Canada’s NAFTA chief, Steve Verhoevl, revealed no active U.S. talks since June 2018’s G7 summit, despite Trump’s auto tariffs threatening 160,000 Ontario jobs and a 2% GDP hit by 2020. Meanwhile, the SPLC’s $3M settlement with Majid Nawaz and its defamation of conservatives like Daniel Pipes—tied to Soros-funded Open Societies—exposes potential legal risks for similar smear campaigns. The host frames this as part of a broader "globalist left" strategy, weaponizing labels against pro-Israel voices since the 1982 Lebanon War, while Israel’s "Rebel Israel" trip aims to counter narratives with direct engagement and expert interviews. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, Canada's NAFTA negotiator says he hasn't even had a conversation with his American counterparts since the G7.
It's June 25th, and you're watching The Ezra LeVance 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.
The most shocking video I've seen in a long time, the head of Canada's NAFTA negotiations just said he hasn't talked to his U.S. counterparts in weeks.
I'm going to play the clip for you just to set it up first.
It was at a boardroom table.
He was next to Christia Freeland, the foreign minister who has been personally working on the NAFTA file.
Here she is in another picture with her crack team of millennials because you know they've got vast experience with complex negotiations like how to get their parents to help pay off their student loans or how to make sure their pot dealer isn't fleecing them.
Yeah, Christia's angels.
You know, I don't want to judge a book by its cover, but there are some things where being old actually is a plus because it means you've done something before, achieved something, have some experience, made your mistakes already.
I think international trade deals, they're an old man's game.
Maybe old women too, but you got to be old.
It's why judges are usually old.
It's why teachers are older than their students.
Cleverness can be quick, but wisdom usually takes time.
There is a difference.
But I think there's a rule in Justin Trudeau's government, nobody is allowed to be older or smarter than Trudeau.
And his cabinet proves that.
Now that's fine when you're just doing selfies and photo ops, but not fine when you're going up against the toughest negotiators in the world on trade who happen to have all the cards because the U.S. is the biggest and most important economy, at least as far as we're concerned.
So I was delighted to learn that we actually had a professional negotiator too.
Not just Christia Freeland, but someone who looks like they've actually been appointed on merit as opposed to being based on a gender or racial quota.
I don't know.
I'm just glad that there's someone involved who isn't all about selfies.
So here he is.
You'll see him sitting next to Christia Freeland at a boardroom table meeting with a panel of Canadians who are very interested in NAFTA and getting a deal done.
And the media cameras are let in and one of the panel asks this chief negotiator, his name is Steve Verhool, that's some pretty obvious question.
Hey man, how's it going?
And he answers honestly because, you know, and he says, it's not going.
Take a look.
Do you still meet your part?
Do you still have the DNA that are working?
We don't have the active negotiations.
Since two or three weeks, I'll have the odd conversation, but not no real engagement, no real negotiating session.
And when we hear that, you were close to a kind of an MOU.
What was the David said for us to do?
These are not popular.
That's something you're picking up.
By the way, an MOU is a memorandum of understanding.
Christia Freeland cut that question off.
Now, did you get the gist of this?
We do not have any ongoing negotiations, not for two or three weeks, no real engagement, no real negotiating session.
Just not.
Now, that's shocking news.
And when there was a follow-up question, you saw Christia Freeland interrupt to stop that answer that she knew would have been just as embarrassing.
But for some reason, the CBC didn't caption her response in French, did they?
When she actually told the question askers, don't ask about such things in public.
I want to show you that video one more time.
It's quick, but I want you to see it.
It means that there hasn't been any progress at all in getting a trade deal since Trudeau and Trump had their Twitter battle at the G7.
There's nothing since then.
It's really quick.
Just watch one more time.
Do you still need to warn?
Do you still have the committee that are working?
What is the status of Super Declaration?
I don't have any active coaching.
Since?
Two or three weeks.
And I'll have the odd conversation, but no real engagement, no real negotiating session.
And.
And when we hear that, we were close to kind of the NWS people.
20% Tariff Impact Scenarios00:04:13
He's an unpopular sector.
He's just been sent to that.
So we're falling off the track.
Our train is derailing.
Our biggest trading partner who's going to war against China on trade, going to a trade war against the European Union, against Mexico.
And we're getting swept up in that.
Shouldn't we be outside of that?
We pretty much have trade parity with the U.S. We're not like China or Mexico.
Why are we in a fight?
But Trudeau won't give up his Quebec dairy farmer cartel or a few other things that most Canadians don't really care about, don't really want to have a trade war over.
And so right now, Trump, after the G7 meeting, he said he's looking at hitting us where it hurts, our auto exports.
