategy, really; never waste a good crisis to get your point across. I mean, who cares about providing solutions when you can point fingers?

 

Jonathan Wilkinson, our valiant Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, criticizes the Conservative Party for not even trying to recognize that climate change is real. Jonathan, we’re still waiting for you to recognize that humans, actual Canadian citizens, are setting forests on fire deliberately. But sure, it’s all the Conservative Party’s fault. Hilarious!

And then the Liberal Party, oh, the Liberal Party, wagging its finger at all of us, saying, ‘Canadians want more climate action, not less.’ They say it like they’ve cracked the Da Vinci Code of Canadian public opinion. Really? Because last time I checked, polls are showing Canadians might want something a little different.

Let’s not forget the honorable Ryan Turnbull, a man who seems to believe that Pierre Poilievre is the harbinger of the apocalypse, promoting ‘ignorance, hate, division,’ and basically every bad thing you can think of. Clearly, Poilievre’s struck a nerve.

So why the desperation? Why the continuous fearmongering? Could it be because they’re afraid that Canadians are starting to see through the smoke—quite literally? Now, you and I both know that the Liberals would love nothing more than to make you believe that the world is on fire and it’s all because of climate change. The mantra: ‘The Earth is burning, so give us more of your hard-earned money to save it.’ But amid the hysteria, let’s focus. We’ve been through a rough wildfire season. Yes, we’ve all seen the headlines. Yet, here’s the twist. Smithsonian Magazine reveals that 84% of wildfires in our southern neighbor, the United States, are started by human activity. But hold on, in Canada, it’s just 55%. Why such a dramatic difference?

Are Americans simply more careless, or could it be that our authorities are quicker to dismiss human involvement for the more politically advantageous ‘climate change’? Isn’t it more convenient to blame the ambiguous, the uncontrollable, than to investigate potential criminal behavior, like arson, which could be preventable?

And it’s not just a rhetorical question. We have had multiple instances of arson across the country. In Mission, BC; in Mackenzie; in Vernon North Okanagan; in Castlegar; in Grand Forks; in Pictou County, Nova Scotia; in Yellowknife. Just recently, a man in Quebec was arrested for setting fires in forested areas. He’s facing charges. Yet, do you see the Liberal government or mainstream media making a big deal out of that? No, because it doesn’t fit the narrative.

In the flurry of headlines, accusations, and the general media hubbub about the wildfires in Quebec, we’re missing something truly elemental: the entire story.

Last month, CBC News blazed across our screens with a dire proclamation. Climate change made weather conditions that powered Quebec’s wildfires twice as likely. That was the conclusion from the World Weather Attribution initiative, a U.K.-based group. Their analysis came in the wake of the record-setting fires in Quebec, and its takeaway? Climate change is ramping up the heat, and in turn, igniting the forests.

Yan Boulanger, a scientist at Natural Resources Canada, even labeled these findings as ‘shocking.’ The province had seen an astonishing 5.2 million hectares burned. The entirety of Canada? A whopping 15.3 million hectares — shattering the previous record. As for this analysis, it’s yet to be peer-reviewed, but CBC was quick to point out the past track record of the research group.

And while those numbers are staggering and the climate concerns valid, there’s another piece of news that’s just as vital to digest.

Two days ago (almost a month later), Quebec provincial police arrested one Brian Paré in connection with — wait for it — numerous forest fires that ripped through the northern province. This isn’t about a stray campfire or a misplaced cigarette butt; this is deliberate, calculated arson. Paré faces charges for setting a fishing cabin ablaze and torching vast stretches of forest over a span of months. It took an army of behavior analysts, criminal profilers, and forensic psychologists to track this man down.

No mention of climate change in that courtroom, I assure you. Do you know what makes fires 100 times more likely? It’s not climate change; it’s ARSON!

Now, I can hear the chorus already, “Dan! Climate change sets the stage for these fires to be more devastating!” Sure, let’s talk about setting the stage. You see, while the liberal media and their academic buddies are blaming your SUV and your meat-eating habits for setting forests ablaze, they’re conveniently ignoring one glaring point: people—real, living human beings—are lighting these fires. Not the weather, not some cosmic karma for humanity’s supposed ‘sins’ against nature.

