Ezra Levant exposes Gerald Butts’ push to link convicted terrorist Omar Cotter (15 at capture, labeled hostis humani)—whose victims include U.S. medic Christopher Spear and soldier Lane Morris—to Canadian soldiers, despite algorithmic search results, framing dissent as alt-right while ignoring Cotter’s crimes. Sheila Gunn Reid slams Trudeau’s gender-based analysis (GBA+) applied to Alberta oil but not Saudi imports, where women face state-sanctioned discrimination, calling it performative "first-world grievance-mongering" that stifles energy development. Jack Buckby debunks UK martial law fears over no-deal Brexit as government scaremongering, noting WTO exit could boost manufacturing jobs while remaining in a customs union would hinder growth, though demographic shifts may now make a Brexit victory unlikely. Their critiques reveal how liberal policies weaponize identity and regulation to suppress dissent and economic freedom. [Automatically generated summary]
You're listening to a free audio-only recording of my show, Rebel Roundup, in which we look back at some of the very best commentaries of the week by your favorite rebels.
On today's show, Ezra Levant will talk about that bizarre story in which terrorist Omar Cotter was somehow being identified by Google as a Canadian soldier.
And Sheila Gunnread will tell you about an egregious double standard that exists in the oil patch, courtesy of the Trudeau Liberals.
And Jack Buckby will have the very latest on that never-ending story, otherwise known as Brexit.
If you like listening to this podcast, then you'd love watching it.
But in order to watch, you need to be a subscriber to premium content.
That's what we call our long-format TV style shows on The Rebel.
Subscribers get to watch my weekly show as well as other great TV style shows too, hosted by Ezra Levant and Sheila Gunnread.
It's only $8 a month to subscribe, or you can subscribe annually and get two months free.
And just for podcast listeners, you can save an extra 10% on a new premium membership by using the coupon code PODCAST when you subscribe.
Just go to the rebel.media slash shows to become a member.
And please leave a five-star review of this podcast and subscribe in iTunes or wherever you listen to podcasts.
Those reviews are a great way to support the Rebel without you having to spend a dime.
And now sit back and enjoy this free audio-only version of my show.
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, ladies and gentlemen, and the rest of you, in which we look back at some of the very best commentaries of the week by your favorite rebels.
I'm your host, David Menzies.
So Omar Carter is many things.
He's a terrorist, a murderer, and even a multi-millionaire, thanks to the Trudeau Liberals.
But how in the world did Google somehow hail Cotter as a Canadian soldier?
And why was Gerald Butts yet again going to bat for Omar?
Ezra Levant will try to make sense of it all.
There's an odious double standard in Canada when it comes to oil, namely the stuff coming out of the ground in Alberta must be subjected to a gender-based analysis.
Meanwhile, crude from that enlightened realm called Saudi Arabia, well, that receives a pass.
Sheila Gunnreid will attempt to piece things together.
And Jack Buckby will drop by to give us the very latest on Brexit, aka the never-ending story.
And finally, we get your letters.
We get them every minute of every day.
And I'll share some of the letters we received regarding my commentary about the city of Toronto banning tobogganing on one of the city's best hills because the hill in question is too hilly.
Those are your rebels.
Now let's round them up.
Check out this.
Gerald Butts, Justin Trudeau's principal secretary.
He took time away from everything else he's doing these days, pushed aside everything less important to weigh in on this matter not once, not twice, not three times, but four times.
I mean, look, we've got the Chinese dictatorship taking our citizens hostage.
We've got an industrial crisis in Alberta.
We have a thousand real things this government needs to do and it's failing at so many of them.
But Gerald Butts makes this the biggest issue of his day and he clears aside hours for it?
Yes, he did.
He wrote this.
He said, Google searches are personally optimized, not news.
When I search for Canadian soldiers, I get Canadian soldiers and Prime Minister Pearson.
Andrew Scheer gets Omar Cotter.
This IT problem is between the chair and the keyboard.
Oh, that's so clever.
But first of all, even if Butts was right.
So what?
So what?
Why would Omar Cotter show up on a list?
But he's not right, actually.
Here's that same public boss of Google search.
And he says, Personalization of our results is minimal, as covered below.
And he links to a detailed answer.
Personalization wasn't involved here.
This was present for anyone doing the search, though exact position may have changed as our results can be very dynamic.
So that's Google's search expert.
But Gerald Butts kept at this.
He retweeted this guy.
This guy who said, when I say taking lessons from the alt-right, I really, I mean that literally.
Meta Canada is the heart of the Canadian alt-right movement on Reddit.
This post was done four hours before Andrew Scheer's tweet.
There's no beating around the bush on this one.
So some guy, I don't know who, claims that an anonymous post earlier on the day in some online billboard, one of thousands of Canadians who were upset by this Cotter story, this guy named John Wiseman, this nobody, found an anonymous site, literally a nobody, that was upset about the Cotter thing too.