Do you see that there?
All the cars coming into the U.S., that's where we're vulnerable.
You know, we sell them more than one million more cars a year than they sell us.
So a 20% import tariff on Canadian-made cars would just devastate the auto industry.
I mean, no American would buy a Canadian-made car for 20% above this price.
It would just smash our industry.
Trump doesn't care, though.
He wants all those factories and jobs to come back to Michigan and Ohio.
He doesn't care if Ontarians say mean things about him.
Ontario doesn't vote in the U.S. presidential elections.
Michigan and Ohio do.
And if he moves factories down from Ontario to Michigan and Ohio, they will vote for him forever.
Now this is a crisis, but Trudeau and Christian Freeland, they've done nothing for three weeks.
In fact, today, Justin Trudeau took his 16th personal day in 2018.
He just took a day off work, like he did the day after the G7 itself.
How many personal days have you taken in 2016?
Another more grown-up national leader would probably be in crisis mode, emergency cabinet meetings, maybe even taking his entire cabinet down to Washington for emergency meetings down there and letting everyone know we take this seriously, probably calling in unorthodox help, calling in the Hail Mary passes, people with gray hair.
Call up Brian Mulroney, who got the NAFTA deal done in the Canada-U.S. free trade deal done in the first place.
Mulroney would love to help.
He'd love it.
So would Jean-Cretchen.
He was no turbo fan of the United States, but he knew about getting business done.
Colin Frank McKenna, the liberal leader, the Liberal Premier, who was a former ambassador, call him any grown-up, a business liberal like John Manley.
But no.
These woke global warming feminists have it all in hand.
I mean, come on.
Chris de Freeland.
Yeah, that didn't work on the Belgians.
They are a teeny tiny country.
I don't think it's going to work with Tyrannosaurus Trump and her other super strategy of hug emojis.
The European Trade Commissioner, Cecilia Malmstrom, and I call each other sisters in trade.
We sign our emails, hugs.
Yes, we do.
We sometimes send each other smiley faces in particularly difficult moments.
Hey guys, time to bring in some help, and not just from the Hug squad.
I mean, don't take it from me, take it from every single Canadian bank that's panicking right now.
Significant Job Losses00:14:39
Here's Scotiabank that runs several scenarios in this study, including this one: the 20% tariff on trade with the U.S. causes an economic recession in Canada.
Output shrinks by 1.8% in 2020, which would mark the first annual GDP contraction in Canada since 2009.
Oh, good.
So the worst recession in a decade.
Oh, good, no problem.
But maybe that's just the Trump lovers at Scotiabank, notorious right-wingers over there.
How about TD Bank?
Here's what they say would happen.
Given the concentration of the auto sector, Ontario bears the brunt of the impact, with growth reduced by as much as two percentage points.
Significant job losses also occur.
Up to one in five Ontario manufacturing jobs could be at risk.
This analysis includes only direct impacts.
Supply chain and income shocks could magnify the economic impacts.
Oh, just that, guys.
One in five manufacturing jobs.
So basically, what Rachel Notley did to Alberta, Trudeau is going to do to Ontario.
Let me read some more.
Significant job losses also result with roughly 160,000 net positions shed relative to the status quo.
Almost all of these losses would occur in Ontario.
Oh, okay.
Well, they're probably pro-Trump shills too at the TD Bank.
How about these guys, the National Bank of Canada?
I mean, what would they say?
Well, they say, quote, the longer negotiations drag on, the riskier investing in Canada and Mexico could become for companies looking for guaranteed access to the U.S. market.
Here's another quote from their report.
I thought this was interesting.
Canada's difficult position is best summed up in the following quote: With NAFTA in place, Canada is an option when globally oriented firms consider the North American strategies.
Without it, Canada is a smallish market that probably can be served from the U.S. or elsewhere.
All of this means the longer the negotiations continue, the weaker Canada's negotiating position could become.
They're basically saying that's the headline of this piece.
They're saying a bad deal is better than no deal.
That's a bank saying that.
Here, let me show you an example of all this.
All this talk about steel tariffs.
I haven't talked about dairy or auto.
Here's a steel company that isn't waiting to figure out what's going to happen with China or Canada.
They made the decision to build a new steel smelter in America.
Jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, right?
And that's what it's all about.
That is what it's all about.
Now, in addition to the permanent 300 jobs, the CEO tells me that there are a thousand contractors they're hiring shortly to help build that plant.
They expect to start producing steel by September.
So you're spending a half billion to build a new steel plant in Ohio instead of India.
Plus, you got a thousand new construction jobs.
And did you hear that?
They're going to be operating in three months.
This is a teeny bit faster than Canada approves industrial projects.
