Ezra Levant and combat veteran Lee Humphrey expose Canada’s RCMP plan to repatriate 30 ISIS-linked war criminals—accused of murder, rape, and ethnic cleansing—via Turkey despite Iraq’s death sentences, while Justin Trudeau’s government allegedly rewards them with $10.5M settlements like Omar Cotter’s. They contrast this with a secret memorial for 159 fallen Afghan soldiers, blocked from families and veterans, and criticize Defense Minister Harjit Sajjan’s embellished record and ideological loyalty over military duty. The episode ties Canada’s perceived betrayal of troops to broader trends of media-fueled political violence, like UK left-wing attacks on Tommy Robinson, where unfounded accusations risk polarizing voters instead of fostering dialogue. [Automatically generated summary]
Trudeau's Plan to Bring Home ISIS Terrorists00:15:00
Oh hi my rebels.
I got a story for you today about Trudeau's plan.
It's not quite a plan.
They're putting together a plan to bring home 30 ISIS terrorists.
And when I say bring home, they're Canadians who renounced Canada, went to Syria and Iraq to be terrorists, murdered, raped, war crimes.
And now that they lost, they want to come back to Canada.
And not only do I tell you the news, which you may have seen Stuart Bell report, but I do something I don't think has been done a lot in the media, if ever.
I take you through about four of the sections in our criminal code that allow Canada to prosecute terrorists without having to have proof of, well, he raped this woman and he murdered that baby.
I show you the actual wording in our criminal code, and I think I make a persuasive case.
You tell me, that we can prosecute all of these ISIS returnees immediately on their return, if God forbid they come back here.
Anyways, that's ahead.
But before I get out of the way, can you please consider going to the rebel.media slash shows and becoming a premium content subscriber.
It's eight bucks a month.
You get the video version of the show, and I got some vids for you today.
And you get access to Sheila Gunread's show and David Menzie's show.
And of course, it's an important source of financial support for us because we ain't taking that government cash.
You know that.
All right, here's today's episode.
You're listening to a Rebel Media Podcast.
Tonight, Trudeau's RCMP are getting ready to bring ISIS terrorists from Syria to Canada.
It's May 22nd, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I published this is because it's my bloody right to do so.
How many ISIS terrorists have gone from Canada to Syria and Iraq, murdered and raped and committed other war crimes there, engage in ethnic cleansing against Christians and other infidels, laid waste to vast swaths of the Middle East, displaced countless refugees, and then have been allowed to quietly return to Canada without any legal consequences at all.
What's the number?
Is it 80?
Is it 100?
Is it 200?
Don't expect Justin Trudeau to tell us, and don't expect Ralph Goodale to let the police tell us either.
You'll recall he scolded Canada's security services for daring to name terrorist threats to Canada, including Muslim terrorist groups and Sikh extremist groups.
Goodale literally instructed police and security agency to revise their warning, to edit it, to make it politically correct.
But why not?
I mean, we know Trudeau orders police and prosecutors around all the time.
We know that Trudeau personally demanded that Vice Admiral Mark Norman be investigated by police, even though he was innocent, just because he embarrassed the Liberals.
And we know that Trudeau personally pressured the Attorney General herself to drop charges against his friends, SNC Lavilan, who actually admitted to criminal corruption.
So of course the Liberals are going to tell the police to cover up the nature of terrorism in Canada.
And I tell you this because now comes news that the RCMP is getting ready to escort home to Canada even more ISIS terrorists.
Turkey willing to help Canada repatriate ISIS members held in Syria, officials says.
Now this is a story from Global News who are notoriously unreliable, but it's written by Stuart Bell who actually knows his stuff.
He's probably the best journalist on the terrorism beat in Canada.
Let me read a little bit from the story.
Turkey is open to allowing captured Canadian ISIS members to transit through the country so they can return to Canada for prosecution, a Turkish official said in an interview.
The official told Global News that Turkey was willing to cooperate with the RCMP to repatriate the dozens of Canadians caught by U.S.-backed Kurdish forces during the collapse of ISIS.
