The Notre Dame fire’s cause remains murky two weeks later, with early media dismissals of terrorism or arson despite simultaneous fires in separate areas and Macron’s shaky credibility. Climate protests like Extinction Rebellion—backed by figures such as Monbiot, AOC, and Klein—glorify primitivism while targeting affluent nations for carbon taxes, ignoring survival needs in developing regions. UKIP’s Katie Hopkins confronted protesters over their privilege, echoing Dr. Dennis Rancourt’s claim that global warming is a white upper-middle-class concern. The episode questions official narratives, generational shifts among Chinese Canadians, and why police tolerate economic-disrupting protests, suggesting deeper political motives than mere activism. [Automatically generated summary]
Hey Rebels, I asked some questions today about the Notre Dame Cathedral fire.
I have no idea what happened, and that in itself is a cause for concern.
Why don't we know what happened?
It's been almost two weeks.
But then again, when I think about it, we don't know what happened in the Mandalay Bay shooting, the worst mass shooting in American history.
And that's been years.
And why is that?
I don't think it's because it's a mystery.
I think it's because someone's decided we shouldn't know.
I mean, I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I just want to ask questions.
Is that okay?
I hope you enjoyed my monologue.
Hey, before I let you go, can you go to the rebel.media slash shows and become a premium subscriber?
It's $8 a month.
Helps us keep the lights on.
You get a video version of the show, and I'd love it if you saw the video here.
In fact, we play you a very important clip in French.
An interview with the chief architect of the cathedral, who for 13 years was in charge of fire suppression.
And you will only hear the French because the English is on the screen in captions.
So I got to tell you, this is one of those times where you've got to have the video version.
So please go to the rebel.media slash shows.
It's $8 a month or $80 for the whole year, and you get to see the video.
You've got to see this chief architect.
He explains the insanity of the theories of how this place burned.
And he's not some kook.
For 13 years, he was in charge of fire suppression.
Anyways, without further ado, here's my questions about the Notre Dame Cathedral.
Tonight, can I show you what the man in charge of fire protection at the Notre Dame Church said?
It's April 26th, and this is 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.
Do you know what caused the fire in the Notre Dame Cathedral?
Insane Theories and Conspiracy00:03:47
I mean, do you know?
Or did you just hear some rumor and that's enough?
If you think you know, are you sure?
Now, I always tell our reporters here at the Rebel, there is no need for conspiracy theories.
The world is crazy enough as it is.
The truth is strange enough.
We don't need to invent conspiracy theories.
There are enough conspiracy facts.
My favorite example, I've been going on about it for almost 10 years.
I've been showing this campaign plan by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
They call it the Tar Sands Campaign.
And it was a detailed plan to destroy the oil sands, as you can see, by defaming them, by denormalizing, by suing them, by using Aboriginal people as cannon fodder.
This is from their plan.
And of course, using Canadian front groups, including the one that was run by Gerald Butts, called the World Wildlife Fund.
So that is literally a conspiracy.
It's not a conspiracy theory.
They actually conspired.
I've been hollering about that for 10 years.
I think finally in the last month, really, the mainstream media has started paying a tiny bit of attention to it.
But my point is, the world is crazy enough as it is.
You do not need to make up dramas.
Occam's Razor, have you ever heard of that?
That's sort of a philosophical idea, very simple.
It's usually right.
It's an old rule of thumb that the simplest explanation is usually the right explanation.
And there's a variation on Occam's Razor that's useful for dealing with people, especially bureaucracies, never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
As in, if someone is evil or someone is dumb, they're probably dumb.
But I'm afraid we live in an era of great deception, where there is both malice and stupidity.
And the people we trust the most to tell us the truth no longer seem to do it.
Think of what we learned from the two-year, $50 million special counsel investigation by Robert Mueller.
For two years, everyone in a position of trust in society, the media especially.
But every think tank, every pundit, every expert, every lawyer, every professor, the whole elite.
Daniel Pipes calls them the 5P professionals.
Press politicians, police, prosecutors, professors, they all misled the world together with their conspiracy theory about Donald Trump and Russia.
They all said there was collusion.
They all actually said Donald Trump was working as an agent of Vladimir Putin.
It was so crazy, but they literally, I mean, insane things like this cover of Time magazine implying that he's a spy.
And this conspiracy theory was reported seriously by all the media.
And more to the point, it was seriously said and stoked by the highest officials in Barack Obama's FBI and the National Security Establishment.
