Man prevented from entering event he registered for because he is not Jewish
A man is prevented from attending an event by Keller Williams real estate company at Aish Hatorah in Toronto, Canada for the sale of property in Jerusalem, because he is not Jewish, despite having… pic.twitter.com/WyDZpbHwUM
— Middle East Monitor (@MiddleEastMnt) March 4, 2024
Canadian, Irish, French Government-Attempted Speech Regulations Appear Like Desperate Censorship Power Plays
BY JEFFEREY JAXEN | MARCH 12, 2024
Following in the footsteps of UKs highly controversial Online Safety Act, now law, Canadian and Irish government officials are proposing legislation that would push the boundaries to further stifle online debate.
During the COVID response, the American government chose to erect a massive, top-down censorship industrial complex pulling in key White House officials, CDC heads, and the Department of Homeland Security.
In the UK, it was all-out military psychological operations using the British Army unit’s 77th Brigade and Specialist Group Military Intelligence. Both countries turned their security apparatuses, once used against foreign enemy combatants, to target its own public domestically in an aggressive move to shape public thought and neutralize independent voices.
Now, humanity is at an inflection point. A non-stop blitzkrieg of contentious issues are affecting the lives of many. The failed COVID response taught us that open conversation and investigation is critical to unwind industry talking points, government propaganda, and scientific falsehoods.
Perhaps more important, the new public square, that is the digital age of social media, serves as a steam valve to debate valid concerns surrounding charged issues like climate change and the net zero push, open migration, vaccine safety, reckless government monetary policy, election meddling, the surgical and pharmaceutical fast track of gender-affirming care for minors, intelligence agency run ‘disclosure,’ and so much more.
Meanwhile, power centers are desperate to take all the above issues and funnel vocal detractors from the dominant narrative into one category – hate.
Over the years, governments have gleefully began attaching the ‘hate’ label onto any person, topic, or explanation that runs counter to the single, myopic version of events, ideas, information, or even historical events they deem fact – despite valid evidence proving otherwise.

Socially, the ‘it’s all hateful except for our viewpoint’ worked for corporations, governments, and legacy media operations when they enjoyed narrative control.
Those days are fleeting now and major cracks have formed upon once-settled topics. Now we see the grip tightening from the legislative angle to create more bureaucracy and new powers to punish.
Canada’s Bill C-63 enacts what’s called the Online Harms Act, amends the Criminal Code, and the Canadian Human Rights Act among other things. It also attempts to define and legislate a human emotion stating:
“hatred means the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike”
Meanwhile, C-63 states that an “Offense motivated by hatred… under this Act or any other Act of Parliament”…carries with a penalty of “imprisonment for life.”
Other goodies written into the bill are the creation of an extrajudicial government tribunal to rule on complaints of threats, intimidation or discrimination from people who can remain anonymous. That’s right, no need to face your accuser says Canada.
If one is accused by the government’s newly-created, extrajudicial group to be “engaging or to have engaged in the discriminatory practice,” they can be ordered, as the bill states, “to pay compensation of not more than $20,000 to any victim identified” and “to pay a penalty of not more than $50,000 to the Receiver General.”
No room for abuse here. What could go wrong?
One would think this would be a one-off piece of speech-chilling legislation from a country that has lost its way under poor leadership. Yet Ireland is also attempting a similar move with mirrored legislative language.
Ireland’s Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences Bill is currently before the upper house of the Irish legislature. The Critic writes the law, if enacted, “…would usher in a dangerous new standard for state-driven censorship. The expression or possession of content or even ideas deemed “hateful” would be illegal under the law, with serious implications for everyday people…”
An opinion piece published in The Hill writes:
“As per the tentative legislation, people with “protected characteristics” which includes, inter alia, race, color, and nationality are afforded new legal protections against psychical and mentally inflicted harms, in which offenders are motivated by “hatred.””
It continues by stating:
“As such, Ireland’s police force, An Garda Síochána, will have the authority under the bill to raid the home of the possessor of such material, demand their password and seize their devices. Failure to comply could result in a year-long prison sentence.”
The reason for the sudden Orwellian about face given by Irish prime minister Leo Varadkar was that Ireland needed to “… modernise our laws against incitement to hatred and hatred in general.”