John Wiseman says they're alt-right, says that's why Scheer was mad about this, and therefore it's bad or something.
It's not bad that Omar Cotter is listed as a soldier.
Gerald Butts didn't think that was bad.
He thought it was bad that Andrew Scheer was mentioning it.
I mean, this isn't even guilt by association here.
That's a full-blown conspiracy theory.
You see, Andrew Scheer read an anonymous thing, and it's just so weird.
And it still evades the question, why is Gerald Butts, Justin Trudeau's principal secretary, why is he defending Google's error to list Omar Cotter, the Al-Qaeda terrorist, as a legit Canadian soldier?
Well, what a bizarre story, equal parts, egregious and downright offensive.
Earlier this week, if you were to Google the words Canadian and soldier, one of the war heroes that would have popped up was convicted terrorist Omar Cotter.
Yeah, someone who killed and maimed soldiers allied to Canada was being depicted as a veteran.
Thankfully, Google corrected this nauseating error after the ensuing outrage, of course.
But how weird, how crazy is it that Justin Trudeau's Fengelli secretary, Gerald Butts, tried to make the case that Google proclaiming Omar Cotter as a Canadian soldier actually made sense, even though Google itself said it was a complete screw-up.
Joining me now with more on this baffling story is our very own rebel commander, Ezra Levett.
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, Ezra.
Thank you very much.
You know, Ezra, let's cut to the chase first and foremost.
What is the obsession with this federal liberal government with Omar Cotter in the first place?
Well, there's a few things.
I mean, Justin Trudeau is an Islamophile.
It's part of his father's tradition of third worldism, alienism, loving the other more than you love yourself.
And during the Cold War, the great challenger to Western civilization was the Soviet Union.
So Pierre Trudeau loved Castro, loved China, loved the Soviet Union, took his family to Russia, took him to Siberia and said, this is the future.
So Pierre Trudeau was always enamored with the third world.
Well, the Soviet Union, the empire has fallen.
And now the great challenge to Western culture and civilization is Islamism.
So Justin Trudeau is enthralled by it.
And Yen Ezra, if I can just interject, Islamism represents the polar opposite of liberal values.
I can't make the connection.
Well, same thing with China.
I mean, Trudeau actually said the country he most admires other than Canada is China.
And then he specifically said, for its basic dictatorship.
He used those words, basic dictatorship.
I admire China too.
I've had the pleasure of visiting there.
I like the food.
I find the people interesting and, frankly, sometimes inspiring.
I think the history is fascinating.
The architecture, there's a lot of things to like about China.
But the one thing you can't like about China is his basic dictatorship.
That's the only thing Trudeau mentioned.
So this goes to his alienism.
He supports everyone against himself, everyone against Canada.
And so he sees in Omar Cotter not only an Islamic terrorist, an al-Qaeda war criminal, but an opportunity for him to say, oh, what have we done wrong to him?
We are so abusive.
We're the Islamophobes for putting him in Guantanamo Bay.
We abused his charter rights.
He is a symbol for us to repent the war on terror and not only to bring Canada down morally, but to pull Al-Qaeda up morally.
And he's also surrounded by people who feel that same way.
The media elites, political elites, the legal elites, the judicial elites, diplomatic elites, all the fancy people thought that Omar Cotter was the bee's knees and that when Trudeau gave him $10.5 million, it would be a huge hit.
They were shocked to see that the vast majority of Canadians opposed it.
I remember an Angus Reed poll showed every single group of Canadians, including liberals, were appalled by it.
I think Trudeau is in such an insulated little box that he actually thinks Cotter is some sort of a hero.
And you know what I think?
I think, I mean, Gerald Butts didn't have the courage to say it this week, but I think what he was motivated by, Gerald Butts would say, and it's factually not true and legally not true, he would say, and I'm mind-reading here, that Omar Cotter deserved to be on the list of Canadian soldiers because he was a child soldier.
That's the connection, I think.
Of course, he wasn't a child soldier.
He wasn't a child.
He was a few weeks shy of his 16th birthday.
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child say a child soldier is 13 or less.
He was mature and knew what he was doing.
He had the choice to leave the compound with the women and children before the final battle where he was captured.
He chose to stay with the men to fight.
He was not a soldier.
The Geneva Conventions define a soldier, someone who bears their arms openly, someone who wears their uniform and their insignia, someone who generally follows the laws and customs of war.
Cotter was zero for three.
Cotter is not a soldier, is not a child, is not a child soldier.
He's a terrorist.
The category in law for him is hostus humani, an enemy of all humanity.
And like a pirate, he has no rights under law.
He could literally be killed in the field, and you can kill a terrorist.
It would be like killing someone attacking you in your home.
You have self-defense.
In the mind of Gerald Butts, and therefore the mind of Justin Trudeau, not only was Omar Cotter a child soldier, but he was the victim.