As for those numbers that supposedly show the weather conditions for these fires are twice as likely because of climate change? A not-yet-peer-reviewed study is your smoking gun? Come on.

And let’s not forget the broader context here. Remember British Columbia?Over 1.6 million hectares devoured by wildfires this year alone. Astonishing, until you dive into the numbers. This isn’t some climate-induced Armageddon; it’s a pattern, one that has a lot of variables—climate being just one small piece of it. Fires have raged for years, caused by everything from lightning to, yes, human negligence. Just ask the folks who remember the Chinchaga fire of 1950—the biggest one North America has ever seen.

Climate change is an easy boogeyman. You can blame it for everything and thus blame everybody, which leads to a broad call for action that usually translates to more control, more regulations, and more taxes. But what it does not lead to is a discussion on the complexities and nuances.

You see, Canada, that’s the sinister issue afoot here. It’s much easier to control a population that’s operating on fear, especially when you can stoke that fear with selective storytelling. As you mull over these points, ask yourself: are we being given the full story, or just the convenient parts that fit a certain agenda?

So you’ve got all these questions swirling in your head, right? Complexities, nuances, arson rates, and where is all that in the grand narrative? Nowhere. Because it doesn’t fit the script, the master plan of Trudeau and Guilbeault to keep you scared, to keep you submissive. They don’t want an informed public asking hard questions; they want a fearful public, willing to buy into whatever they’re selling.

And oh boy, are they selling. A carbon tax here, a trip to China there. It’s like they’re hawking fear from a roadside stand, only instead of selling you overpriced trinkets, they’re peddling overpriced delusions. It’s a yard sale of deception, folks, and the currency is hitting your wallet via taxes!

Alright, now that we’ve connected the dots, let’s dive back into the murky waters of Trudeau’s ‘progressive’ policies because it’s high time somebody said it. You’ve got Justin Trudeau and his trusty sidekick Steven Guilbeault treating the Canadian people like we’re all a bunch of morons. They want to talk about how ‘progressive’ their carbon tax is, and how it’s supposedly saving the planet. Let’s set the record straight: If their carbon tax were the life-saving vaccine for climate change they claim it to be, British Columbia should be a Garden of Eden right now. But guess what? It’s not.

Don’t you just love how they evade accountability? They’re like a couple of tap dancers sidestepping questions they don’t want to answer. Oh, they’ll tell you that it’s ‘complex,’ that you ‘wouldn’t understand.’ Really? You’re going to pull that card? How condescending can you be? This is the same Trudeau who wore blackface, remember? Now he’s judging your understanding of complex issues?

And let’s talk about Guilbeault’s trip to China. Oh yes, China—the world’s leading polluter. The irony is so rich, you could drizzle it on pancakes. What’s he doing there? Sharing tips on how to be environmentally unfriendly? It’s absurd! Yet, they continue to offshore Canadian manufacturing to China so that our country’s carbon footprint ‘looks’ smaller on paper. They’re just shifting the dirt under the rug! It’s all smoke and mirrors!

Now, I know what some of you are thinking, “But the Liberals are doing something about climate change!” Are they? Are they really? Because last time I checked, our forest management is underfunded, our firefighters are under-resourced, and people’s homes are going up in flames! All while Trudeau’s jet-setting around the world!

And let’s not even get started on their international dealings. They have the audacity to preach about ‘green energy’ while sending coal off to China. It’s like a doctor smoking a cigarette while advising you to live a healthy lifestyle. It’s absurd, laughable, and downright insulting to the intelligence of Canadians.

So, when Trudeau and Guilbeault start accusing the Conservatives of wanting to roll back their so-called ‘climate initiatives,’ you better believe the answer is YES! Because Canadians are fed up. They see through the lies, the sleight of hand, the empty gestures that are as hollow as a bamboo shoot!

People are no longer buying into their deceptive narrative. You’re tired of it. I’m tired of it. And you know what? The days of nodding along to sanctimonious drivel are over. Canadians want action, not platitudes. They want honesty, not deceit. And most importantly, they want competent leadership!

