Justin Trudeau’s push to raise immigration to 350,000 annually—72% economic, 28% humanitarian—faces backlash over Somalia’s prioritization amid 6% Canadian support for higher levels (Angus Reid poll). Critics cite high unemployment among Syrian refugees (90% after three years), integration failures like Ibrahim Ali’s case, and U.S. terrorism bans on Somali migrants, while supporters argue for resettling vulnerable Somalis displaced by conflict. Parallel concerns arise over StatsCan’s demand for banks to share financial data of 500,000 Canadians without consent, risking privacy breaches akin to China’s social credit system or the U.S. Patriot Act. Legal challenges and ideological clashes over vetting, border enforcement, and data misuse underscore growing distrust in government policies, blending economic, security, and civil liberties debates into a broader critique of unchecked state power. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, Justin Trudeau is going to jack up our immigration rates to the highest level in history with a special emphasis on Somalia.
Why?
It's November 1st, and this is the Ezra LeVant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
You come here once a year with a sign, and you feel morally superior.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
90% of Justin Trudeau's Syrians are still unemployed after three years here.
Most don't even speak fluent English or French.
The good news is that Syria's civil war is over now and it's safe for Syrian migrants to come home.
But instead of sending them back home, Trudeau is set to bring over even more migrants, but this time he's focusing on Somalia.
Here's the big headline.
Canada to increase annual immigration admissions to 350,000 by 2021.
It's a shocking rise, and it's against the will of Canadians from every province, from every political stripe, from every background.
Most Canadian immigrants don't even want jacked up immigration.
Here, take a look at this poll.
This is from Angus Reid.
This was in the end of August, so it's just a couple months old.
You see that dark blue line there?
Only 6% of Canadians want immigration levels increased.
Just 6%.
That's barely within the margin of error of the poll.
I don't think the number has ever been so tiny.
Compare that to the number of Canadians who positively want immigration levels.
Cut, that's that red number.
49%.
I'm not sure if it's ever been that high in recent history.
People feel burned.
That's why, not just from the terrorism and the crime.
I mean, like Ibrahim Ali, one of Trudeau's Syrians accused of raping and murdering a teenage girl in Burnaby.
Or the countless sexual assault charges and other violence from people Trudeau has favored in recent years, but the economic burdens too.
90% of Trudeau's Syrians still don't have a job.
Most don't speak French or English.
It's just not working.
But look at the CBC headline here, the sub-headline rather.
Most newcomers will address skills shortages and gaps in the labor market.
Yeah, maybe, but I think one of the problems is that we're bringing in a cheap, almost an indentured labor class.
Like the U.S. does with its illegal migrants from Mexico.
We do it legally, I guess.
We don't hire Canadians anymore for minimum wage jobs.
We hire temporary foreign workers.
I don't get it.
Sometimes it seems crazy to me.
Did you see this story?
Just the other day, D.C. Human Rights Tribunal finds resort owner schemed to replace Caucasian workers.
And the sub-headline there, Kinwa Chan ordered to pay seven former employees of Spruce Hill Resort total of 173,000 for racial discrimination.
So there's this spa in the heart of British Columbia.
They fired all their white, that is their born in Canada workers, and replaced them all with ethnic Chinese workers, migrants.
Because, well, well, let me quote from the Human Rights Commission here.
I find that Mr. Chan said words to the effect, Chinese workers are better and cheaper than white workers, and Chinese workers do not have to be paid holiday pay or overtime, unquote.
Now, I'm no fan of human rights commissions.
I think that's actually a labor law issue, not a human rights issue.
I think there is racism there, of course, but yeah, I'm not sure of bringing in extremely cheap foreign laborers who don't abide by things like overtime pay or holiday pay or probably health and safety either.
I don't think that's really a strong economic policy other than if you want cheap labor to drive down wages and want lots of people to drive up the price of housing.
I'm not sure how that's a big win for ordinary Canadians, though, compared to Trump's policy of doing the opposite, reviving the industrial base with six-figure high-skilled jobs like steel.
