Sheila Gunn-Reid and Alex Newman expose how Environment Minister Catherine McKenna’s climate policies—like scrapping Energy East and pushing UN-backed recessionary targets—stagnate Canada’s economy while the Toronto Star absurdly hails her as a "business leader." Newman links climate rhetoric to globalist agendas, citing UN figures like Figueres and Guterres advocating societal upheaval, forced population control (e.g., China’s one-child policy), and framing humans as a planetary "disease," while U.S. fracking proves emissions cuts don’t require economic collapse. Foreign foundations like Rockefeller and Tides, they argue, sabotage Canadian pipelines, costing billions, worse than alleged foreign interference. Gunn-Reid transitions to Trudeau’s $65K sauna in Harrington Lake, revealed via Access to Information requests as a taxpayer-funded luxury ignored by mainstream media despite floodplain risks, underscoring systemic transparency failures and elite entitlement. [Automatically generated summary]
The Toronto Star says Canada's Environment Minister Catherine McKenna is one of the top five people to watch in business in 2019.
Watch in business or watch if she gets near your business.
It's January 8th, 2019.
I'm Sheila Gunn-Reed, and you're watching The Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here and you won't give them an answer.
You come here once a year with a sign and you feel morally superior.
The only thing I have to say to the government for why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
You know, we really haven't heard all that much from Canada's ever-present environment minister Catherine McKenna in 2019, really since the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Katowice, Poland at the beginning of December.
Now, just as Canada was headed into that conference, the United Nations released a report that singled out Canada as one of the G20 countries on track to miss its emissions goals for 2020.
Those emissions targets mean a reduction of emissions to 17% below the 2005 level.
Now to meet those emissions targets, it will mean a purposeful stagnation of the Canadian economy.
And the United Nations report acknowledges that.
They actually say that a catastrophic recession or depression in Canada's economy would be the only way now that Canada could meet those emissions goals.
It's right here, hidden in the sixth paragraph.
Canada, which represented 1.6% of global emissions in 2016, is one of the six G20 countries that short of enduring a low-growth economics scenario will likely miss its 2020 target of reducing emissions to 17% below the 2005 level.
And the Liberals know this.
They know they have to destroy parts of the Canadian economy to meet their emissions targets.
And here's the scary part.
They're willing to do it.
All we have to do is listen to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau here.
I've said time and time again, and you're all tired of hearing me say it, you can't make a choice between what's good for the environment and what's good for the economy.
We can't shut down the oil sands tomorrow.
We need to phase them out.
That low economic growth scenario that the UN says is necessary for Canada to meet their Paris Agreement targets.
Welcome to Alberta.
And at the same time, that so-called climate criminal to the south of us, President Donald Trump, who drew United Nations ire for withdrawing his country from the Paris Accord, has been more successful than the moral preening Canadian government at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while at the same time experiencing record economic growth in the economy.
According to EPA data, greenhouse gas emissions, now let me preface that by saying if you care about those sorts of things, and I don't, have declined 2.7% since Trump first took office in 2016.
And at the same time, as those greenhouse gas emissions are falling in the United States, their GDP growth rate has reached 4%.
The United Nations should be touting Trump as a climate hero and looking towards him for answers.
Instead, he's vilified by both the media and the United Nations time and time again.
And Canada's Environment Minister, Catherine McKenna, by the United Nations' own measures, has worked out to be a total failure.
But she continues to get treated like an angel in the media, like some sort of messianic character who's going to save us all from our oil-addicted selves.
A couple of days ago, in one of the endless listicles that we all get at the beginning of every year, the Toronto Star named McKenna as their number one person to watch in business in 2019.
Look at this ridiculous statement here.
McKenna has the right stuff for the job.
Among the most impressive delegates at the landmark Paris Climate Change Summit in 2015, McKenna helped her boss successfully press for more ambitious CO2 emission targets than the worldwide summit delegates thought possible.
But she's failing.
Sorry, Star, McKenna's not the number one person to watch in business.
She's the number one person out to destroy your business.
Just ask the Trans-Canada Pipeline Company.
When Catherine McKenna and the Liberal government changed the pipeline approval rules halfway through the process, Trans-Canada abandoned their nation-building Energy East pipeline project that would take oil from Alberta to refineries in the east of Canada, and they reinvested in pipelines in the United States instead.