Maybe they're not doing Trudeau's gender analysis and global warming analysis first.
Just a guess.
But let me say my point again.
There hasn't been a conversation between Canada and the United States in three weeks.
Not a word.
You heard them.
Instead of all hands on deck, Trudeau is taking more holidays.
I see that over the weekend he's rolled out a new selfie-style self-promotional video celebrating Poutine.
See, that's what he's good at doing.
Negotiating NAFTA, not so much.
Look, it's a disaster.
Seriously, all the banks say that if we don't fix this, we're going into a recession with mass unemployment, our dollar falling to about 64 cents.
So how did the CBC treat this news?
I don't know if you noticed, but we took that video clip from the CBC, the one of Steve Verhool.
Well, I want to show you the video in the context that the CBC reported.
Take a look.
Today, we got some interesting insight from Canada's chief NAFTA negotiator, Steve Verhool.
Now, we know talks have slowed down because they broke down just before the G7 summit because Canada, the U.S., and Mexico are all in very different positions when it comes to the Sunset Clause.
Justin Trudeau was trying to get NAFTA across the table, but Donald Trump is not backing away from his position.
But Steve Rajul was asked at this photo op, there was an awkward moment where no one was talking in the room, and they all sort of joked around, like, we need to be animated.
And so someone on the council took the lead and started asking some questions to Canada's chief negotiator.
So have a listen.
It's hard to hear, so we've got, the font will come up, so you'll be able to read along, but have a listen.
Do you still need to underpark?
that are working, what is the status of the administration?
We don't have any active questions.
Since?
Since?
Two or three weeks, and I'll have the odd conversation, but no real engagement, no real negotiating session.
And when we hear that, we were close to a kind of MOU.
What was the business of the talk for us to do?
That's not really how that's supposed to go.
It's good for us to get insight into what's going on.
But you'll see Christopher Freeland jumped in there.
You got that down in French so quickly.
Because when your chief NAFTA negotiator is in front of cameras saying, well, we have no active negotiations.
However, I should put this in greater context, that Christopher Freeland has been in contact with her counterparts, and it's sort of at that high-level sort of position right now, where it's at the decision-maker level.
I'm not saying that Steve Rajul's role is not incredibly vital.
He is Canada's chief negotiator.
So hearing that, there is a bigger context there, and there are conversations happening, but it's not the formal talks.
So the giggling, they were giggling about that.
They think at worst, it's a slightly awkward PR moment.
Bit of a gaffe.
We need a bit of spin here, but nothing more than that.
Just a communications issue.
They were giggling.
I'm a family senior suddenly and senior, really?
Well, sure, because they hate Donald Trump, too, just as much as Trudeau does.
They don't understand tough things like NAFTA.
That's for old boring white guys who don't understand being woke and male feminism and global warming.
And after all, if they ask tough questions or if they don't bury the lead here, maybe they'll lose their government journalism job.
Maybe they won't get a Senate appointment.
Oh, didn't you see?
Trudeau just appointed another CBC journalist directly to the Senate.
There's a message there.
If you want your $1.5 billion annual CBC taxpayer bailout, Tow the Liberal line.
And if you're a political reporter and you want your personal multi-million dollar payoff, you better tow the liberal line.
Canada's lead negotiator just confesses things are going awful and we're in a slow-motion car crash and just giggle about it.
Just say it's a little gaffe.
Then again, I suppose that is fair.
The 160,000 Ontarians who will lose their jobs, none of them work for the CBC, do they?
Stay with us for more on this with Manny Montemigrino.
Do you still have committees that are working?
What is the status of the information?
We don't have the active negotiations.
Since two or three weeks, we'll have the odd conversation that kind of no real engagement, no real negotiating session.
And ones who we hear that who were close to a kind of an MOU.
What was the program?
He's an unpopular.
Well, the gentleman sitting next to Christy Freeland was Steve Rahul, Canada's chief NAFTA negotiator, who says that there has been no engagement, no negotiation of any substance between Canada and the United States since the G7 meeting two or three weeks ago.
I find that terrifying.
But let's go to an expert on negotiations and Canada-U.S. relations, our friend Manny Montenegrino, a former national partner at a serious law firm in Ottawa, former lawyer to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and a political watcher who's the president and CEO of Think Sharp Incorporated.
Manny, I thought that was a bombshell.
No conversation between Canada and the states in three weeks.
What do you make of that?
Well, I'm not surprised.
I mean, it's falling into exactly what I said.
I don't think that this government, Justin Trudeau, wants to negotiate in good faith any trade agreement with the United States.
I mean, if you think about it, everyone is saying that uncertainty equals risk, risk equals collapse in market.