Despite the weak cover stories governments are using to capture speech and attempt to regain narrative control, a clear pattern is being seen – open debate is dangerous to the dwindling control of power centers.
The fun doesn’t stop there.
Article 18 of the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty also stipulates that all countries signed on to the power-centralizing agreement are mandated to “… combat false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation” and “inform policies on factors that hinder adherence to public health and social measures in a pandemic and trust in science and public health institutions.”
Finally, a bill in the works in France appears to be a special gift for pharmaceutical companies. Article 4 of the bill specifically states:
Provocation, by means of repeated pressure or maneuvers, of any person suffering from a pathology to abandon or abstain from following medical treatment is punishable by one year of imprisonment and a fine of 30,000 euros. therapeutic or prophylactic, when this abandonment or abstention is presented as beneficial for the health of the person concerned whereas it is, in the state of medical knowledge, clearly likely to cause for them, taking into account the pathology of which they is affected, particularly serious consequences for their physical or psychological health.
As written, it appears that any criticism of vaccine products, SSRIs, statins, opioids, drugs and procedures used to transition children, or just about any other product or medical practice that has debatable concerns and unsettled science surrounding it – if currently accepted in ‘medical knowledge’ – is a protected class not to be spoken ill about.
“When the provocation provided for in the first two paragraphs has been followed by effects, the penalties are increased to three years of imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euros.” states the proposed French law.
The coincidental timing over the past few years of several pieces of legislation whose effect will be to essentially chill freedom of speech in the end equation must be taken seriously. The good news is that individuals at all levels of society are sounding the alarm to critically analyze and reject all attempts at overarching control over basic human rights – no matter how well packaged and intentioned they may initially seem.
CANADA THREATENS LIFE SENTENCES FOR “HATRED”
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | March 7, 2024
Canada’s proposed bill, C-63, lays out liberty-crushing, due process annihilating terms for ill-defined thought crimes such as ‘fear of hate propaganda.’ Meanwhile, Ireland has a similar bill as the public is seeing a hidden hand crafting legislation aimed to disrupt society.
Pre-crime: Canada’s Justice Minister defends “Online Harms Bill” powers to place people under house arrest, cut internet access
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | March 5, 2024
Canada is facing stiff competition from many countries around the world, some of them labeled as “authoritarian,” in the race to institutionalize and normalize, and write into law, some distinctly dystopian concepts, like “pre-crime.”
And unfortunately for Canada’s democracy, its government seems to be doing very well in this aspect.
Justice Minister and Attorney General Arif Virani is currently defending a bizarre provision contained in the country’s “online harms” (C-63) bill that allows the authorities to place people under house arrest out of “fear” they could, at some point in the future, commit a “hate crime.”
Alternatively, citizens singled out in this way will be made to wear a tracking device – an electronic tag.
“Awful and unlawful” is how critics might describe the bill, which, judging by the minister’s comments, the government wants to rush through the parliament. However, Virani is trying to put a positive spin on it by suggesting it is some kind of democratic breakthrough that finds a balance that allows “awful but lawful” content to be kept online.
Meanwhile, what about the people who post it? Some of them will be kept at home or surveilled around the clock, which is the sum total of the provision. And Virani – who, in his role as attorney general, along with a judge, will be the one to decide who qualifies for this treatment – sees nothing wrong with any of it.
“(If) there’s a genuine fear of an escalation, then an individual or group could come forward and seek a peace bond against them and to prevent them from doing certain things,” Virani said of the “suspected future suspects.”
In Canada, according to the Criminal Code, a peace bond is issued “when a person appears likely to commit a criminal offense, but there are no reasonable grounds to believe that an offense has actually been committed.”
Virani explained that such a peace bond could impose restrictions on people approaching “a synagogue or a mosque” (presumably, also a church). Or, their use of the internet, but also somehow behavior could get “restricted,” he continued.
“That would help to deradicalize people who are learning things online and acting out in the real world violently, sometimes fatally,” said the official.
C-63 also seeks to introduce the life sentence for those who commit “a hate crime offense” along with another type of crime.