So yeah, never suspect malice when plain old stupidity can answer it.
But here we now have proof delivered by Robert Mueller and his team of Democrats, by the way, that the whole thing was exactly what Donald Trump said it was from the beginning, a hoax, a witch hunt.
Mueller exonerated Trump.
How can we trust the people who for two years told us a lie?
How can we trust the people we need to trust?
Who's watching the watchman?
Those cops and FBI and secret this and media that, they lied to us for two years about the most important thing in the world, I think.
Wouldn't it be insane if the President of the United States were actually a Russian spy?
That would be the greatest scandal and problem since the Second World War, I think.
If only all those experts would have cared as much about real collusion with Russia, like Hillary Clinton selling America's uranium to a Russian company, or just this weirdness.
Fire At York Church00:15:13
This is my last election, I believe.
They didn't know the mic was still on.
That's Obama saying, I'll have more flexibility after the election.
That's actual collusion there.
So that's the problem we're in now, a time of low trust in our institutions.
Well-deserved low trust, I hasten to add.
There are plenty of reasons, good reasons not to trust big government or big tech or big media or big business.
And by the way, they're all merged these days, aren't they?
Facebook, Amazon.
They're all quasi-governmental in their own way.
Why would you trust them?
Especially when they have a business stake or a personal stake in so many questions you have to trust them about.
So back to my first question.
It's been a couple weeks now.
Do you know what happened in that fire at the Notre Dame Cathedral?
Within hours before the fire was out, the establishment had their explanation.
No terrorism.
Look at this dispatch from the Associated Press.
Look at the timestamp.
They're 11.15 p.m., so the fire's still going.
And look, 11.15 p.m. The Paris Prosecutor's Office says investigators are treating the blaze that destroyed part of Notre Dame as an accident for now.
The prosecutor's office said late Monday they have ruled out arson in Monday's fire, including possible terror-related motives for starting the blaze.
Prosecutors say Paris police will conduct an investigation into involuntary destruction caused by fire.
Really?
So they're only investigating it as an involuntary accident.
And they made that decision about what they're going to look into before they looked into anything.
Before the investigation was done, they sort of said what they're going to look for, only one thing.
Shouldn't you normally investigate first, investigate the fire and follow the facts wherever they lead?
And shouldn't you wait till the investigation is over before announcing what you're looking for, what caused it?
An involuntary accident.
Shouldn't you announce that after?
Like, check the facts first, make the announcement after.
I mean, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, and I'm not an arson investigator.
I'm not a cop, I'm not a fireman.
But normally you ask questions first, you get the answer later.
Well, the New York Times itself, again, right then on the night of the fire, they were pretty sure they knew what caused it.
Construction workers with their welding torches.
Let me quote from the New York Times, finest newspaper in the world.
Glenn Corbett, an associate professor of fire science at John Jay College in New York, said construction work and renovations had long been in a dangerous combination.
There's a history of churches and synagogues and other houses of worship falling victim to construction fires, he said, adding that one of the reasons for the peril was the proximity of open flames on torches, sparks from welders, and other hazards on scaffolding to other flammable materials.
That's amazing.
Glenn Corbett, he was literally in New York City.
I think that's where the college is.
And he knew what caused the fire in Paris.
It was still burning.
But he knew it was welders in New York.
All right, so that's all we need to know, right?
The fact that another major cathedral was recently torched, that obviously was irrelevant.
Saint-Solpis was the name of that one you're looking at.
The fact that more than 800 churches a year, in fact, in France are torched or vandalized.
Hey guys, that's definitely not what's going on here.
The associate professor of fire science told you that.
The fact that Notre Dame itself was the target of a foiled ISIS terrorist plot a couple years ago, that's irrelevant.
And if you mention it, it's Islamophobic.
Shut up, this was the work of welders.
That's what someone in New York said.
Everyone knew it.
Even before the fire was out, even before the investigations began.
If you even ask questions, you're just a conspiracy theorist.
Not the people coming up with banal theories before the facts are, because that's a good kind of conspiracy theory.
They're just coming up with helpful suggestions.
All right, okay, well, it's been almost two weeks.
So what did we learn?
And I say that because I'm actually curious, because one of the most beautiful things in the world was burned before our very eyes.
It would be like watching the Mona Lisa be burned.
And that church burned so quickly.
Have you ever tried to light a log on fire at your campfire and your fireplace?
I don't mean the kindling.