Canadians are not stupid. Far from it. We’re a nation of problem solvers, of innovators, of people who brave harsh winters and come out stronger for it. We deserve leadership that reflects that spirit, not one that seeks to divide us, to stoke fears and rely on alarmism to keep their grip on power. It’s high time our politicians understood that message. It’s high time they were held to account for treating Canadians like pawns in their ideological games

And come 2025, let’s make sure they get that message, loud and clear. Canadians are fed up. We’re through with the lies, the virtue signaling, and the blatant disregard for the people who make this country great. So let’s roll up our sleeves, Canada, and do what needs to be done. Let’s vote them out and reclaim the true north, strong and free!

Storytelling is in our DNA. We provide credible, compelling multimedia storytelling and services in English and French to help captivate your digital, broadcast and print audiences. As Canada’s national news agency for 100 years, we give Canadians an unbiased news source, driven by truth, accuracy and timeliness.

Follow Author

Business

SDTC “Green” Fund or Trudeau’s Slush Fund? Public Accounts Committee Reveals Taxpayer Dollars Funneled to Liberal Insiders with No Accountability

Published on

Ethics Commissioner Konrad von Finkelstein
The Opposition with Dan Knight

Public Accounts Committee reveals SDTC’s rampant conflicts of interest, lack of oversight, and millions in taxpayer dollars benefiting insiders—while Liberal MPs defend Trudeau’s “green” slush fund.

What happens when politicians promise “green energy” but deliver taxpayer-funded corruption? If you tuned in to Canada’s Public Accounts Committee this week, you found out. On the hot seat was Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC), a bloated agency supposedly designed to fund sustainable technology but apparently also set up as a welfare program for ethically dubious board members.

Now, SDTC isn’t some fledgling startup or small-time charity. This agency is sitting on $330 million of your money – Canadian taxpayer money. And what did Canada’s Auditor General find in her investigation? An unbelievable 186 conflicts of interest. That’s not an organization with a few bad apples; that’s a systematic problem.

So why isn’t anyone doing anything? Here’s where it gets even more outrageous. Enter Ethics Commissioner Konrad von Finkelstein, a man whose entire job is to hold officials accountable for ethical breaches. Did he step up to expose the corruption in SDTC? Not really. Von Finkelstein told the committee that his role is simply to “expose” conflicts of interest, not to actually do anything about them. Think about that. Here’s a man whose salary is funded by taxpayers, and his job description basically amounts to reading out loud the names of people breaking the rules.

Conservative MP Michael Cooper wasn’t having it. Cooper laid it out for von Finkelstein, practically begging him to explain why only two out of dozens of SDTC board members were investigated. But von Finkelstein’s excuse? He couldn’t bother because – get this – the Auditor General had already done the hard work. If that sounds like passing the buck, it’s because it is. Canadians aren’t paying for an Ethics Commissioner to sit back and watch. They’re paying for an official who’s supposed to defend the integrity of public institutions. But that’s clearly not happening here.

Liberal Apologists at Work

Not everyone on the committee wanted answers, though. Some were too busy defending SDTC’s “noble” cause. Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith practically bent over backward trying to downplay the whole thing. When Conservative MPs called SDTC a “green slush fund,” Erskine-Smith got indignant. He insisted that SDTC wasn’t a criminal organization and took offense at the term “slush fund.” Really? Because if funneling millions of public dollars into the hands of connected board members isn’t a slush fund, I don’t know what is.

Let’s call it what it is. While Erskine-Smith was busy defending SDTC’s “mission,” the committee heard exactly how that mission was carried out – through unethical, undisclosed conflicts of interest, with board members giving funds to companies they had direct financial ties to. And what did Erskine-Smith call this? Just a “few ethical lapses,” as if millions of taxpayer dollars being handed out without oversight is a minor paperwork error.

The Ethics Commissioner’s Toothless Office

Bloc MP Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné and NDP MP Richard Cannings pressed von Finkelstein on his office’s glaring lack of oversight. Why was he investigating just two board members when nearly 200 conflicts of interest were flagged? His answer was almost laughable: His office couldn’t enforce anything, couldn’t recoup the wasted money, and couldn’t even stop the bleeding of taxpayer funds because his role is “limited.” Limited? That’s putting it lightly.

And here’s where it gets even more insulting. Von Finkelstein admitted that he wouldn’t coordinate with other agencies like the RCMP or the Auditor General to go after these ethical lapses. This office, which exists solely to enforce ethical standards, can’t or won’t go after those breaking them. It’s as if the Ethics Commissioner’s job is to stand back and announce that something unethical happened, only to shrug and do nothing about it. Can you imagine running any organization that way? Of course not – but in the Canadian government, this seems to be the new normal.