Such is the messaging and the climate created by this type of legislation that the Canadian press finds it necessary to reassure people while reporting about C-63’s life imprisonment provision, that it will not apply in cases of “mischief to a garage door.”
But if it did – one might be amazed, but at this point in time, hardly surprised.
Canada faces legal action over arms exports to Israel
Press TV – March 5, 2024
A group of Canadian and Palestinian human rights lawyers have filed a lawsuit against the Canadian government for “contributing” to the bombardment of the Gaza Strip through sending arms to Israel.
The coalition of the lawyers filed a complaint against Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly on Tuesday over issuing permits for export of military equipment to Israel.
The group includes Canadian Lawyers for International Human Rights and Al-Haq – Law in the Services of Man, an independent Palestinian NGO.
In the lawsuit, the group argued that Canada’s Export and Import Permits Act prevents the federal government from issuing permits for export of military goods and related technology to Israel because those exports can pose serious risks by undermining peace and security.
They said the weapons could be used to commit serious violations of international law and serious acts of violence against women and children in Palestine.
The lawyers said the government needs to stop contributing to Israel’s mass starvation of Palestinians and bombardment of Gaza.
Back in January, Canadian Lawyers for International Human Rights (CLAIHR), one of the groups involved in the case, urged the government to “immediately halt” all arms exports to Israel.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also stands accused of misleading the public over weapons sales to Israel.
Trudeau has repeatedly been urged to end arms exports to the Israeli regime. But his government has so far tried to downplay the country’s role in helping Israel build its arsenal.
On Friday, a group of more than 200 lawmakers from 12 countries, including the United States and Canada, signed a letter to call on their governments to impose a ban on arms sales to Israel.
Niki Ashton, a member of Canada’s Parliament was among the signatories of that letter.
Ashton said in a message on the X social media platform that the Canadian government has approved $28 million worth of weapons exports to Israel since the regime started its brutal military campaign in early October.
“That is horrifying,” Ashton said, adding, “Make no mistake. These weapons are directly used to kill and maim starving Palestinians.”
Countries supplying arms to Israel have been facing mounting pressure to halt weapons sale to Tel Aviv since the regime launched its military offensive against Gaza in early October. Israeli forces have so far killed more than 30,500 Palestinians, mostly children and women, in the besieged territory.
Toronto Zionists try to sell stolen property and genocide
By Yves Engler | March 4, 2024
A recent Israeli real estate sale in Toronto highlights Zionists’ racism and violence. Non-Jews were openly excluded from the event and Palestine solidarity activists were violently attacked.
On Sunday real estate firm Keller Williams hosted a sale for properties in Israel. After a city-owned venue canceled the event it was moved to Aish Hatorah Synagogue in Thornhill. Properties located in illegal Israeli settlements were listed, notably in the relatively new colony of Modi’in Illit, which was built on land from the Palestinian villages of Ni’lin, Kharbata, Saffa, Bil’in and Dir Qadis.
Organizers of the event openly blocked non-Jews from entering the venue. In the parking lot they told an Arab looking man, who printed his event registration, that he could not enter because he wasn’t Jewish.
While it is illegal in Canada to discriminate based on religion or race, the police on site failed to intervene.
In an exchange posted on X the Arab looking man who registered for the event is told that he wouldn’t be able to purchase any property anyway. That’s likely correct as land laws in Israel discriminate against non-Jews. In Canada the Supreme Court banned overt discrimination in property ownership seven decades ago.
Alongside their racism, the Israel supporters were violent. A resident of Vaughn named Ilan-Reuben Abramov attacked Palestine solidarity protesters in a parking lot. CTV reported that he shot two nails into a protester with a nail gun. He yelled “every Palestinian will die” and on video Abramov knocked the phone out of another individual’s hand and repeatedly pushed an older woman. He’s also caught on camera preparing to box with the woman. After an uproar on social media, the police arrested Abramov.
In another incident a car bumped into Palestine protesters. In a more troubling incident, an Israel supporter is caught on camera nearly hitting Palestine solidarity activists with their vehicle at high speed. The individual, who has yet to be identified despite their license plate number circulating online, came within inches of running over two people in an incident that could have been deadly.