But back to the story about the new 350,000 people a year immigration plan.
Almost a third of them won't even have any skills.
Not even the kinds of skills you need to work at a fast food restaurant, like knowing how to speak English or French or knowing high school math so you give the right change.
Here, let me quote from the story again from the state broadcaster here.
Canada does plan to gradually increase the number of refugees it will accept under its humanitarian family reunification and sponsorship programs from 43,000 to reach 51,700 by 2021.
I'll read a little bit more.
Nevertheless, the lion's share of the new admissions under Canada's immigration levels plan, 72% will be allocated to economic programs in 2021.
Hassan says he acknowledges that more must be done to help refugees around the world and says he fights every single day to increase the number of refugees Canada admits.
Really?
So right off the top, their plan itself says 28% of these immigrants won't have economic skills.
They'll be migrants, maybe refugees, and Hassan fights every day to jack up that number.
Why?
The Syrian Civil War is over.
People are going home now.
Was this really ever about helping people or was it about something else?
Here's a weird story in the globe.
UN asks Canada to resettle more refugees displaced in Horn of Africa.
Let me read a little bit from the story.
The United Nations Refugee Agency is asking Canada to resettle more refugees from the Horn of Africa, emphasizing the needs of particularly vulnerable Somalis displaced by a decades-long conflict in the war-torn country.
Now, I get it.
Ahmed Hassan himself is Somali.
He wants to bring in his fellow Somalis, but what about Canada's interests?
There are 15 people still in Somalia.
We can't take them all.
What would that do?
How's that going to stop a 20-year civil war?
It's a failed state.
Somali immigrants to Canada have a very poor track record of integration and a troubling tendency towards crime and terrorism.
Sorry to say it, that's statistics.
Somali terrorists.
Take a look at this guy.
Boom.
Somali terrorist, Mohamed Hersey, boom.
Next, Somali terrorist.
From Edmonton there.
He's the guy who went on the rampage.
Next one.
Somali terrorist.
This guy was acquitted.
He walked into Canadian Forces Recruitment Center, stabbed up the joint, but he was acquitted for being mentally ill.
Yeah, there's a lot of terrorists and a lot of mental illness coming from Somalia.
Disproportionate, I bet.
I think it's probably why the United States put Somalia on the list of the seven countries in the world from which it is banning migration because of terrorism.
Now, I know that, of course, not every Somali is a terrorist, and that's great.
But Justin Trudeau is not really the best at vetting migrants now, is he?
And if we're going to supersize our migration, something that, as I showed you, only 6% of Canadians want to do, why are we heavying up on the most dangerous places in the world?
That's nuts.
How about we focus on the tens of thousands of foreigners who already simply walk across the border from New York State illegally and now form a 10-year backlog in our immigration and refugee processing?
How mad is it to rush into bringing in more without dealing with the existing backlog?
I see in the papers today that Ralph Goodale is telling the Border Services Agency to speed up their bogus refugee removal.
That's what we call a fib, people.
It's not up to the Border Services Agency to remove folks who haven't yet had their hearing.
It's up to them to keep up the bogus refugees in the first place.
That's true.
But once they're in, they have the right, according to Goodale and Trudeau, to have a full hearing while they get to stick around in Canada, go anywhere they like.
So if Goodale actually wanted to solve the problem, he'd put up a fence at the border.
He would order police to stop migrants from just walking across illegally.
Look, the sign at the border crossing says it's illegal.
Do you see that?
Stop.
It is illegal to cross the border here or any other place other than a port of entry.
You will be arrested and detained if you cross here.
Yeah, and then you'll be set free.
It's called cats and release.
Goodale and Trudeau have specifically set up welcome tents.
Don't blame it on the border police.
I want to read a little story from La Presse, the French language paper in Montreal, showing, I won't translate it into French, I just wanted to show you it's here.
Yeah, you and I as taxpayers have spent more than almost $997,000, almost a million dollars, on welcome meals, sort of gift baskets, snacks, at the border crossing alone.