Auditor Testifies, and It’s Worse Than We Thought

Just when we thought the Ethics Commissioner’s testimony had exposed the worst of Canada’s green-tech “accountability” disaster, along comes Auditor General official Michel Bédard. You’d think with the staggering amount of taxpayer money SDTC has under its control, someone would be keeping tabs. But if today’s testimony proved anything, it’s that this agency has zero meaningful oversight, a culture that actively ignores conflicts of interest, and no one stepping in to protect Canadians’ hard-earned money.

So, here we go again. 186 conflicts of interest, millions in public funds granted to companies with ties to board members—SDTC is basically the Wild West of “green” government spending. And guess what? Just like the Ethics Commissioner, Bédard’s office can report on it, but he admitted they can’t actually do anything to stop it. All that money might as well be floating in a pool, with insiders diving in for their share.

The “Accountability” Problem: Michael Cooper’s Pointed Questions

Conservative MP Michael Cooper wasn’t here to play around. He honed in on the obvious question: if SDTC’s board members aren’t held accountable, what’s the point of an Auditor General report? Cooper pushed Bédard to explain why these SDTC board members weren’t facing any real consequences. Bédard’s response? His office doesn’t have the authority to penalize or recover funds—it’s all just for show. That’s the message, folks: this is a government program that “monitors” ethical breaches but has no teeth.

If you’re wondering why SDTC board members feel free to treat taxpayers’ dollars like a bottomless well, this is it. They know that nothing’s going to happen. Cooper hit the nail on the head when he called out the lack of deterrence, and Canadians ought to be asking: why are we funding oversight bodies that can’t actually hold people accountable?

Liberals Try to Soften the Blow—Iqra Khalid’s Flimsy Defense

Then, enter Liberal MP Iqra Khalid, swooping in with damage control. Her goal? To downplay this mess as if it’s all just a big misunderstanding. She floated the idea that SDTC’s ethical violations weren’t “intentional misconduct” but simply lapses in judgment, suggesting board members maybe didn’t “understand” conflict-of-interest rules. Are we supposed to believe that these seasoned board members—handling millions in taxpayer funds—just forgot their ethics training?

Khalid hinted that more “training” and “internal guidance” would fix things. Bédard’s subtle response was telling: yes, training is helpful, but let’s be clear, SDTC’s issues are deeper. It’s a cultural problem within an organization that has no incentive to follow the rules. Training can’t fix a system that fundamentally disregards ethical standards. Khalid’s attempt to sidestep accountability only underscored what’s really happening here—a refusal to impose consequences.

Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné and Richard Cannings: Why Aren’t Taxpayers Being Compensated?

Bloc Québécois MP Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné and NDP MP Richard Cannings brought up the most glaring issue yet: where’s the money? Taxpayers are funding SDTC, watching it go straight into the hands of conflicted board members, and yet, there’s no mechanism to get that money back. Sinclair-Desgagné demanded answers on why SDTC couldn’t recoup funds that were misappropriated due to these ethical lapses. Bédard’s response? The Auditor General’s office has no authority to force financial recovery, meaning SDTC’s board can make conflicted decisions with no risk of losing the cash.

Cannings and Sinclair-Desgagné went further, questioning whether anything less than legislative reform could solve this crisis. It was clear that these MPs understood the root of the problem: SDTC’s oversight is built on a house of cards, with taxpayer money at stake and no tools to hold anyone accountable. Canadians are effectively writing blank checks to a board of insiders who profit without consequences.

The Big Picture: A Culture of Entitlement and Zero Accountability

Michel Bédard’s testimony laid bare the sickening entitlement within SDTC’s leadership. This isn’t a minor oversight or an accidental misunderstanding—this is a systemic culture where people with a financial stake in the projects can vote themselves money, and no one bats an eye. Worse, the Liberal defense of SDTC is that because it has a “green mission,” its failures somehow don’t matter. They’re telling Canadians that as long as the organization’s purpose sounds virtuous, the rules don’t apply.

Let’s be real. No one believes that SDTC’s board members are unaware of basic ethics rules. These are people who sit in decision-making positions, who know full well the implications of conflict of interest. What’s happened here is that they’re taking advantage of a system that has no means of holding them accountable, and they know it.

