Justin Trudeau’s government is secretly demanding banks hand over 500,000 Canadians’ financial and personal data—including SINs, addresses, and transaction details—without warrants, despite 2,338 CRA privacy breaches affecting 80,000 people. Critics dismiss claims of anonymization, citing past Liberal misconduct like Trudeau’s $100,000 bribe conviction and StatCan’s 15-year credit data grab. Meanwhile, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal hides identities in J.Y.’s 16 complaints against female aestheticians, framing refusal to perform waxing as discrimination while suppressing dissent. Ontario’s Doug Ford contrasts this with his free-speech funding conditions and welfare crackdowns on ISIS returnees, offering a rare bulwark against overreach. Upcoming events like Rebel Live in Calgary (Nov 10) and Alberta’s "Rainbow Reprimand" school threats expose deeper battles over parental rights, religion, and transparency—where government secrecy and performative wokeness clash with constitutional freedoms. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, Justin Trudeau is ordering Canada's banks to hand over the complete personal records of half a million citizens to the government without a search warrant.
What can we do about it?
It's October 31st, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
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.
Kudos to my former colleague back at the Sun News Network, David Aiken, for his very important scoop.
Here's the headline.
Stats Canada requesting banking information of 500,000 Canadians without their knowledge.
Let me read a bit from David's story that he wrote with Andrew Russell.
Statistics Canada is asking banks across the country for financial transaction data and personal information of 500,000 Canadians without their knowledge.
Global News has learned.
A little more.
Documents obtained by Global News show this National Statistical Agency plans to collect individual-level financial transactions data and sensitive information like social insurance numbers from Canadian financial institutions to develop a new institutional personal information bank.
Oh, just that, eh?
Just a database of everything you buy, everything you save, everything you transfer, every time you use an ATM, every time you buy something on your credit card, every time you tap your credit card on a machine, all the money in your account at all times.
Just that.
Everything.
And it's all attached to your name and social insurance number.
Every single thing.
Hell, why not just tap right into that little video camera on my laptop computer and just watch me all the time?
But what's so incredible here is that this is being done secretly.
The proposal is a secret and the data will be swept up secretly.
There's no search warrant.
There's no probable cause.
These half million people did nothing wrong.
That's the point.
You don't have to do anything wrong.
You're just chosen to be the lucky ones and you won't even know if you were chosen and your bank will not even be able to tell you that they've given your information to Trudeau.
Here, watch some of David's video about this.
Compare just how secret it is to the official spin from Trudeau's spokesman.
And the level of detail it wants is significant.
Not only does it want a complete description of each transaction, the value, the date, the location, and so on, it wants to link each of those transactions to an individual person by asking banks and others to turn over the following information about each of its customers.
Social insurance number, date of birth, name, gender, and address.
Banks will turn over all this information without the knowledge or consent of those 500,000 randomly selected Canadians on StatScan's list.
We're not keeping Canadians in the dark.
We're fully transparent about the data that we collect and how we collect it, and we're happy to speak about it.
Hang on.
You'll know every intimate detail of every dime I spend.
Where, when, how, to whom, from what bank, from what account, from which credit card.
It's all going to the government.
I won't know if I've been selected for this data dump.
I won't know what is being done with this data, but you've got the gall to look into the camera and say you're being very open with Canadians about it.
You're lying to me, and I can see you're lying to me, and you know you're lying, and I know you're lying, and you know that I know you're lying, but you're lying anyways because it's Justin Trudeau.
I mean, what are you going to do?
He's so dreamy.
And if you object, you're obviously an Islamophobic bigot who loves global warming, so shut up.
Oh, and by the way, this starts in January, which is 62 days from now.
Now, Justin Trudeau says this is very necessary to help him make better government decisions.
Really?
And how would that work?
Would Justin Trudeau, knowing that you spent a dollar on a candy bar and knowing what store you bought it in and when you bought it and what credit card you used, all that time and place data would be in there.
Would that really help him make better decisions about pipelines?
Would he maybe not be bringing in a carbon tax?
Would he not be sending our peacekeepers to Mali where they're in great danger?
Would he maybe have negotiated a better NAFTA deal?
Would he be committing fewer diplomatic incidents like he just did by snubbing Brazil's new president?
Would he be less corrupt maybe?
You know, he's got five convictions for breaking the Conflict of Interest Act.
Do you really think that if you let Justin Trudeau literally know every time you spent a dollar where, when, how, to whom, from whom, do you really think that would make him a better prime minister and fewer stupid decisions?
Yeah.
Justin Trudeau's problems are a bigger problem than can be fixed by giving him your bank secrets.
That ain't going to solve the problem with Trudeau, folks.
But just one more point before moving on.
Why do they need to know your name and your date of birth and your social insurance number and your driver's license?
Why do they need to attach that to your info?
If it's just to build some data set for research, if it's just some, I don't know, some economic model about Canada's new economy, well, then why do they need your name and your social insurance number and your date of birth and your data?