I did a little search in Gerald Butts' Twitter history.
He tweets thousands of times.
He has tweeted about Omar Cotter favorably at least 10 times.
He has never once tweeted the word spear, S-P-E-E-R, which is the name of the U.S. Army medic murdered by Omar Cotter.
The reason why Gerald Butts never utters the word spear, Christopher Spear, his widow, Tabitha Spear, the two fatherless children, Taryn and Tanner Spear, the other Special Forces soldier who lost his eye, Lane Morris.
I know these names because I've talked to several of them.
I've written a book about them.
That's why I know them.
And we raised 200 grand for the Spear kids.
Yeah, for the Spear Kids.
Actually, we did that here at the Rebel.
Oh, pardon me.
But I care about them because I know they're the victims.
The reason why Gerald Butts never mentions the Spears, because that if you remind people that there was a real victim, then you can't say that Cotter was the victim.
And that is why Gerald Butts and the rest of the media refuse to name Cotter's victims because they call him the victim.
Wanted Omar's Resurrection00:08:47
Incredible.
Now, Ezra, if we can just look at how this Googling incident occurred in the first place.
I mean, look, I'm not a search engine expert.
I mean, I find the internet and computerization, to me, with my knowledge base, it's akin to black magic, right?
And so you put in Canadian and soldier, and when I first heard about this, I thought it was a joke.
I thought it was a conspiracy theory.
And sure enough, every time I Googled it, Omar Cotter's name and image was coming up.
And the more I Googled it, the closer to the front of the list he was coming up.
I was absolutely astonished.
What I'm trying to find out, Ezra, is that when it comes to the proverbial ghost in the machine, how did this atrocity happen in the first place?
Right.
Well, a Google search executive, I think his name is Danny Sullivan, weighed in, and he's a senior guy in the States.
And all he does is answer questions for the public about search.
Now, we don't know if he's telling the truth because unlike a government agency, there's no disclosure, there's no exist information.
So he works for Google, which means I'm sure on occasion he lies for Google because that's sort of his job, is to defend Google.
He's like a lawyer for someone.
But he said that this was a computer-generated algorithmic decision.
And because they fixed it almost immediately, I tend to think that this wasn't their political hill to die on.
I originally was quite convinced that this was a political choice made by Google.
But when I read the explanation and I saw how quickly Google changed it, and that it was an American who basically said, oh, yeah, our mistake, we'll fix it.
That he didn't seem fussed by it.
I think, well, maybe he's telling the truth.
Maybe this just was some computer error.
But to me, so I mean, I don't believe Google, Facebook, Twitter, and most political things, because they're all hard left-wing.
I actually think, though, that this probably was some machine decision that was wrong.
But it doesn't matter, David.
It doesn't matter, because, okay, this isn't about Google.
We know Google's political.
We know their senior vice president, Eric Schmidt, was a volunteer on Hillary Clinton's campaign.
He was there on election night at her victory party that turned into a defeat party.
We know Google's in the tank.
We know they had a staff-wide sort of crying staff meeting on the Friday after the election.
The video of that staff meeting was released where senior executives were all in a room basically crying really.
So we know that.
The story here is not about Google.
The story is about the fact that Justin Trudeau's principal secretary, Gerald Butts, not once, not twice, not three times, but four times, cleared everything less important from his desk and weighed in in a manner that suggested he wanted Omar Cotter to remain on that list.
So it doesn't matter why he was on the list.
Was it a glitch or was it on purpose?
Because that's not what Gerald Butts wanted.
His four interventions suggested he wanted Omar Cotter.
He was furious and Andrew Scheer wanted Omar Cotter off that list.
He accused, he implied that anyone who wanted Omar Carter off that list was alt-right.
He implied that.
First of all, what is the Prime Minister's principal secretary even doing, wasting half a day on this?
Second of all, why is he throwing in with Omar Cotter?
Third of all, why is he perpetuating the fake news that Omar Cotter was a soldier?
Fourth of all, you got hostages in China, you got a pipeline crisis, you got, and this is the most important thing, it shows, to get back to your first question, what's going on here, Trudeau himself, I think, is a bit of an empty vessel.
Whenever he has an idea, it's just a child's memory of what his father said.
But Gerald Butts, the true ideologue, who really is the de facto prime minister, and that's not my characterization.
Caucus say, you know, Justin Trudeau told the caucus in one of their first meetings in 2015, if you get a letter from Gerald Butz, treat it as if it comes from me.
Wow.
So Justin Trudeau told all his MPs, if Gerald Butts says something, take it as if it's from me.
So we have a de facto prime minister named Gerald Butts who's obsessed with Omar Cotter, obsessed with Muslim migration, obsessed with hijabs, obsessed with Islamification.
Trudeau is too.
But Gerald Butts is the actual decider, and he's crazy on this stuff.