McKenna is a job killer who can't even manage to parlay that into the environmental success story the UN says massive job losses should be.
But McKenna's got the media on her side and $600 million in a media bailout buys you a lot of spin.
Stay with us.
More up next after the break.
Transforming Climate Debates00:11:59
So joining me now is somebody that I met in Poland when I was at the United Nations Climate Change Conference.
And he was somebody I never thought I would come across when I was in Poland.
And that was another skeptical journalist, someone who is skeptical of both the United Nations and of the whole climate change agenda.
So joining me now from somewhere in a log cabin in Scandinavia, which sounds perfectly ideal to me, is Alex Newman from The New American.
Hey, Alex, thanks for joining me.
Hey, thank you so much for having me, Sheila.
It's a pleasure to be with you.
Yeah, I wanted to check back in with you because since we came home from Poland, there's been a lot of crazy things sort of happening in the climate change debate or rather the lack thereof debate.
I wanted to touch base with you, especially because you are American, even though you're in Scandinavia right now.
Bernie Sanders has been saying some crazy things about climate change.
He said that we should start treating climate change like a devastating military attack.
That makes me nervous because when there are devastating military attacks, that often means an attack on the citizen, the freedom of the citizens, right?
Like that's usually where this stuff sort of goes.
Yeah, and we're getting a lot of that kind of rhetoric from the political class, at least the left side of the political class in the United States.
They're almost echoing the rhetoric exactly of Mr. Antonio Guterres, the Secretary General of the United Nations.
During the conference in Katowice, he stood up and in his beginning speech, the one that kicked off the conference, he said, we need to use this climate action to transform the world were the terms that he used.
He said we can make social changes, economic changes, environmental changes.
Then, you know, a few weeks later, you had this socialist in the new socialist in the U.S. Congress, Representative Ocasio-Cortez, using the exact same language.
We're going to use climate action to fundamentally transform our society, our economy.
They're talking about now this new green deal where the government's going to take over all these industries.
And we are dealing with people here who are seizing on this issue for ideological reasons.
They want to use it as a pretext to fundamentally transform our entire society, as Barack Obama put it when he was president.
You know, I think Bernie Sanders is in for a bit of a rude awakening when he figures out who has all the guns in his coming climate change civil war.
I think that's not going to go over the way he thinks it does.
And that's another thing I wanted to touch on with you, because you did write a really great article from the conference in Poland about how the UN climate change boss does want to transform the world, really, using climate change as the vehicle to do it, which is actually a rare bit of honesty from the United Nations because they are saying it is not about climate change.
It's not about the weather.
It's not about extreme weather events.
It's really a vehicle to rewrite the economic structures of the world to change from capitalism to socialism to ultimately Marxism.
And we rarely see them be this honest with us.
That's right.
And, you know, I think that's what people need to understand.
They talk about climate and CO2 levels and global temperatures and sea levels.
But really, what you need to see through all of this is the real agenda.
And that is, as some of these guys have told us in the open, to transform everything.
And when they say transform, they're actually not talking about something new and unprecedented.
If you look at what they're advocating, for example, if you go read the speech of Antonio Guterres when he opened up the COP24 in Poland, he is talking about a return to socialism.
And, you know, we shouldn't be surprised by this.
Antonio Guterres was the head of the Socialist International before becoming the head of the United Nations.
For people out there who don't know the Socialist International, it is the biggest global alliance of socialist parties, Marxist parties, communist parties.
Some of these are just rebranded versions of the communist parties that 30, 40 years ago were slaughtering innocent people, right?
I mean, some of these parties have the blood of millions of innocent people on their hands.
And so when they talk about transforming the world and seizing control of the economy and sustainability, where they say we need to control consumption and production, say, you know, I've seen this movie before and it doesn't end well, but it ends in shortages and horror and very bad things, persecution of dissidents.
It's interesting, just today, by coincidence, I had a very, very nice interview with Dr. Niers Axelmorner, who was the lead sea level reviewer for the UN IPCC back in the early 2000s.
And, you know, they loved him.
This guy's the world's top expert on sea level.
So the UN wanted to have his name as somebody with credentials to lend credence to what they were pushing.
And he said, wait a minute here.
This isn't true.
You can't publish this stuff.
This is not true.
The sea level is not rising at an accelerated rate.
It's not a danger to anyone.
Nobody's going to be flooded.