All they're doing is adding more uncertainty.
And I can only think partly is they want to wrap up the problems with the Trump hate voters in Canada, and this adds to what they want to do.
Well, I looked through some reports by leading Canadian banks.
I'm talking about TD Bank, Scotiabank, National Bank.
These are not political outfits, I don't think.
If they have any politics, I think they're pro-Canada and they're probably a little anti-Trump, to be honest.
Each of them predicts an economic calamity.
We're talking about 160,000 job losses, 2% recession kind of thing.
So how does Justin Trudeau know that those are the real scientific risks?
So it's not just politics.
We're talking about hundreds of thousands potentially jobs, Manny.
How can that be part of a Trudeau strategy?
Well, if you followed, as I have very carefully, the beginning of 2018, our GDP was downward to 1.3%.
We have lost since 2018 55,000 jobs.
We have had our dollar drop about 10%.
Now, if you think of it, our buying power from America, $350 billion, a 10% drop is equivalent to a tariff, if you want to call it, of importing goods of 10%.
That's $35 billion that's going to cost all the consumers in Canada.
So we have already been on a downward trend.
And this government, not because of NAFTA, because of a lot of other things that it's done.
So if you can wrap everything up in NAFTA and wrap everything up into a failure, you can hide a poor economy that's happened before these NAFTA discussions.
You know, I'm just thinking of how big of a crisis I think this is.
Now, I could be wrong.
You're closer to the seat of power than I've ever been.
Sometimes a physical presence by senior hands makes a difference.
I remember on 9-11, and you probably remember this too, Manny, when Tony Blair, the prime minister, flew to Washington just to be there in person.
I mean, I don't think he really was there for any substantive thing.
He was just there to say, this is your battle of Britain.
You know, this is your moment that counts, and I'm here.
And I would think that Trudeau would be having emergency cabinet meetings.
Maybe he would take his whole cabinet down to Washington, D.C. Maybe he would call in Brian Marooney, John Manley, Frank McGay.
He would call in all sorts of elder statesmen from both, maybe even bite his tongue and call Stephen Harper and say, hey, we've been rivals, but I need your help for the country.
And tell me, Kretchen Martin Harper wouldn't come to his aid if they asked him.
Instead, Justin Trudeau's taking personal days, it's like he doesn't even know there's an alarm ringing.
Well, if you look at it very carefully, Ezra, there isn't much to be done.
You don't need these experts that we've had in the past.
There is basically no trade difference between Canada and the U.S. There's a slight variance, depending on you look at it.
The United States is not asking for anything unreasonable.
They've presented, they'll take a bilateral agreement.
They'll do a deal quickly.
What's happening with the delay, I think it's because there's a Mexican election.
And Justin Trudeau and the Liberals do not want to do this alone without Mexico.
Mexico has halted their discussions.
We could do it without Mexico, bring certainty to ourselves, bring certainty to the Canadian economy, but that's why there's a delay.
I think we're waiting for Mexico.
There isn't anything that we need any expertise.
This deal could have been done in a very short order.
There isn't anything that's offensive that America has asked for, so long as we drop a few things that most people think that's offensive.
Ezra, there's another problem that's happening that Canadians haven't been looking at.
And that is, while we are engaged in doing nothing, Trump has gone to China, has gone to Japan, has gone to South Korea.
Now, let me give you the second phase of what this problem could be.
China has a $375 billion surplus with the United States.
Japan has a $55 billion surplus with the United States.
South Korea has a $30 billion surplus.
And they're negotiating it away.
Think of it.
If you're doing your massive trade with the United States and you are in a surplus with them and you have Trump knocking on your door, what is China, Japan, and South Korea going to do to please its largest customer?
They're going to shift their buying preferences to America.
And that, by way of example, if there is a $20 billion purchase of resources from China in Canada, all they have to do is start buying that from America, and that reduces the surplus and reduces the disparity.
America Let Us Buy00:07:45
The second phase that's going to hurt Canada is when all the countries, and I will include the EU in this, because there is a deficit as well.
In order to bring balance, they're going to have to shift their buying, and they're going to shift it to prefer the American producer, whether it be wheat, whether it be anything that we produce with America.
And if we had a small advantage over America, China, Japan, South Korea, EU will say, you know what?
Just to stop the trade war and to bring balance with our biggest and best customer America, let's buy America and let's not buy Canada.
And by the way, Canada doesn't care.
Canada's not fighting.
Canada's not scrapping.
So let's buy wheat from America.
Let's buy minerals from America.
Let's buy lumber from America.
And let's not worry about Canada because they're not in the game.
That's the second problem.