But Ezra, here's the part I really don't get.
When you look at the timeframe in which the Trudeau liberals cut that $10.5 million check to Omar Cotter, it was a couple of years ago.
They moved at lightning speed around.
And I kind of get it.
This is something they wanted to do, but probably realized deep down it's going to rub a lot of Canadians the wrong way, which they were right about, or maybe they were naive and they didn't think it was going to happen.
But nevertheless, you do the unpopular stuff early on in the mandate so that by the time October 2019 comes along, Canadians have forgotten, you know, this, this kind of a thing.
The idea that Gerald Butts would, I mean, surely, you can say what you will about the man, but he's surely a savvy politician.
The idea that he would resurrect this person's name, who I would argue is deeply, most Canadians resent Omar Cotter and resent how this government has treated him so close to the next federal election.
To me, that seems almost self-defeating, Ezra.
Well, I mean, these guys are true believers.
Gerald Butts is a true believer.
He was an extremist environmentalist.
He's an extremist on open borders migration.
He really is an ideologue.
Trudeau, I think, is more of an empty suit, but Gerald Butts is.
And I saw other liberals weigh in on it too.
The husband of Katie Telford, the chief of staff to Trudeau, his name is Rob Silver.
He was weighing in on this too.
I thought these guys have got to know, I mean, they've seen the polling, just as I have.
Angus Reed is the poll I refer to.
They know that, but they just love him too much.
They love Omar Cotter too much, and they love the narrative.
Muslim terrorists aren't really bad.
They were forced into it maybe.
Muslim terrorists can be redeemed.
If you don't think so, you're an Islamophobia.
They love that narrative more than they love the truth that Omar Cotter is an unrepentant, confessed, convicted, war criminal convicted of five counts, including murder and terrorism.
And he has never recanted.
He has never disavowed the jihad.
He has never disavowed his father's role.
He has never disavowed his sister, who is an Islamic extremist.
In fact, he wanted to go to Saudi Arabia to meet up with her.
Well, that's a good idea.
To my surprise, a court in Alberta said, yeah, no, we're not letting you go to Saudi Arabia for now.
So I hope that Omar Carter becomes an election issue in 2019.
I think amongst grassroots Canadians it will be, but I can assure you in the media party, I won't, let me close with one quick fact on this.
We have a new reporter in Calgary, as you know, Kian Bexty, is his name, young guy, he's doing great.
And he went up to Edmonton for this bail hearing as to whether or not Cotter could go to Saudi Arabia.
Imagine letting a convicted al-Qaeda terrorist go to Saudi Arabia.
Would Saudi Arabia even allow him?
I don't think they could, by the way, and what airline would take him, by the way.
I mean, let me know, so I skipped that airline.
But so Kian went to this press conference with Omar Cotter right there and Cotter's lawyer.
And Kian asked the question, and I don't remember the exact wording in it, but in it he said, a terrorist.
And the look of shock and surprise on the face of the lawyer, and you can see the clip, we have it on our website, and Cotter was standing right behind and he smirked.
Oh, yes.
So Cotter was smiling.
The lawyer was shocked because in all the years that Cotter's lawyers have been doing press conferences with Canadian media about Omar Cotter, no one has ever called Omar Cotter a terrorist.
It was the first time.
And this lawyer, Nate, I forget his last name, said to Kean, who are you with?
And Kian said the rebel.
And the lawyer said, oh yeah, it's about right.
Because they are, and I took that as an enormous compliment.
We are the only media in Canada who will call Omar Cotter a terrorist to his face.
And after that, by the way, Kean followed Omar Cotter and said, where's the money?
Did you stash it overseas?
That's a great question, by the way, because he's hiding the money from the family who have sued and won a judgment against Cotter.
Justin Trudeau worked with Omar Cotter's lawyers to hide the money in a way that the grieving widow could not get access to it.
Where is that money?
Is it in Canada?
Gender-Based Analysis Parody00:11:51
Is it in Saudi Arabia?
Is it in, I don't know, with his old friends back in Al-Qaeda?
And who is he going to meet with in Saudi Arabia?
And is he going to meet up with his money?
Is he going to spread some of the wealth around to all his friends that he made in Guantanamo Bay?
These are real questions that only the rebel would ever ask.
Well, Ezra, I hope in the months and years ahead the Spear family is indeed successful in separating Omar Cotter from our money.
Thank you so much.
It was a great commentary, as always.
And there you have it, folks.
Googling soldier in Canada, you got Omar Cotter.
I think I'm going to Google Peace Loving Feminist and see if, oh, I don't know, Paul Bernardo's image pops up.
Just an absolutely bizarre story.
Keep it here.
more of rebel run up to come right after this conservative mp rachel harder used her order paper question to ask the government this
With regard to the government's policy to allow oil imports from Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, has a gender-based analysis been conducted on the importation of oil from Venezuela and Saudi Arabia?