None of the cities are going to have a problem.
And I've been measuring this for 50 years.
So I asked him, you know, if it's not really about CO2 and climate and the oceans, what is it about?
And he said very clearly, this is about globalism.
They want to move power from the nation state to regional and then global governing systems.
And that's what it's really about.
And if you listen to what these UN people say, they will tell you.
You just have to listen closely.
Sure, the Washington Compost and the New York Slimes are not going to break it down for you on the front page.
But the last head of the UNFCCC, Cristiana Figueres, the one who opened the UN climate summit in Cancun with a prayer to Ixchell.
She said it was the goddess of creativity.
Turns out it was the goddess of war, human sacrifice, and cannibalism.
But anyways, she told us what's happening here in this climate process is a fundamental restructuring of the economy of the world.
And that's what people need to understand, Sheila.
You know, it's really scary.
As you were talking about, you know, just the death count from communism, it struck me that the death count from environmentalism could wander somewhere in that area over time.
When you think about denying people in the developing world electricity, cheap, affordable, coal-fired electricity.
We know that electrification is directly related to infant and maternal mortality rates in developing countries.
So when we are denying those people electricity and fossil fuels, really we're condemning them to a short, miserable, horrible life, but they're just a sacrifice, a stepping stone, I suppose, into rewriting how humanity governs itself.
It's really quite terrible.
Now, you talked about that great segue.
Thank you, by the way.
You actually talked about, you know, the New York Times and how other mainstream media is sort of failing to provide balance on this.
And I stumbled across an article actually at the New American where they talk about how Meet the Press has dropped all objectivity when it comes to covering the issue of climate change.
So there will be no other side of the debate because the debate is over, I suppose.
Yeah.
And, you know, that's the attitude they have to take now.
I hope the viewers will go check out the interview I did with Neil Zaksa Mortner because he has so much insight on this.
You know, he just ridicules this idea that 97% of scientists agree.
He says, you know, among geologists, it's like almost none agree with this hysteria.
He was a paleogeophysicist.
He says among physicists, like 80, 90% know this is a hoax.
He said it's all a lie, and real scientists know this.
This is an incredible embarrassment to science.
But now all that they have left is to try to pretend like the other side of the debate doesn't exist.
And of course, this is not a sustainable long-term strategy.
Even in the Soviet Union, when Stalin fell in love with the theories of Lysenko and started jailing and persecuting and torturing and terrorizing everybody who would not go along with it, the truth still came out in the end because the truth is going to come out in the end.
But again, to go back to what you were saying earlier about the consequences of this, it's funny if you're kind of on the outside looking at this, oh my goodness, what ridiculous hysteria.
But when you translate it into human terms, I grew up in Latin America and in Africa.
I've been through the slums of Sao Paulo and Cape Town and Johannesburg.
These people, if they're lucky, they can cook their dinner on dung or some sticks they found in a forest.
It is not okay to sentence these kinds of people to live in absolute poverty because some greenie in Canada or Sweden or the United States or Norway wants to feel better about their carbon footprint.
You know, that is simply not okay.
And when we start realizing that the policies these people are advocating not only aren't humanitarian, but they're devastating to the most vulnerable people in the world.
And then when you realize it's all being done under the guise of climate change, which, you know, the man-made global warming hypothesis, which is a hoax, if you actually investigate and you talk to the scientist, including the UN's own scientists, like Dr. Neozakshm Mortner, then you realize we are dealing with something that is just, to quote Dr. Mortner, evil, right?
This is just absolutely nuts that humanity could have gone this far down the path.
But it's no surprise that they're not willing to talk because if they talk about this, people will very quickly, you know, if they allow both sides to be heard, people will very quickly realize who has the facts on their side.
And, you know, whether there's a 97% of something or the other, it doesn't matter.
The facts are very clear.
And that's why I think they're trying to shut down the debate like this.
You know, when I was in Morocco, I think that's what struck me the most.
When I was there two years ago, I guess it would have been for the climate change conference in Marrakech.
And it struck me the dichotomy between the two Moroccos.
There was this Morocco for the elites, the global elites who flew in and flew out and where they went to this fake little UN complex.
Once you get inside, it's very strange in there.
It's very weird and different and separate from the rest of the city.