Manny, let me add one more wrinkle, and that is on the military side.
Donald Trump has been pressuring NATO allies like Germany to increase their military spending to come closer to the 2% of GDP target.
I understand that he's demanding $20 billion a year more from Canada.
And again, we can tell him to buzz off, but then don't expect America to be our older buddy, senior partner in national defense.
That's something that I don't see the Trudeau liberals going along with happily either.
You got trade demands, which I think are reasonable, you think are reasonable.
Trudeau's adamant.
And now you have military demands.
That's very much contrary to Trudeau's leftism.
What do you think is going to happen there?
Well, I have tweeted this almost two years ago when Donald Trump threw his name in the hat.
I understood the numbers.
I looked at him.
I took him as a credible person.
He had said almost two years ago that there's a NATO problem.
You Google it.
You find out and you say, oh, good.
Look at this.
Canada pays about $20 billion less.
Knowing that, and I knew that two years ago, knowing that, why would you monkey around with NAFTA, knowing that that's also going to be a risk?
We have opened Canada up, and that risk is not going to go away.
Because we have not been, I'll say, friendly with the United States, because we've taken every shot at the president.
The $20 billion is a real demand, and it will come out of Canada.
Just so Canadians know, $20 billion is about 8% of what the government spends in total.
We're running $20 billion worth of deficits now.
And so an additional $20 billion means a substantial amount of services that will ultimately go away.
So this is the additional risk.
Trump will not let this go.
And he's right about it.
And NATO has said he's right about it.
Well, and that's the thing is the dairy cartel, I mean, it's not like Trump is being aggressive and doing, asking for the end of our dairy cartel, 270% tariffs, asking that we come closer to the spending of American NATO spending.
Those aren't, Trump isn't holding us to a double standard.
He's asking us to come closer to his standard.
And I just don't know how easy it is to rile Canadians up and say Trump's being unfair.
And if Trump was unfair, I think Canadian leaders would probably have to say so and be thoughtful about how to negotiate it.
It's just tougher to say, no, we don't want to pay our fair share of military and we want to hang on to these obviously unfair dairy cartels.
It just seems intransigent.
I put the question and I put the question in a different way.
Here's my question.
How much do we satisfy Canadians' Trump hate, which we get from the media 24-7?
We have our prime minister taking shots at either Donald Trump personally or the policies of America, which they ran on and which they're executing.
But how much are Canadians prepared to pay?
And I've got a list.
There's going to be a $20 repayment of NATO per year.
There's going to be a trade issue.
There's going to, and that we can estimate at maybe between 50 to 100 billion.
There's going to be the auto sector.
That is about 100 billion.
And then there's going to be the loss of investments that we've seen that are going to go to America.
And in addition to that, we're no longer going to be able to ride in the front seat with America as world leaders.
If we are put in the back seat or if we are put in the trunk and we're no longer up there with America, with Germany, with the UK, and we slowly lose it, it could mean a devastation to Canada.
So I ask Canadians, how much are you willing to pay for a fabricated Trump narrative hate that it seems to be pervasive in our media for no good reason except for destroying Canada?
Yeah, I think you're right.
I don't think this fight was even likely to happen.
I think we could have dodged it.
Donald Trump has never shown an aggression to Canada.
He's got a beef with China, a beef with Mexico for a long time, a beef with OPEC.
He's never focused on Canada.
I truly believe we kept flicking his nose and flicking him and poking him.
And finally, we've got the lion's attention.
You don't want the lion's attention when you're a little bit more like a little lamb.
Last word to you, Manny.
Yeah, well, exactly that.
From the beginning, the President of the United States said, Canada's not a problem.
We can do a bilateral deal.
Canada's not a problem.
Canada's not a problem.
He's repeated it.
And the numbers reflect that.
What we have done in order, in my opinion, in order to get, and I see it with my friends, I see it wherever I go that people are saying, oh, Donald Trump's a bully that stands by Canada.
That's working.
And it's working for Justin Trudeau.
And I don't know how much we're prepared to pay for this fight that we cannot win and this fight that's going to hurt us.
It is remarkable.
Yeah.
I tell you, I have a deep affection for Alberta oilmen who have suffered so much over the last two years.
And I have this premonition that Ontario auto workers may face a similar hardship if we don't pull out of this trajectory.
Ezra, I don't think we can stop it.
I think one thing we have converted, and I've been in boardrooms with billionaires similar to Donald Trump.
Once we have basically threw down the gauntlet, there is no way that Donald Trump is not going to take the challenge.
We didn't have to do it.
And Donald Trump, even if the numbers don't reflect it, even if, I mean, you recall what he said when there was a press conference by Justin Trudeau right after the G7.