And if so, what were the findings of the analysis?
Natural Resources Minister Amarjeet Sohi replied, gender-based analysis plus plays an important role in government domestic regulatory program and policy development decisions on where to import crude oil from are private sector commercial decisions and as such, federal gender-based analysis plus analyses are not conducted on crude oil imports.
Then Sohe goes on to say, however, many companies do conduct their own gender-based analysis.
No, companies aren't doing their own gender-based analysis when the government fails to do one, especially not Canada's largest oil refinery, the Irving Oil Refinery in New Brunswick.
Now, according to the National Energy Board, New Brunswick has the most quote-unquote diverse crude slate.
In 2017, Saudi Arabia accounted for almost 40% of New Brunswick's crude oil imports, followed by Azerbaijan, the United Kingdom, the U.S., and Nigeria.
Now, I've been told by the government and the media that this liberal government is a feminist one because of, I don't know, something to do with the current calendar year.
But here, you can see there is a hell of a lot of oil coming into this country that is getting away with literal murder, stoning women, hanging gays, keeping slaves, denying women the franchise or the ability to leave their house without a male chaperone.
You know, the current year, Saudi Arabia sort of stuff.
So is that clear, folks?
Alberta oil is put through some nonsensical gender-based analysis to, oh, I don't know, make sure there's gender equality happening in Wild Rose country.
Meanwhile, oil imported from such enlightened regimes such as Saudi Arabia, well, they're exempt from gender-based analysis because, look, they just are, okay?
And with more on this story of grotesque double standards is the host of the gun show, Sheila Gunreed.
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, my friend.
Hey, David, thanks for having me on.
Always, always a pleasure.
So, Sheila, this gender-based analysis has now gone beyond parody.
In fact, it's yet another slap in the face, I think, to Albertans, courtesy of Justin Trudeau, yet again.
So, Sheila, why is there such a double standard to begin with in the first place?
Well, I think it's because the liberals have really weaponized feminism to their own gain.
The MP who brought this order paper question forward is Rachel Harder.
She's been a victim of the liberals' brand of feminism herself.
You'll recall she was denied her seat on the status of women committee because the liberals were outraged because she happens to may or may not be pro-life.
We don't even know if she is or if she isn't.
But the liberals suspected her of being a pro-life woman, so she couldn't even sit on the status of women committee when being pro-life reflects about 50% of women out there.
But the liberals used their feminism to deny her a seat at the table.
And it seems to me that the liberals are also weaponizing feminism against Alberta to block our oil and gas development because they really do believe, based on the people that Justin Trudeau has surrounded himself with, that he really doesn't want these pipelines to go forward.
He wants the appearance that he's fighting for Alberta oil and gas.
But, you know, when you surround yourself with people like Gerald Butt and Zoe Caron, that cannot be the case.
And so they're using this gender-based analysis stuff to deter investment and just add that extra layer of ridiculous hoops that these companies have to jump through to do business here in Canada.
You know, it's just shocking, Sheila, in the fact that gender-based analysis aside, business is there to make money.
And by that precept, they are going to hire the best people for the jobs that they're providing because to do otherwise is self-defeating.
So, you know, this whole idea that there's some government means test to make sure that, you know, and I mean, I don't even understand it, that there's enough women working in the oil patch.
It's ludicrous, especially since, let's face it, Sheila, I mean, that is a male-dominated role.
And it's not due to discrimination.
It's because so many women I've talked to just don't want to do that job.
It's really not pleasant sometimes doing that work, isn't it?
Well, yeah, I mean, that's really the thing here.
This gender-based analysis baloney really negates the fact that there are jobs that men gravitate to and jobs that women gravitate to, and that's okay.
There's nobody in the oil patch saying, we're not going to hire you because you're a woman.
There are people in the oil patch that will say, we're not going to hire you because you might not have the experience or the skill set.
But gender really never comes into it.
In fact, I would suggest that if you cared about a woman's right to choose how she determines her life, the oil patch is a great help in that because for women like me whose husbands work in the oil patch, the income that the oil patch provides gives us the ability to choose whether we go off to work or whether we stay home and raise our kids.
That's up to us.
And when the liberals throw up these roadblocks to the oil patch, it really robs women like me of the ability to structure our family life however we feel like.
And it was so funny because Amarjeet Sohi, the natural resources minister, concluded his reply to Rachel Harder's order paper question by saying something like, yeah, we're not doing gender-based analysis on oil imports, but rest assured, the companies out there, the private sector companies are, give me a break.
It's expensive.
It's garbage.
The economy is tough out there.
And I can't foresee any company adding this extra layer of regulation to themselves if it weren't mandated upon them.
And we know that the Irving Oil Refinery, Canada's largest refinery, they aren't doing that.
They're still importing 40% of their oil from Saudi Arabia, a place where you, as a woman, can't vote, can't drive, can't go outside without a male escort.
