A week after Christchurch, the speaker opposes New Zealand’s 10-year prison sentences for possessing Tarrant’s attack video, calling it counterproductive—platforms like YouTube and Facebook removed it under government pressure, while Twitter deleted a tweet about an Islamic threat to PM Jacinda Ardern. They argue censorship fuels polarization, citing Tarrant’s manifesto as a deliberate provocation on U.S. gun debates and racial divisions, and question why Christian victims are ignored. In Milan, a Senegalese man with Italian citizenship torched a bus of 51 children, blaming media narratives about migrant deaths; the speaker contrasts Italy’s bold EU border push with Canada’s Trudeau-led censorship over immigration and Islam, warning it risks silencing dissent ahead of elections. [Automatically generated summary]
Hey folks, today I go into some depth on the New Zealand mass shooting.
Last week when it happened, I was actually flying home from the United Kingdom.
I didn't have a chance to get into it that day.
Plus the facts were still evolving.
I finally have a chance to weigh in on it.
I wonder what you think.
Let me know.
Without further ado, let me give you that podcast, but give me just one second first to invite you to become a Rebel Media Premium subscriber.
You just go to the Rebel.media slash shows.
It's $8 a month.
And why would you do that?
Because this podcast is free.
Well, hopefully because you like what we're doing and you want to support us because we do have expenses.
It's $8 a month and you can get our video version, which I think is important, especially in a story like this.
So please do me a favor, go to the rebel.media slash shows and become a premium subscriber.
Without any further ado, here is my podcast today.
You're listening to a Rebel Media podcast.
Tonight, a week after the New Zealand shootings, Canada lurches towards internet censorship.
It's March 22nd and you're watching the Ezra Levant show.
Why should others go to jail when you're the biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here and you won't give them an answer.
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.
A week ago, a mass murderer in the city of Christchurch, New Zealand, walked into a mosque shooting everyone he saw, men, women, and children.
He then drove, he left that mosque and drove to the other mosque in town and did the same thing.
The whole thing took 21 minutes, but he managed to murder 50 people and wound 50 more.
The murderer, an Australian named Brenton Tarrant, was arrested.
At first, there were media reports that it was a team of people, almost like a terrorist cell.
Police basically locked down the whole city, in fact, put the whole country on alert, but after arresting other people, they released them.
Turns out that Tarrant did the whole thing by himself.
Tarrant live streamed his murder spree on Facebook.
I have not seen it, partly because others who have say it was horrific and warned against watching it.
I don't think I need to see a real murder.
All of us have seen countless murders before.
Anyone who's watched TV or the movies has probably seen more murder in our lives than our entire family history going back a thousand years combined.
And then there's shoot-em-up video games.
But although those surely desensitize us, we still know they're fake murders.
I think the first time I saw an actual murder was when ISIS burned a Jordanian pilot alive after capturing him a few years ago.
It was horrible.
I've seen far worse from Hollywood, obviously.
But knowing that that Jordanian pilot was real and he really was being buried alive, that stained my mind forever.
I made the mistake of watching one more ISIS murder video, so I have declined to watch any more.
It is not illegal to watch videos of murders.
It is obviously illegal to commit a murder.
In some jurisdictions, a murder video may be deemed to be obscene as extreme pornography can be.
I say all this because immediately the government of New Zealand banned that live stream video and banned anyone from posting the video or retweeting it or anything like that.
I should say that only about 200 people apparently watched the video in real time.
Brenton Tarrant was not a well-known figure.
But you can imagine the natural curiosity, people wanting to know the news, especially something so shocking and something so political.
I do not want to watch the video, but nor do I think that censoring the evidence of these murders is a good idea.
It will lead to paranoia and disinformation and conspiracy theories.
Two years ago, a gunman holed up in a hotel in Las Vegas began shooting at the crowd below.
It was a rock concert below.
He murdered 58 people and he wounded more than 800.
Now, no closed-circuit TV footage has been released of the criminal in a town, Las Vegas, that probably has more closed-circuit TV cameras per square foot than anywhere else in the world.
Police still say they have no motive.
Really?
Or the case of Omar Mateen, that's the Muslim terrorist who murdered 49 and wounded 58 more in a gay nightclub in Florida a couple years ago.
At first, authorities released only a partial transcript of the terrorists' calls.
Remember, he called authorities.
They omitted his mention of ISIS.
And they claimed they actually wrote that he said, praise be to God.