And it struck me just the two Moroccos, the poor people who are cooking on open fires in old-fashioned open-air ovens on their rooftops in Morocco, who are buying their meat from butcher shops that don't have refrigeration because it's just not something they have there, versus the high-end selection of food for the UN delegates who are completely separate from reality in Morocco.
But now that I'm thinking back, that really is an overlay for how these UN global elitists treat the rest of us.
They are separate.
They live in a different reality, and they don't ever want to see how the rest of us have to live.
Oh my goodness, you just hit the nail on the head so perfectly.
And that's what it's like at so many of these UN conferences.
You know, we went to the Sustainable Development Conference down in Rio, and you have these guys showing up in private jets, getting into fleets of Mercedes limousines, armored and tinted windows.
And then you see the poor people digging through the trash can, seeing if they can find some crumbs outside of the conference that these elitists threw away in the garbage can.
It is so grotesque to have these government bureaucrats squandering billions of dollars on themselves and then trillions when you add in all the money they've spent on the pseudoscience, on the marketing, on the conferences, all the malinvestment that's occurred as a result of this.
It's, you know, it's just unconscionable.
And I hope the other side likes to claim that they are the humanitarians.
They're the ones who want to do the right thing for people.
When you actually boil this issue down, it is exactly the opposite.
Alternatives Are Being Sought00:06:11
The scientists who have looked at this and are speaking out, the people who are calling, even the people who agree with the theory and have called out the fraud, people like Bjorn Loomberg in Copenhagen, who's run the UN's own numbers.
Even if you believe the UN's theory, you're going to condemn people to poverty to make basically no difference whatsoever on the climate.
You realize that this is, it's gone so far past the point of insanity.
And it really is about dividing the world up into two separate classes.
There's them, and then there's all the rest of us, right?
And they fly in on private jets and they lecture us about how we need to ride our bicycle.
It's so obscene.
And I just, you know, I wish we could show it to people in the Western world because all they see is the, you know, the carefully packaged photographs from the fake news.
And, you know, they see, oh, the speeches from the diplomats.
We just want to make the world a better place.
But they don't see what's really going on there.
And, you know, that's why I value what you guys do so much.
And, you know, all the alternative media out there that's trying to get out the real story.
And I think fortunately, that's why the alternative media is growing so much.
People have realized they're not going to get the truth, whether on climate or anything else, from the fake media.
And so now people are looking for alternatives.
And I think that's a very good thing.
We've got a lot of work still to do.
But I do think, especially in the United States, people have woken up.
Our president ran on a platform of, hey, the man-made global warming theory is a hoax.
And he won.
So people are clearly waking up.
And that's a very good thing.
Well, and to touch on President Trump, greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, if you care about those sorts of things, are actually going down.
I suppose in no small part due to our friend Fracking.
But if you care about those things, it is possible to move forward and reduce greenhouse gas emissions without hobbling the economy.
But I think hobbling the economy is part of the plan for that introduction of socialism.
You were talking about sort of showing the other side of these conferences.
When we were in Morocco, some of our most popular videos that we did when we were there was showing just how fossil fuel dependent these conferences are despite their claims to the contrary.
In Morocco, I don't know if you were in the press room there, but I came home from Morocco with a bad cold because they had the air conditioning up so high in the desert that I was wearing a sweater and my nose ran the whole time.
And that was just to keep the journalists comfortable.
They would water the desert every morning to keep the dust off the fancy people's expensive shoes before they came in to these conferences where they would then tell everybody that, you know, you only should shower every other day and flush your toilet every couple of times that you use it to save water.
In the meantime, they're literally, literally watering the desert in a place where water is really a commodity for the poor.
And those were some of our most popular journalistic pieces when we were there because people want to see that side.
They don't want to see the polished lies.
They want to see the truth.
And that really was the truth of what we were reporting on there.
Yeah, and that's been our experience at every single one of these.
In Rio, the Qatar delegation sent a private car to come get us to go to their tent.
They were blasting AC into an open-air tent in Rio de Janeiro.
Unbelievable.
The amount of waste that goes into these things.
And then you realize they do this every year, traveling around exotic destinations around the world on your dime, consuming massive amounts of resources.
And then you see, too, the people who are pushing this.
You know, the Energy and Environment Legal Institute, it's a think tank in the United States that focuses on these issues.
They came out with a report, I think, a couple of years ago now, on how the Rockefeller dynasty got involved in promoting this climate scam and how they poured massive amounts of money into it.