I don't mean the stuff that just goes really quick.
I mean a mighty oak beam, one foot by one foot thick.
That, by the way, that hard wood is 800 years old.
It's so hard.
It's practically petrified.
It's almost a millennium old.
Have you ever tried to light a beam of wood like that on fire?
Now, I am not an expert about fire, but I think I need an explanation of how the greatest symbol of Western civilization of Christendom in all of France suddenly burst into flames and so quickly that the whole thing was consumed so quickly.
Those mighty oaks, I'm curious.
I don't know a thing about wood and fire, but I just, I don't feel like I've been answered well.
Here's a theory.
This is on CBS News.
So you know it's right.
These are the 60 Minutes, guys.
A computer glitch caused it.
A glitch caused.
A glitch, eh?
A glitch.
A glitch?
A glitch?
I can't stop saying that word now.
Imagine accepting that as an explanation.
Ezra, you're coming home, your shirt's half undone, you smell like booze.
What happened?
Oh, it's just a glitch.
Shut up.
Look, a glitch.
Ezra, you failed your exam again.
Oh, it's just a glitch.
Ezra, you didn't take out the garbage again.
It's just a glitch, people.
Could you imagine using that as an excuse for why a fire burned the church?
It was a glitch.
I got to borrow that from CBS.
I should tell you that glitch is a very special word.
We're not talking about a mere thingamabob or a thingamajig.
This isn't a doohickey or a whatchamacallit.
People, you're wondering why the greatest church in France burned.
It's a glitch.
So shut up, you Islamophobe.
Okay.
All right, that explains it.
And not just anybody, a computer glitch.
Maybe we should call our IT guy.
You know, the guy who fixes our Wi-Fi.
Maybe he can explain.
Here's NBC on the scene, on the ground.
They're in Paris the morning after.
Listen up.
NBC News Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel is there.
He's been covering the story since it started yesterday.
Richard, let's start first with the cause of the fire.
The fire department has suspected that it was this renovation that was taking place up high in the beams.
What more have they said about that today?
So they have ruled out arson.
They have ruled out terrorism.
They say they are treating this as an accident.
And investigators have already begun to question some of the construction workers who were working on this renovation project.
They are concerned that something may have gone wrong there, that there could have been a loose flame.
Architects are also now on the site studying to see how much structural damage there actually was.
All right, pretty quick to rule out arson or terrorism and to suggest it was construction.
And they were asking questions of construction workers if one of them caused the computer glitch or something.
All right.
Now here's a reputable newspaper in France.
I think it's reputable.
Interviewing one of the construction companies that was indeed doing renovations.
Now I'll show you the French first and then I'll read you an English translation.
So here's the French, Le Journal du Démanche, which means the Sunday Journal.
Let me read now.
This is from the renovations company.
The safety procedures on the Notre Dame de Paris construction site, quote, have been respected, said one of the leaders of the scaffolding of the cathedral on BFM-TV Tuesday.
So this is a newspaper quoting an appearance by him on TV.
The day after the fire that ravaged the building, quote, all I can tell you right now is that at the start of the fire, absolutely none of the employees of my company was present on site, said Julien LeBras, adding that all employees of his company, Europe Es Scaffoldage, participate in the inquiry without any reservation.
Okay, I thought it was a construction fire, but he says his people weren't working then.
I thought it was a computer glitch.
But then I learned it wasn't just one fire that started.
The fire started in two places.
It was two, I think.
Let me quote.
Let me quote.
This is from NBC.
Sorry, CBS.
Michel Picot of the Friends of Notre Dame, a U.S.-based foundation dedicated to fundraising for the cathedral's reconstruction efforts, said the entire roof was destroyed.
Okay, we knew that.
The fire started up near the rooftop while another fire started in the north bell tower.
Picot told NBC News.
All damage seems to be up high and did not go into the lower part of the church or touch the organ or stained glass window.
Yeah, sorry, this is NBC.
Okay, what are the odds, eh?
That you have not one fire, but two fires started at the same time in different parts of the church.
Is that even accurate?
The guy who was quoted there was the boss of the reconstruction fund, so maybe he knows.
I don't know.
Sure sounds like a glitch, though.
That's a glitch.
Esther, you're eating cookies again.
I thought you were on a diet.
Yeah, it's just a glitch.
Here's a man who was the chief architect at the church for 13 years.
So this guy, his job was to keep the church safe.
He was in charge of structural integrity, electricity, fire detection.
