Ezra Levant critiques Dawn Hilton Williams’ false claims of police racism after refusing to sign a $70 speeding ticket in Virginia, despite body cam footage showing no abuse. He contrasts this with Hamas-led riots at Israel’s Gaza border post-Trump’s Jerusalem embassy move, arguing Trump’s pro-Israel stance—abandoning the Iran deal and countering Iranian-backed threats—better stabilizes the region than Obama’s policies. Levant also condemns Canada’s Trudeau government for enabling eco-terrorism against Kinder Morgan’s pipeline expansion while failing to address ISIS-linked crimes, exposing a pattern of prioritizing radical leftist protests over actual security risks. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, a routine speeding ticket leads to a false accusation of racism.
I'll show you the video.
It's May 15th, and you're watching The Ezra LeVant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
You come here once a year with a sign, and you feel morally superior.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
I want to show you two videos.
They're from the state of Virginia, but really they could be from anywhere in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, too.
This is the first video that was published to the internet, but I'm actually going to show it to you second.
It's a woman driving in her car after receiving a speeding ticket.
It has received hundreds of thousands of views.
Actually, it's been uploaded in various parts of the internet, so I imagine that amongst all the different places it's been seen, it's been seen millions of times.
And it caused the release of the second video taken by the body camera of the police officer who gave that woman her traffic ticket.
Normally, such body camera videos are not released to the public, but the police department decided to do so to rebut the first one.
But I'm going to show them to you in chronological order as they were filmed.
As in, I'm going to show you the police officer's body cam to show you what happened.
Then I'll play you excerpts of the woman's selfie video afterwards.
I think it's more fair that way.
So I'll start with the police video.
Now, I think it speaks for itself.
The only thing I'm cutting out from the video, I'm going to show you every second of it.
The only thing I'm cutting out are the uneventful parts where he goes back to his own police car, camera on his chest is still on, and then he types in the computer and he writes up a ticket in silence.
So I'm going to skip that just because it's two minutes a waste of time.
Other than that, I am not editing out a single second.
This was the full tape of the entire interaction.
It was just eight minutes long, including the time the cop was back in his car writing the ticket.
So the interaction with the woman in question is much shorter.
So the video starts with the cop in his car by himself.
He just pulled over another driver, he just pulled over, and he's about to get out to talk to the driver.
Here, have a look.
This is a couple minutes long.
My name is Sergeant Sasso.
I'm in the Brunswick County Sheriff's Office.
Okay.
Just need to see your driver's license and your vehicle registration.
Yeah, the reason I'm stopping you, I thought you wanted 70.
The speed limit here is 55.
There's no speed limit sign.
I just got out of the car.
Okay.
All right, I appreciate it.
Yeah, your vehicle, the which.
I'm going to reach in here again.
That's fine.
Yeah, I saw no ticket talking.
Thank you.
And you still live in South Carolina?
Yeah, I live in South Carolina.
I was in Menorfa, Virginia, at an API's tournament, and I'm on the way back to Spoon.
Okay, all right, I'll tell you what.
Just hold tight for a quick moment, and I'll be right back, okay?
Okay, thank you.
Okay, so he sits down in his car, and he does what cops do in their car for a few minutes, writes up a ticket, checks the computer to see, I don't know, if there's any outstanding warrants on the driver.
But you saw the entire interaction.
It was pretty quick, wasn't it?
And both sides were friendly enough.
No rude words, no hostility.
And just to point out the obvious, nothing racist in any way or sexist or transphobic or Islamophobic or any other microaggressions.
It was just a cop pulling over a speeder, going 70 in a 55 mile an hour zone.
The cop starts out by saying, good afternoon.
And he identifies himself by name and title and the department he's with.
It seems pretty professional.
And the woman, her name is Dawn Hilton Williams, well, she was friendly enough.
In fact, the first thing she said was, how are you?
And he said, doing well.
It's ridiculous to point this out, but I'm just saying it was friendly enough.
I mean, no one likes to be pulled over for speeding.
I'm not even sure if police like doing traffic duty, but going 70 in a 55 zone, it's more than a rounding error, but fair enough.
Anyways, so he goes back to his car.
He sits there for three minutes to write up the ticket and check the police computer.
And then he walks back to give her the ticket.
The total time of the second interaction, and that's the final interaction, is three minutes long.
Here, watch it in its totality.
All right, ma'am.
What I have here for you, it is a traffic summons for Brunswick County General District.
Yes, for Brunswick County General District Traffic Court.
Okay, so stop just there for a second.
I'll show you the rest in a second, but did you notice he calls her ma'am?
Just want to point that out.
That's just southern thing.
I think southerners are very polite.
Aren't they ever been down there?
They're just a little more polite.
And saying ma'am and sir is just a little more normal in the south.
But my point is the cop was showing enough respect to the speeder.
And I say again, not a drop of racism, sexism, or any other ism.
Ma'am, sir.
Sort of obvious, but I want to point that out for later.
Okay, back to the tape.
Your court date is going to be June the 6th at 10.30 for the 70 in a 55 mile per hour zone.
Where is the sign that says it's 55 miles an hour?
In numerous places.
Numerous places where?
I'm in the between the gas station I just came from, right here in the court.
I mean, numerous, numerous places back that way.
You're more than welcome to go back there and look at them.
I mean, take pictures of them, whatever you want to do.
So you didn't give me a warning.
You gave me an actual ticket.
Yeah, no warnings today, ma'am.
So your court date is going to be June the 6th at 10.30 for the speeding of 70 and a 55.
You have the option to prepay this.
I'm going to give you a phone number, plus a website that has our courthouse information.
If you contact our courts, they will tell you what the find is, answer any one of your questions.
And if you decide to prepay it, then you do not have to come to court.
But if you want to prepay it, if you don't want to prepay it, then you have to come to court on June the 6th at 10.30.
I'll hire an attorney.
Need you to sign right here.
I'm not going to sign that ticket.
Oh, ma'am.