Why do they attach your individual identifier to it?
That doesn't make any sense, does it?
Unless, of course, there are still some secrets about this that haven't been disclosed yet.
I mean, this whole thing was supposed to be a secret.
David Aiken's report blew that open.
Congrats again to him.
But what hasn't been revealed yet?
Remember a few months ago when Justin Trudeau threatened Facebook if they didn't cooperate with him?
I wonder what private deals they got up to about sharing data with the government there.
By the way, it's obviously against the law to snoop in this way, to be a voyeur, to be a peeping Tom this way, privacy laws.
I was about to say when private companies do this sort of things, they're liable under various privacy statutes, but who's kidding whom?
Look at this story.
Privacy Commissioner Slam slow to non-existent federal action in light of major data breaches, also from global news.
This is just last month when there are clear-cut cases of data being leaked or stolen, like by Facebook or by Equifax or Nissan.
Trudeau doesn't do anything about it.
In fact, he says, hey, I want to do that too.
He wants to get in on the game.
Now, the Conservative opposition brought this up on Parliament for the past two days, and I'm glad they did.
Here's Candice Bergen, one of my favourite MPs.
Here's what she said, and listen to the answer.
Mr. Speaker, there were disturbing reports this weekend that Stats Canada has informed banks and credit card companies that it expects them to hand over personal financial data of at least half a million Canadians without their knowledge or consent.
Even worse, banks won't be allowed to inform their customers that the government is following every single one of their transactions.
With a long history of government privacy breaches, Canadians are rightly worried.
Why are the Liberals collecting the personal data of Canadians without telling them?
Honorable Prime Minister.
Our government is ensuring that the personal data of Canadians are protected.
Statistics Canada will use the anonymized data for statistical purposes only.
No personal information will be made public.
I understand Statistics Canada is actively engaged with the Privacy Commissioner's office on this project and is working with them to ensure Canadians' banking information remains protected and private.
High quality and timely data are critical to ensuring that government programs remain relevant and effective for Canadians.
Hang on, he said the data would not be made public.
That it would be protected and private.
Those are the words he used.
But I want my data, my personal information, all my banking details.
I want it protected and private from him.
It's from him and the government that I want it kept.
It's from him and his political busy bodies, his ideological warriors, his scolds, his inquisitors.
I don't want the general public to get my banking data.
I don't want hackers to get it.
But look, I'm 46 years old now.
I've had a bank account since I was a student.
And for all those decades, the bank has kept my private business private.
I'm not really worried about them.
I'm worried about that guy, about Trudeau.
It's not protected and private if it's in his grubby hands.
Let me show you the next question and answer too.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government plans to access the personal financial information of Canadians without their knowledge or consent.
Personal information like bill payments, online purchases, credit card transactions, cash withdrawals and deposits, even e-transfers between family members, and the list goes on.
Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and immediately assure Canadians that this intrusion into their lives will be stopped?
Right Honor, the Prime Minister.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians rightly expect that government agencies and groups like Statistics Canada work with the Privacy Commissioner to ensure that their private lives are protected.
But Mr. Speaker, need I remind you and all Canadians that it was the Conservative government that chose to stop the long-form census, to cancel the long-form census as a way of protecting people's private information.
What that led to was more policy based on ideology and less policy based on evidence like we are doing now.
Their attacks on data and information continue.
attacks on data and information.
Data information, that's just numbers.
Numbers don't have rights.
People have rights.
You can't attack data.
You can attack people, and in this case, people's privacy.
The number of dollars in a bank account, that's not the problem.
The problem is that that number of dollars in a bank account belongs to someone who has an expectation and a right to privacy.
And Trudeau was snooping on them as if the number is the center of things instead of the person being spied on.
What a bizarre and audacious spin to criticize the Conservatives by comparing how they shut down the other snooping, the mandatory long-form census a few years back.
Well, yeah, for the same reasons.
It was invasive.
The government doesn't need to know every single detail about our lives on pain of imprisonment.
Well, now they don't have to go through a census.
They just grab your information from the bank.
No need to make you fill out a form.
Just grab it secretly.
Don't tell me that giving Justin Trudeau a GoPro live cam about my life and finances will make him make better decisions.
He's flawed.
He has poor judgment.
He has a poor work ethic.
He's corrupt.
He's surrounded by ideological extremists.
None of that will change if he knows what your vacation budget is or your grocery budget or your phone budget or if you borrow or loan money to a friend.
None of that will change.
He'll just be snooping about you.
He's a pervy voyeur.
He doesn't deserve that information.
And I don't trust him.
He's a lawbreaker himself, as you know.
He's the first prime minister ever convicted while in office of breaking the Conflict of Interest Act.
He took huge bribes.
That $100,000 free vacation on that billionaire's island in the Caribbean, he was convicted of that.
Yeah, no, I don't trust him to follow the law.
Here's another story, also from Global.
Good for them.
Canada Revenue Agency logs 2,338 privacy breaches in just under two years.