Instead of what he actually said, Allah Akbar, they edited his calls.
So do you see my point?
I don't believe people should watch snuff films.
I don't want to.
I've seen two in my life.
That's two, too many.
But by banning them, especially something so politically charged, it plants seeds of doubt and mistrust.
Are you not skeptical of the Las Vegas shooting?
I am.
And that's not a conspiracy theory.
This is saying where's the facts?
New Zealand put an enormous effort into deleting the facts, into deleting the video.
They pressured YouTube and Facebook and other websites into their service.
Now, YouTube and Facebook, they say that more than a million and a half people tried that day to share the images of the murders.
Surely not all 1.5 million of them are vicious monsters.
I think a lot of them were actually the opposite.
People who were scared, who wanted to understand the vicious monster who was there.
But in fact, merely possessing the video is a crime punishable by 10 years in prison in New Zealand now.
And sharing it, well, that makes you a dealer.
That's 14 years in prison.
And they're actually prosecuting people for this, by the way.
But the prosecutions are the least of it.
Like I say, literally, millions of people want the news.
Look at this on Twitter.
Nick Monroe tweeted a fact.
It's just a fact, that an Islamic terrorist threatened the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Eiredern, in retribution.
Twitter made him delete that news.
Why?
Why would they make him delete the news?
It wasn't fake news.
It might be upsetting news, but why force them to delete it?
And why was Twitter doing a government's errands for them, censorship errands?
This wasn't even the obscene footage, was it?
Here's a warning from New Zealand's police on Twitter.
They say, we would also like to remind the public that it is an offense to distribute an objectionable publication, and that is punishable by imprisonments.
Here's a copy of another email, also obtained by Nick Monroe, from the New Zealand police to an internet company demanding to know the names of anyone who downloaded a copy of the Killer's Manifesto.
Hang on, so is this to block an obscene video or to block all information?
What's going on?
Now, before I go any further, let me state the obvious.
I don't do this for any normal people who are watching, but rather for bad faith critics.
Obviously, I disagree with and condemn this mass murderer who did his murders in the name of a political goal.
That's terrorism.
I say that because to the left and to liberals and to the self-appointed censors of the media, that's really what this moment was about.
It was a moment to weaponize the 50 dead bodies and fire them at conservatives.
Andrew Scheer, the conservative leader in Canada, put out a tweet of condolences and sympathy and solidarity very quickly.
Look at it.
He later put out a longer statement that mentioned Muslims and mosques.
But the fact that Scheer did not do so immediately, that he did not name-check Muslims and mosques, was evidence to much of the Canadian media that Andrew Scheer himself was an Islamophobe who probably agreed with the murderer.
That's the argument made by half a dozen Canadian media, including Andrew Coyne of the once sane National Post.
It was nuts.
I should point out that Andrew Scheer's language in his first tweet was remarkably similar to that of our Governor General and to that of the Queen herself.
So what?
It was an opportunity to name and shame and blame Andrew Scheer for a mass murder on the other side of the world, the murderer who has surely never heard of Andrew Scheer.
So here in Canada, Andrew Scheer was blamed.
In America, obviously, Trump was blamed.
It was whatever the left needed to do.
In the UK, they blamed Tommy Robinson.
By the way, in Turkey, where the murderer had traveled to, and the murderer also traveled to Pakistan and other places, by the way, in Turkey, their Islamist president, Reshep Erdogan, has been using the footage of the shooting at political rallies to demonize his opponents.
I guess he's not worried about New Zealand arresting him.
And he ought not to worry.
Here is their prime minister wearing a hijab.
Now, she is not Muslim.
Why is she wearing a hijab?
I know why some Muslim women wear a hijab, but she's not Muslim.
She doesn't need to wear one to commiserate.
Why the theater?
Here's a non-Muslim policewoman in New Zealand wearing a hijab.
Why?
I don't understand.
The hijab is not a symbol of Islam.
And even if it were, are they saying they're Muslim?
It's a symbol of women's submissiveness.
Not all women wear one in Islam.
But again, that's the weaponization of this issue by the identity politics left.
If you're not wearing one, you obviously are a racist.
By the way, that's exactly what the murderer set out to do, get this kind of quarrel.
Here, let me read from some of his manifesto.
I say again, he is a murderer and a terrorist, and we ought to take whatever he says with a grain of salt.
If someone is willing to murder, they may well be willing to lie, especially a lie that they know the media would repeat.