Male escort.
I don't, hang on, let me clarify.
Male chaperone.
That's right.
And that's the thing.
That is a ludicrous lie that companies would be internalizing this kind of gender-based analysis.
And then, and to your point, Sheila, of Saudi Arabia, a company that the Trudeau liberals say, well, we're exempting from this means test.
This is a country where you have state-sanctioned discrimination against women.
You know, I mean, it's perverse.
If I were a woman, I would say that Saudi Arabia is in the top five or top 10 countries where I would hate to live because of the infringements on my liberties.
So how can this feminist prime minister, this feminist liberal party, give a regime like that a pass?
Well, Justin Trudeau's brand of feminism is really first world female grievance-mongering and the male support thereof.
When you look at the sort of things that he supports, you know, he'll support reproductive rights in the developing world, but that doesn't mean maternal health.
It doesn't mean neonatal health.
It doesn't mean access to proper sanitation in hospitals to keep moms and babies alive.
It means funding abortions in the developing world, which, as we know, oftentimes ends up being sex-selective abortions.
So this is just, you know, feel-goodery, really, on behalf of the liberals, reaching out to get support from women who really don't care about the oil patch, largely, you know, SJW do-gooders who see everything through a gendered lens, but really it abandons the true meaning of women's equality.
You know, it is shocking.
And Sheila, I was just thinking about something, and I don't know if this has ever been done, but what a great little social experiment this would be, which would be to have gas stations across Canada do a test where one pump, it's labeled as Canadian gas, and the next pump to it is Saudi Arabian gas, and everything is equal.
87 octane, it's $1 a liter.
And I bet you the vast majority of people that needed to fill their tank that day would be avoiding the Saudi product and going with the Alberta product.
What do you have to say about that?
I would love to see that done because I truly believe even Canadians who, like us Albertans, we see as sort of not allies in our fight to get our oil to market, like those in Quebec.
I even think that they, if they knew, if they truly had, if we truly had an education program saying this is what you're putting in your pump, this is fair trade Canadian oil, and this is Saudi tyrant oil.
I think people would always choose the Canadian oil.
You know what it reminds me of?
It reminds me of the stickers that we put on packs of cigarettes.
If we put those stickers of what the Saudis do to women and gays and foreign indentured servants, we'd never put a drop of that in our tanks.
Incredible.
We'll have to wrap it here, Sheila, but it's just so perversely ironic that Canada, which produces ethical oil, is the country that is subjected to these ludicrous virtue signaling means testing that means nothing, whereas the worst of the worst get a pass.
Boy, the Trudeau Liberals at their finest, I would say.
Sheila, thank you so much for that commentary.
Great work as usual.
Thanks, David.
Have a good weekend.
You got it.
And folks, keep it here.
More of Rubble Roundup to come right after this.
Martial Law Fears00:09:43
So what do you make of this idea that martial law might be implemented as a result of no-deal Brexit?
Well, it's nice that the government are taking the leave campaign seriously.
You know, what can I say?
Let's hope it doesn't descend into that.
But unless Lislott, over here in the Palace of Westminster, take the vote seriously, take what the people said on June the 23rd, 2016, seriously, anything can happen.
I think it's really Project Fear.
I think if they don't do Brexit, then they ought to maybe have to have martial law then.
I think there'll be a bigger reaction then, actually, rather than the no deal.
No deal won't be a problem.
We'll go WTO.
We'll be fine.
We'll be fine.
Yeah, scaremongering.
Don't believe a word of it.
I don't see the point of that because unless martial law, unless you've got a whole violent revolution that needs to be repressed, then no problem.
English people generally are fairly quiet, fairly, you know, they may protest, they may stand up and say a few things, but I can't see English people generally picking up a sword or a shotgun or something like that and advancing on Westminster to protest in that way.
I think it's a lot of sophistry and drama and theatre on the part of Mrs. Theresa May.
But I think that the moves in France now have made some traitorous politicians rather nervous.
And they should be.
We the people are sovereign.
We voted to leave and we wish to leave now.
Do you think maybe it's a last ditch attempt by the government to try and scare people into supporting their deal?
I think it will.
I don't know if it's the last one.
They'll certainly be revving it up.
Yeah, I think they'll rev it up right until the last minute, actually.
But I feel confident we're fine.
We'll be absolutely fine as a nation.
And we'll do lots of things with Europe, I hope, and do a deal once we've left.
And we'll be in a better negotiating position then as well.
Well, talk about a production that's been years in the making.
Brexit is apparently turning into the never-ending story.
And one of the newest twists is the possibility of martial law being implemented in the UK if Parliament passes a no-deal Brexit.
Who knew Brits were about to riot in the streets?
And joining me now is our London-based rebel, Jack Buckby.
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, Jack.
Hi, David.
Thanks for having me on.
Always a pleasure, my friend.