It humiliated him and it made him look weak going to North Korea.
And that is how he sees himself.
We are continually trying to make him look weak, either to the world or elsewhere.
And that's going to be a very expensive bill and for no reason at all.
But it's going to cost Canadians a fortune.
Yeah.
Well, Manny, it's always great to talk with you.
I should say your last video was a very interesting video, I thought, and our viewers agreed more than 100,000 views of that video.
And the number one source of views was Americans watching videos.
So I think that your point of view is it's underrepresented in the mainstream media.
And I think people were craving your straight talk, Manny.
Fighting For Canada00:13:31
And I have no doubt that this conversation will be well received as well.
Thank you for fighting for Canada.
Thank you, Ezra.
Ezra, I do this because I really love this country.
And no one is speaking for this country.
And I see cross politics.
You know, I fought this in 1995.
And I believe cross politics will harm Canada.
And I will speak against conservatives.
I will speak against liberals.
I will speak against our government to protect Canada.
Well, I'm glad you are, Manny, and hopefully it'll make a difference.
We'll talk to you.
Thank you, Edison.
Thank you, my friend, and we'll keep your eye on this story.
All right.
Thank you.
Take care.
Thank you.
That's our friend Manny Montenegrino.
He's the president and CEO of Think Sharp.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Welcome back.
Well, there's an entire industry.
Oh, and I mean industry.
It is well-funded and well-paying of demonizing conservatives as haters.
And there's lists of haters and hate speech.
I think what it really means are people that the left themselves hate, but groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center, they come up with lists, very damning lists of people they consider to be haters.
It was interesting, as you saw in our show the other week, they called Majid Nawaz, a liberal Muslim reformer in London.
They called him a hater and an anti-Muslim.
He crowdfunded a lawsuit.
He threatened to sue them.
And not only did they submit, did they settle, but they gave him a groveling video apology and paid him more than $3 million.
Well, that's just a tiny dent to them and their $400 million endowment.
But I see they're at it again.
Let me read to you from their anti-Muslim roundup of this week.
It's titled, The Following is a list of activities and events of anti-Muslim organizations.
Organizations listed as anti-Muslim hate groups are designated with an asterisk.
And the defamation goes on page after page.
Let me skip to the end because one of our friends is on the list.
And let me ask you before we go to our friend, does anything in here come even close to a reasonable or plain definition of the word hate?
Let me quote to you exactly what they say is hateful.
There has been a very large uncontrolled immigration to Western countries.
I think it's just the beginning.
There are hundreds of millions of people from poor, less well-governed countries who wish to come to the West.
It is, I think, one of the great problems of the future.
Much of the focus is on the immigrants and what they're doing, and the left and its appeasement of immigrants, and particularly Muslim immigrants, and most especially Islamist immigrants.
So where's the hateful part?
Is that not just an observation about immigration and a prediction?
Well, that was issued, that was spoken by our friend Daniel Pipes, the president of the Middle East Forum.
And yet the Southern Poverty Law Center says that is hateful.
Joining us now via Skype from Warsaw, Poland is Daniel Pipes.
Daniel, welcome to the show.
What on earth do they, how is that hateful?
It's an observation of immigration.
The United Nations has said the same thing about numbers.
We know it's true.
Why does the SPLC think that's hateful?
You'd really have to ask them, but if I Wertigander, a reply, it would be that we who are conservative are stupid and painful by our nature.
And therefore, when we open our mouths and type out a sentence, we are being hateful.
And it doesn't really matter what the specifics are.
We are bad people.
And we need to be called.
Well, here's what surprises me is that they're throwing the term around so cavalierly just days after paying out 3 million plus to Majid Nawaz.
I mean, I don't know all the details of his case.
It just strikes me that's such an enormous settlement, they must have been afraid of something coming out at trial, either the damages done to him, or perhaps, you know, if they had to disclose their records, who put them up to it?
Who demanded it?
Were they paid cash?
You know, was this like an anti-endorsement?
They accepted money from, oh, I don't know, George Soros in order to smear people.
I think that there's, we don't know the whole story there because the settlement's so spectacular.
They obviously haven't learned their lesson if they're still smearing people like you and Annie Cyrus.
And I see a lot of the people they're attacking are former Muslims who have a real experience at the hands of Islamism.
It's shocking the way they go after victims of Islam and call them anti-Muslim.
I'd make two observations.
The first is that Majid Nawaz lives in Britain, and therefore the rules might be quite different.
We in the United States have something called the Sullivan Law that basically precludes someone with a public profile from being able to sue someone who defames.
And Nawaz in Britain, like you in Canada, don't have that.
We can go after the defamer.