Revenue Canada staff themselves breached security and snooped on people they liked or hated or were neighbors with or spied on people more than 2,300 times.
80,000 people had their privacy breached.
And remember, that's just the stuff you tell Revenue Canada.
But what you tell Revenue Canada is a sliver of a fraction of what your total banking information is.
Everything, every cent in, out, when, who, where.
There was a huge breach at the CRA recently, but according to the government, they covered it up, so no point making a fuss about it.
No point in calling the police.
Look at this.
This is from another story.
This is from the CBC.
The type of personal information included name, contact information, social insurance number, income and deductions, and employment information.
Law enforcement will not be notified.
So yeah, yeah, no problem.
Just keep it a secret.
Keep it a secret that government snoops are snooping.
Keep it a secret where there's a data breach.
Just keep saying you're protecting the data from the public when it's you, the government, from whom we want protection.
By the way, I don't trust Trudeau or his wrecking crew, but I wouldn't trust a Conservative Prime Minister either.
I wouldn't trust any politician or the thousands, you know, the thousands of security breaches they already show.
You can't trust anyone in government, bureaucrats, clerks, whomever, they snoop.
They take a peek.
They gossip.
Maybe they are bored.
They search their neighbors.
They're friends.
They're enemies.
An ex-wife, an ex-husband, whatever.
They just take a peek.
Oh, he's spending money on that.
Oh, he's spending money at the bar.
He must be drinking again.
Oh, isn't that funny?
He spent money on a hotel.
I wonder if his wife knows.
You don't think that kind of snooping is going to go on.
And by the way, they've been doing this already under Trudeau, full tilt.
One more story from Global.
StatCan scooped up 15 years of personal financial data from Canadian Credit Bureau.
Let me read a little bit.
This is also from David Aiken and Andrew Russell.
As Statistics Canada plans to build a massive new personal information bank with the real-time financial transaction data of hundreds of thousands of Canadians, Global News has learned the agency has scooped up 15 years worth of credit rating information from a major international credit bureau, which could include millions of Canadians.
The data harvest was done without the consent or knowledge of those Canadians whose credit history was passed on to Statistics Canada.
Oh, just that.
So what can be done here?
Well, I'm glad David Aiken broke this news.
I'm glad the opposition is asking questions about it, but you know, that's not going to go anywhere.
You see Justin Trudeau.
He doesn't give a damn.
In fact, he loves it.
You don't think he's going to take a little peek himself?
Suing for Privacy00:05:23
So where are the Civil Liberties Associations?
This is their sort of thing.
David Aiken quoted the former Privacy Commissioner Ann Kavukian in his story, She's Well Regarded.
She was shocked by what Trudeau's up to.
But the banks and the current Privacy Commissioner, well, they're pretty obedient.
I mean, Canada's banks are extremely regulated.
There is no chance they would quarrel with the federal government that could kill them or punish them to the tune of billions of dollars if they said a word out of line with the Liberal Party.
They're all in this together with Trudeau.
And where are the Civil Liberties Associations?
That's a joke.
Natalie De Rosier, she was the general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association for years.
Where's she now?
Well, she ran for the Liberal Party.
I don't know if I mentioned that.
She seems to be fine with all this because it's the Liberals, you know.
Well, how about that BC Civil Libert Group?
They used to be pretty good.
Yeah, their leader joined the NDP.
Look, Canadian civil liberties groups are a sham.
They never stand up for actual freedom, just left-wing things.
They love their omercotters.
Not so good on the free speech or the banking privacy.
You'd think they'd be setting their hair on fire.
Half a million people's intimate details just going to be dumped into the government's hands.
Oh, and that's half a million every year.
Every year they'll choose another half million people.
As if that's not going to be hacked.
As if it's not going to be hacked by China, by commercial hackers.
As if it won't be searched by Justin Trudeau's liberal war room looking for dirt, as if it won't be.
I don't want to just talk about this or complain about this.
I want to do something about this because someone has to and who will?
Step one, obviously, is to let Justin Trudeau know that this is outrageous and unacceptable.
And it's not the data that has the rights here.
It's us as Canadians.
Stop snooping, you little perv, you peeping tom.
Stop snooping.
So we've set up a massive petition at stopsnooping.ca.
I want to get 50,000 names on this against this insanity.
50,000 names.
And no, I won't give your personal details to Justin Trudeau.
Just your name.
And come to think of it, I think I'll redact your last name.
I'll just give him your first name because I don't want him to put you in some database as like a dissident.
But sign our petition and we'll show him your first name.
And I want to show him 50,000 Canadians are opposed to this.
But look, that's not enough.
So today I spoke with a lawyer who specializes in class action lawsuits.
And I asked him for advice about this.
I thought a class action lawsuit would be the best approach, but he convinced me that a better approach is to hire a privacy lawyer and to file a complaint with Trudeau's privacy commissioner.
And when that is inevitably rejected by Trudeau's handpicked man, to appeal that for judicial review to an actual court.
