Ezra Levant examines Canada’s controversial bail decisions for accused terrorists, including the $50K release of Reza Mohammediasil (47) and his son Mayar (18), linked to explosives and The Anarchist Cookbook, while neighbors protest. He ties this to Ralph Goodale’s alleged suppression of "Muslim extremism" in threat assessments and cases like Basam al-Rawi (2015), who fled to Germany mid-trial despite sexual assault charges. Levant contrasts this with the UK’s deplatforming of political figures—Tommy Robinson, Carl Benjamin, and Anne-Marie Waters—by Facebook and Twitter, calling it election meddling, and warns U.S. leaders like Trump could face similar censorship. With tech giants like Google and Microsoft backing Canada’s vague "digital charter," he questions whether legal costs for dissent (e.g., The Rebel’s $350K in lawyer fees) stifle free speech, suggesting systemic bias undermines justice. [Automatically generated summary]
Hello Rebels, I tell you a terrifying story today about the kind of criminals who were allowed out on bail.
I show you David Menzies' great journalism when he just knocked on the door of two accused criminals who were just back at home, just accused criminals, accused terrorists, accused bomb makers.
They're just at home.
And I tell you the case of a rapist, an accused rapist, excuse me, in Halifax who's been allowed to leave the country.
Because you know how accused rapists are.
They're the most honest of people.
If they're convicted, he'll surely come back, right?
So that's ahead.
Before I get to that, please consider becoming a Rebel Premium subscriber.
It's $8 a month, or $80 if you buy the year in advance.
And you get the video version of the show.
And you know what, today I show you a video of David Menzies going to the, he just knocks on the door, ding dong.
Hi, I'm David from the Rebel.
Can I talk to the terrorists?
And they talk to him.
And I show you the highlight.
You got to see that on video.
Anyways, go to the Rebel.media slash shows.
You get the video access to the show.
You get David Menzies' show.
You get Sheila Gunread's show, and it supports our journalism.
All right, here's today's episode.
You're listening to a Rebel Media podcast.
Tonight, what kind of judge would let accused terrorists out on bail?
A Canadian judge.
It's May 24th, 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 is government about why I publish them is because it's my bloody right to do so.
Did you see David Menzies' video yesterday?
He just went to the home of an accused father and son terrorist duo.
Here's a story by Joe Warmington about it in the Toronto Sun.
I'll show you a clip from that David Menzies video in a moment.
Warmington, bail granted in alleged explosives possession case.
Let me read a little bit.
Richmond Hill, home in time for the Victoria Day weekend.
Reza Mohammediasil, 47, and his son Mayar, 18, were released on noon Friday on $50,000 bail and ordered to return to court on June 6th.
Neighbors were furious.
Why did they get bail, said one?
That's crazy.
Another asked, how can they be charged with explosives but allowed to come back here?
So this is such a serious allegation, such a serious plot that U.S. authorities brought it to Canada's attention.
This is an international situation.
And our Canadian court system, our prosecutors, our judges said, yeah, thanks, you Americans.
You're so racist.
We're fine.
It's no biggie.
We'll let these accused bombers out on bail.
I mean, a bomb.
How much damage could a bomb do?
It's probably all a misunderstanding.
And we wouldn't want anyone to call us Islamophobes or something.
So they just let this father and son duo.
Just go home.
Here's how CTV reported it.
One of two suspects charged in explosives investigation was on cusp of radicalization.
Source.
Yeah, if police are seizing explosive materials from your home, you're not on the cusp anymore.
You're over the cusp.
You passed the cusp a long time ago.
And if it's a father-son thing, as the police allege, then this isn't some rogue kid who just started hanging out with the round crowd.
This was a family business.
Let me read from CTV's story.
CTV News Toronto has learned that officers found the chemicals, which included mercury, red phosphorus, and ammonium nitrate, in the Richmond Hill Homes garage and an adjacent shed.
Police also found a copy of the Anarchist Cookbook, a book with instructions on how to make explosive devices as well as manufacture drugs and modify electric devices.
Every person who has blown anything up has gone to that book, the source said.
I mean, who amongst us hasn't bought red phosphorus and ammonium nitrate and mercury?
How how do you even find those things?
I mean, whose tool shed doesn't have some of that just lying around in case.