They are the oil-barren dynasty.
They've made their fortune in oil.
And here they are bankrolling all these pseudo-green groups to complain about climate change.
These are some of the richest people in the world bankrolling a movement to tell all the rest of us that we need to make do with less, that we need lower standard of living, that we need to give up more of our money and our freedom under the guise of climate change.
It is an absolute farce.
And in fact, our Senate looked into this as well.
The U.S. Senate, we have a committee there, the Environment and Public Works Committee.
They came out with a brilliant report.
I think it was in 2014, where they described what they called the Billionaires Club.
And they identified all these different billionaires, you know, extremely wealthy people who had almost created the green movement.
They were funding a bunch of activists who probably were totally clueless to go out there and demand less freedom, less money, more globalism.
And when you realize that, you know, these are people who have everything.
These people were born with a silver spoon in their mouth and they want to take away the ability of a poor person to even heat up their own food or stay warm in the winter.
It's just absolutely obscene.
It's grotesque.
And in my opinion, it's criminal.
You know, I'm so glad to hear an American journalist touch on just how meddlesome and horrible the Rockefeller Foundation is.
They have had a campaign directed at Canada's oil patch for at least 10 years.
Likewise with the American Foundation, the Tides Foundation, they have been funding Canadian environmentalists on the ground to block Canadian pipelines to tide water.
Because as you know, the price differential between Canadian oil versus West Texas Intermediate is sometimes around $50 a barrel.
Canadians are losing millions of dollars a day on our oil because we can't get it to export markets.
The United States is our only customer.
And this is the kind of foreign collusion that should drive people crazy.
This is worse than any sort of so-called Russian collusion that may or may not exist.
Population Crisis Claims?00:05:51
It doesn't.
But I mean, they're hobbling the Canadian economy.
They've hobbled my entire province.
And it's directly funded by American foundations.
And nobody seems to care about it.
So I'm so pleased to hear an American journalist actually know something about it and really care.
Now, I wanted to ask you something else.
Another thing that you wrote about when you were at the climate change conference in Poland.
Something we've actually already touched on, just how anti-human the climate change movement is.
Al Gore sees the climate change agenda as a vehicle towards population control.
Now, they never ever say whose population is being controlled or by whom, but I'm willing to guess it's not Al Gore's.
It's probably yours and mine.
That's exactly right.
It's so funny, the hypocrisy, too.
You know, Al Gore's got four children of his own.
Then Ted Turner, another one of these big population control Zealots, actually got a chance to ask him a couple of questions down in Rio de Janeiro, where he was down there promoting population control.
Turns out he's got five children, right?
So it's always us who need to not have children and not consume resources and ride our bikes and all the rest of it.
But there is, you know, a very, very sinister side to this movement.
And they typically don't talk about it in terms that would alarm people.
They couch it in, oh, we just need population control because there's pressure on the earth's resources and things like this.
But Al Gore gave some really interesting hints about his agenda.
He put up some graphs there.
And I actually sat through his whole speech in Poland, which is probably a waste of an hour, but it did produce an article for me.
And people like to read about Al Gore because he's wrong so often.
And of course, it snowed when he arrived, right?
But he put up these graphs on there and he showed the population of China, which had leveled off.
And he didn't explain how that was achieved.
If he had gone a little further, he would have pointed out that this involves some of the most barbarous policies you can imagine, right?
In China, working with Planned Parenthood and with the UN Population Fund, and this has come out in congressional hearings in the United States.
They have enforced a one-child policy for many decades.
Now it's two children.
It's just as brutal, but you're allowed to have two.
And this involves forced abortions, right?
If they find a pregnant woman who has already exceeded her quota of babies, right?
So she already has one baby, they will literally strap the woman to a table and kill her baby on purpose.
You know, they talk about we're pro-choice activists.
They're not pro-choice.
They are pro-death activists.
And this is the lengths they're willing to go to to suppress the human population.
The UN has a whole agency, the UN Population Fund, that runs around.
They put out a report a couple years ago about how there's too many Africans.
How are we going to get the Africans to stop having babies?
I mean, this is so racist.
If a conservative said something like that, you know, they'd be tarred and feathered by the next morning.
And yet the UN does it with our tax money and no one complains.
So Al Gore actually showed on his thing.
Well, here's the population of Africans and it's still going up.