So you're suing, suing actually Trudeau and his privacy commissioner.
You're not suing as a class action, but under privacy law to have the whole scheme rendered illegal and to make a constitutional argument if necessary.
I thought that sounded right.
That sounded right to me.
Now right now we're trying to recruit just the right privacy lawyer, someone who doesn't mind taking on Justin Trudeau and all the powers that be, and all the snoops and all the peeping toms from Justin Trudeau to Mark Zuckerberg to challenge them and fight back.
I hope to have more concrete news with the name of a lawyer willing to fight the fight.
I don't have that name ready to reveal yet.
I will keep you posted.
But this is serious.
I mean, it's just the thing to drive people underground, actually, to get people to switch to Bitcoin or another cryptocurrency, to get people to set up a foreign bank account, or maybe just to walk around with $1,000 cash and buy everything with cash instead of doing it electronically so the government can spy on you.
I mean, seriously, would you want Justin Trudeau, that scoff law, that five times convicted, law-breaking, ethically challenged Snoop, having access to your most private business?
No, not me.
Not me.
So please sign our petition at stopsnooping.ca.
Let's get started.
I hope to have a privacy lawyer in place by next week, maybe even sooner.
I mean, seriously, it is bad enough the kind of spying the government does on us now and the thousands of security breaches they do.
You saw those stats from the Canada Revenue Agency, the snoops and the pervs and the peeping toms there.
Trudeau's own five convictions for breaking the law, but giving them everything in real time about our daily lives from when we buy a pack of gum to who we send money to in an interactive payment.
Yeah, no thanks.
please go to stop snooping.ca.
Welcome back.
Well, there is a battle in the court of public opinion every day.
We try and fight that.
There are political battles.
But these days, as you know, so many of the big decisions in life are made in the court of law, either through proper courts or through the kangaroo courts of human rights commissions.
Women's Rights Defended00:14:38
And in that field, I believe that conservatives are absent most of the time, underfunded and under-resourced, underlawyered.
There's one happy exception in Canada, and that is our friends at the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms and John Carpe, their boss, joins us in studio now.
John, great to see you again.
Good to see you.
You know what?
You come with updates on two important cases.
I want to talk about them.
The first one involves a fellow who has a last name that is, I think, German in origin.
It's Grabber, G-R-A-B-H-E-R.
And we have a picture of him holding up a license plate.
As you know, in most jurisdictions, you can get a vanity plate.
That's his name, Grabber.
I mean, there's other names, often German, that sound a little funny in English.
Fuchs, F-U-C-H-S, Fokker, F-O-K-K-E-R.
These are real names in German, and I guess they sound like goofy phrases or even swears in English, but that really is his name.
But the Nova Scotia government won't let him have that plate anymore, will they?
He had it for 27 years.
First, it was his father that had that Grabber, or in German, they would say Grebel, but Grabber license plate.
And then it was his son that had it, and now it's Lauren Grabber himself.
He's in his early 70s.
27 years, that last name, it would be like Levant.
It's your last name.
You're proud of it.
And there was one anonymous complaint who said that this was offensive.
And immediately the government responded by pulling it.
And ostensibly, it may have had something to do with the U.S. election in 2016 and a certain candidate and, you know, grab her.
Because if you use your imagination, it could say grab her.
But nobody was using their imagination for 27 years.
So we filed a court action against the Nova Scotia government for Lauren Grabber's right to go back to the 27-year tradition of proudly displaying his last name on his car on the license plate.
And tell me an update on that.
You've recently filed an expert report in the court, and we're familiar with that expert, Dr. Deborah So, who's been very courageous at pushing back against the excesses of radical feminism.
Tell me a little bit about what she testified.
Well, the Nova Scotia government got an expert report from a professor at McGill University, Kerry Renschler, who said that the last name Grabber promotes violence against women.
Displaying this name is going to lead to more rapes taking place in Canada.
Just crazy.
Well, maybe they ought to lock Grabber himself up.
Maybe they ought to force him to change his name because simply being in the room and saying, my name's Grabber.
Yeah.
Well, and there's businesses.
There's Graber.
If you Google Grabber, you'll find there's Grabber Consulting Limited is the name of his wife's company.
There's American companies with the name Grabber.
So Dr. Deborah So, we had to, and it's unfortunate that the litigation has to get to this.
But Nova Scotia put in an expert report, so we have to respond and put in our expert reports.
Tell me a little bit about what Dr. So's expert report says.
In a nutshell, that the Renschler report just makes no sense.
That's that.
I mean, imagine the government commissioning, like spending money, finding an expert in a different province and having her justify this.
Now, by the way, Dr. So points out that there are some vanity plates in Canada.
One has the word juckling, penis, which actually is not the last name of the person who has it.
That's someone named Sylvain Poirier, who for some reason wanted a license plate that says penis.
Now, that's goofy, and he's not even pretending it's his name.
But that was upheld because, if I'm not mistaken, that was, you know, that's a body part, and you might be shy about it, but it's not in itself obscene.