Okay.
But I don't have to sign it.
So, ma'am?
But I appreciate it.
Okay, now this is not an enjoyable conversation.
I notice that he keeps saying ma'am, ma'am, so he's staying cordial.
But look, that's what getting a ticket is like.
It's not friendly.
Now, she asks where the signs are for 55.
He says there are plenty of signs.
She can go back and look at them.
She asks for a warning instead of a ticket, and he says, no, sorry.
And he keeps on going.
He's not rude.
He answers her points.
You can go look at the signs.
He's firm.
She's starting to get a bit more defensive.
He tells her she can pay the ticket or fight the ticket, which sounds legally correct to me.
And he asks her to sign the ticket, but she objects.
Now, it's true.
You never have to sign anything someone puts to you, including a police officer.
I mean, you just don't have to.
But here's why the cop asked her or really told her to sign it.
Because it's her promise to either pay the ticket or fight the ticket in court, as opposed to just driving away and never coming back.
Because if you recall, she said she was from South Carolina, and this was in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Here, he explains it.
Hold on.
All right.
So, what you're signing here is a promise to either come to court or promise to prepay.
It's not an admission of guilt.
It's only a promise to me that you're going to get it taken care of by either coming to court or prepaying it.
If you refuse to sign the summons at this point, I'm going to have to get you outside of the police car, outside of this car.
I'm going to place you under arrest and take you in front of the magistrate.
I will get your vehicle towed and go from there.
So, yes, ma'am, you do not have a choice.
You have to be on the phone.
I don't care about that.
You do not have a.
I don't care who's on the phone.
I'm talking to you right now.
You do not have a choice but to sign the summons.
So, once again, you're signing right there.
So, thank you.
I knew you were going to sign it.
Thank you very much.
All right.
Appreciate it very much.
And you have a very safe day.
Okay?
Thank you.
And we're done.
Now, that last part wasn't too friendly, was it?
But he explained his point.
If she didn't promise to either pay the ticket or promise to come back to court to fight the ticket, those are basically your two options.
He would have to arrest her and bring her to the magistrate, the judge, right then and there.
Now, it wasn't friendly anymore, but it wasn't particularly rude.
And there was no sexism or racism, was there?
Let me quote him verbatim, because this part is important.
I'll quote it.
He said, so what you are signing here is a promise to either come to court or promise to prepay.
Prepay.
It is not an admission of guilt.
It's only a promise to me that you're going to get it taken care of by either coming to court or prepaying it.
If you refuse to sign the summons at this point, I'm going to have to get you out of the side of the police car, place you under arrest, and take you in front of a magistrate.
I will get your vehicle towed and go from there.
So yes, ma'am, you do not have a choice.
Well, I guess she did have a choice.
She could go before a judge right then and there.
But that's a bit insane, don't you think, to be arrested, have your car towed, and taken immediately to the judge?
So she chose not to do that.
She chose just to accept the summons.
Now, I don't know if you heard her in the middle of that.
She said, my cousin's on the phone.
So I guess this whole conversation was on speakerphone or something with her cousin.
But the cop is right.
That's pretty irrelevant.
And he was getting impatient.
Now, could he have had a better bedside manner?
Well, sure.
But that's a thing for doctors, not for cops.
Was he impatient?
Yeah.
Was he rude?
I'd say he was firm.
But here's the key question.
Was he racist?
No, of course not.
Was he sexist?
No, of course not.
Did he swear?
No, of course not.
Did he shout?
No, you heard him.
He did not.
Did he, I don't know, touch her?
No, of course not.
So you just saw what happened.
The total time of their interaction was actually only a few minutes, plus a few minutes of the cop in his own police car.
That's it.
That's over.
It's done.
It was not fun, but being pulled over for speeding is never fun.
I can tell you that.
If you deny that you were speeding, fine, fight it in court, either immediately or later, or pay.
I mean, none of those are fun.
I get it.
If you don't like it, then don't speed.
Now, obviously, that video was filmed in real time during the arrest, but it was not obviously broadcast.
Police body cams are not broadcast to the public.
They're kept for various good reasons, including to assure no police brutality.
I bet they make cops be just a little bit better behaved because they know everything they do or say can be reviewed by their superiors or a hostile media or a lawyer for a hostile criminal or accused.
Now, I'm no police chief, but I'd say the officer did fine.
Maybe he could have been 10% friendlier, but I don't know if he was just having a bad day.
But look at what that lady did right afterwards.
Got on her phone and she did a Facebook video live stream broadcast to her Facebook page right there.
It was 11 minutes long, which was several times longer than her entire interaction with the cop.
I'm not going to show you all 11 minutes of it.
It was very repetitive, but I did show you every single minute of the interaction with the cop.
Now I'm I'm going to show you what she said.
I'll probably play half of it and I say again that her side of the story was the one that the public saw and heard first.
I'm going to play the first four minutes of her tape is four minutes long, but I want you to watch it.
I promise I won't make you listen to the whole 11 minutes here.
Just watch his four minutes.
Hi everybody.
Um, this is Dawn.
Um, i'm driving.
I typically would not drive and do a face time video, but I am um, just i'm in Virginia.
Uh, I can't even tell you what town.
I had to look at something to tell you what town i'm in in Virginia.
I think Suffolk County or some town in Virginia and I just was threatened by this police officer and and and I want all of my, all of my African Americans and people of color that are out there are going to know exactly what i'm talking about and and I want to get a check-in on our people.
But i'm on this route called 58 West.
It's right off in between Virginia as you go to Richmond.
It's a cut through between Norfolk and Richmond, and I have had a traumatic experience um, and I want the people who are not African American, who know me, to to really get where we're coming from.
Every time when I saw the police pull up behind me the state trooper I was immediately afraid.
I was on the phone with my cousin Patrice, and I had her on on speaker because I was on bluetooth.
I'm in the car.
He threatened.
The man threatens to pull me out of the car.
Um, you know, we shouldn't be afraid to um drive and and get pulled over by the police.