I think we would be positive to that, said the official.
Due to the sensitivity of the issue, the official and a colleague spoke on the condition they would not be identified.
Now, who cares what the Turks say?
They're becoming more and more Islamist themselves all the time.
There was a lot of evidence that they were actually allied with ISIS.
They, for example, bought black market oil shipments from ISIS for years, which financed so much of the terrorism.
Like ISIS, they hate the Kurds, and the Turks actually bombed the Kurds in Iraq.
So maybe the Turks are just looking to cause trouble, which they do more and more.
They interfere in the West, certainly in Europe.
They're hardly worthy of the name NATO ally, frankly.
So maybe this is all disinformation, but read this.
The RCMP has been exploring options for bringing the roughly 30 Canadians held by the Syrian Democratic Forces back to Canada.
Turkey is considered the preferred route.
The Liberal government has said it would be difficult to get the Canadians out of Syria because they could be arrested and charged by authorities in neighboring Turkey and Iraq.
So that's the news today.
The Turks have told Stuart Bell, who I trust, that they would be happy to assist getting those terrorists into Canada, just as long as they didn't have to deal with the Kurds.
So the Kurds, who are pro-Western allies that the Turks hate, so the plan suggested by Turkey is that the Kurds would give the ISIS terrorists to the RCMP themselves or to Canadian soldiers themselves in Syria, who would then escort them to Turkey, and then the terrorists would apparently be flown from Turkey to Canada.
That's what Turkey's proposing.
And of course, you know what's going to happen.
Trudeau and the Liberals love ISIS terrorists.
ISIS, as you may recall, is an offshoot of al-Qaeda.
That's Omar Qatar's terrorist group.
Justin Trudeau so loves Omar Qatar that he gave him $10.5 million and a public apology.
And worse, he connived with Qatar's lawyers in secret to secretly transfer the money to Qatar in a way that allowed Qatar to hide the money from the family of the man that Omar Qatar murdered.
Tabitha Speer, the widow of Christopher Speer, is suing Omar Qatar.
So is Lane Morris, the man Cotter blinded in one eye.
Trudeau worked secretly with Qatar to hide the money from Qatar's victims.
So yeah, do you doubt Trudeau wants to bring more ISIS terrorists back?
It's not just Omar Qatar.
Three other terrorists or alleged terrorists have each been paid approximately $10 million by Trudeau in other absurd settlements too.
They're not real settlements.
These terrorists or accused terrorists don't have real claims against Canada.
Qatar had no real claim against Canada.
This is just Trudeau's way of laundering money to the terrorists or accused terrorists.
He says, oh, we'd better pay them because they could in the future sue us in court and win.
So we better give them $10 million.
Yeah, no, this is just you, Justin Trudeau, just giving, coming up on 50 million bucks to terrorists.
But Canadian veterans, well, yeah, Trudeau doesn't have a lot of time or money for them.
Again, my question is, what veterans were you talking about?
Was it the ones that fought for the freedoms and values that you so proudly boast about?
Or was it the ones who fought against?
Because honestly, Mr. Prime Minister, I was prepared to be injured in the line of duty when I joined the military.
Nobody forced me to join the military.
I was prepared to be killed in action.
What I wasn't prepared for, Mr. Prime Minister, is Canada turning its back on me.
So which veteran was it that you were talking about?
Thank you for having the courage to stand here, and thank you for listening to my answer.
On a couple of elements you brought up.
First of all, why are we still fighting against certain veterans groups in court?
Because they are asking for more than we are able to give right now.
Now, why should these terrorists from ISIS be allowed back at all?
Look at how Trudeau is so dismissive of that Canadian hero.
But why is he working to bring terrorists here?
I know there's a technical legal argument.
If someone has a Canadian passport, if they're a Canadian citizen, they have the right, that's what a passport means to pass back to Canada.
Now, we can argue about that, but why should Canada lift a finger to assist in bringing them back?