I mean, there's just these guys are obviously just do-it-yourselfers.
They're fixed rappers.
They're real handymen.
Mets, right?
But good thing we caught them on the cusp before they actually, you know, became bad guys.
Whew.
And so a judge, I couldn't find the judge's name in four different news reports I read.
A judge just let this dad of the year and his son of the year go home.
Just go home.
Oh, and the judge says, stay off the internet.
I mean, kids these days, he could be radicalized.
So they're just dumped back into their neighborhood because we're stupid that way.
Kids These Days00:05:22
And by we, I don't mean you and me.
I mean our 5P professionals, the press, the politicians, the police, the prosecutors, the professors, because Ralph Goodale, who personally declared that there was no national security issue here, well, we know for a fact that he ordered Canada's security agencies to scrub any mention of Muslim extremism from the national threat warning.
So anyways, in case you missed it, I'd like to show you a couple of minutes of David Menzies literally going to the house ding-dong and asking for these two accused terrorists.
He just rang the doorbell and said, hi, I'm David with the Rebel, and I'd like to ask you some questions about making your bomb.
He did that.
Here, watch for you.
I'm going to play a couple minutes here.
Not the whole thing, but I encourage you to find the whole thing on our website or our YouTube channel.
Here, take a look.
Hi.
Good.
How are you doing there?
Is Risa or Meihar here by any chance?
Yes.
Oh, okay.
My name is David Menzies with Rebel Media.
Is there a possibility I can speak with them?
No, we are not interested.
No?
We're just wondering where they got the bomb from and what they were planning to do with it.
Explosives.
No?
My hero has.
Oh, you're Meijer then, eh?
Sorry.
I need to not talk to anybody, but I'm just wondering who those two individuals were going to use the bomb on.
We didn't have any bomb.
You weren't going to use it for.
You must be Meihar then.
Sorry for that.
What's your name?
But that looks like Meihar to me.
It doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter.
Okay, then.
We are not interested in any of that.
But you're going to go to the U.S., Buffalo, I believe, maybe, to use this bomb?
Where do you get explosive material, though?
Sorry, we are not interested.
We're trying to live our life.
Well, you were trying to live your life, but it sounds like you were going to use a device to take away other lives.
Well, Meyer, what were you going to use your bomb for?
Sorry, sorry for not, but you are not interested in interviews.
Do you support Sharia law for non-Islamic countries, maybe?
Sorry about that.
No.
We don't consider it with my lawyer.
Sorry about that.
Okay, then.
But I mean, these are very serious questions.
Sorry about that.
Are you planning on setting up fireworks tomorrow for Victoria Day?
Sorry, I cannot do any interview.
I'm sorry.
You can't do any interview.
Okay.
But I mean, if you're I take it that's your son and your husband, if they're innocent, why wouldn't they want to speak, ma'am?
I cannot answer anybody, sorry.
Oh, sir, please, I would love to hear you correct the record then, if you could.
I mean, what is what what is inaccurate or not true?
Is is it a mandatory interview?
Pardon me?
Is this a mandatory interview?
Are you forced to do interviews?
Oh, I absolutely not, ma'am.
I'm just interested.
Thank you so much.
Okay, but but your husband is saying it was inaccurate.
I'd love to know what was inaccurate.
I I don't want to report false details.
Okay, you're back in court on June 6th, I believe, right?
Okay, and the truth will come out on June 6th, then?
I don't know how long the investigation takes, but you will find out after the investigation.
Does your son support ISIL or ISIS, anything like that?
No.
No?
Okay, then.
Never?
No.
So how did the border agents...
Yes.
But you are going to keep asking the question, and the question is not related.
So I just can tell that whatever you're asking is no.
How could they get something so wrong as that?
I mean, if it wasn't a bomb, what was it?
I don't know why I needed to.
I'm telling that I have already talked to police.
I have given them any information.
They did the same thing.
Yes.
There is nothing, you know, related to terrorists, nothing related to bombing, nothing.
Okay.
But I'm just, I don't think you're answering my question.
If it wasn't a bomb, what was it?
A radio, a clock?
I mean, like, how did this get confused as an explosive device?
I don't know.
Why?
Because it just was a very childish device.
Nothing like that stuff.
No, this is just something that, you know, really just secures with you.