And i'm telling you, I um, I showed him my license, asked him why I was stopped and he said that I was going uh, 70 and a 65 or 60 and a something like some kind of small difference.
And so i'm in the middle of a rural little town and i'm sorry that i'm upset, but I don't get upset too much.
Usually I get angry, I don't get afraid.
But you know um, and I protested a lot.
I'm 50 but i'm when i'm in my day.
I would say I did a lot of protesting and a lot of fighting just so things like this would not happen to us.
But I get pulled over by this white cop and he said he's sergeant somebody and I asked him what the stop was for and he told me that the seven mile an hour difference or whatever this was in the speed difference.
I saw no traffic signs by the way, no traffic signs by the time I had stopped at a convenience store to get a banana and by the time I had gone to where he immediately pulled me over.
Black and White Stop00:12:43
When he saw me um, I gave him my license registration for the rental car that i'm driving.
I just come back from the Meat Conference.
My daughter was playing tennis in the Meat Conference championship.
I'm on the way back to Greenville, South Carolina, the cop comes back with the ticket.
I'm on the phone with my cousin.
She's saying, stay calm.
I'm nervous, having both hands on a wheel, feeling all afraid.
He comes back, and when he comes back, he gives me the ticket.
And I said, so this is not a warning ticket.
So I didn't see any signs.
There were no signs.
He said, well, you can go back and look for signs.
I said, okay, so this is not a warning ticket.
He said, no, this is not a warning ticket.
So I said, okay.
And my cousin's on the phone on speaker.
He can't see that she's on the phone because it's on speaker on the other chair.
So he said, well, you'll need to sign this ticket.
And I said, why would I need to sign the ticket?
I don't agree with, and this is just something that I don't think.
I said, I won't be signing the ticket, but I'll take the ticket.
He said, no, you'll need to sign the ticket.
I said, I don't agree.
I didn't see a sign.
I'll abide by the ticket, but I'm not going to put my signature on that ticket.
And he said, well, if you don't put the signature on this ticket, I'll pull you out of the car and then you'll arrest you and I'll infound the car.
So my cousin immediately puts her voice from the seat that says, don't I sign a ticket?
Because my natural instinct for anybody who knows me knows that I do not like to be told what to do.
I abide by the law.
I'm respectful of the law, but you can't make me sign a ticket.
So I went ahead and signed a ticket only because I was immediately afraid.
And he looked like he was ready for me to pull me out of the car.
He didn't say, I'll ask you to step out of the car.
He said, I'll pull you out of the car and I'll arrest you and I'll found your car.
All right, I'm going to stop it there.
Now, her recitation of the facts here are sort of close.
I note she claims she was only going 60, not 70.
She said she at another point that she was going seven miles an hour over the limit, not the 15 the cop said.
Maybe it's easy to get that wrong, but the cop was pretty clear about it.
It was surely on the ticket.
I wonder if that was a mistake or deliberate, because if you're pulled over for a trifle for five miles an hour over the limit, well, then maybe it really was racism, as opposed to if she had said, I was going 70 in a 55 zone for Canadians who follow kilometers.
That would be like going 115 kilometers an hour in a 90 zone.
Yeah, that's not a rounding error.
And all of a sudden, it would look like you're actually a speeder.
Now, she said that the cop threatened to pull her out of the car.
He didn't say pull.
He said get.
Here, listen.
If you refuse to sign the summons at this point, I'm going to have to get you outside of the police, outside of this car.
I'm going to place you under arrest and take you in front of a magistrate.
I will get you vehicle code and go from there.
He didn't say he'd pull her, which suggests that he would rough her up or physically grab her.
He said he'd get her outside the car and get her to the judge.
I mean, maybe there's a nicer word than get.
But again, that slight change in wording, close to the truth, but not the truth.
And that difference, well, it's pretty important, isn't it?
If you're claiming you're terrified, if you're in tears, if you're mentioning race again and again and again, a white cop, I'm black, white, black, white, black.
And isn't that the most dramatic thing here, of course?
She's crying, which suggests that she had been terrorized by a thug, which suggests that she really had been threatened with violence, perhaps.
I don't know.
But in fact, she just got a ticket from a cop who wasn't fooling around or debating, but was still saying, yes, ma'am, no, ma'am.
But she mentioned his race again and again.
She's black.
The cop was white.
This was a special message for her black friends and her white friends.
And it's a teachable moment for white people to learn what we go through.
Who's we?
Was she in trouble for driving while black?
Or driving 70 in a 55 zone?
You saw the body cam tape.
Okay, I'm not going to play the whole of the rest of you.
Just a few short clips because she's really working herself up into a frenzy here.
And remember, she's doing this right after the incident.
She's going live on Facebook from her cell phone in her car.
The cop had no idea that she was doing that.
It was only days later that the police department released his raw footage to disprove.
Her allegations.
This was the first the world had heard about this encounter was her Facebook Live.
Okay, some more.
This video goes on for 11 full minutes.
I'm not going to play it all to you, but do you see this woman's allegations diverging from the truth?
And she's getting herself more and more revved up, isn't she?
Now, to be clear, she's saying it was racist and that it was a threat of physically being pulled out of the car.
Here, watch some more.
And he said, so then I signed, then Patrice said, sign a ticket.
And I said, okay.
So I would, you know, and he said, well, I don't care, you know, you're going to get out of this car.
I'll just pull you out of the car.
After he heard her, he thought that was me.
So I signed a ticket.
And I just want to show you what area I'm in.
This is the area in the middle of this kind of stuff.
This is where I am.
So it's not like I'm not afraid because this is where we got lynched.
This is where we got lynched.
This is where even in today's day, you'd be Freddie Gray.
You can be a Baltimore.
You don't have to be in a rural area.
But I was literally afraid that he was going to pull me out of the car, impound my car, and I'd be Sandra Bland.
Now, why do any of my white friends, nobody ever, do anybody ever feel like that when they get pulled over?