Zionists have once again revealed their violence and supremacism. Claims of victimhood notwithstanding, one must hold a deeply racist and violent worldview to promote an apartheid state slaughtering tens of thousands.
And trying to sell stolen property as well as genocide in Canada.
Canada’s Liberal Government Advances “Online Harms” Censorship Bill
Trudeau wants new laws to censor online speech

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | February 27, 2024
Canada’s Justice Minister Arif Virani has advanced a highly controversial bill, named Bill C-63, proposing comprehensive new legislation aimed at addressing online “hate” speech.
We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.
The bill covers seven types of harmful material, from content sexually exploiting or re-victimizing children and survivors, to content promoting violence and extremism.
But it also outlaws online “hatred,” so-called “hate speech,” and forms of deepfakes.
In an attempt to decrease the prevalence of harmful content, this legislation puts the onus on online platforms to be accountable and transparent about how they handle such content.
Platforms like social media and live-streaming services are included under the legislation’s “online services” umbrella.
The bill would also create a new “standalone hate crime offense that would apply to every offence in the Criminal Code and in any other Act of Parliament, allowing penalties up to life imprisonment to denounce and deter this hateful conduct as a crime in itself,” – the briefing explained.
The proposed law would also raise the maximum punishments for the four hate offenses from five years to life imprisonment for advocating genocide and from two years to five years for the others when persecuted by way of indictment.
The Liberal government states that the bill’s proposed regulations centre on the platforms most frequented by Canadians. However, the specifics will depend on whether these platforms meet the eventual user thresholds. Over time, the government may hold other platforms accountable, if these platforms end up posing “a significant risk of harm.”
Additionally, Bill C-63 proposes establishing a censorship organization, which will oversee digital “safety” issues. This organization is anticipated to include a five-member digital safety commission, an independent digital safety ombudsman, and a digital safety office. These will assist in addressing Canadians’ grievances about platforms’ content moderation decisions.
In a recent critique of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s approach to regulating online speech, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre didn’t mince words. He accused Trudeau of labeling any speech he personally dislikes as “hate speech.” This accusation comes amidst discussions surrounding Canada’s proposed online harms bill, a legislation echoing similar efforts in other western democracies aimed at curbing hate speech, terrorist incitements, and violent content online.
Poilievre’s comments reflect a growing concern about the potential for such laws to be misused for broader censorship. This concern is not unfounded, given precedents in other countries where similar laws have veered into the realm of suppressing free speech. The Conservative leader’s stance suggests a keen awareness of these risks.
The term “woke authoritarian agenda” was used by Poilievre to describe the draft of the online harms bill, which he and his party are committed to opposing. He draws attention to the Trudeau administration’s handling of the 2022 “Freedom Convoy,” a protest against COVID-19 restrictions. Poilievre points out the government’s extreme measures, including freezing citizens’ bank accounts, as indicative of a mindset that easily conflates criticism with hate speech.
Highlighting the Trudeau government’s actions during the pandemic, Poilievre remarked, “Justin Trudeau said anyone who criticized him during the pandemic was engaging in hate speech.” This statement underscores a fear that the government might use the proposed legislation to silence dissent in various scenarios.
US, UK sacrifice international security for Israel’s interests: Tehran
Press TV – February 25, 2024
Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman has strongly condemned fresh “arbitrary” airstrikes by the United States and Britain on Yemen, saying the raids proved once again that the pair sacrifice international security for Israel’s interests.
Nasser Kan’ani made the remarks on Sunday after American and UK forces carried out a series of aerial assaults against positions across Yemen, including the capital Sana’a.
“Such arbitrary and adventurous attacks contravene the internationally recognized rules and principles and violate Yemen’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” he said.
“The US and the UK once again proved that they fully support the Zionist regime’s war crimes and genocide in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and that they put the illegitimate security and interests of the occupying regime ahead of international peace and security.”
In a statement, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) said that the strikes were conducted with the support of Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, and New Zealand in a bid to “degrade” Yemen’s capabilities to conduct naval pro-Palestine operations.
Kan’ani said that the US and Britain showed that they breach all moral and humanitarian principles, as well as international law and the UN Charter.
He added that the two countries are seeking to escalate tensions in the region, expand the scope of the Gaza war and divert public opinion from Israel’s war crimes, and buy an opportunity for the continuation of the ongoing genocide against Palestinians.