Is that what the Quebec authority in charge of license plates said that both penis and anus were acceptable as licensed plates?
So, I mean, I don't know who would want that on their license plate.
I'll be honest with you.
But if you can have that for free speech, surely Mr. Grabber can have his name that he's had for 27 years.
He ought to.
And the case was going to be heard in April of 2019.
It was set for September, but the government was dragging its heels with the report and they weren't meeting deadlines and so on.
So the September 2018 hearing had to be canceled and bumped over to April of 2019, which is a disgrace.
Yeah.
You know, I want to talk about one more case you have.
And this looks like a silly case and a goofy case and something like a clickbait story online.
But I think it's the front line of a battle of government censorship and what you can and can't say.
And I'm not even kidding when I say if you ban a license plate today, you ban his company name tomorrow.
And then maybe you ban his own name the next day.
Just because some, you know, it's childish to say, oh, ha ha, Graeber sounds like Grabber, or just like Falker sounds like a swear word.
Ha ha, like that's a Beavis and Butthead level, childish cartoon joke.
But now the government of Nova Scotia and this highfalutin professor saying, no, no, no, that's not a joke.
That's really a problem we need to censor.
Like you've got to fight these goofy fights when you see them.
You've got to stamp them out before this craziness becomes normal.
Well, and the whole thing, see with the Grabber license plate, part of the problem we face in Canada is that there's this false notion that I have a right to not be offended and to not hear anonymous.
That's a counterfeit human right not to be offended.
No such thing.
And it can't function.
If I have a right not to be offended, you do not have free speech right, and vice versa.
If you have a right not to be offended, I don't have a free speech right.
So this is why the Grabber case, one of the reasons it's important is you've got an anonymous complainant who says, I'm offended.
I wonder who that is.
And says, I'm offended.
And then the government rushes in and says, oh, you feel offended?
We're going to kill off free speech rights.
And that's where the battle is fought, and that's where we're fighting.
The fact that it's anonymous raises alarms for me, too.
Is it some vendetta against him?
Is it someone even from within the Human Rights Commission?
It's even some politician who thinks, well, if I were to raise this in a bill, I'd be laughed out of town.
But my friends at the Human Rights Commission will let me make it.
I think there's a lot of problems with secret justice.
Speaking of which, I want to talk about another case.
So that Lauren Graber case, it's very interesting.
It's going to court in 2019, and we will keep in touch with you on that.
It's very interesting.
But you have another case that you've been fighting in British Columbia, but I know that there's similar cases in Ontario and other jurisdictions.
I want to read from a press release on your website.
Victory for BC aesthetician who faced human rights complaint for refusal to perform waxing service on trans women.
So this is a guy who has announced that he's a gal.
Yes.
All right.
And I've said a hundred times, if there's someone who's confused and troubled, don't pick on them.
Don't make them feel bad.
Don't be mean to him.
But this guy here, you were just telling me before we turned the cameras on, has gone to 16 different aestheticians and said, I want you to wax me down there, even though he's not a lady down there.
And he's going to all these female aestheticians and he's literally imposing himself on them.
And when they say, I'm sorry, we're not qualified, or that's just weird, he's suing them, 16 of them.
Is that accurate?
Human rights complaints, 16 of them.
16.
And he won't accept an apology.
He's demanding $2,500 apiece.
So that's a shakedown.
It's a shakedown.
Yeah, it's a shakedown.
But an apology for what?
I mean, it's even a different thing.
It is a different procedure.
In fact, a guy could get hurt.
We were going to bring an expert witness.
We've won the case now.
I didn't go to trial.
The guy backed down.
When he saw that the woman that he was trying to pick on and extort $2,500 from, when he saw that she was represented, we said, well, we're going to represent her at the hearing.
We're going to call an expert who is an aesthetician who waxes guys.
Okay.
And this woman, this woman waxes guys.
It's a different procedure.
It's a different kind of wax.
And you have to be trained and you have to know what you're doing because there's some men that want that done.
Okay, so we were going to call her and she had agreed to come as an expert witness at the hearing and testify that the procedure, the waxing procedure for men is fundamentally different.
You can't do it without proper training.
And then the complainant backed down and there was a second case.
We acted for a second aesthetician, also a woman, also a single mom.
And he had complained and she was devastated.
It was so stressful.
And demanding, you know, your apology is not good enough.
I want $2,500.
I just keep thinking, apology for what?
I think there's something really weird about a guy who says, I'm a girl.
Okay, fine.
Don't pick on him.
But now he's going to 16, he's going to every single aesthetician and saying, get to work, ladies, because I'm a lady just like you, despite my biology.
And he's insisting the most intimate, personal, private things that these women are forced to work on him and pretend he's a her.
He's being abusive to them.
He's violating their privacy, their norms.
It's so obvious to me that he's looking for some psychological affirmation that he really is a woman because only a woman could be involved in something so incredibly intimate.