Are they afraid that they're never going to come home or see anybody else because the police are at the door saying, I'm going to pull you out of the car?
Why do only African Americans and people of color know what I'm going through right now?
Is it true that only African Americans feel that way?
Feel nervous and upset about getting a ticket and don't like the idea that if you refuse to pay the ticket or promise to attend court that you might have to go to see a judge right away.
I'd feel a little bit sick about it too, a little bit.
But I wouldn't call it, I don't know, anti-Semitism just because I'm Jewish or anti-male sexism just because I'm a man or anti-right-handed or something.
I'd say, yeah, it's because I was speeding and then I tried to talk back a bit to a cop.
I showed you every second of the police interaction.
There was not a word about race or sex or anything.
It was all about going 70 in a 55.
She's the one who's talking about race and talking about slavery.
She's talking about slavery to get out of the ticket.
Sorry, lady, you're the racist blaming the white cop and implying that people in rural parts are all slave owner descendants.
You're the one demeaning the history of slavery by invoking it to save yourself 100 bucks for speeding.
Next clip.
The only reason I was able to even, and then I sat there, I couldn't even, I signed a ticket, and he said, I knew you'd do the right thing.
And then he patted the side of the car and he said, have a great day.
He said, I knew you'd sign it.
You know, kind of sarcastically.
It was a very controlling, bullying experience.
And no one should threaten to pull me out of a car just because I haven't signed a ticket, because I don't, because I have a right not to sign the ticket.
I didn't say I wasn't going to comply.
I said, I don't think I need to sign that ticket.
Just to say it again, the rules seemed pretty clear to me.
She wasn't from that county.
She was from South Carolina, just passing through Virginia.
So if she didn't promise to pay the ticket or promise to come back and fight the ticket, she would be arrested and taken to a judge right there and then.
I mean, it does sound harsh, I guess, but then don't speed through that county or just take your lumps and pay the ticket or just say you'll come back later.
I don't think only black speeders are told that.
I think all speeders are told that.
But she really warmed to her theme, didn't she?
She was threatened with physical abuse.
She keeps saying he threatened to pull her out.
Pull, pull, pull.
I think she must have said the word pull at least 20 times in her rant.
Anyway, for me to sign that ticket or he's going to pull me out of the car.
Why would you threaten?
Why would you have to pull me out of the car?
I never said I wouldn't have stepped out of the car willingly.
Well, he didn't say that.
She just made it up.
Next clip.
And he just walked off, the bully that he was, proudly, happily, like he had accomplished something by degrading me as an African-American, as a citizen.
You saw the video.
Did he degrade her?
Did he degrade her as an African-American?
He did not.
Next clip.
The cop pulled me over.
He can pull me out of the car if he wants.
Whether for doing something or not, whenever he wants, he can impound the car, and I can be Sandra Bland.
Sandra Bland, if you don't know, was a black woman who was arrested on a traffic stop, by the way, by a Hispanic cop, if that matters.
And I guess in this game of race card playing, it does matter.
And she was later found dead in her cell.
A rule of suicide by investigators, but that was disputed by political activists.
My point is, do you think the traffic stop that you just watched, that three-minute interaction, do you think that was actually just one step away from her being found dead in a jail cell?
Next clip.
I just wish I knew what we could do about this.
It shouldn't happen.
It happens every day, thousands of times a day.
But I'm just tired of it.
It actually does happen thousands of times a day.
Thousands of times a day, speeders are pulled over all across America and Canada too, and pretty much anywhere where there's the rule of law on highways.
It is true.
And if you don't like it, and very few of us do like it, then don't speed.
Next clip.
I was very polite.
It doesn't matter how polite you are.
It's all sick, crazy bullying, and the police are ridiculous.
I'd agree.
She actually was polite enough in the interaction with the cop.
Her first comment was asking him how he was doing.
But then she said that the cop was sick and crazy and a bully.
No, no, no.
Now I'm going to stop here.
It goes on for another full three minutes.
She whips herself up into a frenzy.
But more importantly, she whips the world into a frenzy with her false accusations of racism, her extreme victimology.
You saw the full tape of what actually happened.
I showed it to you first, which is the opposite of how most of the world saw it.
Most of the world saw the accusation first.
And then maybe some of them saw the truth come out later in the web, the body cam video, but how many didn't?
How many people only saw her video and think that racist traffic cops really are prowling the highways of Virginia looking to kill or enslave black motorists?
How much more hate and distrust was just sewn between blacks and cops?
How much cultural damage did this liar do, this liar, this drama queen, this huckster, this hoaxer?
I have a new rule.
If there is a claim of racism or sexism or Islamophobia, I want to see proof.
I want to see the video.
And there's always a video.
I want to see the whole video before I believe it.
Whether it's a young girl in Toronto lying about a Chinese man cutting her hijab outside her school, a liar, or this new liar in Virginia, I just don't believe it anymore.
And I sure don't believe our white liberal media that's only too quick to put the false allegations on the air and then are slow, if ever, to correct the lies because they love, love the narrative too much, the narrative that we are all evil, violent racists, even if it never actually happened.
Stay with us for more.
Hey, welcome back to Did you know that every day at 12 noon Eastern Time, which is 10 a.m. Mountain Time, 9 a.m. Pacific Time, I host a one-hour live YouTube show.
Iran's Influence on Gaza00:09:36
You don't have to pay to watch this behind the paywall.
It's a way to talk to people who are YouTube subscribers but not yet subscribers to this, our premium show.
It's lightly produced.
We don't have long monologues.
I just show a few clips in chit chat.
And mainly I take comments from the general public about any subjects of the day.
It's a light show.
We're in and out in an hour.
I just sit down and chat.
It's a good way to connect with viewers.
If you want to ask me questions in real time, I encourage you to do that.
And one of the things we talked about today at some length was the deliberate response by the Hamas terrorist group in Gaza to try to detract from, jump on the media coverage of Donald Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
It was a mass riot on the international border.