A million bucks in snacks.
Yeah, so yeah, don't pretend that the problem is with the border guards.
It's with their bosses, you, Ralph Goodale and Justin Trudeau, who order the border guards to be concierges and waiters.
Like a Walmart greeter to every lawbreaker who just walks across.
I believe that Trudeau and Goodale want the lawbreaking to stop the moment Trudeau deletes that tweet he made a year and a half ago, welcoming every lawbreaker who can make it to our border.
And you see, that's the sad part.
I like immigration if it's lawful, if it's orderly, if it's manageable, if it's absorbable, if it's in the best interest of Canada, and frankly, the best interest of the migrants too.
What favors are you doing any of those Syrians who are still alienated here?
Learn English and French.
Come with a skill.
Love Canada.
Concerns About Income Reporting00:13:01
Prove it.
Learn our customs and our values.
Don't beat women.
Don't become a terrorist.
Become an integrated part of our country.
Who could be against that?
Well, actually Trudeau is, isn't he?
His Syrian fiasco is a case in point.
He didn't vet anyone.
And now that it's safe back in Syria, he insists they stay as part of a political, ideological, religious campaign he's on.
Canadians don't want that.
And they know that Ahmed Husson and Justin Trudeau have a collateral purpose.
And every single day we allow the lawlessness at our borders to continue and then reward it by raising our quotas.
Who does that?
Who gets taken advantage of and says, yeah, we'll sign up for an extra helping of that?
Well, it's just further proof that Trudeau and Hussin are not doing what's best for Canada.
It's why only 6% of Canadians support Trudeau's new move.
But to me, the real question is, why hasn't Andrew Scheer or the Conservatives taken issue with this new jump in immigration numbers?
They haven't, have they?
They talk about an orderly border.
Sure.
They talk about the rule of law.
Yeah, thanks, guys.
But they haven't set a peep against the 350,000 number, have they?
They haven't said a peep against the obsession with bringing in people from Syria and Somalia and other Muslim countries.
They have not said a word about that.
Why not?
Stay with us for more.
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?
Honourable 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 the government programs remain relevant and effective for Canadians.
Well, we showed you that clip and more from the exchanges this week in Parliament.
I'm glad the official opposition is raising the alarm.
I think there's several odious aspects to Justin Trudeau's answers.
I'm not as worried about my private, intimate banking details being released to the public as I am about them being released to him.
So the fact that he's saying they'll remain private, well, they will not be remaining private because they will go into the hands of the government.
And I am not confident that a government that had more than 2,300 security breaches with Revenue Canada's secret information will be able to handle a database of half a million real-time Canadians and their most intimate details.
And just stop and think about it.
You might not be upset about Trudeau knowing you bought a candy bar for a dollar at 2 p.m. on this day in this store, but what if you went to a bar and had a drink and you paid for it on credit card?
Now Trudeau knows that.
What if you went to a hotel somewhere and stayed some, and now they know that?
What if you went to a drugstore and bought a certain kind of medicine and that's being tagged where you bought it, how much you paid, what store you went to?
You don't realize how many things in your life are actually private.
Do you want Justin Trudeau to know about it?
Joining us now via Skype is our friend Lauren Gunter, senior columnist for the Edmonton Sun, who's written about this.
His column is called Private Bank Info Grab Will Make Government More Expensive.
Lauren, welcome to the show.
I think expensive is the least of the worries, but yeah, it'll make government more expensive too.
Well, you know, and I'm worried about them knowing the personal level details.
For instance, they've asked the banks not only for this, what they call individual level transaction, so they want to know, did you pay for that escort that you frequented while you were on a business trip with a credit card, a debit card cash?
I mean, they want to know that level of detail.
Not only do they want to know that level, they want the banks to give them your social insurance number when they hand over your individual transactions.
So that's very concerning.
I mean, they say it's, what did True will call it, anonymized?
Well, maybe at some point it will get to be anonymized, but it's not when it comes from the banks.