And I think he's using these 16 people as some sort of therapy for him psychologically.
And when they resist, he's punishing them.
The fact that the Human Rights Commission of BC has allowed 16 such complaints is proof that that whole commission is rotten to the core and has to be shut down.
Well, you know, they are kangaroo courts.
I wish I could disagree with you, but you and I both, you've read enough cases.
I mean, the Kimberly Nixon case, right?
guy who wants to be a volunteer counselor at a rape crisis for women who have been raped and he wants to be the volunteer counselor in a room in a building where no men are allowed to be in because it's a where women he won he won at the human rights It took a real court to straighten that one out because ultimately it was straightened out.
But the Human Rights Tribunal of British Columbia said, yes, this guy has a right to counsel women who have been raped.
I remember that case, and this was before trans became a big deal.
I think that went all the way up to the BC Court of Appeal, if I remember.
I believe so.
$100,000 in legal fees or more that this rape crisis center had to take away from helping real rape victims to fighting this man, a big six-foot-something guy, who said, I want to be in the rape crisis center because I'm a woman now.
Well, and by the way, there, the staff were nice to him.
They gave him a gift.
They said, they apologized to him, but they said, sorry, we can't let a six-foot-something guy like you, in drag, essentially, come into the rape crisis center for women who've just been raped.
And they have paranoia about the rapists breaking in and men sneaking in.
And there was testimony in that case, I'm glad you reminded me of it, of women who said, had he been allowed in there, they simply wouldn't have gone to the Rape Crisis Center because they wanted a true safe place.
I'm not talking about a psychological safe place.
You've just been raped.
You need a place to go.
The Vancouver Rape Relief Center was the place.
And this guy said, let me in.
That's outrageous.
Well, what's going on now is typically the complaints are public and you can find out the name of the complainant.
That's how our justice system normally works, unless there's like a minor child involved or some very rare circumstance.
Our justice is supposed to be open and public in Canada.
And thus far, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal is not releasing the names of the...
We were aware of two.
The two cases we took on, both of them were won without even going to a hearing because the complainant backed down.
The other 14 were trying to get the names of these 14 female aestheticians in British Columbia, mostly greater, well, we don't know for sure, but we believe the greater Vancouver area.
I mean, I imagine.
So if you can't get the names of the 14 women he's suing, can you tell me how you know they exist?
The Human Rights Tribunal told us so.
So the Human Rights Tribunal of B.C. has told you that this menace...
That this guy has filed 16 complaints in total.
But they won't tell you who the other...
They won't tell us the other 14.
It's a secret.
Why is it a secret?
What's so secret?
Can you tell me his name?
We've gone with J.Y. is what we've gone through.
Is there a reason why?
I regard him as a menace.
He's basically being a predator on these.
And you mentioned some of them are single women, trying to make a living by waxing other women.
It's an aesthetic thing.
It's girl stuff.
Guys shouldn't even know about these things.
I mean, it's a girl thing.
It's a girl thing.
And that's why he wants to be in it.
Yes.
You know, I mean, guys don't go into nail salons.
Guys don't do those things.
He's going in there because he wants affirmation that he is a girl.
And you know what?
A guy wants his nails done.
I don't even really care.
But when you're saying, wax my twig and berries, you are becoming a menace yourself.
And the Human Rights Tribunal is keeping his identity secret.
On what grounds?
Well, he's claimed that he needs to, you know, that this is private.
We're working on this.
How can it be private if you're going to court and demanding that the state compel these single moms to come to court, compel them to testify, compel them to submit or pay a fine?
That's the opposite of private.
He's making a public case out of it.
I'm outraged by this, but not surprised.
It's just like what I went through a dozen years ago when the cartoon complaints.
Right.
Although you knew the complainant.
Yeah, that's right.
That wasn't a suit.
Mainstream Media Boycott00:06:32
This is, you know what?
Shut it down.
Shut down these human rights commissions.
You know what?
I'm so frustrated by this.
I have one more question, and then I'm going to tell people how they can go to your website to help you directly because you're doing such important work here.
I have a question for you.
Here in Ontario, we've gone from having really the worst government in Canada to the best, in my view.
Doug Ford is not just economically strong, he's very politically incorrect.
And he's doing things like he said, if ISIS terrorists come back to Canada, if Trudeau lets them back in, he's going to block them from getting welfare.
Okay.
I mean, it's a tiny thing.
I don't know if he can do it even.
But it's a big thing symbol.
It's these battles you have to do.
Yeah, well, that's the thing.
I mean, someone might say license plate grabber, an aesthetician being forced to wax a fella's gear.
But that's how the insane becomes normalized.
Yes.
And not just normalized, that's how it becomes legal precedent.
And then the police get involved, and then we've just gone to the right.
Yeah, like the United Kingdom, where you've got the police that are policing speech.
There's 900 of your tweets.
There's 900.
Are you copying Islamophobic today?
So you've got to fight these ones.
Do you think you hear anything, or maybe I can invite you to reach out to Doug Ford's government?