You know, just something like that.
It was a curiosity.
No, no, no, nothing like that.
Yeah, I don't know how to explain, you know, everything that I explained.
It shows something else in the video.
That's why I'm not interested in any type of interview.
Right.
I don't know, you know, my English is not that much good.
I may give you, you know, I use some words which is not correct.
That's why I don't want to talk about that.
But say I accept your explanation that it was not a bomb, I'm just, I'm just trying to figure out You were kind of young, you know, I was trying to know if I can't explain it better than me Okay.
And my lawyer will explain everything.
I don't want to do any interview.
Okay, then.
But the only thing that I can tell that you're innocent and there was not anything related to bombing or something like that.
Yeah, that looks really, really normal.
They seem really normal.
Accused Rapist's Escape00:07:08
I'm sure glad we caught them before they were radicalized.
I'm so glad it was just a childish thing.
That's what she said, right?
A childish experiment.
A curiosity.
Who amongst us, especially a 47-year-old man and his 18-year-old son, who hasn't had a bit of fun with a kid's chemistry set, you know, making a fake volcano by pouring vinegar into baking soda?
Kids will be kids.
And that's so obviously what's going on here.
At least the judge thinks so.
So our prosecutors and our judges and our police and everyone just send him back home to the neighborhood.
Hey, neighbor!
Can I borrow a cup of flour?
Hey, neighbor!
Can I borrow a liter of ammonium nitrate?
You know, the usual backyard banter in Richmond Hill, Ontario, barbecue season.
But of course.
I mean, a couple years ago, Abdullahi Hassan Sharif rammed pedestrians on the street, rammed police on the street, then got up and attacked the cop directly.
He got out of the car and he attacked him.
He had an ISIS flag in the front seat of his car, an ISIS flag.
How do you even get an ISIS flag in Canada?
That's probably even harder than getting ammonium nitrate, but he did.
And the police, the prosecutors, chose not to charge him with terrorism.
He had the ISIS flag in his car, but they chose not to charge him with terrorism.
Probably because he was, what's that word again?
Just doing child's play.
It was just a curiosity, and he was on the cusp.
So he wasn't really doing anything wrong.
And look at this news I read today from Halifax, Nova Scotia.
Former Halifax taxi driver accused of sexual assault finishes testifying in retrial.
Let me quote a bit.
For nearly eight hours, Basam al-Rawi was cross-examined by Crown Prosecutor Carla Ball regarding an allegation that he had sexually assaulted an intoxicated female in the back of his taxi.
The alleged incident happened in the early morning hours of May 23rd, 2015, before the victim was found partially naked by a police officer.
Now, there has been a crime wave of Muslim cab drivers raping Halifax women.
I mean, here's just a sample from this year alone.
Another Halifax taxi driver charged with sexual assault.
Let me read.
Syed Abul Ghassim Sadat Lavassani Bozor, 74, appeared in Halifax provincial court on Tuesday.
And here's another one.
Like, these are just from this year.
Police have released the name of a 36-year-old Halifax man who was charged with sexual assault in relation to a woman in his taxi last month, Tesfam Kedani Mengus.
I mean, there are so many of these charges, it might be faster to list the Halifax taxi drivers who haven't been charged with raping their customers.
Remember this story?
Halifax police could drop use of Middle Eastern when describing suspects.
And look at the sub-headline there.
We do acknowledge that this is potentially a bad way of doing things, says Constable Amit Parasram.
And then this.
There's no such thing as a Middle Eastern looking person, said Raja Koori, president of the Toronto-based Canadian Arab Institute.
Yeah, well, there is, actually, and there's an accent, and surely the Canadian Arab Institute wants nothing more than to stop this crime wave, right?
I mean, surely they want to stop the crime wave, not just cover it up and stop accurate reporting of it, right?
So back to the crime wave, as the story today shows, a taxi driver's on trial again for rape.
Let me read some.
Al-Rawi told the court through an Arabic translator that the young woman was emotional and intoxicated when she entered his taxi.
Hang on, hang on.
He needs a translator?
Why does he need a translator?
He came to Canada years ago.
He drives the taxi, works with the public.
He was certified, presumably had to pass some sort of basic accreditation with the Halifax Taxi Commission.
Do you have your driver's license?
