February 8, 2024     ₿lockheight: 829,573

Bill C-372 seeks penalties up to $1,000,000 and two years in prison for promoting fossil fuels as anything less than an existential threat to humanity.

Just when you thought Canada couldn’t get any more Stalinist, an MP from the country’s far-left NDP party is calling for any speech that “promotes fossil fuels” – even truthful statements like comparing the relative emissions of natural gas to coal – to be banned and criminalized.

MP Charlie Angus, from Timmins, in northern Ontario (where the average temperature in February runs -7C to -21C) has introduced a private member’s Bill C-372 called “The Fossil Fuels Advertising Act” that would “prohibit the promotion of fossil fuels except in accordance with the provisions of the Act.”

Promotion defined as:

“a representation about a product or service by any means, whether directly or indirectly, including any communication of information about the product or service and its price and distribution, that is likely to influence and shape attitudes, beliefs and behaviours about the product or service.‍”

That which is not expressly permitted is forbidden…

“This enactment enacts the Fossil Fuel Advertising Act to prohibit the promotion of fossil fuels except in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

The only public discourse that would be permitted on the matter would be literary or dramatic representations that “use or depict” fossil fuels, or “opinion or commentary” provided that in either case, the author or creator has no ties or recieves no consideration “directly or indirectly” from the fossil fuel industry.

The preamble calls climate change an “existential threat” and cites the 2023 forest fire season as a pretext.

“Whereas, in 2023, Canada experienced the worst wildfire season ever recorded as the country exceeded the largest area ever burned in a year, totaling more than 7.‍9 million hectares”

There is no mention that in multiple cases of throughout the 2023 forest fire season, such as the Lake Cavan fires in Quebec and the infamous Lake Barrington Fire in Nova Scotia, the cause was arson, (not “global boiling”).

“Claimed, without evidence…”

The phrase “claimed without evidence” has become a staple of the corporate media. It belies a baked-in partisanship reminiscent of late Soviet Era agitprop. This is especially noticeable if anybody to the right of Stalin dares question any precepts of technocratic socialism.

Yet Bill C-372 is replete with such claims…

Whereas air pollution caused by fossil fuels leads to millions of premature deaths globally, including tens of thousands of premature deaths in Canada alone, and is a major cause of cancer, respiratory illness, adverse pregnancy outcomes, children’s diseases and cardiovascular symptoms;

This is a faith-based statement (on par with Al Gore’s unhinged shrieking at Davos 2023 that “Climate change causes the equivalent of 600,000 Hiroshima class bombs per day!”). It also runs contrary to quantifiable data from multiple sources and studies showing that climate related fatalities have been in free-fall for over a century.

Via WSJ: We’re Safer From Climate Disasters Than Ever Before

It is also settled science that more humans die every year from extreme cold than do heat or warming effects by a factor of 2-to-1.

Bill C-372 further asserts, without evidence (am I doing this right?), that

fossil fuel production and consumption has resulted in a national public health crisis of substantial and pressing concern, in a way that is similar to the public health crisis caused by tobacco consumption;”

By Statistics Canada’s own measure, tobacco still kills 48,000 Canadians every year. This bill is claiming that every day, an equivalent 131 Canadians are dropping dead because of fossil fuel induced climate change. If true, why not cut the total problem of climate and tobacco related deaths in half by simply banning smoking outright?

There’s only one problem: Free Speech

“Parliament is of the opinion that fossil fuel advertising currently deploys techniques which knowingly mislead the public and fail to disclose the health and environmental harms associated with their use, impeding informed consumer decision-making, undermining public support for effective climate action”

By “impeding informed decision-making” on the part of  Canadians  he probably means any criticisms of inexorably higher carbon taxes (which get unfairly applied according to the whims of political favouritism anyway) or drawing attention to ridiculous, symbolic, non-solutions like wind turbines,  or forcing Canadians pay for expensive heat pumps in sub-zero climes.

(Reminder: We’re in Canada)

Further, the companies and scientists gainfully employed by Canada’s energy industry, which is responsible for 7.5% of Canada’s entire GDP (with 75% of that in Alberta), aren’t allowed to defend their industry or their livelihoods from the onslaught of junk science and ideological fanaticism, or to counter it with measured, rational, science-based counter-factuals.