But let me read part of it because it's relevant.
This is what he wrote.
I chose firearms for the effect it would have on social discourse, the extra media coverage they would provide, and the effect it would have on the politics of the United States, and thereby the political situation of the world.
The U.S. is torn into many factions by its Second Amendment along state, social, cultural, and most importantly, racial lines.
With enough pressure, the left wing within the United States will seek to abolish the Second Amendment, and the right wing within the United States will see this as an attack on their very freedom and liberty.
This attempted abolishment of rights by the left will result in a dramatic polarization of the people in the United States and eventually a fracturing of the U.S. along cultural and racial lines.
I think he meant that, I think.
But whether or not he meant that, that's exactly what has happened.
In fact, it's like his manifesto was taken as an instruction manual by the left.
In addition to instant massive censorship, we have instant massive disarmament of the people.
New Zealand has just decided to ban all the guns used in the shooting.
And if you don't hand them in, you will be arrested and get almost as much time as if you had that video on your computer.
That's pretty quick, eh?
Hey, here's a question.
If that mosque had had an armed guard or an armed congregant, as some U.S. churches do, would the gunmen have been stopped?
I don't know, maybe.
But I know one thing, the murderer here probably wouldn't obey a gun control law, given that the murderer here wasn't obeying the don't murder people law.
This isn't about stopping the next terrorist attack.
You saw the terrorist himself boasted about different ways he could have killed.
Who knows if he really could have, but do you think that he would look at a new law against a particular kind of firearm and say, oh, well, then I'll give up my murderous plans.
The terrorist manifesto talks about Trump.
He says he likes Trump in some ways and hates Trump in other ways.
So like I say, there's something here for everyone.
He says he's an eco-fascist.
Who knows if that's true?
He says his intellectual inspiration is Candace Owens.
But surely that's a lie.
She's a black female Republican.
Surely he must be just saying that, knowing that the left-wing media in the world would demonize Candace and knock her down a bit.
Again, the media were only too happy to comply.
And take advantage of the crisis.
Here is news that Jordan Peterson, the Canadian professor, best-selling self-help author, a friend of our show, his book is now being banned in New Zealand.
What?
Why?
Him?
On what grounds?
Oh, who knows?
Who cares?
Don't let a good crisis go to waste, right?
Maybe you've heard of the website called Zero Hedge.
I really like it.
It's a huge economics website, lots of news, business stories.
It's contrarian.
That's why I like it.
I think it's mainly financial and monetary.
Frankly, I don't even understand everything in it.
But it's contrarian, and it was just banned from New Zealand, banned.
Oh, and from Australia too, I think, but for sure from New Zealand, just because.
And you doubt that kind of opportunistic authoritarianism is coming here to Canada too?
Well, listen to Ralph Goodale.
Canada is going to consider all the tools that we have at our disposal to deal with this effectively.
When the executives of the social media companies come to the ministerial meetings and present their cases, they usually come with lots of examples about how quickly they moved on this and how quickly they moved on that and how their technology allows them to respond within seconds and so forth and that they're doing their best.
Well, I think the public is beginning to lose some patience with we're doing our best argument.
They want to see effective action and I think we need to examine all of the tools.
Oh, so we have a massive right-wing terror threat here in Canada, do we?
You know, Trudeau just gave $10.5 million to Omar Khader, an al-Qaeda terrorist.
Trudeau says we have to welcome back any ISIS terrorist who wants to come here because, and he really said this, they have an important voice we need to listen to.
Trudeau has stopped stripping ISIS terrorists of their Canadian citizenship.
But the real threat is right-wingers.
Oh, you bet it is.
And Ralph Goodale and Justin Trudeau are going to pressure the internet companies to do his bidding here, too.
That's what he says.
That's what Goodale himself says.
Look at the headline.
And if they can ban Zero Hedge, that's a huge website.
Well, surely they can ban, oh, I don't know, the rebel.
And if you're against any of this, why?
What?
Well, are you some sort of Islamophobic terrorist?
Massacres and Media Narratives00:02:28
The New Zealand killer was a terrorist and a murderer.
His manifesto was a mishmash of half-baked ideas.
It's no surprise.
It was designed, I do believe, to cause mayhem and madness, and it's working.
But it is not a license for the Ralph Goodales of the world and the Andrew Coynes of the world to silence us on genuine subjects.
It is not bigoted to question the religion of Islam itself any more than it is bigoted to question the doctrine and philosophy called Christianity.