It's very personalized at that point.
That is very disturbing.
This is a government that doesn't handle personal information particularly well.
But the bigger concern that I have is that over time, they're going to say, look.
Oh, this percentage of Canadians is under-reporting its income.
Hmm.
So not just filing an income tax return and all the details with that.
That's not good enough for them.
They want to know more.
And they're going to say, oh, well, you know, if say a quarter or a third of Canadians have a little bit extra income than what they've been reporting to the government.
Well, then we can raise taxes.
And then they'll look at this and they'll say, oh, you know, my goodness, our social programs, as enormous as they are, as expensive as they are, well, they're just not creating the solutions that we think they should.
So they have to be bigger.
We have to have more bureaucrats.
We have to spend more money.
We have to transfer more of income from A to B or from one region to another.
This is merely an excuse.
There could be privacy breaches.
There could be information that's picked up by hackers that's used against bank customers to take their money or to use their credit cards against their will.
But my bigger concern is that in general, even if they keep all of this stuff very tightly secured, they're still going to find ways from this information to expand the state.
And that's what bothers me more than anything else.
No government has a right to this information, period, regardless of what they're going to use it for, in the absence of criminal suspicion.
If they suspect you're guilty of some criminal aspect, they go to a judge and they say, hey, look, we'd like to look at this person's bank records.
We'd like to look at more detail about their income.
Fine.
They can do that if a judge says, okay.
But this is without a judge.
This is without your knowledge.
This is without the banks being able to get in between the government and its customers and say, hey, wait a minute.
The banks have said we don't really feel comfortable doing this.
But there is a law that was passed by the liberal majority last year that says StatsCan can ask for this information and the banks cannot say no.
Well, that's incredible.
And I should tell you that we are, I haven't announced it yet, but we're talking with a senior law firm with privacy law in Toronto.
And we hope to make an announcement, I hope, as soon as tomorrow, of a legal challenge to this that we'll look to crowdfund because this is so outrageous.
Lauren, I think you're onto something when you say it'll be used to justify more taxes and more programs.
But I think the government has no shortage of justifications now.
I think it's actually one level darker.
I think it will provide a mechanism for collecting more taxes.
We've seen in China how the government there is trying to link online searches with your personal phone number so that they're personalizing what they know.
If you have a database of half a million people and know exactly what those individual half million people have done, remember, they're uploading your social insurance number, your date of birth, your driver's license, so they know exactly who you are.
I don't think they would stop at, okay, well, we know these guys are not reporting their income.
I think they would say, oh, just plug that into the CRA.
Just plug that into CSIS and the RCMP.
And frankly, we don't even know what we don't know yet here, Lorne.
Because remember, this was broken by our friend David Aiken.
So this was a secret until this weekend.
Until Sunday, yeah.
We don't know what else remains secret.
We don't know how this has been.
We know that banks and Google and Twitter and Facebook, they're all having this dance about data.
You have the Trudeau government saying, hey, Facebook, Link In.
Hey, banks, Link In.
And so I'm not so much worried about their rationale for jacking up taxes.
I'm worried about their power just to go in and grab it.
Well, there's no question that that is a potential threat.
I don't think these people are clever enough to be there yet.
But the thing that bothers me, which could easily lead to what you're talking about, is that inherent in all of this and the justifications for it is this unquestioned belief in the nobility and effectiveness of government.
You heard Trudeau himself say, we need this information so that government programs can remain relevant and effective.
They're not relevant and effective now.
But this is this belief that government means no harm, that nothing government does is ever going to affect you in a negative way.
Government is purely a force for good.
And it's not.
I mean, I'm not saying that it's evil.
It's mostly incompetent.
But in its clumsiness, steps over people's individual rights all the time.
It gets in the way of economic development.
Sometimes it does good things, but lots of times it's just this big lunky clump that womps around in dark rooms and creates damage.
It's an unintentional vandal, if you want.
And that's what distresses me.