Now, tell me, those people you interviewed in your segment, Jack, they didn't seem to me to be the sort that would, oh, I don't know, overturn cars and smash windows.
So what's the deal with this idea of martial law potentially being implemented?
So this idea of martial law being implemented, it came about as a result of Whitehall officials.
That's government officials, the background workers who aren't political.
They just get the stuff done.
It came out that Whitehall officials were talking about it as a possibility.
But this was no accident.
Of course, the government wanted this information to get out, that they were planning the possibility of implementing martial law.
And the reason they wanted that to get out is Theresa May was desperately trying to get her potential withdrawal agreement passed in Parliament.
That didn't happen.
So over the last few days, she's had to go back to Parliament, pass a few amendments that give her the ability to go back to the EU and renegotiate.
And her idea was, I am sure, is if people hear that martial law is a possibility in the event of no deal, then maybe the politicians might work with me on a deal.
And it looks like it might have paid off.
Scaring people paid off.
You know, that's really interesting.
I'm just wondering what would have triggered this whole concept in the first place, Jack.
Is it looking across the channel, perhaps, at France and seeing what's happening there with, you know, almost every weekend yellow vest protesters and some of those protests have become quite violent?
Was that sort of playing in on this gambit?
I mean, maybe, as I say, I think the whole thing was completely disingenuous.
And there's a flaw in it, which I mentioned in my report.
And that is if we leave without a deal, the people on the Brexit side of things certainly won't be rioting because that's what we want.
We want no deal.
We want to leave without a deal, leave on World Trade Organization rules, become a free trading nation once again.
So the only people that might actually end up rioting in the event of no deal are, you guessed it, Remainers, which is not good for the government.
It's effectively, if this wasn't disingenuous, if this suggestion of martial law was really what they thought was going to happen, the government are effectively telling us that they expect the Remain side to go out, break the law, commit atrocities and do all sorts of terrible things if we leave without a deal.
Which is what leads me to think it's disingenuous because I don't think the government believe that people would do that.
And Jack, tell me, I mean, when the rubber meets the road, when there is a Brexit, and I mean, certainly we're at the 11th hour, given that we're talking March for this to happen.
What I'm just trying to understand, and I think what our audience wants to understand, is that for Joe and Jane everyday Britain, you know, a person like you living in London, what does this mean?
You know, how does Brexit affect you financially or any other way once it becomes a reality, Jack?
Well, that's an interesting question because there's a few variables there.
Say we leave without a deal.
We're told that we need to stockpile food, that we won't get medicine, that there's all sorts of crazy things.
They told us that people who need insulin will die because insulin isn't made in the UK when in fact actually there's two major manufacturers of insulin in the UK.
If we leave on World Trade Organization rules, that means we can drop tariffs with other countries.
We can trade freely.
That means cheaper goods for the UK, but it also means cheaper materials for UK manufacturers.
So leaving on these WTO terms means that British manufacturing can do better.
There might be more jobs in manufacturing.
It's a real goldmine for economic growth, leaving on WTO rules.
The other possibility is leaving whilst remaining in a customs union with the EU, which means things will largely stay the same, which is, I guess, fine for some, but there's so much more that we can do.
You know, that's fascinating.
So that far from the, you know, the sky falling, things are going to be the same.
Or as you said, in certain examples, things are going to improve as more of a free trading nation, Britain becomes because of the Brexit deal.
Tell me, Jack, in terms of those who voted for Brexit going back a couple of years ago, I'm just wondering with all the analysis that's gone into this, and as you know, according to the elites of the day back then, this was never supposed to happen.
This was the longest long shot you could possibly bet on.
Any of those people suffering from buyers' remorse given two years' worth of analysis of what Brexit might end up doing?
Or are they more entrenched than ever that this is the way to go for Britain to sever ties with the EU?
I think there definitely is some buyer's remorse, but I don't think it's based in reality.
It's based on fear-mongering, real genuine fear-mongering.
We call it project fear.
That's what we called it during the referendum campaign.
And project fear got even worse after we won.
We've seen, and sure, you've seen, I think I've talked about it with you before.
We've seen that we're told that sandwiches would run out.
The most recent one is that we'd have no lettuce, which personally I can live with.
No more lettuce, no more tomatoes, no more drugs for cancer patients, all these terrible things.
And people, I think a lot of people have believed it.
And some people are so sick and tired about hearing about Brexit, they think, you know what, sod it.
Do what you want, just leave it.
And some people feel like that.
But those who don't buy it are more emboldened than ever.
I don't trust the polls on this.
The polls show that quite a large amount of people have buyers' remorse.
I don't think it's anywhere near as much as what the polls say.
But yeah, I think this project fear has definitely worked on some people, which is disturbing.
It shows you just the lengths that politicians will go to to really create a distrust in the political system.
They don't care.
Interesting.
And Jack, one last question.