While Bill C-372 asserts that “the protection of the environment is a valid use of the federal criminal law power”. It would be a stretch to apply provisions of The Environmental Protection Act to the normal course operations of the energy industry, let alone free speech. There is no mention of it in the Canadian Constitution, nor the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Section 2(a) of the latter declares as a fundamental right of all Canadians “freedom of conscience and religion” (although nobody seemed to have this right when it was time to refuse the Covid jabs).

And, of course, 2(b) “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication”

Like it or not, communication includes promotion, defending oneself,  and taking a firm, defensible stance that we have a moral duty to provide abundant power to society through the practical, judicious use of cleaner fossil fuels.

That said, the Canadian government (to which the NDP are the junior partner in a governing Liberal-Socialist coalition), has no compunctions around trammelling Canadians’ constitutional rights.

A federal judge recently ruled that the Trudeau government’s invocation of The Emergencies Act, that saw Canadians’ bank accounts seized along with the violent suppression of the #FreedomConvoy protest, was both illegal and unconstitutional (the Federal government intends to appeal the ruling).

Realistically, C-372  has about as much chance of passing as a Liz Warren bill, but the NDP’s do prop up Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party in a slim minority ruling coalition – they could, in theory, jam it through.

After that, it would be illegal for me to observe that the people of Timmins, Ontario, Charlie Angus’ home riding, would not survive a single winter without fossil fuels (and since I hold shares of Imperial Oil and Canadian Natural Resources, it might be construed as “benefiting from the proceeds of climate extermination”, or something).

The fact that this bill was even entered into the Parliamentary register is testament to how out-of-touch the ruling Liberal-Socialist coalition is.

I leave you with this clip of Federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, shrieking “climate change is real”, like a total nutcase in Canada’s House of Commons…

Canadians loathe the carbon tax, and as I’ve been documenting month-after-month in the “Get Woke, Go Broke” section of The Bitcoin Capitalist, the public is done with the ESG narrative and climate hysteria. It’s over.

The later the politicians figure this out, the better – because this is the one area where I am an unabashed accelerationist. Keep at it Charlie! You go Guilbeault!

As previously announced, we’re closing The Bitcoin Capitalist to new members once the Bitcoin halving hits, you can sneak in under the wire here. You could also subscribe to the Bombthrower mailing list for free, here – and get my CBDC Survival Report when it drops.

About the author 

Mark E. Jeftovic

Mark E. Jeftovic is the founder of Bombthrower Media and CEO of easyDNS.com, a company he co-founded in 1998 which has been operating along the lines described within these pages.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked

  1. "This is a faith-based statement"

    Only in the sense that Republicans have already proven that they are willing to question any and all statistics, even if their own lives depend on taking the statistics seriously, like what happened during the pandemic.

    Obviously, if you are unwilling or unable to take statistics seriously, you have trouble with a lot of basic arithmetic as well. In which case, you really don't want to continue living, whether you are aware or not that the usefulness of your brain is greater as fertilizer or food for farm animals than it is for thinking.

    If you want to take issue with a statistic, you better say something better than that. Especially because "faith" is something that could be described as a statistical concept related to information theory, and in that particular specialised meaning, I don't think you meant to say that.

    1. Republicans have already proven that they are willing to question any and all statistics, even if their own lives depend on taking the statistics seriously, like what happened during the pandemic.

      I’m not a Republican, but it was precisely from following government issued statistics during the pandemic, and entering them into a spreadsheet every day – that myself, and anybody else paying attention to the numbers, knew that the pandemic was not existential – and we were being gaslighted with hysteria as early as April or May 2020.

      I was telling people to batten down the hatches and hunker down in January 2020 – I was probably the first person in Toronto spotted in a grocery store in an N-95 mask in Feb. By April or May I knew it was all b/s, that masks didn’t work, that lockdowns were insane, and that the virus wasn’t much more fatal than the flu and correlated 100% with age, co-morbidity factors and Vitamin D deficiency. That was all from looking at the numbers.

      Paying attention to the numbers is why most of are here and calling b/s on whatever comes out of the MSM.

      1. Its a fascist coalition not socialist. Also masks and distancing were all that was needed. The proof of this is observable. Just go outside in winter and talk. Watch how far the vapor moves(that's what the virus rides on, as well as spittle) from your body., now do it with a mask on. Its observable. Masks will not stop the virus at an atomic level, wearing a mask while distancing will and does provide an adequate measure of protection.

{"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}

My next E-book will be "The CBDC Survival Guide"

Get on the list now - and receive your copy when it's ready.