It is not bigoted to oppose mass immigration.
More than 90% of Canadians, in fact, do oppose it.
The reason we've had the media surge is indeed because a mass murderer of 50 people in New Zealand is truly news.
That's true.
But there is no link to Canada.
There is no link to genuine debates here about multiculturalism or immigration or the separation of mosque and state.
It's the Jacinda Arderns and the Ralph Goodales and the Andrew Coynes who are using those dead bodies for their own political purposes.
And I note their silence in the face of other similar mass murders in recent days, at least when it's Christians being murdered by Muslims, whether it's in Nigeria or the Philippines.
The left has a saying.
It's a Leninist saying.
The worse the better, they say.
They love chaos and disruption.
It gives them opportunities.
They love a good crisis.
It gives them cause to do things they've always wanted to do, like banning guns or banning books or banning websites.
That's not a solution to terrorism, by the way.
It won't make a single person safer, but it will help the global left continue their mission.
Stay with us.
We'll talk about a mass kidnapping in Italy that I'm sure you haven't heard of because it doesn't fit the New Zealand narrative.
Stay with us.
Well, some massacres or attempted massacres receive enormous coverage, and I think they should.
I think the mass shooting in New Zealand is a story that should be reported on widely.
It's very interesting and disturbing, and it's a horrific crime and a tragedy, too.
But others seem to get little or no media coverage, and I wonder if there's some sort of pattern.
Look at this story that was highlighted by the son of the U.S. President, Donald Trump Jr.
Senegalese Deaths Ignored00:12:03
He says, I'm not at all surprised it's getting little to no coverage.
It doesn't fit the media narrative that everyone trying to come here is Mother Teresa and everyone who wants security and vetting is racist.
That's how this works.
And he retweeted a video, and I'll quote the video caption, video footage of the attack where the Senegalese man attempted to set a bus full of kidnapped children on fire.
Video is not graphic, but you can hear the screams.
I'm surprised that such a brazen hijacking in Italy is not getting wall-to-wall coverage.
Well, let's take a moment to look at that film, and that tweet is correct.
It is not graphic, but it is terrifying nonetheless.
Here, take a look.
51 children and their chaperones who had been held hostage on a bus for 40 minutes ran free screaming.
Joining us now via Skype from Milan, Italy is our friend Alessandra Bocchi, from whom I first noticed this news because, funny enough, it wasn't on CNN or in the New York Times.
Alessandra, great to have you on the show again.
Thanks for being here.
Thanks for having me.
Tell me a little bit more about this story.
What city was this in in Italy?
And has it received prominent news coverage in Italy itself?
So this happened in Milan in northern Italy.
And it was the school bus that was supposed to go to the gym after school.
And the driver changed the direction of the bus and threatened the kids.
He first tied them to the floor.
He covered the floor with petrol to then set it on fire.
And he said explicitly, I'm doing this to end the deaths in the Mediterranean.
This man is of Senegalese origin.
He was given Italian citizenship in 2004.
He had criminal precedence for sexual offenses and for driving under the influence.
So it's unclear how he managed to even be a bus driver for school children in the first place.
And yes, it's tragic and how the media has covered or rather not covered this story is pretty crazy.
I mean, it shows the double standards that there are.
If you look at the New Zealand shooting where about 50 people were killed, if I'm not mistaken, in this case, it was 51 children who risked being burned alive.
I mean, they were saved last minute by a young boy who was able to take his handcuffs off and hurt himself while doing so.
He has bruises on his hands, and he managed to call the police with a phone that had accidentally fallen on the ground.
There's a video of this boy.
And thanks to him, these children were saved.
Last minute, the police broke in the bus, and the guy threatened to, he actually, he used a lighter to set the bus on fire.
So it was on fire when the children came out.
Unbelievable.
We have a short clip of that young boy, the hero.
I'm going to play a little bit of it.
He's speaking in Italian.
I know you've watched this clip because I got this clip from your Twitter feed.
Let's just show that boy for a second, and then we'll turn the volume down in Italian, and maybe you can explain to us what he said.
So here's the hero of the day.
Take a look.
Eravamo tutti molto spaventati perché, insomma, questo qui ce lo siamo trovati come è stato spaventosissimo.
OK, we'll take that volume down, because most of our viewers don't speak Italian.
But Alessandro, can you tell us what that young boy said?
He talked for about a minute.