Because if anyone has the courage to push back against the shenanigans and to defy political correctness and say, I simply don't care.
Like the guy scrapped cap and trade on the global warming side.
He's scrapped the bailouts for green schemes.
He's scrapping things that were considered untouchable.
He's just doing it.
And he's forcing universities to honor free speech as a condition for public funding, which is the way it should be.
And they're whining and crying about how their autonomy is being violated.
They never had autonomy in the first place because when they're getting their billions and billions, they sign agreements where in order to get the money, you have to do this and you sign on the dotted line.
They don't get a blank check to do whatever they want.
So the Ford government is adding one more condition for funding and saying you have to uphold free speech on campus.
I guess my point is Doug Ford looks like he might be the kind of premier to, I don't know if I would say abolish human rights commissions, but at least rein them in on these extreme political correctness cases.
I'm guessing you haven't had a chance to connect with him, but I hope that over the course of time you'll get to know the minister responsible or meet someone in the premier's office.
Because if there's any place where we can roll back this craziness in Canada right now, it's obviously not Trudeau's federal government.
It's obviously not the NDP government in BC or Alberta.
But I think Doug Ford has the courage, and maybe that's something for you to look at in the year ahead.
We'll give it some thought.
All right, I hope you do.
Well, listen, it's great to have you here.
I want to mention, I'm going to mention your website in a second for people to chip in, but you are going to be joining us in Calgary.
Yes, I'm looking forward to that.
On November 10th, tell us a little bit.
I mean, Rebel Live for our viewers who don't know, it's like a one-day conference, convention.
We've got Lindsay Shepard, a free speech battler.
We've got politicians coming.
We've got oil sands advocates coming, a small business advocate, and you'll be there.
Can you give us a sneak preview of the kind of things you're going to be talking about?
Will you be going over some of your cases for our attendees?
I'll be talking about those, and the big focus is going to be on parental rights.
Okay.
Parental rights is right up there with free speech, freedom of religion, private property rights.
These are all pillars of the free society.
We have a situation in Alberta that you've probably heard about it.
The education minister has threatened to close Christian schools, and there's one Jewish school as well, if they do not remove religious references from their school policies.
That's incredible.
I didn't know that.
I'm surprised they're going after a Jewish school because normally they don't touch the Jewish schools in the Muslim schools because they only go after politically incorrect Christians.
Well, there's a letter there.
It was Alicia Crabella of the Calgary Herald called it the Rainbow Reprimand.
And Danielle Smith on the radio show host also called it the rainbow reprimand.
The government had colors there and they said, well, yellow is for asserting truth, and that's an offense against diversity.
And orange is for this and pink is for that and green is for that.
And they had all these colors, and then they went through the school policies.
This is posted on our website.
They went through the school policies and highlighted it yellow or orange or brown or pink, depending on what offense against diversity or some other concept.
And the mainstream media has tried to kill the story, but it's still getting out.
Yeah.
I remember when we spoke about this last time, I asked you if you had any word from the United Conservative Party, Jason Kenney's opposition.
We haven't talked about it.
Have they weighed in on that?
Yes, they have.
And what have they said about this?
It was a day or two or three after our interview, and they created an online petition in regards to protecting the freedom of religious schools.
Okay, good.
Has anyone, an online petition, we've had.
And Jason Kenney made a statement in a public statement.
Well, I'm glad to hear it because I'm worried he's going politically correct, not because he himself is politically correct, but because he's so afraid of the media.
And what you're saying is that he has stood up on this issue?
He has.
And the media, the media is, remember, the mainstream media is getting weaker every day, bit by bit by bit.
And they know it.
And the word is getting out.
So, I mean, the mainstream media tried to boycott the story, but yet we had this citizens group in Alberta called Parents for Choice and Education, which you're familiar with.
And they've got over 10,000 people on their email list.
And they put out the news.
And it was just lighting up on Twitter and Facebook.
The word got out there anyway, in spite of the mainstream media boycott.
You know what?
The mainstream media is being as discredited as the mainstream politicians.
And if they don't realize that soon, they're going to be out of business.
John, it's great to see you again.
Folks, if you want to support, we haven't done a crowdfund for John in a long time, and we should amend that.
But in the meantime, may I ask you to go directly to John's website, which from memory is jccf.ca.
Mainstream Media's Decline00:05:17
Is that right?
Correct.
That stands for Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms, jccf.ca.
Would you agree with me that in this vast country of ours, you can really count on one finger the groups that are fighting the fight in the court of law?
And this case of grabber and the case of the guy who wants to be grabbed and all these estheticians, would you not agree with me that while those sound goofy, they are actually the pointy edge of the spear to move us towards political correctness and control by our governments to give the government power over our lives.
I believe that John Carpe, probably more than anyone else, is fighting the fight in the court of law.
And if you have a few extra dollars, may I encourage you, and I think they get a tax receipt for that, is absolutely.
So go to jccf.ca.
What a good egg.