Israel and Gaza, of course, are no longer the same country.
Gaza used to be part of Israel, but then Ariel Sharon forcibly removed every Israeli citizen and soldier.
It's been in the hands of Hamas ever since.
It's an international border, obviously, with a terrorist state, and Hamas basically sent hundreds, thousands of people to the border to infiltrate.
Some of them were armed with bombs or Molotov cocktails.
Others got caught up in it, were civilians, but many were terrorists.
Anyway, that dominated the press in the anti-Israel segment of the media, which is by far the majority, including in Israel enough.
If you read the Twitter stream of Haaretz, which is the leading liberal paper there, it was almost completely demonizing Trump and blaming Israel for the riots on its Gaza border.
Israeli border police responded to the infiltration attempts by shooting the infiltrators, killing dozens.
We don't know quite how many because you can't trust Hamas when they say it was 55.
Anyways, that's the background.
Let me show you a clip of how Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, handled that Hamas outrage.
Take a look.
Today's meeting was called to discuss the violence that some suggest was connected with yesterday's opening of the United States Embassy in Jerusalem.
For some people, the embassy opening is said to be a reason to engage in violence.
How is that justified?
As our president said when he announced the decision in December, the location of our embassy has no bearing on the specific boundaries of Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem or the resolution of contested borders.
It has no bearing on Jerusalem's holy sites.
It does not prejudge whatever the parties might negotiate in a peace agreement.
It does not undermine the prospects for peace in any way.
She went on at some length, and as you can see, she's at the United Nations, where a list of countries, mainly dictatorships, have decided to condemn Israel for shooting back at its international border.
Let me ask you, how would the United States respond if a thousand armed protesters from ISIS came up from Mexico?
Well, joining us now to talk about this violent riot at the border and the American reaction to it is our friend Tiffany Gabai.
She used to host culture wars in the rebel and now she is our managing editor.
Tiffany, it's great to see you again on TV.
Most of the time you're behind the scenes.
It's great to have you back on TV.
Great.
It's great to be here.
Thanks for having me.
And Tiffany.
And Nikki Haley is great.
Go ahead, please.
Well, I was going to say, like the rest of us, we were watched, we were gripped by this historic decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem.
I call it historic because that is the natural capital of Israel, not just the modern state, but in biblical times.
I think the leftist anti-Israel media were desperate for any excuse to reign on the parade, and they found it from Hamas, didn't they?
Oh, of course they did.
Now, I mean, this was an incredibly redemptive moment for the Jewish people or anyone who supports Israel.
Of course, Jerusalem is and should be the undivided and eternal capital of the Jewish state.
And there are historical grounds for that, legal grounds for that, strategic reasons for that.
I mean, we have to remember what happens when Israelis are not in control, right?
It's not like, you know, anyone can go and pray at El Aqsa.
You know, this is not an enlightened or, you know, people who are embracing of different cultures.
The Christians and the Christian holy sites are protected when Jews are in control of them and not so when it comes to the Arabs.
So that's another story in and of itself.
But of course, Nikki Haley and President Trump and our current administration have done more for Israel in just the last few months, in the last year, than all other administrations combined.
And of course, not including the most recent administration, which was the most destructive.
But of all the pro-Israel presidents and administrations, the Trump administration has been absolutely incredible.
I think the move of the embassy is symbolic because it's an affirmation that Israel is a sovereign state.
It's not going anywhere.
And the greatest power in the world is affirming that obvious fact that others can deny, but it's sort of an emperor has no clothes moment.
You can keep saying that Israel is not real, but it's been around for 70 years and America is firming that up symbolically.
But I think actually Donald Trump abandoning Barack Obama's personal agreement with the Ayatollahs of Iran is actually far more substantive because Iran, like many Muslim countries, wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.
But unlike the others, it is actually energetically building a nuclear bomb and missile program to do that.
And by the way, threatening America, Europe, and other Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia in the bargain.
I think Trump ripping away that Obama deal and without any nuance or hesitation, just saying, I'm out of it, that's probably the, that could be the most important move America makes in the region.
Let me throw one more in because there's actually others.
And Trump's refusal to be held hostage by the perennial Palestinian demands and negotiations.
I think his pushing the Palestinian issue to the back burner, his dealing with Iran, I think that's actually the most important thing Trump has done in the region.
What do you think?
I completely agree.
And in dealing with Iran, he is dealing with the Palestinians and their proxies.
You know, you've got Hamas, you have Hezbollah, you have basically Iran looking to destabilize the entire region and supporting terror in that region against Israelis and against Americans.
So it is absolutely one of the most critical moves that he's done to try to bring some stability back to that region.
I mean, you mentioned Aretz a few moments ago, and it's just literally one of the most subversive rags, as I call it.
They had a headline the other day saying that Bibi and Trump lit the fire now with this embassy move.
And are we going to watch the Middle East burn?
And I had to laugh to myself.
Think about what Obama did overthrowing Mubarak or aiding the ostracer of Mubarak in Egypt, Gaddafi and Libya, allowing those two countries to fall, Egypt to fall to the Muslim Brotherhood and Libya basically to burn down, to allow what has gone on in Syria for Hezbollah to increase its stranglehold in Lebanon, to not aid the Iranian dissidents in Iran.
I mean, you could just go country by country and Obama doused the entire region in kerosene and lit a match and watch it burn.
And now Trump is really has, you know, he's got his work cut out for him.
But the centerpiece of it all is Iran.
They're the largest state sponsor of terror in the world.
And so this has been a very, very monumental, you know, last few days and weeks with, you know, nixing the Iran deal, moving our embassy to Jerusalem, that incredible intel operation that Israel pulled off with regard to gaining all of that intelligence on Iran's nuclear aspirations and its project.
It's just been incredible.