Listen to him.
So this, listen to him talk about the wiring, the glitches.
Listen to him talk about fire detection.
He says that they had at least two fire men in the church itself at all times, night and day.
So this isn't just some guy.
This is the boss.
This isn't me, a know-nothing who keeps having glitches.
This is the chief architect of the cathedral, obsessed with its safety, who knows every staircase, every stone, every timber in the building.
Take a look at this.
And you have this reflection that you have a idea that exists.
We can do other things for civil.
I can conjecture.
It was Notre Dame Justice that Martin is in the middle of the year.
We have all the Notre Dame, so that there is no possibility of possibility.
We have a norm that all the detection and protection of the cathedral detection.
With elements of measures, aspirations were allowed to detect.
The cathedral, the game in permanent city, who are new, and that can see a pencil that the duty is permanent.
In permanence, to difference of alert mechanisms, possibly.
Because we have colossal work, and then you know, it's like all these historic children on Notre Dame, we had normative techniques to control, etc. considerable when we were considering that I came to the end of the day.
And for the 13 years you were the architect and chief of the building, did you not know about the fire start?
Did it ever happen?
No.
15 years ago, he was obsessed with stopping fires at that place.
Thirteen years.
Then, look, I have no idea what happened.
And I don't think that you do either.
And I would normally not be a skeptic about something like this, other than how freighted it is with politics.
Like I say, it's a symbol of Christendom in France, a city besieged by Islamic terrorism.
And the Notre Dame itself was specifically targeted before by terrorists, by ISIS, just a couple years ago.
And maybe that construction boss that I quoted in the Journal de Dumanche from his TV appearance, maybe he was lying.
Maybe he didn't know his men were there.
Maybe it was something else.
Welding at night?
I don't know.
In two different places?
Who managed to get mighty oaks blazing without anyone noticing, without the two firemen, without the detection?
Two on-location fire wardens didn't see it.
Maybe it was a glitch.
I'm confused, but I'm an ignoramus.
I don't know anything about this stuff.
But that architect of the cathedral for 13 years, he said he was stunned.
He said he was stunned.
If he can be stunned, can I be stunned?
But the problem here is the people who we have to rely on for the truth.
They are liars.
Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, his popularity was as low as 23% recently.
I think it's bounced back up to 28%.
Oh, he's thrilled that only 72% of French people despise him.
He's got a big comeback going on right now.
It's bad enough that France's greatest treasure burned on his watch by accident.
It's a big glitch.
Emmanuel Macron's Comeback00:09:17
What happened at work today, honey?
It's just a glitch.
But if it were a terrorist, and if that terrorist were known to French police authorities, as most terrorists in Europe seem to be, they're already being watched impotently by authorities, well, that would finish Macron, wouldn't it?
Then it wouldn't be an international emotion of sorrow that so many people feel.
It would be an emotion of rage.
If there were evidence that terrorism did this, it would not only show that Macron failed to stop the fire, it would question other things too.
Why did he not stop the terrorist, if he was known to believe?
It would question immigration and policing in France in general.
Macron would do anything to avoid that.
He would be gone immediately.
He couldn't survive that.
He would do anything in the world, don't you think, to avoid that coming out?
Now, that's just pure speculation on my part.
The architect didn't really speculate, did he?
He just said he had conjecture, but none that he would say aloud.
Maybe there will be a convincing report, one written after all the facts are in, not all those theories beforehand.
One that clears up what facts I've mentioned above were rumors and gossip and outright lies and which were true.
Was it welding?
Was it construction workers or were they not there?
Was it a glitch?
Was there really two fires?
But really, I'm not sure anyone would believe Emmanuel Macron anymore, no matter what he said.
Look, I still don't know why that man in Las Vegas at the Mandalay Bay Hotel a couple years ago shot down at a crowd below, murdering 58 people at a music concert, wounding more than 400 people.
Do you know what happened there in the city with more closed-circuit surveillance cameras than possibly any other place in America?
Do you know what happened in Las Vegas?
Has anyone ever said?
I think one of my jobs is to be curious and skeptical, to ask questions, who, what, where, why, when, to push back on answers that seem a little bit off.
Sorry, we had a glitch, guys.
All right.
It's time to head home for the weekend.
Guys, it's a glitch.
You can let go of the front page now.
Glitch.
Not a lot of journalists seem to push back these days.
Well, actually, they do when they hate the subject.
Like Donald Trump.