What Canada Needs Now, Real Accountability, Not Empty Promises

The real takeaway from Bédard’s testimony? Canada’s so-called oversight framework is a farce. The Trudeau government has set up an accountability structure that looks good on paper but doesn’t stop the political class from dipping their hands in taxpayer money. If we want to see real change, Canadians need a complete overhaul of the system—one that actually empowers the Auditor General and Ethics Commissioner to take action and enforce consequences, not just to “report” and move on. Until that happens, SDTC will keep doing what it does best: functioning as a de facto slush fund for Trudeau’s elite insiders, where conflicts of interest are not exceptions but the rule.

Canadians deserve far better than a government handing out their tax dollars to political friends who think they’re untouchable. Michel Bédard’s testimony laid bare SDTC’s blatant failures, and it’s a moment of reckoning. Will any of these politicians rise above the corruption and demand real reform? Or will this testimony be just another chapter in the Trudeau government’s long saga of accountability failures?

Let’s get one thing straight: this isn’t about “green energy” or “sustainability.” Those are just fancy words bureaucrats use while they funnel public money to friends and business associates without a shred of oversight. And here’s the kicker—Liberal MPs want Canadians to think this is just a “misunderstanding” or, worse, that questioning it is somehow unpatriotic. It’s the Trudeau swamp at its finest: shut down accountability by slapping a green label on taxpayer-funded corruption and hoping no one notices.

Let’s face it: Sustainable Development Technology Canada isn’t operating in some dark corner of bureaucracy. It’s operating right out in the open, with the full backing of Trudeau’s government, while the Ethics Commissioner, the Auditor General, and Liberal MPs play the role of political apologists, doing everything they can to sweep this rot under the rug.

This committee session showed Canadians one thing loud and clear: they’re being lied to. Told that their money is supporting green technology, but instead, it’s being pocketed by insiders. SDTC, the Ethics Commissioner, the Auditor General—they’re not protecting Canadians. They’re protecting the interests of a political class that’s putting cronyism above the public good.

In a fair system, people would lose their jobs over this. Taxpayer money would be repaid. And those who let SDTC slip through the cracks would face consequences. But in Trudeau’s Canada, officials hide behind excuses, Ethics Commissioners wring their hands about “exposure,” and Liberal MPs get offended when we dare call corruption for what it is.

This isn’t “oversight.” It’s an insult to every Canadian who funds this government. It’s time to drain the Trudeau swamp, end the era of unchecked cronyism, and demand real, accountable governance. Canadians deserve nothing less.

Continue Reading

Dan Knight

Corruption, Crime, and Economic Chaos: Trudeau’s Canada Exposed in QP

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Liberals Stonewall Corruption Probe, Bail System in Shambles, and Economy Sinks Below Alabama—All While Seniors and Canadians Struggle to Survive

This is a pilot—we’ve never reviewed Canada’s Question Period (QP) before. But after yesterdays circus, we might have to make this a regular thing. If you like this summary, comment, like, and share.

Yesterdays Question Period in Canada’s Parliament was exactly what you’d expect from Justin Trudeau’s government—pure corruption and delusion. We’re talking blatant scandals, crumbling economic conditions, and, of course, Trudeau’s ministers tripping over themselves to defend the indefensible. Let’s break it down, and remember—this is your money, your future, and your freedoms on the line.

Liberal Corruption: $400 Million in Self-Dealing

First up: corruption. Trudeau’s Liberals are embroiled in yet another scandal, this time involving $400 million in contracts funneled to Liberal insiders. The Conservatives, led by Pierre Poilievre, hammered the government for refusing to hand over documents to the RCMP. These documents are crucial to investigating 184 cases of conflicts of interest uncovered by the Auditor General. In other words, the Liberals are using your tax dollars to line their own pockets.

The MP from Regina-CapelMichael Kram, went after the government, asking the obvious question: why is Trudeau hiding these documents? Why are Liberals protecting their insiders while Canadians can’t even afford to feed their families? Poilievre demanded accountability, but what did the Liberal House Leader, Karina Gould, have to say? That the Conservatives were trying to “trample the Charter rights” of Canadians by asking for these documents.