It's one thing for them to have the legal right to return.
Let's put that aside for now.
But why should Canada work towards it, negotiate towards it, spend money, make arrangements?
Why should that be done?
Why is that not asking more than Trudeau is willing to give?
Let me read some more from Stuart Bell Story.
The RCMP sees Turkey as a better option than Iraq, where foreign ISIS members could face death sentences.
An RCMP delegation visited Turkey in March, and officials from the two NATO allies held recent security consultations.
So I'm still trying to figure out what the problem there is with Iraq.
So these are terrorists.
They committed terrorism in Iraq.
They murdered Iraqis and raped Iraqis.
Why should they not stand trial in Iraq?
They are terrorists.
In our Canadian, British, American legal tradition, terrorists are outside the law.
They're not soldiers who are entitled to the Geneva Conventions of War.
They're legally the same species as pirates, actually, who can be killed practically on site.
Why wouldn't we let the Iraqis try them?
Why would we go to any lengths to return them to Canada, where they will surely be set free if not paid $10 million each?
What a contrast to this enormous effort to bring home dozens of murderers and rapists.
What a contrast with the RCMP and the military and our Foreign Affairs Department all working around the clock with various foreign governments to save their terrorists.
What a contrast with how Trudeau and Christy Freeland ignore our two Canadians held hostage by China, Trudeau's favorite country.
Someone sent me the following pitiful clip of Christia Freeland, our foreign minister, on the CBC last night.
Obviously, I don't watch the national, but he sent me this.
Just take a look at this.
It's just amazing.
I have sought repeatedly a meeting with Wang Yi, the foreign minister, my counterpart.
Thus far, that meeting hasn't happened.
But if Chinese officials are listening to us today, let me repeat that I would be very, I'm very keen to meet with Minister Wang Yi or to speak with him over the phone at the earliest opportunity.
China?
If you're watching this, can you totally return my calls?
Okay, or text me.
That is how far we have fallen.
But what will happen if these terrorists do return to Canada?
And imagine the price of it.
Well, Trudeau says we have so much to learn from these terrorists.
They're such an important voice, these terrorists and rapists and war criminals.
You know, Justin Trudeau is a feminist.
He keeps telling us that.
But you know, we all have a lot to learn from rapists.
I think it's now that in Syria and Iraq they've been declared defeated.
There is a question of them coming back to this country, and you can't possibly monitor all of them, can you?
Yes, we have security agencies that are engaged on this file very much, but there's also a lot of community outreach going on.
We know that actually someone who has engaged and turned away from that hateful ideology can be an extraordinarily powerful voice.
Yeah.
Well, that's, I can see what's happening.
I can see what's going to happen, can't you?
Of course you can.
But what should happen?
Well, first of all, we shouldn't lift a finger to repatriate these terrorists to Canada.
They disavowed Canada.
They're morally opposed to the concept of Canada as a sovereign country because, of course, it is a nation of man with secular laws.
Queen Elizabeth is our head of state.
It's not a nation of Allah.
It's not a theocracy.
Many of these terrorists actually make the point when they go to Syria and Iraq of burning their national passports as a symbol that they don't believe in Western nation states.
They're only part of the Muslim ummah.
So why help them come back to Canada?
But if they do come back, if they do manage to make their way back, why do we not prosecute them?
The first sentence of Stuart Bell's story implied there would be a prosecution, but there has not been a prosecution to date of any returning ISIS terrorists.
Why do we let them roam around Canada?
In one case, to re-terrorize one of the rape victims.
Let me explain this story that Barbara Kaye wrote in the National Post, and I've seen it elsewhere.
There was a rape victim of an ISIS terrorist.
The rape victim came to Canada.
But her ISIS rapist was allowed back into Canada too.
And they're both living freely in the same city.
And imagine that the rape victim encountered her rapist in Canada walking free.
How is that even possible?
Well, Justin Trudeau, that's how it's possible.
