Everything that can be done by the private sector should be done by the private sector. Keep government small.

The same posh dimwits who pushed the transing of children, free drugs for addicts, easy bail for criminals, climate alarm for anxious people, and racist and sexist hiring practices to somehow end racism and sexism now want social media bans. "For the children" they say. Not buying it.

Alberta's culture is what drives Canada. Those who denigrate it do so to their own detriment.

I have 7 kids at home. They get a dumb phone when they get to an age when we need to pick them up from their extra curricular activities. As they get older they get a regular phone, but have restrictions and they are monitored, as is their access to computers. They do not get an email till they are 13. Their school has a no social media policy that parents sign on to. They are not allowed x, insta, snap or facebook till they are 18. No government supervision required. Just good old parenting.

Even Liberals should be disgusted by this blatant attempt to censor free speech and implement Digital ID 🤯

It is a bit odd that kids are not allowed to use social media but can still browse some pretty crazy porn online.

I’ve been warning for months about the EU’s insidious long-range plan to build up BlueSky and expand its network partners in preparation for a regulatory ban on X. They’re calling it EuroSky, and the goal is to impose a new Iron Curtain.

The Royal Society for Blind Children and the National Deaf Children's Society have both come out against the Starmer social media ban. "Internet bad" is a trendy, upper-middle-class opinion for people with extracurricular budgets that ignores legions of people who rely on it.

Heh, attacks on free speech rarely have the desired effect in Alberta.

Watch for "harm" definitions expanding beyond clear child exploitation to vague categories like misinformation, hate, or adult content. Regulators then demand broader takedowns. That's the standard creep pattern. Track the commission's actual scope.

🚨🚨 The countries on the list!! Not a good look, Canada.

Authoritarian regimes use "protecting children" as a standard pretext for broad internet control. Top 5: 1. China – Great Firewall minor mode rules enforce total CCP dominance over information. 2. Russia – 2012 child-harm blacklist law quickly expanded to block opposition and "extremism." 3. Iran – Moral and child-safety filters uphold theocracy and crush dissent. 4. North Korea – Total isolation framed as shielding citizens from foreign corruption. 5. Saudi Arabia/Vietnam – Religious or party controls wrapped in youth protection. Genuine CSAM blocking is narrow and universal. The pattern here is power consolidation. Canada's new Safe Social Media Act and similar Western bills start with the same rhetoric. Watch the expansion.

Under the pretext of banning under-16s from social media to “protect the children,” Keir Starmer has snuck in some small print that should make Americans really glad that all the tea was dumped into the Boston harbour back in 1773. Adults will still be “allowed” to use the platforms… once they’ve handed over facial recognition, digital ID, passport, or credit card details to prove they’re not a child. So it was never really about the kids. It was about making sure every single person who wants to speak online has to first tell the government exactly who they are. Step 1: Link your real identity to your speech Step 2: police have a lovely searchable database of every spicy take, meme, or complaint you’ve ever posted Step 3: bring in the consequences - arrests, travel ban, debunking, for out-of-bounds speech The UK is in a free fall.

The Canadian left treats the American surveillance state as a civil-liberties emergency. It has had almost nothing to say about the one Mark Carney is building. stephentaylor.ca/2026/06/15/…

Thank you, @TulsiGabbard, for vindicating me. In 2021, I published the docs. In 2022, I went to URK Biolabs, filmed it. MSM called me a Conspiracy Theorist, ignoring my evidence. @guardian = Guardian of Govt Treachery against the People. Also, Shame on @nytimes, @BBC , @wapo

“Leftwing people find it very hard to get on with rightwing people, because they believe that they are evil. Whereas I have no problem getting on with leftwing people, because I simply believe that they are mistaken.” Sir Roger Scruton

The country that's arresting people for 'mean' tweets is now prohibiting sm for under 16. Because 'safety.' Because 'the children!' If I fought covid creep with you and you're falling for this obvious authoritarianism, I just don't know what to say....

Josh Dehaas: Carney's plot to censor the entire internet nationalpost.com/opinion/jos…

Forever Canadians, will you denounce this? I recently interviewed a Filipino immigrant who came to Canada in 1994, became a Canadian citizen, built a life here, and now supports Alberta independence. Most people on both sides responded respectfully. But a small group of self-described “Forever Canadians” didn’t make an argument for Canada. They didn’t explain why Confederation should continue. They didn’t debate this man’s ideas. Instead they told him to “go back where he came from.” They said his opinion doesn’t matter because he wasn’t born here. They called for him to be deported. Some even said immigrants shouldn’t have a voice in this discussion at all. Here’s what many of you don’t seem to understand. Over the last year I’ve interviewed immigrants from the Philippines, Ukraine, and other countries. My wife is an immigrant from Venezuela and also agrees. Some of the strongest supporters of Alberta independence I’ve met were immigrants. Why? Because many of them came to Canada believing it was one thing and are now watching it become increasingly similar to the very systems they left behind. Many are afraid to speak publicly because they still carry the instinct to stay quiet. In the countries they came from, expressing the wrong opinion often had negative consequences. Yet they see what’s happening. And they’re talking about it privately. My own wife is an immigrant. So when people accuse the Alberta independence movement of being anti-immigrant, they’re not describing reality. A person’s argument should stand or fall on its merits, not on where they were born. If Alberta independence is such a terrible idea, then make the case. If Canada is worth preserving, explain why. But if your response to a fellow Canadian citizen is “go back where you came from,” you’ve already abandoned the argument. To those immigrants who love Alberta, who believe in freedom, and who are hesitant to speak because of the abuse you’ve seen directed at others: Stand tall. Hold your shoulders up. Speak your mind. The fact that some people resort to insults, threats, and personal attacks is not a sign of strength. It’s a sign they’ve run out of arguments.

UK is a police state