His face was obscured because, of course, he's a minor child.
Yes, he said we were all very scared.
This man threatened us and he tied us to the floor and he covered the floor in petrol.
So basically what I said before.
Now, this is terrifying, but it's also puzzling to me.
You point out some of the quirks.
He was twice convicted of drunk driving, and yet he's a school bus driver.
He was convicted of sexually molesting a minor, and yet he's a school bus driver.
But also, which is very odd to me, is he's obviously been in Italy for quite a while if he received Italian citizenship in 2004.
So he didn't just come over on these migrant-packed ships in the last few years.
He's been in Italy for 15 years, but he obviously regards Italy as hostile, as a hateful place that he wanted to hurt in the most brutal way he could imagine, which would have been murdering 51 children.
What do you make of that?
The fact that 15 years in the country and he was a terrorist still, he wasn't absorbed or assimilated.
Yeah, well, it clearly shows that there's a problem with integration with some people.
And also, I'd like to add that the way that the story was covered, the fact that he was in the international media, actually in the Italian media, even the most left-wing media mentioned the fact that he was of Senegalese origin in the headline, or at least the first paragraph.
Whereas the English-speaking media, so the Guardian, BBC, and so on, didn't mention it until the third or fourth paragraph.
It was crazy.
And in the headline, they didn't even say where this happened.
They didn't even mention the country.
So there's this weird wanting to omit these facts, which are central to the story.
The fact that he's Senegalese, of Senegalese origin, is inherently inherent to his motive, which was to stop the death in the Mediterranean of his compatriots.
The prosecutors also found that on his phone, he sent videos to Senegalese friends that he had who were living in Senegal, telling them, Africa writes up, you should stop coming over here.
And instead, we should punish Europe for its politics towards migrants.
So it's obviously, if this was just a random crime, you don't need to mention the ethnicity because he's a citizen.
But if his country of origin is the motive behind the attack, a terrorist attack, then yes, you have to mention it.
It is key to the story.
So it's pretty crazy.
Yeah.
Now, he was complaining about the deaths of Senegalese and other Africans, some of whom capsize in the Mediterranean.
But in fact, under Matteo Salvini, the new Interior Ministry of Italy, since he has blocked these human traffickers, that's really what they are.
They can call themselves NGOs.
They can call themselves well-meaning people, but they're human traffickers.
And they do it for profit.
Either they're being paid by human traffickers or they're being paid by leftist international groups.
They're being paid one way or the other.
They're not doing it for free.
Since Matteo Salvini closed the ports in Italy, the number of deaths in the Mediterranean has fallen because the traffickers know there's no point.
In many ways, Salvini has saved the lives of hundreds, maybe thousands of these Africans.
Yes, exactly.
In addition to that, the lie that has been propelled and propagated in the media for the past year that this populist government is responsible for deaths at sea.
I actually linked on my Twitter an interview by the BBC to the Interior Minister Matteo Salvini, who, and this interviewer tells him, you have blood on your hands, which by the way, isn't even a question, like it's not his place as a journalist to make that accusation.
But this lie that this government is responsible for more deaths at sea.
If you look at UN statistics, you will find that actually deaths at sea have more than halved.
And so actually under this government, the fact that it's closed the Italian ports has made less people take that dangerous journey.
And the NGOs have almost completely stopped working, except for a last one.
And this was the reason behind this attack, actually, that one Italian NGO wasn't allowed to disembark the migrants in Italy.
And Salvini sued the boats for threatening public safety and human trafficking.
So this was the reason behind the attack, but nobody died on that boat.
So yes, deaths have gone down, but obviously he was listening and reading the mainstream media.
And so he got this impression.
And many others also have this anger thanks to this lie.
You know, it's interesting.
That's what our friend Joel Pollock suggested yesterday.
I asked him what he thought about the New Zealand killer saying, oh, I admire Candace Owens, the black Republican, but not everything she says.
And I thought that was just a troll.
I thought that obviously a white supremacist murderer doesn't admire Candace Owens, a young black woman.
I thought he's just pushing buttons in the media.
But Joel Pollack said, well, maybe he believes the media because the media portrays Candace Owens, a young black woman, as a Nazi.
Maybe he believed it.
And that makes me follow up to your answer there, Alessandra.
Maybe migrants and other Italians and other people are believing the left-wing media, are believing that Matteo Salvini is a fascist murderer.
And maybe people like you and I can see through it.