The chief statistician, the person who's in charge of Stats Canada, said pretty much the same things Trudeau did.
Well, you know, we don't mean any personal invasion with this, but gosh, we need this information.
It helps direct government programming and funding.
And this is exactly the same excuse they used when the Harper government in 2011 said people didn't have to fill out the long form of the census.
There's a mandatory long form.
The Liberals have brought it back since they've been in government.
In fact, it was the first thing they did because socially, this is about whether or not you believe in government.
Do you believe wholeheartedly in the goodness of government?
Well, yes, then you don't mind giving them your individual bank records.
Well, I think they've underestimated Canadians in this case.
They didn't necessarily on the census, there were an awful lot of people who thought, I don't care whether I have to fill out the long form or the short form.
I think the conservatives are making too much of this.
But when you start saying, you remember that online purchase you made that you maybe didn't want your spouse to know about?
Well, the stats can't know about it.
So who else is going to know about it?
Or the CRA is going to know about it?
Who else is going to know about it?
Well, at one point, go ahead.
I remember in the 1990s when you and I worked together, there were 25,000 people in the federal government who could have access to your income tax record.
Now, your tax record is supposed to be extremely sacred and extremely confidential.
But there were 25,000 people in different departments who had access to it.
Wow.
That was in the 90s.
Now, imagine how many people have access to it now.
Yeah.
Well, as I mentioned on yesterday's show, there were over 2,300 breaches at the CRA alone.
But the CRA only has what information you positively give them.
They don't have real-time access to every interact payment, every e-transfer, every time you go to an ATM.
Now, I acknowledge that I'm more pessimistic and perhaps a little bit darker than you are.
And that's one of the reasons you're much more popular than me is that you are a happy, happier person.
But I know this.
Liberals and Data Collection00:12:03
I know that Justin Trudeau brought in senior campaign managers from Barack Obama's campaign in his 2015 election.
By the way, if a conservative campaign ever brought in Steve Bannon or a senior Republican, it would blow up the Canadian media.
When liberals brought in senior Democrats, it was just called being savvy and worldly.
But those Americans, especially from Chicago, the Chicago Way, the Barack Obama style, the city of Al Capone and David Axelrod and Rahm Emmanuel, those are the people who weaponized the IRS under Lois Lerner.
Those are the people who started using every single nonpartisan tool of the U.S. government, the Department of Justice, for example, to go after political enemies.
And Lauren, I want to remind you that just this summer, Justin Trudeau now had a political purity test to get a summer jobs grant.
You have to sign on to his political ideology on abortion issues or you wouldn't get a summer grant.
I think that the Trudeau government has shown that they're willing to politicize things and inappropriately.
Go ahead.
And I don't even think they think they're politicizing them.
I mean, take a look at Bannon.
You mentioned Bannon.
Coming to Toronto, there are all sorts of mainstream politicians who say he should not be allowed to speak.
So they believe that his defense of populism is so outrageous that it amounts to hate.
And therefore, he should be prevented from speaking in Canada.
Well, when you get to that point where you think the other side is so unreasonable, they should not even be heard, then you do start, it gets back to this thing I said earlier, this unquestioned belief in the goodness of government.
And you start to think, my goodness, well, we could use government to keep these radical people.
We should use government to keep these extremists from spreading their message of hate.
And when you get more and more and more information about individuals, you have more and more and more levers to use to try and silence them.
So I do have, in a general sense, a great concern about this level of individual detail, this personal detail being accumulated in a database that the government has access to.
My more immediate concern, though, is, as I said, is that they're just going to use this as an excuse to expand government spending and increase taxes.
Yeah.
Well, we've seen the abusive conduct by Facebook, Twitter, and the other social media titans.
If someone has the wrong opinion, they just become unpersoned.
If you give the government real-time access to the same or more information, they could be just as abusive.
You just got me thinking there.
So let's say someone actually thinks Bannon is interesting and bought a Breitbart baseball cap online or supported the rebel with a $10 donation.