Donald Trump cannot tell you that water is wet without CNN saying, well, actually, ice is water and it's not wet.
Gotcha, liar.
Orange man bad.
So journalists are super skeptical when it's their enemies, like Donald Trump.
But here they seem to be unskeptical, anti-skeptical, completely incurious to the extreme.
Oh, it's a glitch, guys.
Because they know that there's a possibility here that this was arson or terrorism.
So they are delighted to accept any answer whatsoever.
That architect was on TV.
That was a live broadcast.
I don't know if you saw Ondéract, that means live in French.
I wonder if that would have gone to air if it wasn't live.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
I want the facts.
I really do.
I love when the facts disabuse me of a speculation.
I am sad it was a fire, but I suppose I'd rather it was an accidental fire.
Not that any fire there was acceptable.
The fire was a horror and a tragedy and a loss and a moral blow.
But if Macron has covered up its true nature, then that is far, far worse for everyone because it proves what every conspiracy theorist would think.
That you can never trust your own government or authorities, that the government is actually your enemy and you are its enemy and you must doubt everything they say.
That would be a terrible fact if that were true.
That is not healthy.
We need, I think, a few good journalists to ask a few good questions.
Trouble is, they've all been chasing imaginary Russians around the world these past two years while France burns.
If you wonder what I think, I don't know what to think.
I'm not resolved on it.
That's what I'm saying.
It's crazy that we don't know the answers.
But if the answer is finally given to us by Emmanuel Macron, I got to tell you, I don't think I'm going to believe him.
Would you?
stay with us for more.
Welcome back.
Well, I want to show you a clip.
There's a little bit of bad language here, but mostly it's super gross.
So if you have a weak constitution, you might want to look away for the next minute or so.
I want to show you something that happened in London, England, at an environmentalist protest called Extinction Rebellion.
Get ready to be grossed out.
Extinction Rebellion.
Oh, God.
The whole area absolutely stinks of a smell that you've probably smelled before.
The homeless smell.
You know, that sort of urinary sweat BO thing.
It's really quite disgusting here and probably a danger to public health.
And I just want to show you this.
Hope you're not eating your breakfast as well.
This is a combustible toilet.
I really don't want to open the door.
But there's like a suspicious sort of leakage that is feeding this, let's call it a lake of piss.
That is like quite literally 100% concentrated piss.
And it stinks and it's disgusting.
Now, I agree with him that everything he saw there was disgusting, but I thought he was actually cruel to the genuine homeless people who often have physical or mental disabilities or simply can't help their situation.
I'm not joking around when I say that is an unfair comparison to hobos or the homeless because the people at that super gross environmental event were largely wealthy middle class or upper class kids who were doing this on purpose, who were being super gross as some sort of moral statement.
And I think that was my only criticism with what we saw there.
Our own Janice Atkinson went to this same environmentalist event and asked some really simple questions and got some silly answers.
Here she is asking someone, how are you supposed to travel to Australia if you can't fly?
Take a look.
To go on holiday to Austria or say Australia because I want to go and visit some family.
How do I get there?
By train.
By train, people.
Duh.
Take the train to Australia.
I don't even understand that answer, but helping me figure out what the extinction rebellion is and who's behind it, who's financing it, and if it made any difference other than having a bunch of people live sort of gross for a day.
We're joined now by our friend Mark Morano, the boss of climatepot.com, who was on the West Coast, hopefully not surrounded by super gross environmentalists.
Great to see you again, Mark.
Very good.
Happy to be here, Ezra.
Thank you.
Yes, I'm in Seattle, Washington.
But the beautiful city, there's a lot of environmentalism there, too.
It's also a high-tech city, and people love to be wealthy in Seattle.
One of the things that gets me about the environmentalist credo is they want us to move backwards in time, in my view, to where things that were gross in the world, like for millennia, people wanted to get away from gross things.
That's why we invented fridges so food didn't rot.
That's why we dealt with garbage in landfills so it wasn't just on the street.
That's why we had proper plumbing and sewage and sanitation.
To me, not flushing, which is an environmental thing, sorting your garbage and composting it in your backyard, not showering for a day.
All these things are gross.
They're regressive.
They're getting back to an unhealthy, unhappy era in human existence that for millennia, humans tried to move away from.
Here you've got a bunch of rich kids in London living gross as if anyone in medieval ages wouldn't give anything to live in our hygienic, safe, healthy, modern, industrialized society today.