If you're in Calgary on November 10th, he will be one of our key speakers at the Rebel Live.
There are still some tickets available, although I should say, I do believe we're going to sell out, and the venue does have a maximum capacity, of course.
So please, if you haven't got your tickets, go to therebelive.com because I think it's going to sell out.
All right, stay with us.
More ahead on the run.
Hey, welcome back on my monologue yesterday on the election of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil.
And the media party calling him far-right, Alan writes, like the Trump election or any election of anyone right of Stalin, it means that the world is going to end soon.
The apocalypse is upon us, and we won't even live long enough to see global warming end all life as we know it.
Look, Bolsonaro is right-wing in style and dramatic in his language.
And I should point out that he got almost 50% in the first round of elections, and then this second round, the runoff, there were only two candidates, so of course he got more than 50%, but still, I don't think you can call someone far-right if they are that popular.
I don't think.
I mean, isn't that statistically if you're so popular that you have most of the population on side?
I just don't think you could call that far-right because he obviously got a lot of working-class votes.
Brazil is actually a fairly poor country.
He did really well in Rio.
You saw the stats about his sons.
The largest vote totals ever.
I'm sorry, these guys are solving a real problem of corruption on the left.
I hope I'm right.
I hope he's not a Nicolas Maduro, but I don't think he is.
Anyone who's friends with America and Israel and talking about freedom and prosperity, it sounds like he's the best thing to happen in Brazil in a long time.
And I think the man who stabbed him on the street knew that.
I don't think he would stab someone on the street who wasn't going to be an effective conservative leader.
Keith writes, Trudeau does not approve of Bolsonaro.
He would rather jump in bed with the likes of Macron Merkel and the unelected despots at the EU.
He needs to put out to grass.
It's just weird.
Look, I mean, Bolsonaro, when he won the election, had not yet done anything as president.
I don't even think he's sworn in yet.
So any congratulations would be to the country for having a successful election and to the man who now holds the office of the leader of the fifth largest country in the world, the largest country in the southern hemisphere, like, I guess, in Latin America rather.
200 plus million people.
Why would you be so grudging?
Even if you didn't like the man, why would you not at least be diplomatic in your diplomacy?
If you want to grouse and bitch and kvetch in private, fine.
But isn't diplomacy the place to be diplomatic?
I don't even get it.
I thought these guys were supposed to be pros.
Why would you get off on the wrong foot from the very first second?
It beats me.
Compare that as we did to his love affair for the Castros.
On my interview with Alessandro Rabocci about horrific migrant crimes in Italy, Liza writes, Salvini rocks, but while Italy is a part of the European Union, his hands are tied.
The EU is a bad deal if sovereignty means anything to you, and it should.
I've got a feeling that Salvini can stand up to the media backlash and threats within government, but what about the legalities of being in the EU?
Can he deport or not?
Well, listen, I don't have the knowledge.
I don't have the deep knowledge on the European Union.
I know that in the past, Hungary, for example, has refused to comply with the European Union, and they have fined it millions of dollars, and they said, we don't care.
Keep your money and keep the migrants, and we're going to be Hungary.
We're not going to bring in a million Syrians and Afghans.
We'll let Germany run that experiment.
So, yeah, it's not like Italy's going to be invaded.
They'll be economically punished, like Poland and Hungary have been by the bullies in the EU, but it hasn't stopped it, has it?
On my interview last Friday with Yasmin Mohamed, Terry writes, you expressed concern about facing a burqa-wearing accuser in court.
Burqa-Bound Judges?00:01:55
I believe the greater concern, and eventual certainty, is facing a burqa-clad judge in a Canadian court.
Yeah, I mean, that's what we talked about with the, you know, the handmaid's tale.
My one skepticism, though, is if you are wearing a burqa, you're probably not let out a lot by your husband slash owner slash guardian.
I mean, we heard that from Yasmin's original interview with us.
She really wasn't allowed out of the house.
So you're probably not going to go to law school if you're wearing the full ninja.
You're probably not going to article at a big law firm, put in the long hours, because you're going to probably be working with men or something.
And you've got to be a lawyer for a number of years to be appointed.
So I think that a burqa-clad woman is unlikely in the near future because, of course, if you look at Saudi Arabia and Iran, there are no burqa-clad judges because girls can't do things like that in a Sharia society.
But I take your point.
Well, that's our show for today.
I should tell you that in addition to launching stopsnooping.ca, my friend David Menzies is on his way to Mexico to report from the front lines of the caravan inexorably making its way to the United States border.
He's going with some real questions like, hey, who's organizing this?
Who's paying for the buses and the hotels?
Who's paying for the food?
Who's arranging it?
Who's keeping everyone paid and happy and healthy and moving at an extraordinary clip?
That just doesn't happen organically.
Who is behind this?
If you want to watch all of his reports, you could go to caravanreports.ca.
Caravanreports.ca.
Well, my friends, that's our show for today.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at the Rebel World Headquarters to you at home, good night.