Well, now that information is going to be in the hands of Justin Trudeau.
Half a million people at a time.
Oh, I see you bought something from Ben Shapiro.
Oh, I see you subscribed to Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh.
Oh, I see you bought a book by a forbidden author on Amazon because I know all these details through your bank and perhaps correlated with information we get directly from Facebook.
This is a total, what was the phrase in the medieval times, a panopticon, a total all-seeing eye.
And I don't want that in the hands of anyone, let alone, not even, I wouldn't want it in the hands of Stephen Harper.
I wouldn't want it in the hands of Andrew Scheer, let alone Justin Trudeau and Gerald Buddha.
You can use the modern term, which is the deep state.
Yeah.
This is the idea that all of this electronic information.
Remember the panic that there was on the left under the Patriot Act when the Bush administration decided that it would have supercomputers, I think they're in Utah, that would have all the data that's transferred in emails and telephone calls from everyone.
And when there were patterns that they were detecting in these, there would be a message spit out that, hey, there's something you might want to look at.
And then they had to take that warning, go to a federal judge and say, Judge, can we please look at so-and-so's records?
Because there's a suspicion, the computer suspicious that they're terrorists.
And there was, oh my goodness, I can't believe this is such an impingement on our freedom of information, freedom of speech.
Well, all of that is at least as bad in this.
And the very same people who were horrified by the Patriot Act are saying, oh, this is just what we need.
We need to do that.
Well, Lauren, this is very troubling, and I think these things are happening faster than we know.
I think that the tech companies are practicing with the government of China their technology there.
We know that Google is doing that.
We know Google is working with the government of China and being compliant with them.
And they're taking their learnings to the rest of the world.
We know Facebook is already submitting to Justin Trudeau's demands.
And the banks, the frontline, I find this deeply troubling.
Frankly, it makes me want to spend cash on things instead of credit card.
Not that I'm doing anything embarrassing or bad, but I don't want Trudeau watching everything I do or 25,000 snoops.
Last word to you, my friend.
Yeah, I'm not as concerned about that in the immediate, in the next year or two, but over 10 years, over 20 years, over 15 years, maybe even only 15 years.
That's certainly all possible.
And it's possible not because I think there's a group that sits in the cabinet briefing room in the basement of the National Defense Department and schemes this.
It's going to happen because of the bureaucratic banality of all of this.
And that is, they just want to do good.
And they see this.
They get this information is just out there and think, oh, if we can just grab a little bit more of it, we can make government even better than it is now because they already believe government is really good.
And that's what worries me more than the conspiracy.
Yeah.
Well, I think there's a lot to be worried about.
I appreciate your time, Lauren.
It's great to see you as always.
Let me just read out the title of your article one more time.
I encourage people to find this on the EdmontonSun.com website.
It's called Private Bank Infograb Will Make Government More Expensive.
Well, that's for sure.
Lauren, great to see you again.
Good to see you.
All right, there you have it.
Our friend Lauren Gunter from Edmonton.
Stay with us.
Oh, by the way, before I go, have you signed our petition yet at stopsnooping.ca, stopsnooping.ca?
I'll have more news for you tomorrow about this.
We've got a lawyer we're working with.
We're going to actually challenge this thing in court.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Hey, welcome back on my monologue yesterday about Justin Trudeau forcing the banks to hand over your private information.
Wendy writes, There is no reason that this data has to be passed on to StatsCan with specifics about us, our social insurance number, data, birth, address, sex, and name.
This is the start of a fascist state.
But what do you expect for someone who has great admiration for the dictatorship of China and who wrote a heartfelt eulogy for Fidel Castro, man of the people?
Well, it's funny you mentioned that.
I don't know if you saw or you remember what I said to Lauren a little while ago.
The big, this is what they call big data, right?
There's so much data about all of us there, and Facebook and YouTube and Google are crunching through and governments are getting into it.
They're practicing in China.
There's something in China they called social credit.
It's not like our political party here in Canada, social credit.