Given the propaganda campaigns on both sides about Brexit, and this is a hypothetical question, I grant you that.
But if a Brexit redo, in other words, if another vote was to happen today in 2019 in Britain for a Brexit, what do you think the results would be?
It would depend on the campaign and how it was run.
There's an interesting thing.
We recently passed a day where mathematicians say that enough Brexiteer voters have died and enough young people have become legally aged voters that achieving Brexit in another vote is now mathematically, statistically impossible.
And that's not coming from a propaganda idea.
It is pure mathematics.
So I think it's possible that we would lose on those terms.
But if the campaign was positive enough, maybe we'd win.
Interesting.
Well, Jack, in the meantime, this weekend, stock up on tomatoes and lettuce and I guess ham sandwiches in case the worst of the worst does happen and London goes to hell because of the Brexit debate.
Anyways, thank you so much for weighing in on this important topic, Jack.
Thanks so much, David.
Tobogganing's Dangers00:05:01
You got it.
And folks, keep it here.
More of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
Well, it's the proverbial winter wonderland, isn't it?
It's a great day for tobogganing, and I'm at one of the best hills in Toronto for tobogganing.
Except one thing, the Grinches at City Hall, folks.
Look at this.
Hill clothes for tobogganing.
I'll read the sign verbatim.
Terrain has developed severe ridges and drops that create high risk of injury.
Designated toboggan hills are available in Riverdale West, Withrow Park and over 20 other parks.
So basically, severe ridges and drops.
The city is concerned that the hill is too hilly and it is now forbidden to toboggan here.
And what if we do toboggan here like those brave kids down there?
Are the sled police going to come and issue us a ticket or arrest us?
Again, folks, this is the nanny state supreme taking away the fun of a pastime in Canada like tobogganing for no other reason than probably reducing liability at the city in case someone does sprain an ankle or something.
Well, we're going to put this hill to the test.
We're going to see how dangerous it is.
I got the menzoid super sled here and we're going to go for a toboggan run.
And, please, folks, whatever you do, don't call the toboggan police on me, will ya?
Well, can you believe it, folks?
I went all the way down the hill and ended up with no bruises, no cuts, no broken bones.
Actually, it was fun, which is exactly what tobogganing is meant to be.
Oh, but leave it to the no-fun police to get involved and ruin things for everybody.
In any event, here's what some of you had to say about this latest episode of the Nanny State running amok.
Dan J. Briand writes, making the boys weaker every generation.
You know, you make a good point here, Dan, and maybe with all this buzz about so-called toxic masculinity, which by the way is just code speak for masculinity, it is probably seen as a good thing by some that boys are made weaker and weaker.
How sad during the two world wars, 15-year-old boys would actually lie about their age in order to enlist and fight for their country.
Today, these same boys are being told that sledding down a hill is far too dangerous for them.
Wow, how the world has changed.
Bass cannon Jake 2 writes, if the libs had their way, we would be living in a demolition man-like world and it would probably be mandatory to cover everyone in bubble wrap and safety pads.
Hmm, you know, I seem to recall that sex was also outlawed in the future world of Demolition Man, replaced by some sort of virtual reality thingy.
Well, I guess we can't be too safe, I suppose.
Robert Hammond writes, the only thing the city should be able to do is put up a sign that says, toboggan at your own risk.
Well, you know what, Robert?
I can live with that compromise.
What I can't live with is this feudal reaction by the progressives to ban fun activities, closing down tobogganing hills and eradicating playground equipment like swings and monkey bars.
I'm not denying that bad things happen, but whether it's a bruised shin or a chipped tooth or even a broken bone, that's the rub, isn't it?
Sometimes bad things can and do happen.
It's all part of life.
It's all part of growing up.
It's not the end of the world.
We just need to deal with it.
What a concept.
Vash Matrix writes, oh, those hilly hills covered in snow are almost as scary as driving, but much safer.
Oh my.
You know, Vash, funny you should mention that.
When we went out to film that segment, the snow just kept falling and falling that day.
So much so that there were a reported 300 car accidents in a 24-hour period.
But I didn't hear about any reported toboggan accidents, by the way.
So I guess the obvious solution is for the safety bureaucrats down at City Hall is to ban cars during the wintertime because obviously it's just too dangerous.
And Rattlehead writes, oh, that's it, David.
Snowfall Fears00:01:17
That's it.
Got your ass now.
You're in big trouble.
Well, you know what, Rattlehead?
Just bring it, brother.
To paraphrase the late, great Charlton Heston, I'll give you my toboggan when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Well, that wraps up another edition of Rebel Roundup.
But before I let you go, we are making a big announcement at the Rebel this week.
Member of the European Parliament, Janice Atkinson, has just joined our team.
She'll be keeping you up to date on all the historic changes going on in England and the rest of Europe right now.
Here's a sneak peek.
As you'll see, she's not afraid to speak her mind.