“Instead of taking effective and immediate action to eliminate the main cause of insecurity and instability, which is the Zionist regime’s warmongering and its daily killing of hundreds of Palestinians…, the US and the UK are waging military attacks on a country that is trying to somehow put pressure on this killer regime and stop its killing machine,” the top diplomat said.
In recent months, the US and its allies have launched illegal attacks on Yemen amid their frustration in the face of an anti-Israel maritime campaign by the Yemeni armed forces.
Israel waged a US-backed genocidal war on the besieged Gaza Strip on October 7 following a historic operation by the Palestinian Hamas resistance group against the occupying regime.
In support of Gaza, Yemeni armed forces have targeted ships going to and from ports in the occupied territories, or whose owners are linked to Israel, in the southern Red Sea, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, the Gulf of Aden, and even in the Arabian Sea.
The US-led attacks on Yemen prompted the country’s military to declare American and British vessels to be legitimate targets.
‘Conspiracy theorists’ threaten mainstream media, says Canadian PM
RT | February 21, 2024
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Wednesday blamed social media for preventing major news outlets from shaping public opinion the way they used to.
The Liberal Party leader took his message to the Conservative stronghold of Alberta, sitting down with radio host Ryan Jespersen for an exclusive 30-minute interview on his Real Talk podcast.
“There is out there a deliberate undermining of the mainstream media,” Trudeau said, answering a question towards the end of the interview. “There are the conspiracy theorists, there are the social media drivers who are trying to do everything they can to keep people in their little filter bubbles, to prevent people from actually agreeing on a common set of facts, the way CBC and CTV – when they were our only sources of news – used to project across the country, at least a common understanding of things.”
Earlier this month, Trudeau denounced the move by Bell Media to lay off many of its local journalists and sell 45 of its 103 regional radio stations, arguing that local journalism holds Canadian democracy together.
“There are massive changes that need to happen in our media landscape, and [the] government can try and create conditions and incentives for it to happen,” he told Jespersen on Wednesday.
“We’re putting money towards local independent media,” Trudeau added, having argued a moment earlier that such overt funding would compromise news outlets as mouthpieces of the government.
In June 2023, the Canadian parliament passed the Online News Act (ONA), under which search engines and social media platforms would have to compensate news outlets for posting their content. While Google has complied, Facebook is “choosing to be bad guys about this,” Trudeau told Jespersen. Meta has responded to ONA by blocking all news content by Canadian publishers on Facebook and Instagram.
Ultimately, it’s up to Canadians to declare they don’t want to accept the “encrapification of news,” Trudeau said, borrowing the phrase from British Columbia Premier David Eby.
Trudeau’s comments on the podcast also echoed those made by former US President Barack Obama in a May 2023 interview to CBS. Obama named “a divided media” as one of the things he was worried about, noting that the US once had “three TV stations … and people were getting a similar sense of what is true and what isn’t, what was real and what was not.”
“How do we return to that common conversation? How can we have a common set of facts?” the 44th US president wondered at the time.
Canada Announces Supply of Over 800 Drones Worth $95Mln to Ukraine
Sputnik – 20.02.2024
Canada will send more than 800 multi-purpose SkyRanger R70 drones worth over $95 million to Ukraine, the Canadian government said on Monday.
“Today, the Honourable Bill Blair, Minister of National Defence, announced that Canada will donate more than 800 SkyRanger R70 multi-mission Unmanned Aerial Systems to Ukraine. These drones, valued at over $95 million, will help Ukraine as it fights bravely to defend itself amongst Russia’s illegal and unjustifiable full-scale invasion,” the government said in a statement.
The statement added that since the start of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine in February 2022, Canada allocated over $9.7 billion in assistance to Ukraine, including $2.4 billion in military aid.
Western countries have been providing military and financial aid to Kiev since the start of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine in February 2022. The Kremlin has consistently warned against continued arms deliveries to Kiev, saying it would lead to further escalation of the conflict. In April 2022, Russia sent a diplomatic note to all NATO countries on the issue of arms supplies to Ukraine. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has warned that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine will become a legitimate target for Russian strikes.