Secondly, you've mentioned several times there was a settlement and emphasized that they didn't go to court.
Nawaz simply got a strong, well-written letter from a prominent law firm, and that got him the money.
So now the question is, are they inclined to do this again?
Are they fearful?
All of all those 900 plus they've determined to be haters.
But what if something happens to them?
We have a couple of cases where those they deemed to be haters were physically attacked.
The Bambi Research Council in Washington and Steve Scales, a leading member of the Republican House.
Are they opening themselves up to damages, enormous damages, much bigger damages than they've been had so far?
I can't at this point say what I'm going to do, but I'm certainly keeping the door open to the possibility of going to them.
And by the way, they've attacked me in this way many times before, including I was one of the 15 along with Majid Nawaz, they called anti-Muslim haters almost two years ago.
The door is open considering my options.
But at this point, I can't say what I'm doing.
Yeah, well, that's very interesting.
I mean, of course, Maji Nawaz may have sued or threatened to sue in the UK, but the SPLC is in the United States.
So it's interesting to me because I don't know how much luck he would have had collecting a UK judgment in the United States because of some of those First Amendment defenses you referred to.
I think that this is a larger global strategy.
And I don't say this as a conspiracy theorist, but Dr. Pipes, I don't know if you know this.
Shortly after Justin Trudeau was elected prime minister, he met with George Soros in New York and they talked about immigration, especially Muslim immigration to the West.
And I thought it was big news, but very few agreed with me, I guess.
The government of Canada signed a contract with Soros' Open Societies Foundation contracting out immigration policy, at least in regards to Muslim migrants, to Soros.
And there was sort of a three, and this is on Justin Trudeau's own Government of Canada website.
This is not a conspiracy.
There were three points of cooperation, and the third was to create a narrative in support of Muslim migration to the West.
So the first two were about actual policy.
The third was about shaping the public discussion.
So if Soros is doing a business deal with governments about shaping and spinning, I wonder who's behind the scenes hiring a third-party arm's-length NGO like the SPLC to demonize to attack, because I think that there are larger forces at play than just some junior researcher in the bowels of the SPLC in Montgomery, Alabama.
I think that the whole strategy of the globalist left is to smear any voices to the contrary, like you.
Frankly, I'm shocked I haven't been included in the list too.
I'll do something about that if I can.
You know, it's a major undertaking, but I think it's a losing undertaking.
You mentioned I'm in Warsaw.
Poland, Hungary, Czechia, Austria, now Italy have fundamentally changed their policies or have policies in place that reject immigration in general and Muslim immigration, in particular, illegal Muslim immigration observation.
And I expect this will be the case in many, many other countries, including Canada, in the years ahead.
So good luck to them.
They're fighting in a battle.
As time goes on, as people see the problems associated with uncontrolled illegal immigration, especially Muslims, most especially Muslims, they're saying no to it.
I want to ask one question.
I mean, I'm Jewish.
It doesn't animate everything I do, but it does color some of my thinking on some issues, including Israel.
I think I would be pro-Israel even if I wasn't Jewish.
I'm pro-Taiwan, and I'm not Taiwanese.
I see it as a little democracy next to a big dictatorship.
You're a conservatives.
Of course, conservatives.
Yeah, I think so.
I mean, Taiwan, that's why I support South Korea.
That's why I'm sympathetic to the Kurds.
It's not for ethics.
My way of putting it is no, I know your position on taxes.
I know your position is.
Well, I mean, I think there is some overlap, but I'm not an ex-Jew or a post-Jew.
There's some Jewish liberals who, you know, being Jewish is a slight embarrassment, and if anything, they just use it to play the race card sometimes.
My point is that it means something to me.
And yet, the hard left, the alt-left, they throw the epithet Nazi or neo-Nazi out even at Jew.
And I'm, you know, I'm not very observant, but I feel Jewish.
I feel like it's a special kind of language of oppression to take the word Nazi and take it as gag duct tape over the mouth.
But not just that.
Like, I see on the list one of our former reporters, Laura Loomer, is on the list.
And whatever else you think about Laura, she's a proud Jew.
And to take that duct tape and put it over her mouth and say, you shut up.
You're not allowed to be worried about Islam.
Jews who went through the Holocaust two generations ago are not allowed to be worried about those who call for the Holocaust now.
We're going to call you a Nazi to shut you up and you have to be a quiet victim.
I think there's something especially odious about them shutting up either former Muslims or Jews who were genuinely and in good faith worried about Islam targeting them.
No argument.
I think this began about the time of the Lebanon War in 1982.
I recall feeling shocked when I first saw Israel, the Israelis being called Nazis.
It's just beyond belief.