And what is so disheartening is that in spite of all of that information, in spite of the fact that we have proof, we see the photos and the footage, right, of tens of thousands of Palestinians who were mobilized by Hamas, funded by Iran, to breach Israel's border using the pretext of the embassy,
because it's because the terror tunnels aren't working and they're just doing whatever they can to breach Israel's border, sending Palestinians to their death with meat cleavers, burning tires, Molotov cocktails, actual bombs and explosive devices that they planted, wire cutters, kites with swastikas on them, launching firebombs and burning down fields, in many cases their own fields and infrastructure.
Despite all of that, you have the liberal media.
Unfortunately, you have many liberal Jews.
You have the mainstream media, not just liberal media, unfortunately, not even reporting on this and making it seem as if people in Gaza are just these victims who are being slaughtered and mowed down by Israelis.
You have, this is absolutely amazing.
Even South Africa recalled its ambassador and insisted that Israel withdraw from Gaza.
Democrats And The Derangement00:04:03
It's like news flash, they withdrew in 2005.
And what did Hamas do?
They destroyed all the infrastructure that Israel left in place for them to make a better life for Palestinians.
So it is so clear and obvious what is going on and who is on the right side of good.
And yet despite all that, despite all the information we're privy to, it just shows not one congressional Democrat turned up at that embassy opening.
All of our mainstream media outlets are condemning Israel.
And that is, it's truly disheartening.
So anyone who says anti-Semitism isn't alive and well is kidding themselves.
This is just the latest and newest incarnation of it.
I was truly surprised that not even Democrats from Jewish districts would go.
Not even Chuck Schumer, the Jewish senator from heavily Jewish New York State.
The only Jewish Democrat was a retired Democrat, Joe Lieberman, who was there.
I was truly shocked by that.
It's true to me that the Democrats in the U.S. are going the way of the British Labor Party under Jeremy Corbyn.
They're just plain old anti-Israel and moving from anti-Israel to anti-Jewish.
It's so weird.
Let me ask you one last question.
I put this to Joel Pollack, our friend at Breitbart.com.
I see images from Israel that are very pro-Trump.
Trump is popular in the streets, popular in the polls, and I can understand why the embassy ran all of these things.
But do you sense any movement towards the Republicans amongst American Jews?
In Canada, let me just preface it.
Jews were traditionally liberal.
And maybe they are sagging that way again.
But when Stephen Harper was the prime minister, the Jewish vote finally woke up and said, Harper is a friend of the Jews.
He's a friend of Israel.
He's a friend of Western values.
And by the time Harper was done, he got a majority of the Jewish vote, not all of it.
From what I can see, American Jews still vote 70%, 80% for Democrats.
Is that going to change at all?
Are they still going to insult Donald Trump for aesthetic reasons and turn their nose up at the most pro-Israel president ever?
Yes.
Unfortunately, we don't see that shift here in the U.S. At least 70% still vote Democrats, still consider themselves liberal.
And the derangement with regard to Trump is so severe that even if they were moved, even just a little bit, to want to support an actual pro-Israel president, they won't do it specifically because it's Trump.
Anything that is Trump is bad.
And they don't seem to recognize the intellectual inconsistency.
They will sit there and scream about the alt-right and about how Trump is a Nazi and the internment camps are being built as we speak.
And at the first sign of a more traditional anti-Semitic trope being espoused, like Abbas did recently, well, the gloves come off.
We can't have that.
Let's decry anti-Semitism.
The ADL gets out and all these left-wing Jews come out and they decry that kind of anti-Semitism.
But actually supporting Israel, the only safe haven in the world for Jews escaping anti-Semitism and persecution and death and destruction, that they cannot support, that they cannot get on board with, because that doesn't gain them any cocktail party cred.
That you don't do in polite liberal circles.
It's okay to condemn traditional anti-Semitic tropes.
It's okay to call out the alt-right or say that Trump is a Nazi, and yet he's the most pro-Israel in terms of his actual action.
So there is a very bizarre disconnect.
And their derangement and really seething hatred for Trump will just not allow themselves to even throw him a bone, even on this.
And that's very, very disheartening.
Yeah, it is.
Unfortunately, the Jews don't deserve Trump, his generosity towards them.
Bizarre Disconnect00:14:57
I mean, he does it for his own reasons, but I tell you, the Jews are lucky to have an ally like him.
Israelis, it sounds like you're getting it.
Tiffany, it's great to talk to you again.
Thanks for taking the time to be with us today.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
That's great to see you.
There you have it, Tiffany Gabbai, the Rebels managing editor, joining us via Skype.
Stay with us.
more ahead on The Rebel.
Welcome back.
Well, Kinder Morgan, the company that owns the Trans Mountain Pipeline and has an approved proposal to expand the pipeline, approved by the National Energy Board and by Justin Trudeau's cabinet.
They say that if they don't have a clear sign that the project will in fact proceed by the end of May, which is what, just two weeks and a bit away, they're going to cancel the project right off the billion dollars they've spent and go home, take their billions elsewhere to invest.
This is a project worth more than $7 billion in construction alone, let alone the value to oil companies of having an outlet to the sea.
Well, a troubling article by our friend Anthony Fury in the Toronto Sun, let me read to you the headline.
Forget legal challenges, direct action is Trans Mountain's real hurdle.
And I want to read a key phrase that Anthony quotes, quoting Mayor Gregor Robertson, who said this on Bloomberg TV.
So he was giving a clear message to business viewers.
I should remind you that Gregor Robertson served on the board of the Tides Canada Foundation before he became mayor.
He was an anti-oil extremist even before becoming mayor.
Let me quote you what Gregor Robertson said to the press.
He said, I don't think this project will go.
I really don't.
Based on the resistance on the ground, he later added, I don't think the resistance on the West Coast is going to fade.
I think it will only intensify.
Escalation looks likely.
Well, when the mayor, who is in some ways the chief lawmaker for a city, says he is absolutely certain that violence and lawbreaking will proceed, and when his ideological co-religionists, in fact, engage in that lawbreaking, well, gee whiz, if you were Kinder Morgan, would you decide to add another $6.4 billion to the one you've already lost?
Joining us now via Skype is Anthony Fury, the author of the column himself.