In China, it means a running government tally of if you're a good boy or a bad boy.
It's like Santa's list of who's been naughty and nice.
And your social credit in China means are you compliant and submissive or do you have too much to think?
And in China, your Google searches are linked to your phone number, which is linked to your identity.
That's what Google's working on with China.
So everything you type in the computer, everything you say right, think even, goes on your social credit.
So they call it there.
They're testing these things out in China.
The companies learn these skills and these tricks, and now they're trucking with governments in Europe and Canada.
I don't think Trump is part of that, but I know Justin Trudeau and most European governments are.
I find that terrifying.
Billy writes, maybe the Canada Revenue Agency will look at your interest in deposits and withdrawals and decide an audit is in order.
Don't believe me, Obama's IRS focused on conservatives for audits.
If Barack can get away with it, why not Justin?
Yeah, you know, it's funny, I didn't see your letter when I raised that same exact point with Lauren Gunter.
Never trust the government.
The government is not made of angels.
If men were angels, we wouldn't need any laws now, would we?
We wouldn't even need a CRA.
Everyone would just submit their taxes honestly and perfectly.
The whole fact that we need to be governed, that we have a judiciary, that we have police, we have checks and balances, is because we are not angels.
And why would you think that someone, because they're a public sector government worker, is somehow morally or genetically or emotionally or criminally superior to your ordinary Joe?
Yeah, you insane it.
I mean, just think about the information that every time you use a piece of plastic to buy this, buy that, the time, the place you were at, what you bought, that's all being fed into the government.
It's enough to make a fellow go back to cash.
Someone with the nickname, I'm guessing this is a nickname because it doesn't sound like a Christian name, Whitey McPrivilege writes, funny how the liberals have no problem secretly collecting personal banking and credit information from anyone who has a social insurance number, but when it comes down to verifying a person's citizenship and eligibility to vote election time, oh no, there's no way we can do that.
What a great point.
There, you just need any sort of idea.
Here's my Costco card.
Can I vote now?
That is a very good point.
On my interview with John Carpe, Paul writes, great to see that the JCCF is racking up some victories.
They're a great organization and deserve our support.
The Human Rights Commissioners are a farce and they really need to end.
Yeah, you know what made me sad about that interview with John?
Two things.
First of all, that it's just John and his little band of Mary Warriors, and I think they're great.
They're great.
You know I think they're great.
But there's so few of them, one handful of them, versus all the power of the state and all these left-wing public interest law firms.
It makes me sad how few and how small John's entity is.
And the second thing is, if you caught that part where he was talking about that transgender activist who has complaints against, what was it, 16 female aestheticians who refused to work on his kibbles and bits.
Well, the government is keeping secret 14 of those women's identities.
So John can only help two of them.
The other 14 are being put through the ringer.
That's abuse.
We're the feminists here.
We're the feminists.
It's outrageous.
Yeah, I think there's a lot more work to do.
I think the Rebel has a part of that.
And by the way, if you want to see John in person, as I think I alluded to, he'll be in Calgary on November 10th at our theerebelive.com.
Last I checked, there was still some room.
November 10th Sellout00:01:01
I got to tell you, you should get a ticket online at therebellive.com because we're going to sell out.
And I know some people are going to come on Saturday, November 10th, to buy tickets to the door.
And I hope there's room and we'll try and jam you in.
But if you want to be guaranteed to get in, please don't be disappointed.
Go to therebelive.com.
It's going to be a great lineup of speakers.
In fact, just last night, we booked another speaker, our friend Prem Singh, who's amazing.
That's it for today.
Can I tell you, my buddy David Menzies is down in Oaxaca.
That's a Mexican word.
That's where the caravan's coming through on its way to the United States.
We sent David into that.
I hope he's fine.
David's pretty street smart.
I think he'll be able to take care of himself, but it's a pretty exciting mission.
It looks like warmer weather, too.
Anyhow, so if you want to see what David's up to, go to caravanreports.com.
Caravanreports, plural.com, for all of David's news.