Freedom Convoy leaders sue Trudeau regime for targeting protesters with Emergencies Act
By Anthony Murdoch | Life Site News | February 15, 2024
OTTAWA, Ontario — On the second anniversary of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government’s use of the Emergencies Act (EA) to quash the truckers’ Freedom Convoy in 2022, the heads of the protest, Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, and a host of others have filed a $2 million lawsuit against the Trudeau government.
The lawsuit, announced yesterday by Freedom Convoy lawyer Keith Wilson, includes Lich as well as other convoy leaders Chris Barber, Tom Marazzo, Danny Bulford, and a host of others.
“On the 2-year anniversary of the Federal Government illegally invoking war measures against its citizens and targeting key protestors in Ottawa by freezing their bank accounts, today Tamara Lich, Chris Barber, Tom Marazzo, Danny Bulford and other protestors who were targeted by @JustinTrudeau and @cafreeland have filed lawsuits against the Federal Government.”
Wilson said that Section 24 of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms “gives Canadians the right to sue their government for damages when Charter rights are violated.”
“Doing so affirms the seriousness of respecting Charter rights and is intended to deter future governments from breaching Canadians’ fundamental rights.”
Wilson noted that the lawsuits seek $2 million in damages.
Lich, on X (formerly Twitter) noted about the lawsuit on Wednesday that “Accountability is a thing. It’s go time!”
“Happy Emergencies Act Day! I hope you all look back and fondly remember how your government shot you with rubber bullets and tear gas for your own good!” she also wrote.
Tom Marazzo, who was also involved with the Freedom Convoy and is a 25-year Canadian army veteran, said about it that it was “2 years ago today, instead of celebrating Valentine’s Day, the most corrupt government in Canadian history, launched an all out illegal assault on the Rights and Freedoms of every Canadian citizen in Canada, with the help of the NDP, Bloc, MSM and the Banks.”
“2 years later, they are all still in power with no end in sight. The one question that is never addressed, by any of them is why did Canadians feel so desperate that they had to go to Ottawa in the first place???” wrote Marazzo on X.
Further details about the lawsuit will be forthcoming in the next few days.
The lawsuit comes just after a Canadian federal court last month ruled that the Trudeau government’s use of the Emergencies Act to quash the truckers’ Freedom Convoy in 2022 was unconstitutional. The court ruled that the use of the EA was a direct violation of the Charter and thus “not justified.”
The EA controversially allowed the government to freeze the bank accounts of protesters, conscript tow truck drivers, and arrest people for participating in assemblies the government deemed illegal.
An investigation into the use of the EA, as per Canadian law, was launched by Trudeau. However, it was headed by Liberal-friendly Judge Paul Rouleau, who led the Public Order Emergency Commission. This commission was to investigate the Liberal government’s unprecedented use of the EA against the anti-mandate Freedom Convoy protest. Unsurprisingly, the commission exonerated Trudeau’s use of the EA.
Freedom Convoy leaders Lich and Barber have been involved in a lengthy trial after being charged and taken to court by the federal government for leading the protests. The trial has not yet concluded and has been put on hold, with its resumption date uncertain. It is also not yet clear how the recent court ruling will affect the trial.
In early 2022, the Freedom Convoy saw thousands of Canadians from coast to coast come to Ottawa to demand an end to COVID mandates in all forms. Despite the peaceful nature of the protest, Trudeau’s government enacted the EA on February 14, 2022. Trudeau revoked the EA on February 23.
During the clear-out of protesters after the EA was put in place, one protester, an elderly lady, was trampled by a police horse, and one conservative female reporter was beaten by police and shot with a tear gas canister. Rebel News reporter Alexa Lavoi, while covering the Freedom Convoy, was shot point blank in her leg with a rubber pellet, which police were using against protesters.
On February 14, 2022, the day the EA was invoked, Canadian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Chrystia Freeland mandated certain bank accounts be frozen under the EA. In total, close to $8 million in funds from 267 people were locked. Additionally, 170 bitcoin wallets were frozen.
The freezing of bank accounts by Freeland without a court order was an unprecedented action in Canadian history and was only allowed through the Liberal government’s invocation of the never-before-used EA.