Though in fairness, Stephen Harper didn't prosecute any of them either.
Why not?
You might think, how can you put a terrorist on trial, though, for what he did in a war zone far away, perhaps years ago, when all the witnesses might be killed, perhaps killed by the terrorist himself, when there is no evidence in hand?
When you couldn't bring people to a trial, when you couldn't have a chain of custody over the evidence we've all watched for police procedurals, where it's impossible to convict someone beyond a reasonable doubt when the crime scene was obliterated, perhaps by a bomb, when 100 practical problems would make such a prosecution impossible.
Just think of all the translations.
How could you possibly have a prosecution like that in a Canadian court?
Well, obviously, you can't, and obviously you can't fight a war with lawyers.
You can't fight terrorists in a faraway land with a beyond a reasonable doubt obsession with details and evidence and testimony that we use in our domestic criminal law.
It doesn't work for foreign terrorists.
And it doesn't have to work, though.
That's the point, because after 9-11, the Liberal government of Canada, Jean-Cretchen, actually revamped our terrorism laws in Canada within months of 9-11, actually.
And they have been updated occasionally as well to deal with specific cases like ISIS.
In fact, there are plenty of laws in Canada that apply other than our traditional criminal code crimes like murder, say.
Facilitating Terrorism Offenses00:04:18
There are financial laws.
If someone sends money to a terrorist group, you're a terrorist.
There's organizing laws.
There's doing things here in Canada.
Here's an example from our criminal code.
There is so much in our criminal code now.
I'm not going to read too much of it, but this part, Section 83.181, participation in activity of terrorist group.
Everyone who knowingly participates in or contributes to, directly or indirectly, any activity of a terrorist group for the purpose of enhancing the ability of any terrorist group to facilitate or carry out a terrorist activity is guilty of an indictable offense and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years.
So you don't have to prove who killed whom, who raped whom.
Just that someone did something, even indirectly, to help terrorism.
I'm going to read some more.
I want to show you how expansive this is.
An offense may be committed under subsection one, whether or not, look at all this, look at all these, whether or not a terrorist group actually facilitates or carries out a terrorist activity.
The participation or contribution of the accused actually enhances the ability of a terrorist group to facilitate or carry out a terrorist activity.
Or whether or not the accused knows the specific nature of any terrorist activity that may be facilitated or carried out by a terrorist group.
So you don't even have to know what's going on.
You don't even have to be competent.
You just have to try to help.
And you're guilty 10 years in jail.
There are so many sections in our criminal code like this.
I promise I won't read them all to you.
I'm just trying to show you how easy it is to convict someone who supports terrorism or a terrorist group without proving they detonated a bomb or raped someone here.
Just, for example, this video of Omar Cotter, this is a talent, this is an al-Qaeda propaganda video.
This is a video of Omar Cotter building IEDs, improvised explosive devices, for al-Qaeda.
This is enough proof to convict him on multiple charges.
Let me just read a little bit more to prove to you my point.
You don't need to have Matlock or an Arab Colombo to prosecute these guys.
Even Inspector Clusot could do it.
Let me read some more.
This is the criminal code definition of participating or contributing.
Participating in or contributing to an activity of a terrorist group includes providing, receiving, or recruiting a person to receive training.
Providing or offering to provide a skill or an expertise for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a terrorist group.
Recruiting a person in order to facilitate or commit a terrorist offense or an act or omission outside Canada that if committed in Canada would be a terrorism offense.
Entering or remaining in any country for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a terrorist group.
That's a crime.
And in making oneself, in response to instructions from any of the persons who constitute a terrorist group, available to facilitate or commit a terrorism offense or an actor omission outside Canada that if committed in Canada would be a terrorism offense.
So just saying, yeah, I'm available for your instruction, that's a terrorist offense, 10 years.
Trying to go there, 10 years.
Even if you're just associated with, yeah, that is everyone in that Syrian prison.
There are plenty more sections that apply.
Even just traveling abroad, financial, just the goal, I'm going to Turkey.
Even if you don't even get there, that's an offense.
The fact that they're all there right now is pretty much all the proof you need to convict them.
10 years in prison.
So why no prosecutions?
And therefore, there have been no prosecutions so far.
Why would you think there would be prosecutions to come?
Justin Trudeau will not prosecute these terrorists.
He'll praise them and pay them and listen to their very important voice.
What a disgrace.
What a disgrace.
But I think he already knew that.
Stay with us more on this subject.
Welcome back.
A Forgotten Memorial00:02:00
Well, last year when I was in London on one of my many trips to Tommy Robinson's court cases, I took a moment to visit the spot on the street where a British soldier named Lee Rigby was murdered.
He was literally decapitated in broad daylight by a Muslim terrorist.
I wondered how that spot was marked.
And I was utterly disappointed when I saw how.
Here, take a look at this quick clip.
And where's the memorial?
Where's the statue?
Where's the plaque?
Where's the story?
Where's some sort of consecration of this ground?
You have nothing.
You have this.
What's this?
Some sort of power transformer?
What on earth is this?
All there is?
Like an unmarked tombstone.
All there is is some flowers and a tiny brass plaque on the ground, covered in dirt.
And more to the point, without any meaning in loving memory and a tribute to a true hero, Lee Rigby, his date of birth and the day he was murdered in our hearts forever, but with no explanation.
Who was he?
There's no mention even that he was a soldier.
His military title is not there.
No mention of how he died.
Was it just a car accident?
Sometimes along the side of a highway, you see flowers and a little cross in remembrance.
Remembrance of what?
You say you want to remember, but what are you remembering?
No one knows.
If someone were to walk by here, they would not understand what's going on.
If they came to inspect the notes, they might have a clue by reading this absolutely heart-rending one.
I'm going to try and read it without choking up.
It says, To dad, I miss you a lot.
I love you from Jack.
Imagine that, not saying how he died, why he died, a little brass plaque covered by dirt and dust.
And all the politicians say, oh, we can't have a memorial here.
Secret Memorial Service00:09:05
It would distress social cohesion.
Well, at least you can go to the spot where Lee Rigby's brass plaque is and look for it yourself.
But even that is not allowed in Canada for the nearly 160 Canadians who died fighting in Afghanistan.
I always say that the UK is a time machine where we can see our future five years down the road, and it has come to pass.
Joining us now to tell us the disgraceful manner in which the Canadian forces brass have commemorated the, I think it's 159 dead and many more wounded from Afghanistan is our friend Lee Humphrey, a combat veteran himself.
Lee, nice to see you again.
Good to see you, Ezra.
The story is written, there's a version of the story in the National Post by Christy Blatchford, who's a real supporter of the troops.
Can you give us the basic facts of how this memorial was announced, where it is, the restrictive access to it, and some of the excuses put up by the Canadian forces?
Yeah, it blew my mind when I saw this several days back.
I commented on it, and I was absolutely stunned that they had held a memorial service in secret that only included serving members of our military and allied militaries,
that they delayed the notification of this service to the public with the excuse that they were sending letters to the family of the fallen to let them know that the ceremony had taken place, even though they weren't invited in any way, shape, or form.
Then they began to make excuses when it did become public that they wanted a dignified service, as if having veterans of the Afghan war, wounded veterans of the Afghan war, or families of the fallen in attendance wouldn't have, in fact, brought a sense of dignity to that ceremony.
It should have been held in public.
It should have been publicized.
Because I think all Canadians want to not celebrate, but remember the ultimate sacrifice that these men and women paid for their fellow Canadians during this conflict.
And then to go on and put it into an annex of the National Defense Headquarters, which ensures that no veteran, No Canadian will ever get to visit this memorial.
Only people that are still serving can get in.
Or families of the fallen if they send in a request for a specific viewing time.
It's absolutely disgusting that they would do this.
It's absolutely disheartening that our government would treat veterans in this way.
You know, there's so many things about this that I, I mean, this cannot be accidental.
Surely someone must have mentioned it.
It's almost as if, it's not almost as if.
I'm not going to pretend that there's any doubt here.
They are ashamed of this.
They want to have this in some little tucked away place.
There's this one quirk that Christy Blatzford talks about where couriered letters were sent to the families of the fallen on May 10th saying the first letter, the first line of the letter is, the Afghanistan Memorial was officially opened on May 13th.
So they sent these letters out before it happened saying, oh, it's already happened.
It's all over.
Every single thing here is weird.
They didn't even tweet about it.
They didn't have a press release about it.
They didn't tell anyone about it until after the fact.
And I'm sorry, I had my stats wrong.
There were 40,000 Canadians who served in Afghanistan over the course of years, and there were 1,800 who were wounded.
The number of people who had to be in on this bizarre secret keeping surely measures dozens or hundreds.
This was a planned demotion, diminution of the valor of the 159 fallen and the 1,800 wounded.
This is almost as big a scandal as the Mark Norman scandal in my mind, Lee.
You know, it is baffling because you're right.
Hundreds would have been involved in the planning of this room.
Public affairs, senior officials in the Department of National Defense on the Chief of Defense side of the equation, as well as senior members in the Minister of National Defense's office.
PMO would have been involved.
PCO would have been involved.
Everybody at the senior level of government would have been involved in this as well as veterans affairs.
And something like this doesn't happen by accident.
This was planned.
They purposefully decided to keep this from the public, to keep it from the families of the fallen, to keep it from wounded Afghan vets, to keep it from Canadians.
It's absolutely disgusting what they've done here.
And on top of the Mark Norman fiasco, it just says that this government, this minister, this chief of defense staff have absolutely fallen from grace.
I mean, I'm lost for words to describe what they've done here.
I really am.
Well, I think we had an early signal.
You might recall that the anniversary of the murder of Corporal Nathan Cirrillo at the National War Memorial.
It was in the interregnum.
I'm trying to remember my dates here when Stephen Harper was not yet succeeded by Justin Trudeau as Prime Minister, but there was an overlap period.
He was the prime minister designate.
Harper was still the prime minister.
I'm going from memory here, but I seem to recall them jointly laying a wreath together.
But the next year, Trudeau did not mark that ceremony.
He sort of was pressed into it because Harper was still the PM.
So many things like this, it's not an accident.
It's a pattern.
And there's just one line, and I think you referred to it.
A military spokesman told Christy Bladsford, the decision to hold a humble internal event was made by senior leadership to ensure proper reverence, reverence.
You referred to that earlier.
The implication being that if we let families or like the implication there, the lie, the cover-up, is as abusive in its own way as the original decision.
What can be done here?
Surely, surely this is boiling the blood of thousands and thousands of people inside the military.
The military is an institution that depends on discipline.
How can loyal soldiers express their upset without being insubordinate?
Yeah, the way serving members do that is they contact those of us that are veterans that are advocates.
So, you know, a couple of things have jumped up and really become dominant issues on the Facebook page that I found at Conservatives for the, or Veterans for the Conservative Party of Canada.
One of the moments that stunned us was when Trudeau authorized the payment of $10.5 million to a terrorist named Omar Cotter.
And the visceral reaction on our page was overwhelming and long-lasting.
The Mark Norman case was another time when veterans and their supporters really rose up and expressed themselves frequently on the page.
This, when we first began posting about it earlier during the long weekend, and then again last night as the excuses began to roll, is again blowing up in the veterans community and with serving members contacting me directly saying, you've got to speak about this, we're livid about this, especially about the CBS.
Especially coming on the news that he just got a massive raise, which is, you know, in our lingo, that's like a reward.
And so the serving members are livid, so they're reaching out to us to speak on their behalf.
Now, Harjit Sajjan, the defense minister, I mean, on paper, he looked like an incredible candidate.
Loyalty Under Fire00:06:45
Not only was he a former cop, but he was a former soldier who served in theater, and he looked like a happy warrior.
He looked like a real soldier's soldier.
We've since learned a few things about him.
But putting aside his flaws, he did serve.
He did serve in jeopardy, and he surely did have moments of braveness and courage and leadership.
And he absolutely, surely had friends who died or were wounded.
I mean, put aside any other flaws in the man, how can someone who served in the theater so I mean, that's these days that's unusual for a defense minister.
How can he abide this?
Is there no germ of loyalty within him still?
Has it all been drummed out?
Is his love for the luxury lifestyle of a cabinet minister so strong that there's no vestige of loyalty to the grunts, to the guys he was in a trench with?
How does that work?
Well, you allude to, you know, his embellishment of his service.
Within the military, there's only really a few things that officers can do that will end any form of respect that soldiers have for them.
And one of them is embellishing your own service record, especially in combat.
And he did it in purposeful ways on multiple occasions.
It wasn't an accidental exaggeration or a report that was exaggerated that he was unable to correct.
So soldiers already had a problem with that.
He got to keep his job.
So his loyalty to Trudeau for allowing him to remain as the defense minister, despite something that should have been a fireable offense, he should have been demanded.
It should have been absolutely demanded that he fall on his sword and resign from cabinet for what he had done to disgrace those that served and actually did plan Op Medusa.
And so I can only surmise that his loyalty to Trudeau now for allowing him to keep that great job, and I can't imagine what a great job it would be to be the Minister of National Defense, has surpassed his loyalty to the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces.
And he allowed this to go forward because that's what the PMO wanted.
That is so frustrating.
You know, we have our tiny story, and it is in no way comparable to the stories we've just discussed.
But I remember a couple Christmases ago, we saw a little story in the CFB Borden-based newspaper about how they needed a food drive for the food bank for Christmas hampers, not for the surrounding community, but for serving soldiers.
So we crowdfunded 15 grand and sent it over, and they refused the check.
And we went to two other veterans' charities.
They accepted the check, but then they got a call from Sejan's office saying, don't cash the check from the rebel.
And look, we were just trying to give money to in the end.
Lee, you helped us find a veterans charity in Calgary that we gave it to.
But what kind of defense minister and his staff goes out of his way to stop a charity check from going to a soldier's food bank because you hate the rebels so much?
That, to me, was so troubling.
And we did an access to information request on that.
And we saw all the dozens of defense staff who were panicked about the fact that this was the rebel and we can't let them help soldiers.
And they literally put Trudeau's ego ahead of, and it wasn't a huge donation.
It was just 15 grand.
I was so upset by that.
And it's trivial compared to the other things we're talking about, but it's another proof point that this is a pattern, Lee.
This isn't an accident or getting a foot wrong.
This is a pattern.
Yeah, absolutely.
I mean, the word has come on down from on high that, you know, the military cannot cooperate with any form of group or media organization like yourselves if it goes against the Trudeau brand in any way, shape, or form.
And the CDS and the minister have signed on to this for whatever their reasons are.
And they've been pursuing this ideology for years now.
I can't express how disappointed I am in the CDS.
He was a well-respected combat leader until he became CDS.
And I can tell you, the respect loss is insurmountable for him.
Well, I tell you, it's, I mean, listen, I never served in the military, so I just speak as an outsider.
But I can only imagine having gone through the fire of Afghanistan to sell out the respect of the troops in the way he has done.
And this memorial is, it's heartbreaking, and hopefully it'll be undone.
And hopefully this public pressure will cause a change in course.
And if it doesn't, hopefully, I think Trudeau may well lose the next election.
And hopefully, a conservative defense minister will correct this error.
I certainly hope so.
I can't imagine that Canadians would abide this slap in the face for long.
Last word to you, Lee.
Yeah, sure.
So just before the last election, Aaron O'Toole and the then defense minister Jason Kenney put out a plan for a series of memorials and renovations to existing monuments to add the Afghan war.
And I recently spoke to a member of the Conservative Party to be assured that that plan would be put immediately back on the table to correct this wrong.
We must be proud of our efforts in Afghanistan to liberate the people of Afghanistan from tyrannical terrorist rule.
And the men and women that sacrificed everything for that deserve nothing less from us.
Well said, Lee Humphreys, thank you so much for joining us today.
And I hope that what you've just described, the remedy that you've just said, exists in a plan form.
Low Information Echo Chamber00:03:01
I hope that plan is indeed executed this fall.
Thanks for your time, my friend.
Thank you, Riser.
All right, great to see.
That's our friend T. Lee Humphrey.
Of course, he's a conservative activist and a former member of our military.
Stay with us.
It's more ahead on The Rebel.
Hey, welcome back on my monologue yesterday about the United Kingdom leftists embracing political violence.
James writes, The violence and hate generated by the intolerant left progressives has infected the Western world, encouraged by our globalist-controlled fake news MSM, political elitist establishment.
They hate anyone with a contrary opinion to their closed-minded PC dogma.
Well, that's interesting.
You know, Jessica S., Svietinovsky, I'm trying to pronounce the last name, don't want to do it wrong.
She's doing great over there in the UK.
You should go to tommyreports.com.
She's doing like three videos a day.
It's great.
And she talks to so many people who I'm going to call low-information voters.
And I'm not even saying that as an insult.
They just don't have a lot of information.
They're not really following politics closely.
But they've heard of Tommy Robinson, and they have sort of a message track.
Oh, Tommy Robinson.
I'll just repeat the last thing I heard from my friend or from the media.
So she asked them, what do you think of Tommy?
Oh, he's a fascist.
Do you have an example?
No, you should look it up.
Like, she's probably talked to 20 Tommy haters.
And she asks all of them, well, can you give me an example?
It's a fair question.
I mean, if you said to me, Ezra, why do you think Louis Farrakhan's an anti-Semite?
I could give you like five specific examples immediately because I know why I think he's an anti-Semite if we're talking about that.
20 people, she's asked, why do you think Tommy's a fascist?
Just because, or you look it up, or you tell me, or I don't know.
And what's that?
That's the media demonization of him.
So if you lay down this message track endlessly, this endless drumbeat, Tommy's a fascist, Tommy's a fascist, Tommy's a fascist, low-information voters who don't really do any research on their own and just have barely listened to politics.
And fair enough, right?
I mean, I think most of us listen to the politics too much.
It would be nice if we didn't have to.
But a low-information voter hears, oh, Tommy's a racist.
Obviously, a racist.
So yes, your point is the media is absolutely behind this.
So if you actually, if someone actually believes that Tommy is a Nazi, and if you tell 60 plus million Brits that he's a Nazi, maybe one of them is actually going to say, oh, my God, he's a Nazi.
Oh, my God, he's the next Adolf Hitler.
And we all know the thought experiment.
If we had a time machine and could go back and kill Hitler, of course we would.
That would save history.
So you tell 60 million plus Brits that Tommy's the next Hitler, one of them might actually believe you.
And if he's truly seized with the belief that there's a new Hitler about to kill millions of people, he probably thinks he's saving the world by killing Tommy.
Yeah, so yeah, you're right.
The media drumbeat.
Why Lauren's View Matters00:01:05
Robert writes, first they start with milkshakes, then they break up the baseball bats.
Yeah, well, I showed you the brick and the stones that were thrown, and I saw that some local Tory in the UK had his office torched with arson.
On my interview with Lauren Cunter, Liza writes, I agree with Lauren.
As the left moves further left and old Yeller persists with her screeching, it will only turn more Canadians off.
Yeah, yeah, I mean, simply saying the same message louder and shriller probably won't convince someone who wasn't convinced when you said the same message softly and more respectfully.
In fact, I think it will harden them like a boiled egg gets harder with cooking.
And I just think that shouting and laying on that you're a bigot and laying on you're a neo-Nazi, all right.