By now, 35 years later, it's routine.
It was definitely an outrage.
We're shocked.
Last question to you, Professor.
I appreciate you taking so much time.
And I know the time zone, it's late over there.
What is shocking to you and me now is normal on many university campuses across the West.
I think that the most anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, and frankly anti-American, and they all go together, the most anti-American places in North America are the university, are the university campuses.
I'm so sorry my phone went off there.
I think the most anti-Semitic places are university campuses.
And what can we do?
Let me respond quickly to that and say, and drop two names.
One is Mohammed bin Salman, the prince of Saudi Arabia, and the other is Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the opposition in Britain.
I mention them because Muslims are no longer as solely anti-Zionist as they used to be.
Of course, there's still plenty who are, but there's a lot of rethinking.
Whereas the left is increasingly, and without breaks, getting more and more anti-Israel, anti-Semitic.
It's very striking.
It is a radical reversal of health and speaking.
Well, I find it very troubling, and I look forward to hearing your reports upon your return from Poland.
I understand you're going to some of those other countries you listed earlier.
Hopefully, there will be some sort of template there that we can learn from in Canada and the United States as we try and fight this same situation too.
It's nice for you to make the time for us today.
Dr. Pipes, great to see you again.
Thank you.
All right.
Thanks very much.
That's Dr. Daniel Pipes.
He's the president of the Middle East Forum.
Exciting 10 Days Ahead00:03:45
Stay with us.
more ahead on The Rebel.
Hey, welcome back on my monologue Friday about the media with their hoax of a crying girl saying she was separated from her mother, using that to attack Donald Trump.
James writes, how could anyone believe the fake news in Time or the CBC there was more truth in Soviet pravda?
Well, I think pravda, everyone in the Soviet Union knew was government propaganda, and so they adjusted accordingly.
Maybe not everybody, but I think a lot of people did.
Here in our media, I think we still have a trust there.
So people will say, well, Newsweek, Time, they wouldn't lie.
Maybe some people are more skeptical of state broadcasters like the CBC, but even though I don't think so, I don't think we are as alert to the fake news as Russians were of Pravda.
Tammy writes, there's approximately five inches of separation between mother and child.
I hope she's deported again.
The father of this small child would be wise to seek sole custody of all four children.
Anyone who says Time magazine's cover was metaphorical is kidding themselves.
This was pure propaganda to manufacture public outrage.
Absolutely.
And like I say, it was so reminiscent of little Ailen Curdy, who, tragic as his death was, what a miracle that the Reuters photographer was right there.
And even though we saw the aunt of Ailen Curdy say that his dad was just taking him to Germany because his dad wanted free dental care, yeah, that was left out of the official narrative, wasn't it?
Well, folks, I tell you, I'm going to Israel with about 60 of our rebel superfans.
I've mentioned it on the show before.
We call it Rebel Israel.
And we're going for an educational trip.
It's going to be a little bit touristy, but we're going to have briefings from the military and political leaders.
And we're going to tour hotspots.
We're going right to the border with Gaza.
We're going right to the north in the Golan Heights.
It's going to be an exciting 10 days altogether.
And we do it because it's fun, it's interesting.
We get to hang out with our most enthusiastic viewers, but it's also a fundraiser for the Rebel.
So it helps pay our bills here.
I will be taking a lot of friends from the Rebel with me, and we will be producing a ton of videos from there.
So I hope you find that interesting.
What I've done for the next week, though, is I have pre-recorded special long-form interviews with some of the most interesting folks you can imagine.
So I still will have a daily show at 8 p.m. Eastern.
I'll just give you some teasers of some of the shows.
I interviewed Robert Spencer at length about his new book called The History of Jihad.
Very interesting.
Talked to Barbara Kaye at great length about a meeting she had with a Yazidi rape slave who found on a bus in Canada her ISIS rapist.
Don't mean to scare you, but that's what that story was about.
We cover the Gamma.
We talked to Mark Murano, the boss of Climate Depot, for an update on how the global warming battle is going 500 or so days into Trump's presidency.
We have a very special 4th of July show.
So we have pre-recorded some long-form new content for every single day.
Plus, after those interviews, which we pre-recorded, we will have daily updates from Israel fresh that day.
So I hope you enjoy that.
And maybe if you like what you see, maybe you want to come on our next trip.
I don't know where that will be.
I mean, Israel's, it's a very far way to go, and 10 days is a long way to go.
But maybe we will do other events closer to home.
I don't know, but hopefully you'll find the videos enjoyable enough that you'll want to join us next time.
Anyway, so you will see me tomorrow.
It'll just be a pre-recorded show, and I hope you tune in nonetheless.