But if you keep propagating these lies about Salvini, about the opposition to these human traffickers, maybe one in a thousand or even one in a million people will believe he's the new Hitler and will do something insane like this terrorist attack.
How much blame should we give to the propaganda media that's whipping up people?
It sounds like this terrorist in Milan might have been whipped up by the media.
Yes, a lot of blame because actually you mentioned the New Zealand attack.
In the manifesto, the terrorist mentioned the birth rates, the declining birth rates many times as a reason for his resentment.
But that's an actual fact.
Whereas in this case, this is a lie.
The fact that this government is responsible for more deaths, migrant deaths at sea, is a lie.
So they've been, you know, as we said, propagating this lie for so long.
And so they've stoked up this division and hatred that they claim that they're against and trying, you know, to fight and that the opposition is responsible for.
But they are responsible for it.
It's just on the other side, so they don't care.
You're being very generous with your time, Alessandra.
Italy's Role in Brexit Veto00:03:05
I won't keep you long, but I do have two more quick questions for you, just because I have you, and I find Italy so very interesting, and you're a window into Italy for our viewers.
One of my questions is about Salvini.
Is he and is Italy becoming the new Hungary?
And what I mean by that is Hungary was one of the first countries to say, stop to Angela Merkel, stop to the open borders mass migration, stop to the EU bullying less wealthy countries than Germany.
Is Italy becoming that dissident state that stands up to the EU?
Is he the new Hungary?
Yes, and actually they're achieving much more because it's a more powerful country in the European Union because it's a founding member.
So there's no more backlash anymore for closing the ports, for example, to mass migration.
At the beginning, the European Commission and senior members of the EU or the EU or representatives who were pro-EU were very hostile towards this policy, but now they've accepted it.
So I think Italy has the potential of achieving much more and changing really the course of politics in Europe.
Well, that's interesting.
And I have one last question for you.
In the United Kingdom, which more than two years ago voted for a Brexit to leave the EU, Theresa May, the so-called conservative leader, she's conservative in name, but she certainly has, in my view, been doing her best to resist actually leaving.
She's asked for an extension, because of course, the UK is supposed to leave in just over a week.
But I see various UKIP or pro-Brexit politicians in the United Kingdom saying to other EU countries, you can stop this because if a single EU country vetoes the extension of the UK's participation in the EU, it's off.
Here's what I mean.
The UK has served notice to the EU that it's leaving on March 29th.
Theresa May says she wants to extend that.
But all it takes is one other country to say, no, no, no, we're sticking with the March 29th exit as per Article 50.
And I know that some of these Brexiteers have asked Matteo Salvini to get Italy to be one of those vetoers.
I know that's a very long and complicated question, but do you think there's a chance?
Do you think there's a chance that Italy could help get the UK out?
There's no evidence of this.
I've not heard that Salvini or Di Mayo have any intention of that sort.
Actually, Giuseppe Conte, who's the prime minister, said that he would like an extended period for Brexit because a deal is better than a no deal.
Italy Could Veto Brexit?00:01:46
Okay, well, that's a good clarification.
I appreciate that.
And I know you follow things very closely.
Well, Alessandro, it's great to see you again.
You've been very generous with your time.
I rely on your Twitter feed to tell me things about Italy because as we've proven today, if I were to relied on CNN or CBC or the BBC, I simply wouldn't know what's going on.
In fact, I would know certain things that were not true.
So it's great to have you as our voice.
Thanks for your time.
Thanks for having me.
All right, it's our pleasure.
That's Alessandra Bocchi.
You can follow her on Twitter as I do.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Well, that's our show for today.
What do you think?
Did you feel personally guilty for what happened in New Zealand?
Andrew Coyne thinks you should.
If you have any criticism of Islam itself, he and his kind think that you must be a hater.
If you have any criticism of mass open borders migration, you've got to be a bigot.
And I think that that is going to be the campaign tactic we see in Canada for Justin Trudeau and Ralph Godell in their re-election.
You've been seeing it for months.
I've been telegraphing it.
He's a feminist.
You're a misogynist.
He's open-minded.
You're a bigot.
He's a friend to all.
You're an Islamophobe.
Oh, and if you keep talking about subjects he doesn't like, you're a right-wing extremist and maybe the police will pay you a visit.
I can see it very clearly now, that, plus an extra dollop of internet censorship, that's the re-election strategy.
Well, folks, that's our show for today and for the week.
Until Monday, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, see you at home.