Anthony, great to see you.
Very troubling report that you have here.
Yeah, no kidding, Ezra.
I think most Canadians would be forgiven for thinking that the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain fight is a legal one, stuff about jurisdiction, and now we're hearing about all these references to BC Superior Corps, Rachel Notley threatening to ban liquor sales or BC wines coming into the province, all that sort of stuff.
So it's still within the rubric of polite society and lawmaking and all of that.
No, no, no.
There's a whole other element to it.
The civil disobedience element.
Those friends of Gregor Robertson's you refer to.
His statement is very interesting to me because he mentions resistance more than once.
He talks about escalation.
And as you point out, he was with Tides Foundation.
I think he knows some of these eco-radicals.
He's maybe come across them in the past.
He maybe hears through the grapevine.
What does he know that we don't know?
Because I found documents that show Greenpeace and much less moderate organizations in Greenpeace have been running direct action summits and learning centers and so forth for people to learn how to oppose Kinder Morgan.
What does direct action mean?
Well, it's a bit of a euphemism for actually doing physical things to stop and disrupt a project from going through.
Yeah.
Well, I mean, I know from studying the publicly disclosed grants made by Tides Canada and their American head office in San Francisco that they in fact fund these anti-oil extremist groups, including his friend and ally, Sippora Berman, who used to be a senior Greenpeace executive.
She's now with a group that used to be called Forest Ethics.
It's now called Stand Earth.
There's so many of these different groups, but they all are collegial.
They fund each other.
They support each other.
Here's why I mentioned Sepora Berman, Anthony.
I'd like your thoughts on this.
She made her name, she got her start in professional activism with what was called the War in the Woods a couple of decades ago when there was logging interests on Vancouver Island.
And she was with the extremists that physically blocked the logging vehicles, destroyed vehicles.
I'm not saying she herself nailed spikes into trees, but the idea of tree spiking is when they log that tree and take it to the sawmill, the steel spike breaks the steel saw, destroying the mill and frankly endangering any workers there.
So true eco-terrorism, it was called the war in the woods, and they won.
By sheer eco-terrorism and violence, they won.
By law breaking, they won.
And Sepora Berman, the lesson she learned there was break the law, get a slap on the wrist, and keep at it.
And she is now one of the leaders opposing this.
She and Gregor Robertson are friends and allies.
I believe you will see War in the Woods style physical violence and ecoterrorism.
And I don't think Gregor Robertson's disagreeing, is he?
Yeah, that's the interesting thing.
NDP MP Kennedy Stewart, he's one of the guys who was arrested alongside Elizabeth May in those arrests.
Now, Gregor Robertson said escalation and so forth after those arrests.
So he's saying it's going to be escalated over and above these people refusing to move and having to be dragged away by cops.
Now, Kennedy Stewart commissioned his own polls in which he argues he found that something like 12% of British Columbians, which equals hundreds of thousands of people, said they'd be willing to engage in civil disobedience to stop this pipeline.
I mean, this is madness.
12% is a small number, but not when you talk about the severity of what's being discussed here.
And even if then only 1 or 2% of those people actually act on their direct action, you're talking thousands of people who are saying we're going to lay down on the train tracks or we're going to go in the night and do something untoward.
There's been ecoterrorism in Canada in the past.
This character, Weibo Ludwig, as you know, is something of a folk hero in some circles.
He's not 100% ideologically overlapped with the sort of climate evangelists.
He has his own sort of niche interests as well, but it's happened before, hundreds of pipeline bombings in Alberta and BC in the past 20 years.
A good reminder about Webo Ludwig.
I think he was more of a rogue, one man, or one family operation.
But here, let's just put some footage over the screen now.
This is a riot that happened on Burnaby Mountain several years ago.
I remember we filmed this when we were at the Sun News Network.
A full-out riot with hundreds of people.
Sappora Berman's group, Forest Ethics, was there.
They were among those arrested.
David Suzuki personally attended those riots to give them his premature.
So the idea of riots attacking cops, they actually threw a garbage pail at a cop.
The one cop who happened to wear a turban for some reason, they threw garbage on him.
Wearing masks, threats to police.
We see in the past month, RCMP officers physically attacked.
So it's not even that it's about to start.
It has been going on slow burn for years.
Here's the thing.
You're always going to have ruffians looking for a fight.
When they have the moral approval of the CBC, of David Suzuki, of the mayor, of MPs, if MPs are actually breaking the law with them, that encourages any young person who says, yes, I'm saving the world.
And every moral authority in the province is encouraging me and expecting me to do this.
It's only the evil cops and that Stephen Harper who says, don't.
I think the moral exemplars are the actual instigators here.
Yeah, well, you make a good point because Elizabeth May and Kennedy Stewart are clearly saying you can do this if you disagree with the position that the majority of Canadians hold and that the courts have upheld and so forth.
And some injunctions are being upheld by law enforcement.
Yeah, they're sending the message, come on, kids, come and do this.
And Kennedy Stewart releasing that number about the number of people who do civil disobedience, he said, oh, this keeps me awake at night.
But his response to it was not to say, so don't do this, folks.
His response was to say, so shut down this pipeline.
It's almost a dare.
It was very occasionally worded, but it's basically a threat saying, we're going to unleash the dogs of war on you guys unless you do our bidding.
Yeah, I don't believe that it keeps him up at night other than with excitement.
I mean, I think, as you indicate in your column, he was fined $500 for breaking the criminal injunction.
I think he regards that $500 as a cheap press release that now he can waive.
He's running for mayor in Vancouver.
Now he'll be able to say, I'm more pro-environmentalist, anti-pipeline than anyone here.
I'm the only one who's actually being convicted, paid a $500 fine.
So he's actually looking to turn his own criminality into an election tool.
Here's what scares me is the guys who are supposed to be watching this.
I mean, Justin Trudeau, who pretends to support this pipeline, a couple of years ago, Anthony, his energy minister, Jim Carr, I have to keep reminding people because no one's ever seen or heard of Jim Carr.