Hold on. The Liberals are talking about Charter rights? Let’s get real here. These are the same Liberals who trampled all over Charter rights when they invoked the Emergencies Act in 2022. They shut down protests, froze bank accounts of peaceful demonstrators, and trampled on freedom. Trudeau’s government violated Canadians’ most basic freedoms, but now they’re hiding behind the Charter to dodge corruption allegations? The hypocrisy is nauseating.

Bail Reform: Trudeau’s “Hug-a-Thug” Program Exposed

And while we’re on the subject of failure, let’s talk about crime. Trudeau’s government has created a public safety nightmare. Under his watch, criminals walk free because of his “hug-a-thug” bail policies. Today, Pierre Poilievre exposed yet another case: a repeat violent offender, out on bail, shot a police officer. This is the reality in Trudeau’s Canada—violent offenders arrested, released, and committing more crimes. All while our police officers are under siege.

The Justice Minister, Arif Virani, blamed the provinces, as usual. No solutions. Just excuses. He tried to shift the blame, while the streets remain unsafe. Virani’s response to a cop getting shot by a criminal on bail? Crickets. Meanwhile, families across the country are afraid to walk down their own streets.

Canada is Now Poorer Than Alabama: The Liberal Legacy of Economic Collapse

And if you think that’s bad, let’s dive into Trudeau’s economic disaster. Under his leadership, Canadians are now poorer than people in Alabama. That’s right—an Economist report compared Canada’s living standards to one of the poorest states in the U.S., and guess what? Canada came up short. How’s that for leadership?

Adam Chambers, the MP from Simcoe North, laid out the truth. Canada has the worst consumer debt in the G7, housing costs have doubled, and GDP growth is projected to be the worst in the OECD until 2060. 2060! That’s how long the Trudeau nightmare will haunt Canada. And what do the Liberals say in response? Jean-Yves Duclos, the Public Services Minister, bragged about their investments in “affordable housing.” What a joke. This government built six affordable housing units in a riding over the course of years. Six!

But it gets better. Trudeau’s government keeps parading around their dental care plan like it’s some kind of win. Great—Canadians can get their teeth fixed, but they can’t afford to buy food! What’s the point of dental care when families are lining up at food banks? The Liberals are so out of touch with reality it’s unreal.

Seniors: Two Classes, One Betrayal

The Bloc Québécois and NDP didn’t hold back on the government either. They called out Steven MacKinnon, the Minister of Labor and Seniors, for continuing to create two classes of seniors. Right now, seniors aged 65 to 74 are being treated like second-class citizens because the Liberals refuse to increase their Old Age Security (OAS) by 10%. Seniors over 75 get the bump, but if you’re under 75? Forget about it.

The Bloc MP from SheffordAndréanne Larouche, ripped into MacKinnon, accusing him of failing seniors in his own riding. But MacKinnon, like a good Liberal, brushed it off, hiding behind weak excuses. Larouche was right—this government is willing to throw seniors under the bus to avoid a political fight. MacKinnon had the nerve to lecture us about how well the Liberals are doing for seniors, but all we see are skyrocketing costs, poverty, and broken promises.

“Hate Speech”? No, It’s Just Speech

Finally, we need to address the elephant in the room—this obsession with so-called “hate speech.” NDP MP Leah Gazan pushed her bill to classify residential school denialism as hate speech. Let’s be clear: we all agree that residential schools were a horrific chapter in Canadian history. But this isn’t about that. This is about free speech.

You may not like what someone has to say, but free speech exists for a reason. It allows us to have a dialogue, to debate, to confront bad ideas with good ones. Labeling everything you disagree with as “hate speech” only shuts down conversation. And let’s be real—Trudeau’s government is the last group of people that should be defining what is or isn’t acceptable speech. These are the same people who trampled on free expression during the Freedom Convoy protests. Speech is speech. You either support free speech, or you don’t.


This has been your first recap of Canada’s Question Period—what a disaster zone. Trudeau’s Liberals are corrupt, out of touch, and more interested in defending their friends than helping Canadians. Crime is out of control, the economy is in free fall, and seniors are being thrown under the bus. And don’t even get me started on the hypocrisy of Liberals defending Charter rights after invoking the Emergencies Act to crush dissent.

Let’s get the truth out there. If you like what you’ve read, comment, like, and share. Should we keep this going? Let us know.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight newsletter.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X