Yeah, actually, in my sequel that I'm working on to the film Climate Hustle, I actually feature a Hollywood component that's exactly what you're talking about.
Actress Drew Barrymore, of E.T. Fame and a whole bunch of other movies, went to Bhutan and all these other poor developing world nations with other Hollywood celebrities.
They flew there.
And in the documentary footage, she is bragging about how she went and took a poo in the woods and how it was awesome and there was no modern plumbing and sanitation.
And they were just all laughing and they're going to go take number two in the woods.
Rich Kids Protest Climate?00:11:55
They look at this as though glorifying it.
As you're mentioning here, they're glorifying gross primitive behavior and they're extolling the virtues of lack of development, of lack of fossil fuels.
This is at the same time enjoying all the benefits.
And I think you mentioned these are the children of the well-to-do, kids who in many cases went to nice private boarding schools who now have taken up their cause with the extinction rebellion and are doing things like gluing their breasts to Goldman Sachs in London, bare breasts on the, I guess, on the side of the building, and the police had to come and the lady did that yesterday.
They are doing the most outrageous stunts they can think of.
They're trying to disrupt everything.
But you're right.
It's an absolute glorification of primitiveness, if we can say that.
Yeah, and we just saw some imagery of protesters there, all of them wearing or using fossil fuels.
I mean, the majority of artificial, a lot of outside clothing.
Look at that, that banner is made of vinyl, that wheelchair, I don't know what that is, but I see metal, vinyl, plastic, none of this possible without hydrocarbons, fossil fuels, industry.
I don't know who's behind this.
I see, of course, that children of the corn girl, Greta Tunberg, I think she's from Sweden.
I since learned since we last talked about her, I said I found her creepy and cult-like.
I realize now that I may have been more mean than I thought I was because I learned that she has had mental illness or other, she was suicidal for a while.
She had mental health issues.
She was, and her parents were boasting about this.
She's clearly being controlled by them.
I sort of mocked her weirdness and her cult-like nature, but I now know that she was suicidal and this is part of her mental health problems.
I don't think it's funny at all for a young girl to be turned into an eco-weapon of doom when she's clearly mentally ill.
Yeah, in fact, it started out originally her protests, sort of like, hey, we need to call action, we need to get government to act.
But in the last few months, as she's gained celebrity and her movement has gone when United States, March 15th, we had the kids' climate strike.
She has gotten, as you're saying, the word creepy, more and more doomsday-like and saying more and more dark, disturbing, weird things about the climate and about essentially there being no hope.
And the kids, why should they be in school when they have no future?
Because, you know, there's no future because we're not listening to the world's best scientists at the United Nations.
Yeah, and I think she's got some form of autism as well.
So you're describing here.
So she's well-funded.
Her parents are PR.
I think her mom is a PR agent and this whole movement that she's gone is not some spontaneous little movement of a teenage girl who cares about the climate.
This was a contrived, plotted, planned, orchestrated effort, and it's paid off spectacularly for them.
She is now the face of the climate movement, internationally, certainly more.
And she's also up for a Nobel Prize now.
People are openly talking where she could win a Nobel Prize for skipping school to talk about doomsday.
You know, children of tender years, I don't think, should be weaponized for politics.
I think it's super gross.
I mean, we all sort of cringe a little bit when we see some of those super insanely obsessive pageant moms, you know, who dress up their tiny little girls in adult-style makeup and go absolutely nuts with pageants.
And we say, whoa, calm down.
It's just a girl.
But at least all that is, is do a dance, do a song, and dress pretty.
This is actually the opposite.
This is be an apocalyptic doom.
You know, she said, what's the point in going to school if we're all going to die?
That's not just a metaphor.
Apparently she believed that.
She said that I have no point in living.
And when you have kids talking to kids in a semi-suicidal way, I think that's bordering on child abuse.
If I heard that some teenager was going to my kids' schools to talk about how she doesn't think there's any point in living or going to school, to keep that weirdo away from my kids, or actually I'd say, keep that tool of her weirdo parents and their funding marketing scheme away from my kids.
She clearly couldn't or wouldn't do any of this on her own if she didn't have a team of adults orchestrating it behind the scenes.
No, in fact, she's been asked very specific questions about renewable energy and the climate, and she falls back on, hey, I'm just a kid.
I don't know the answers to these.
And to which the answer is, yes, exactly.
So why are you going around talking about the world's finest scientists and we have no future?
Again, just the typical stuff.
They're trying to have it both ways.
But there's a funny incident with this Extinction Rebellion in London yesterday where they went up to the head of the UK, the UKIP party, and there was a journalist with them.
And these boys were going off about, we need to do this, we need to do that.
And the interview went awry and they turned on these protesters and started asking where they went to school.
They called them posh boys.
A journalist named Katie Hopkins was a little bit more visible.
Well, we know Katie.
She was with the rebel.
Here, let's play a clip of that.
Yeah, I don't know if you know Mark, but Katie did a lot of journalism for us in the past.
We have that clip.
Let's just play it here for a minute.
It's vintage Katie Hopkins turning the tables.
Okay, I mean, it's a long clip.
We'll just play a minute of it.
Take a look at this.
There's this perception I have where I live, and it's a place called the rest of the UK, that climate protesters are massively overprivileged and kind of posh kids.
And you seem to be falling straight into that for me.
So can you explain to me why it is that it seems to be almost a luxury of the privileged that live in London to dictate to the rest of us what we should and shouldn't be allowed to do?
It feels that way.
No, I'm just asking you about this idea of privilege.
So like your hero and pin-up, Greta, is actually a very privileged individual with privileged parents.
You, it sounds to me, are a privileged individual.
Can I just check where you went to school?
No, exactly.
Can I ask where you went to school?
Did you go to a nice boarding school?
Does it matter?
Yeah, I'm just asking.
You've been asking Gerard a lot of questions, and I've only asked you one.
Yes, I've only asked you one question.
I just want one answer.
Just before we move forwards, I just want one answer to one question.
And I'm just asking, where is it you went to school?
So one question, Gerard's just answered.
Gerard has just answered 15 of your questions very politely.
It goes on for a bit, but you can see he does not want to say how fancy he is because it's true.
I want to tell you an anecdote, if I may.
When I was with the Sun News Network, I went to British Columbia for an anti-pipeline protest, and it was the largest environmental protest I've ever been to in my life.
I think there were close to a thousand people there.
For sure, there were 800.
And it was right downtown amongst the gleaming towers of Vancouver.
And Mark, I don't know if you know Vancouver.
Well, it's not far away from where we are now.
It has an enormous Asian population.
Lots of Chinese Canadians, lots of Indo-Canadians.
I think it's actually a majority minority city now.
And I was at this protest.
This was about four years ago.
Five years ago.
And out of 800 people, I saw only two visible minorities who were Asian.
I went up and I asked them, and one of them was actually an Australian Chinese guy who was visiting Vancouver and said, I just came to see what the fuss was about.
And I can't remember what the other person told me.
To have 800 people in Vancouver and only two of them are Asian, that's almost statistically impossible.
And it goes to, I think, a white liberal snobbery, pseudo-religion, superstition.
I think, I mean, you can come up with your own theory, but I think Katie Hopkins is onto something there where this is a dilettante project.
You've got your fancy car, your cottage, your boat, your vacations.
You're jetting to Bhutan, like you mentioned before.
But then once a year, you virtue signal and you tell everybody how awesome you are because you're trying to make the little people pay a carbon tax.
Yes, When the environmental movement is actually self-aware of this, they've actually openly talked how they have a race problem.
They have a minority problem.
They are literally a lily white community of wealthy white environmentalists and the whole climate movement.
I've had scientists, one of them is Dr. Dennis Rancourt of Ottawa, a physicist who's talked about it being a essentially global warming is a condition of the white upper middle class.
It's their perceived tragedy.
their perceived catastrophe and they're trying to impose it on the rest of the world.
And if you look at places like Africa and Asia, where the 1 billion people don't have the running water and electricity, they're worried about survival and development.
They're not worried about levels of carbon dioxide in the environment, but they are, but the environmentalists got around that now because they're offering them massive amounts of funding to their leaders to pay them off to join the treaties and stuff.
But you're absolutely right.
Hopkins is right.
These are privileged, mostly white, wealthy individuals with great connections.
That's what the modern environmental movement is all about.
I want to leave you with one more theory.
And of course, it's just conjecture on my part.
I, of course, admire Chinese Canadians very much, especially the work ethic, the family values, the patriotism.
There's so many great things about Chinese Canadians.
I love Vancouver.
My theory is this.
A lot of the Chinese Canadians are first generation, and their parents would say to the kids, are you crazy?
You're going to that ridiculous rally?
Study.
Become an engineer.
Become a doctor.
Become a lawyer.
Make a success for yourself.
We didn't leave China or India to come to Canada to have you go to some stupid anti-energy protest.
Like, I think the family that's still the new immigrant mentality would say, are you crazy?
We're here to make a success in life, not to be an anti-success.
But my fear, Mark, is that the next generation, so these young Chinese Canadian kids whose parents are, you know, tiger moms saying, don't fool around, get your degree, be great.
My worry is that their kids who will grow up in wealth and luxury will be just as self-hating and liberal as the white posh kid we saw there on the street in London.
That's my theory.
I'm worried that that smart work ethic that you see amongst Asian Canadians will be gone in a generation and the next generation will be true to love and millennials.
Well, I think, you know, there's always the older generation complaining about the young, but I do think there's a thing in Chinese culture that I think will stick there.
There is a work ethic, I think, that you can just see in Excel.
I mean, in the Asian community, but you don't see many Asian environmental protests.
You don't see them being disruptive.
One of the things about the Extinction Rebellion out here among these white, wealthy individuals, or the posh boys, as Hopkins calls them, is they are openly bragging about how they want to cause economic disruption as much as possible.
That's the only way they can get the attention of the government.
That's why they're trying to shut down the financial centers.
That's why they're trying to shut down airports, shut down highways.
They're doing everything they can to be as obnoxious and in your face as possible, and they're loving all the attention they're getting.
Disrupting Extinction Rebellion00:02:39
And I don't know.
I mean, again, it's going to come down to, is the police going to crack down?
Why are the police allowing disruptions in the financial centers or at airports?
How far are they going to be allowed to go with this message?
And how long are kids going to be allowed to skip school?
These excused absences that they're promoting for this.
And again, even if you believe the climate catastrophe, what they're advocating for, they're advocating for the overthrow of capitalism.
That's now, you know, George Monbiot and others, they're just openly using those phrases now.
People like AOC in the United States and Naomi Klein of Canada.
So it's going to be very interesting to see what kind of official response is going to be as they just, they're going to continue to ramp this up because they're loving it.
The school protests, Extinction Rebellion.
They're actually achieving their goals right now.
They're doing a great job disrupting.
Well, I think the answer to why they're getting away with it is the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, is a hardcore leftist who finds common cause with them, and the mayor of Manchester is no better.
Well, Mark Morano, great to see you, and thanks for bringing us the common sense.
I think that there is an inexhaustible supply of stupidity on the left and an inexhaustible supply of lobbying money behind it.
So I don't think we're going to see the end of this craziness anytime soon.
I know you'll be there to help us understand it.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you, Ed.
All right.
There you have it.
Mark Morano.
He's the boss of climate.com.
Stay with us.
your letters to me next.
Hey, welcome back.
I'm a monologue yesterday about Tommy Robinson launching his campaign for MEP, Member of the European Parliament.
Paul writes, Tommy's election would be great.
It would make it harder to silence him.
I'd love to see that happen.
Yeah, I tell you already, I mean, today I noticed that his campaign Twitter account was just suspended by Twitter with no notice or warning.
And that's sort of crazy when you think about it, because that is foreign meddling.
Twitter is based in San Francisco.
He's running the UK.
In an election, I mean, Tommy is a duly registered candidate.
You don't have to like him or support him, but he's a candidate, and a company called Twitter is silencing candidates it doesn't like.
Expect a lot more of that.
Robert writes, with people like Farage and Robinson in the EEU Parliament, the EU is going to be sorry they extended the Brexit deadline.
Yeah, I think so.
I think it is an absolute certainty that Nigel Farage will be in Parliament.
He might sweep the whole place.
I hope UKIP gets some folks in.
Great Idea For Subscriptions00:00:58
I think it would be great to have that Count Dankula on.
He's such a character.
And he's so irreverent.
That's what I like about him.
And I like Jared Batten too.
Michael writes, I think you should set up a system that allows people to give someone a subscription to the Rebel as a present.
That's a great idea.
It's a great idea.
You know, we're relaunching our website.
And I'm not going to, we have some exciting news about that.
I'm not going to give it to you until we're ready.
But, you know, I'll talk to our web developer, and that's a great idea.
Tina writes, I really enjoy both your commentaries and your guest interviews.
Definitely worth eight bucks a month.
Well, that is friendly of you to say I appreciate that.
And boy, we sure depend on it because the folks who watch this show really do carry the load for our free stuff because we don't get any dope from YouTube.