He's just not included in any real decisions.
He made the mistake, Anthony.
I don't know if you remember this.
He publicly said if there was eco-terrorism, the government would deploy the RCMP or even the military, which sounds like a pretty obvious thing to say.
But look at this.
So he said that here's the first headline.
Liberal minister says those who protest pipelines less than peacefully will face the Canadian military.
It's a bit of a torqued headline.
But days after that, look at that.
He was frog-marched out there by his boss, Justin Trudeau.
Here's the headline in Reuters.
Canada Energy Minister apologizes for pipeline protests.
Remark, let me just read the first sentence.
Canada's natural resources minister on Tuesday apologized for remarks he made about anti-pipeline protests that some people interpreted as a threat to use troops against demonstrators.
So he was forced to apologize for saying he'd uphold the law.
What more of a green light do you need from Justin Trudeau?
Say that it's bad to do the civil disobedience.
Say that it's bad to illegally cross the border.
Say it's bad to go abroad and fight with ISIS.
I mean, just say, give us a break here, throw us a bone, and just please say those basic things.
And yet the prime minister can't even bring himself to, I think, set the tone that these things should be disapproved of.
It's bizarre.
It's topsy-turvy.
Yeah, he's been tougher on Jim Carr for threatening to uphold the law than he's been on any of these lawbreakers.
Anthony, it's great to talk with you.
Time flies.
There's so much here, and I'm so glad you're bringing these to the attention of a larger audience.
I mean, Gregor Robertson and Kenny Stewart and Elizabeth May, they are in full league with the protesters.
I hope you keep shining a light of scrutiny on them.
All right.
Sounds good.
And don't forget Catherine McKenna.
Jim Carr, we never see him at all.
Catherine McKenna, she's the second in command of the government, or at least I see her everywhere, and her tweets seem to matter.
So I don't know.
Apparently, she's the one in charge.
Yeah, you know, that's a very good point.
And she is friends with many of these protesters.
We've got the photos to prove it.
I'll show those on another day.
Great to see you again, Anthony.
Thanks for being here.
Take care.
All right, there you have it.
Anthony Fury, his column, if you missed it in the sun, is called Forget Legal Actions, Legal Challenges.
Direct Action is Trans Mountain's Real Hurdle.
That's code for law breaking.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Oh, hey, welcome back on my monologue yesterday about an ISIS murderer living in Canada.
Paul writes, What good are the laws if they're going to be ignored?
The Trudeau Liberals are an outlaw government, and the media party is completely complicit.
Yeah, I mean, if you're having trouble understanding this, think of Paul Bernardo, the mass murderer, sexist, rapist, sorry, rapist, horrific crime of the decade in the 90s.
That's what ISIS is.
People who killed not in an act of occasional passion, hot-blooded killing.
These are cold-blooded killers who did this in ISIS's case for an ideology, for sick pleasure.
They would murder in the name of their jihad.
They would rape in the name of jihad.
They believed in rape slaves.
That's what this ISIS thug did.
So he wasn't some hot-blooded killer who did something in the moment.
He was diabolical.
He was truly evil.
Like Paul Bernardo, he enjoyed and felt a religious surge from the murders.
And he's on the streets, and the CBC won't name him, and Trudeau will not prosecute him.
And I've shown you the laws there.
We don't have to prosecute him for actual murder.
It might be tough to prove.
We could just prosecute him for going to join ISIS.
That itself is a crime.
For supporting ISIS is a crime.
Getting on a plane or trying to get on a plane is a crime.
Those are all crimes that could lock this guy up for years.
No, no.
And the CBC is running defense for him.
Ron writes, with the many provisions in the criminal code that could apply in these cases that are being ignored, can't a class action lawsuit against Trudeau be launched?
Well, I don't think you could launch a lawsuit against Trudeau for not exercising his political discretion, his executive discretion.
And some of these provisions in the criminal code need the consent of the Attorney General.
So they have within them implicitly that it's a political decision by the Attorney General.
I don't think you can bind the hands of a justice minister that way.
There are other provisions in the criminal code that an ordinary citizen can have a private prosecution.
That is, an ordinary person goes to a judge and say, judge, there's been a crime.
The prosecutors aren't attending to it.
I have the facts.
Let me take the criminal code and sue this guy in a private prosecution.
It's quite rare, but it does happen.
I don't think that's allowed in these terrorism cases.
You need the consent of the Attorney General.
Bruce writes, the common thread through today's show is that wicked people protect each other's backs.
Trudeau protects jihadis.
School officials protect abusers.
Professional protesters protect organizations which don't care about our prosperity.
I love it when real investigative reporting unmasks the monsters.
Well, thanks very much.
I was really glad to have our friend James O'Keefe from Project Veritas on.
Media Love Accusations!00:01:31
He has had so many successes.
Some are really little, some are enormous.
His undercover investigations into a group called Acorn stopped, I think, billions being funneled into that left-wing street organizing organization, a socialist organization from which Obama came.
In the case of his school investigations, it's got various teachers' union bosses suspended.
He does incredible work, and that's why the left hates him, as he mentioned.
The Washington Post got a Pulitzer Prize for investigating him.
His investigations haven't won the prize, but the anti-reporting, the anti-journalism of the Washington Post has.
That shows you how messed up our world is.
Well, folks, that's our show for today.
What do you think about me showing you those videos?
I mean, it's just a random woman in a random county at a random traffic stop, but it just struck me as something that happened so much.
There is so much demand for racism in the media and so little actual supply that we have hoaxes like this.
I actually think there's an excess of hatred in the world, and a lot of it comes from radical Islam.
But the media can't talk about that, so they ignore that and they crave other types of racism and hate, including making it up about just some traffic cop who, I guess, could have been 5%, 10% friendlier, but he didn't have a racist bone in his body.
The media loved, loved the accusation.
The correction, well, yeah, not so much.
That's our show for today.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters.