Canadian World Domination

Canada Channel by calvados

Any and all things Canadian or related to Canada. Pretty straightforward, eh?

Note that videos with limited or questionable Canadian content are liable to be removed from this channel. If the guy who's filming mentions that he's from Toronto but that's the only remotely Canuck thing in the video, it's goodnight Irene.

Fuck Canada Post

Fuck Canada Post.

They do not have proper complaint procedures or applicable ways to complain.

They do not deliver the item I paid for delivery - only place a pick up the next day slip

this happens to hundreds of thousands of people over the years.

Did I mention they do not have proper contact procedures ? Facebook, twitter or on the phone.

Close canada post, it is obvious they can not fulfill the arrangements I paid for, this is years of it happening, DHL, PUROLATOR, or UPS. Canada post can not survive any longer.

HEAR ME ! those assholes are not listening.

To Canadian sifters - Easily bypass US only region blocking

Not used the Sift Talk before, but as @eric3579 advised me, this would be a good place to share something I discovered a while back.

It's a simple Chrome and Firefox extension that will allow you to view any US only, region blocked content like Comedy Central, Netflix, Hulu, etc in your browser. Just go here, install and bam, no more region blocking bollocks:

I've been using it for months and never had any problem with it.
It is completely FREE, but if you feel so inclined, why not give them a small donation for this extremely useful addon?

BTW. it's not just for use in Canada, but anywhere.

Robo Calls and Election Fraud

The Robo-Call fraud scandal keeps getting worse. Post your thoughts, rants, propaganda, links and videos here. Demand full accountability for the worst political scandal in living memory. The Conservative Party likes to point to the Liberal sponsorship scandal where millions of dollars were stolen from government coffers, this is so much worse- they've stolen the entire fucking country.

Heard anything about Canada lately?

- Maybe about pulling out of Kyoto and stifling the Durban climate talks?
- or The Oilsands? "Not the cleanest stuff around, but hey we'd still like to run it over your aquifer and sell it to ya, eh!"
- or Building more prisons for Texas style justice, which coincidentally, Texas recently advised against.

What do you think/hear about Canada these days?

I'm curious because of this site below.

Country channel criteria?

What qualifies a sift to be classified into one of the country channels?
I've been wondering this while sifting, as animation schools are in many different countries.

Is it the origin of the creator? Is it where video was made OR is it the subject matter it is dealing with?
Or is it any combination of these?

I'm tempted to say it's the subject matter, and that's what I have been going with so far. However, I keep bumping into this issue and I wondered what word on the siftstreet is.

passports for kids

Has anyone ever applied for a US passport for their kids?

We're leaving the country for summer vacation and I'm trying to get them a passport. Apparently, the passport office wants ALL parties listed on the birth certificate present when applying. This is a problem. Assuming I could even find their father (and I probably could if I put a little effort in, given he isn't on a bender or back in the state asylum), it would be physically dangerous to do so. No one on the phone is the least bit helpful. Anyone know a loophole?

Letter From Senator Tommy Banks to Stephen Harper

A letter from Senator Tommy Banks to Canada's Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, pretty much sums up the situation that Canada is in right now, heading to an election on May 2nd. You may have seen some of the Shit Harper Did videos and this letter puts it a bit more eloquently. Anyways, here it is:

There is only one thing about the outcome of the May 2nd election on which Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Harper agree. It is that one of them will be the Prime Minister of Canada. Mr. Layton, Mr. Duceppe and Ms. May are not in the running to form a government. They can't. It will be either Mr.
Ignatieff or Mr. Harper.

That is the choice, and it is a very clear - in fact, stark choice.
We will choose between openness or secrecy.
Between listening or refusing to listen.
Between someone who respects Parliament or someone who disdains it.
Between things we can and will do now or things that, (provided of course
that everything goes well), we might do in five or six years.
Between someone who answers all questions from Canadians, or someone who
won't accept any.

Between Mr. Harper who said "It's past time the feds scrapped the Canada
Health Act", or Mr. Ignatieff who said " . . . we don't want user fees. We want
universal, accessible, free-at-the-point-of-service health care, paid out of
general revenue. That's just bottom line. Otherwise we get two-tiered".

Between buying jets or helping vets.
Between real early childhood learning and care or Saturday-night
Between respect for our great institutions or contempt for them.
Between helping families or helping big corporations.
Between the Canada that we think we have, or the way in which Mr. Harper has
already changed it.

Over the past few years Mr. Harper's government has quietly engineered so
many changes that there are some ways in which our country is barely
recognizable. Many of us don't yet realize the extent of those changes,
because many of them have been brought about very carefully and gradually -
almost imperceptibly in some cases.

This is diabolically clever. If these things had all been done at once,
there would have been loud protests and reactions. But moving just one
little brick at a time doesn't cause much fuss - until you realize that the
whole house has been renovated. And we've hardly noticed.

These are changes that are at the very heart of who and what Canadians are.

They are changes to the protections that used to exist against the tyranny
of the majority - or against a single-minded my-way-or-the-highway autocrat.

These changes are losses to our very Canadian-ness. Let me remind you of
some of them:

The Law Commission of Canada was created by an Act of Parliament in 1997.
It worked very well. It kept an eye in a sort-of avuncular way, on necessary reforms of the law, including election law. The Commission couldn't actually change law; but it was very good at letting governmentsand everybody else know when changes needed to be made and why. It was our legal Jiminy Cricket, and it performed a valuable service for Canada. The Commission was created by an Act of Parliament, and any government wanting to shut it down should have been up-front about it. It should have come to Parliament with a Bill to rescind The Law Commission
of Canada Act.

That's what any of our 21 previous Prime Ministers would have done.

But to Mr. Harper, Parliament is an inconvenience. Somebody might ask "Why
are you doing this?" But he didn't want to go through all that Parliamentary trouble; so, rather than proposing the abolition of the Commission (a proposal about which there would have been pretty fierce debate on all sides), they just eliminated all funding for it in the federal budget. Governments can do that.
Poof - no Law Commission.

Nice and quiet. Just one little brick. Hardly noticed.

Then there was the Court Challenges Programme, set up in 1994, which was the
means by which a bit of legal help could be provided to a private individual
or small organization who didn't have a lot of money, and who was taking on,
or being taken on by, the Government of Canada. It leveled the legal
playing field a bit. It was a perfect example of fundamental Canadian

By convincing a tough panel of judges of the reasonableness of your cause,
you could get a little help in paying for some lawyers to go up against the phalanx of legal beagles that could always, and forever, and at public expense, be brought to bear against you by the State. In other words, if you weren't rich, and if you were taking on or being taken on by the Feds, you might have had a chance.
But Mr. Harper doesn't like being questioned, let alone challenged. It's
so inconvenient!
Solution? Quietly announce that the Court Challenges Programme is being,
er, discontinued.
Poof - no Court Challenges Programme - no court challenges.

Hardly noticed.

The Coordination of Access to Information Request System (CAIRS) was created
(by a Progressive-Conservative government) in 1989 so that departments of
government could harmonize their responses to access-to-information requests
that might need multi-departmental responses. It was efficient; it made
sure that in most cases the left hand knew what the right hand was doing, or
at least what they were saying; and it helped to keep government open and
Well, if you're running a closed-door government, that's not a good idea, is
So, as a Treasury Board official explained to the Canadian Press, CAIRS was
killed by the Harper government because "extensive" consultations showed it
wasn't valued by government departments. I guess that means that the
extensive consultations were all with government departments.

Wait! Wasn't there anybody else with whom to extensively consult? Wasn't
there some other purpose and use for CAIRS? Didn't it have something to do
with openness and accountability? I guess not. Robert Makichuk, speaking
for Mr. Harper's government, explained that "valuable resources currently
being used to maintain CAIRS would be better used in the collection and
analysis of improved statistical reporting".

Right. In other words, CAIRS was an inconvenience to the government. So
poof - it's disappeared. And, except for investigative reporters and other
people who might (horrors!) ask questions, its loss is hardly noticed.

And the bridge too far for me: Cutting the already-utterly-inadequate
funding for the exposure of Canadian art and artists in other countries.
That funding was, by any comparison, already laughably miniscule. Mr.
Harper says that "ordinary" Canadians don't support the arts. He's wrong.

And his is now the only government of any significant country in the world
that clearly just doesn't get it.

All these changes were done quietly, cleverly, and under the radar.
No fuss. No outcry. Just one little brick at a time.
But in these and other ways, our Canadian house is no longer the kind of
place it once was.
Nobody minds good renovations. Nobody even minds tearing something down,
as long as we put up something better in its place. That's not what has

Mr. Harper fired the head of the Canadian Wheat Board because he was doing
his job properly.
He removed the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission because she
wanted to make sure that the Chalk River nuclear reactor was safe.

Hardly noticed.

There are many more things that were hardly noticed: Cuts to funding for
the Status of Women, Adult Learning and Literacy, Environmental Programs, museums funding, and more.
All quietly, just one brick at a time.

Hardly noticed.

As to campaign promises, everybody in sight on every side is guilty of
breaking those. Except the Federal NDP of course, who haven't yet had the
opportunity. (It's very easy to make promises that you know you will not
likely have to keep).

But the government promised to end wait times in health care. They didn't.

They promised to end, once and for all, the whining of some provinces about
the non-existent "fiscal imbalance". They didn't.

They said they had brought final resolution to the softwood lumber problem
with the U.S. They haven't. They promised to create thousands of new
child-care spaces in Canada. They haven't.
They promised not to tax income trusts ("We will NEVER do that!" they said).
They taxed them.
They promised to lower your income tax.

They raised it.

They said they had a good "made-in-Canada" plan to meet our obligations on climate change. They don't. Mr. Harper has said plainly that whatever the Americans do is what we'll do too.

They campaign on a platform of transparency and accountability; but they're now trying to discredit the Parliamentary Budget Officer that they created, because he's trying to do the job that they gave him. Mr. Harper said that our form of government, evolved over centuries from the 900-year-old British Westminster tradition, was all wrong. We had to have fixed election dates, because otherwise, democratic principles would be trampled. "Fixed election dates", he said, "stop leaders from trying to manipulate the calendar. They level the playing field for all parties".

So Parliament (remember them?) at Mr. Harper's insistence, passed a law requiring fixed election dates, which Mr. Harper promptly broke.

Somebody once said that we get the kind of government we deserve.

What did we do to deserve Mr. Harper?

He once said that we should all "Stand Up for Canada". Well, let's do

We just have to decide whether the present version of Canada is the one that
we'll stand up for. Or stand for.

Thank you

Tommy Banks (an Alberta Senator.)

Leslie Nielsen random quote generator

"[Playing chess] Tanya Peters: What are you doing?
Lt. Frank Drebin (Nielsen): Oh! I was, uh, just conjugating my next move.
Peters: Your bishop's exposed.
Drebin: It's these pants."

"Doorman: Your coat, sir?
Lt. Frank Drebin (Nielsen): Yes, it is. And I have a receipt to prove it."

HEADS UP CANADA: CRTC OKs usage-based internet billing

This one slipped under my radar until today.

"CRTC green lights usage-based internet billing

Metered internet usage is on the way, with the CRTC handing down its final decision on how wholesale customers can be billed by large network owners.

The federal regulator on Thursday gave Bell Canada the approval to implement so-called usage-based billing to wholesale customers — usually smaller internet service providers that rent portions of its network — within 90 days. Under the plan, Bell will charge wholesale service providers a flat monthly fee to connect to its network, and for a set monthly usage limit per each ISP customer the ISP has." (Source October 28th)
... ...

"Smaller ISPs had opposed the plan, which the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission provisionally approved in August last year, on the grounds that it will make them indistinguishable from Bell." (Source: May 6th)
... ...

"I remember in the early dial up days when we were billed per hour of useage by the hundreds of small internet companies that started this industry.

Along came bell and rogers, technology increased, and they were able to reduce the prices substantially offering "unlimitted highspeed packages". The cost dropped to almost nothing. Then all of the smaller companies went out of business as a result of being unable to complete (the way market forces SHOULD work)

Now that those companies are gone. We are left with more or less 2 internet suppliers. And now they have switched back to the old system of useage based billing and jacked up prices far higher then they ever were.

So in other words all the developments of the last 15 years were nothing more than to eliminate competition. And now we're right back where we started, except now we have no choice". (CBC commenter.)
... ...

There is already an online petition against the approved fee hikes that might be worth reviewing.
... ...

I didn't realize that this was going on. It would mean paying money to see advertisements which automatically download on some of my favorite web pages as well as the content I go there for.

Any sifters out there have any more info or thoughts on this?

[edit: Some thoughts from boingboing]

Canada Savings Bond Ads...

It may be that only Canadians are getting Canada Savings Bonds ads on this site but they are extremely annoying. They are always on top and it makes submitting a new video impossible. Refreshing the page helps but only if the ad doesn't pop up again. Anyone else getting this problem? I don't mind seeing ads on the sift but these are the first that have been so annoying.

So How Anonymous Are We?

Came across this gem while reading my daily news, and thought of the sift for 2 reasons; I wanted to post the cartoon here (not sure if it is already posted here), and then wondered if Dag et al. would protect my identity if the cops came a-knockin'.

What would you guys do it Officer Bubbles' lawyer smacked you with a threatening letter? What would you do if a Canadian Court demanded you reveal the identity of a sifter? What would you do if there were financial implications for not divulging a sifter's identity?

Movie help?

I don't know if this is the right forum or not but I need help figuring out a title for a movie. All I can remember is that the movie is British and there are two guys in a house and when they wake up they walk outside and there is nothing but there house. Everything is white outside. Can anyone help me with this? I really wanted to watch this and forgot all about it. Thanks.

Send this Article to a Friend

Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients

Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

New Blog Posts from All Members