And here's the Chinese.
Look how great they did.
And, you know, when you start listening, when you start picking up on these little cues, a whole bunch of the UN climate people have praised communist China.
Cristiana Figueres, who we talked about earlier, said China is doing it right on climate policies.
In Copenhagen, I was actually at the UN Climate Summit where the Chinese delegation said, Hey, our one-child policy has resulted in 300 million fewer births.
If you add this much CO2 emissions per human, you can see that we've drastically reduced our CO2 emissions by cutting the population.
And all I could think to myself was, Yeah, how many forced abortions did you do to get those numbers?
How many women did you terrorize?
How many husbands did you beat up so you could kidnap their wives and kill their babies?
This is absolutely sick.
And I hope people will realize that these people are not your friend and they will go to extreme lengths to bring your life, your family, your freedom under their control.
That's, you know, it's really disgusting when you think about somebody doing the math on aborted babies and their lifelong CO2 emissions.
It's just horrific.
And really, where are the feminists on this?
Not only are they terrorizing women, but we know that it's baby girls that are ending up in a garbage can.
It is, by and large, baby girls.
There's a missing generation of girls in China.
And the feminists are completely silent because then they'll have to say that abortion is an inherent wrong.
That's right.
And, you know, and I just wish, you know, the pro-choice, if you're really pro-choice, why are you not speaking out about this?
When you have the United Nations, your tax money going to this, and this has been exposed in official congressional hearings, it's so grotesque.
But, you know, this attitude, Sheila, permeates the whole UN.
I have a poster from the UN Sustainable Development Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 2012, just seared into my brain.
They had this kind of anthropomorphic earth, right?
It had eyes and a nose and a thermometer sticking out.
It was obviously sick.
And then the doctor comes and he says, I know your problem.
You have humans, right?
So this attitude that humans are a disease or they're a cancer on the world and that the UN is going to save us from this scourge of humans.
You know, it just flies in the face of everything that we see, right?
Children are a blessing.
You know, if you have kids, that's awesome.
And, you know, our oh, it just gets me really upset, Sheila, to have this kind of attitude funded by our taxes permeating our school books and our governance.
It's so grotesque when you realize it.
And they act like we have a population crisis.
In fact, we have quite the opposite.
You know, we are at the point now where most Western societies are not even creating enough children to sustain the next generation.
So to have them come in and say, you shouldn't have children.
Children are bad.
They're going to produce global warming.
It's just a sick, anti-human attitude.
Exposing The Education Crisis00:03:24
And I hope people see through it.
You know, and I really wish if that were the case, like you pointed out earlier, the environmentalists would follow their own dogma when it comes to having children and then just sort of make themselves obsolete.
But as you pointed out, they love to have lots of kids in Canada here.
One of our most notable environmentalist hypocrites, David Suzuki, he's a creation of the state broadcaster, to be honest with you.
He's got five kids and a pile of houses.
Some of it is oceanfront property.
So when he starts taking climate change seriously, maybe I might, probably not.
Alex, I feel like I've taken up a lot of your time today, but I wanted to ask you what you're working on next at the New American.
If you want to give us a sneak peek of what's going on for you.
I'm so glad you asked, Sheila.
Thank you very much.
And actually, we are just wrapping up.
We're in the final stages right now of another special issue.
Last year, at the beginning of 2018, we came out with a special issue on the deep state.
You know, you have 75% of Americans are concerned about the deep state.
So we went out and we defined it for people.
What is it?
Our next one is actually an expose of the government's education system.
It's probably just as relevant to Canada as it is to the United States.
We're going to be showing the sexualization of the children, the indoctrination of the children.
We're going to expose why there's an illiteracy crisis in the United States that has resulted in, according to the government's own numbers, half of American children cannot read.
We are in a crisis right now.
It's deliberate.
And actually, I'll be up in Canada in mid-February at a conference in Calgary speaking on this exact issue.
So if people up in the north want to hear about it, they're very welcome to come.
And I hope people will get a copy of that special issue.
What conference is that?
I don't know the name of it, but a lady named Kim is organizing it.
And she said that there's going to be Craig Rucker from CFACT will be there.
He's really involved in the climate debate.
And so I'll send you more details as soon as I have them.
Please do.
I would love to know.
If it's the conference, I think it is Freedom Talk, if that's the conference.
You're going to have a great time and everybody is going to be very receptive to you.
Education is one of those things here in Alberta, where I live, that has been under attack.
I would describe what happened in Alberta here to my American friends as imagine if Elizabeth Warren somehow got control of Texas.
That's what happened here in a fluke election.
And we've been living with the destruction both to our oil patch and our education system over the last three years.
And I've said it time and time again, I think the most devastating attack is to our education system because it is rewriting the culture of the province and it is giving us children who will be unable to work our way out of the financial crisis that is being left here for us.
So if that's the conference, I'm very excited and I think you're going to have a great time in beautiful Calgary.
Alex, where can people find you?
I know you guys have a YouTube page and a website.
Why don't you give us those so that people can check out some of your other work?
Thank you so much, Sheila.
And so yeah, our website is thenewamerican.com.
When people go there, they can either just read our online articles, which are free, or they can subscribe to our print magazine.
The New American Magazine00:02:44
It comes out twice a month.
You can get it delivered straight to your door and you can get, you know, email daily headlines or whatever.
And then we do have a YouTube channel.
It's at The New American Magazine.
I hope people will check that out.
And again, thank you so much for having me, Sheila.
I really appreciate it.
And hopefully we'll get a chance to hang out in Calgary in, what, less than a month now, something like that.
Yeah, that'd be great.
I want to thank you so much, Alex, for coming on the show today and being so generous with your time.
I promised you 20 minutes and here we are at 30.
And I hope that I can reach out to you again and have you on the show next time something relevant pops up.
I'd be honored to come back on.
So thank you so much, Sheila.
Thank you, Alex.
Stay with us.
more up next after the break.
Welcome back to the show.
Now, this is the portion of the show where Ezra normally gives his final thoughts or reads viewer feedback or even his hate mail.
To be honest with you, I try not to read the hate mail.
You know what?
We have so many great viewers.
I like to highlight them when I get the reins to the show.
Now, yesterday, I did an access to information investigation into the true facts surrounding Justin Trudeau's expensive sauna fiasco at his summer cottage at Harrington Lake.
Now, originally, the installation of his self-purchased sauna would cost the taxpayer $65,000.
Why?
Because Trudeau wanted it installed in one location for the winter and then moved to a separate location where it would permanently rest in the spring.
That massive bill would include wiring this thing twice, landscaping twice, clearing trees, reclaiming the old location, and then building a new deck and structure to house his sauna.
Now that plan never materialized, thank God in heaven, and the CBC and the PMO reported it as the Prime Minister choosing the cheaper option just to leave his expensive sauna in the first location and not ding taxpayers with that expensive bill.
But I dug down and found out it had absolutely nothing to do with Justin Trudeau being struck with a fit of fiscal conservatism.
The second location was in the floodplain of the lake.
So Trudeau's expensive sauna couldn't be moved there.
Not once did anyone express concerns about the costs of doing all this.
It was just that the lake could flood and ruin the electrical sauna at some point.
And in the comments for that story, Roland Terrence wrote, TheRebel.media, you are just great.
Why We Publish Documents00:01:57
I've never seen any mass media that publishes documents or informational sources.
Keep going.
Well, first off, Roland, thank you for your kind words.
I publish those documents for two reasons, really.
When I do these access to information stories, I'm well aware that much of the mainstream media and the left like to call us fake news.
So I know that they will automatically disregard any fact-based reporting that we do just because they don't like the messenger.
I get it.
So it's necessary for me to be able to show you and list the page numbers where I'm getting this information from.
And to be honest with you, the left has hypnotized themselves into discarding what we say.
For some of them, it doesn't even matter if we publish the documents.
Some of them have actually accused me of making up the documents for them.
They are just so far gone that they think their eyes are lying to them.
But maybe, just maybe, I can reach a few.
And we publish those documents for a second reason, a very important reason.
That reason is that at the end of the day, these are your documents too.
As you know, we routinely get exorbitant bills from the government to prevent us from getting access to these documents because the government knows we don't have the deep pockets of the CBC and we will not take a media bailout.
So they give us these bills to basically paywall us from their information.
But time and time again, our viewers at home helped me crowdfund to get access to these documents.
And I appreciate that you at home trust me to ask these questions on your behalf and you trust me to report the answers to you.
But you paid for these documents at the end of the day and you are absolutely entitled to them.