Can you speak basic English?
You're in Halifax.
And he still needs an Arabic translator.
Let me read some more from the story.
The police officer who found Al-Rawi's parked Honda Civic in Halifax's South End testified that she found an unconscious female passenger in his back seat with her shirt pulled up to her breasts and panties and pants off.
So the allegation is that he was raping an unconscious woman who was passed out drunk.
He was raping her in his taxi.
For the life of me, I can't understand why any woman in Halifax would set foot in a taxi.
The immigration minister doesn't care about you.
The taxi commission doesn't care about you.
The press and the politicians don't care about you.
Why would you take your life and limb in your own hands like that?
Do not take a taxi in Halifax if you're a woman.
Let me read some more.
Al-Rawi told Crown Prosecutor Carla Ball that he felt the investigating officer was persecuting him based on the color of his skin and accent and that he chose to reserve his right to silence during some of the questioning.
The racism card.
I mean, why not?
Justin Trudeau uses it.
It's the official liberal way.
If someone disagrees with you on anything, immigration crime, just call him a racist.
Why wouldn't an accused rapist found by police to have a naked, unconscious girl in the back of his taxi, why wouldn't he play the race car?
Why?
Do you think the media or politicians or the press would call him out for using the race card?
I mean, why not just go the whole way and accuse that unconscious rape victim, herself, of obviously being racist?
I mean, obviously.
Let me read some more.
The court will be back in session on May 30th for closing submissions to Judge Anne-Marie Simmons.
All right, so a white woman judge, probably a liberal.
I didn't even bother to check.
It's so obviously the case these days.
So I think, if I had to guess, I think she just might acquit based on what I've told you.
Muslim man accusing authorities of racism versus some drunk white girl.
I know which side liberal feminists have chosen these days.
I'm pretty sure how I know this will end, but that's not my point today.
My point is this.
We're talking about bail of some accused terrorists in Richmond Hill just living at home.
Now, let me quote from a CBC story about this Halifax rape trial that mentions this pack just in passing.
Al-Rawi, who now lives in Germany, previously told the court his passenger was emotional about running into an ex and at one point kissed him on the cheek after he complimented her.
Yeah, sure, that's what happened.
That Halifax girl kissed the taxi driver and undressed herself to be ravaged by him in his dirty, smelly cab.
That's exactly, I'm sure that would explain why she was found unconscious and naked.
But that one point there, that one point, Al-Rawi, who now lives in Germany, he's in Germany, an accused rapist, was just allowed to leave Canada and just move to Germany, so he's not in custody.
He didn't even have to surrender his passport.
He's just allowed to go home to Germany, just to leave the country.
And we're super sure he'll come back if he's convicted, eh?
So a father-son, accused bombmaking team are set free on bail.
And an accused rapist is not just free on bail.
He was allowed to move to Germany.
Social Media's Political Impact00:15:31
Has anyone ever read our national anthem?
Oh, Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
Is anyone standing on guard?
Any?
Anyone at all?
Stay with us for more.
Hey, welcome back.
Well, as you may know, for the last few weeks, we've had a reporter, Jessica S., embedded in the Tommy Robinson campaign in Northwest England, covering the election for the European Parliament.
Now, the UK wasn't supposed to even be in this election because they voted to Brexit, and that was supposed to happen on March 29th.
But alas, Theresa May, who just announced her resignation, delayed it as best she could.
And so they're still in.
So the election is afoot.
And so interesting candidates are presenting themselves, not just Tommy in Northwest England, but others, including some YouTube personalities, including one called Carl Benjamin and another named Mark Meeken, who we like to know as Count Dankula.
They're quite some characters.
But what's troubling and interesting in the news of our day is that social media companies, Facebook, Twitter, PayPal, have decided to ban or de-platform these people, even as they are acting as formally registered on-the-ballot political candidates.
I can tell you that Tommy Robinson's campaign had their credit card processor, Stripe, simply cut them off in the middle of the campaign.
I can't imagine something more meddlesome in an election by a foreign actor.
Well, joining us now to talk about this, is our friend Alan Bokari.
He's the senior tech correspondent for Breitbart.com.
Hey, Alan, great to see you again.
Welcome back to the show.
Hey, Esther, good to be on.
You know what?
I'm against this sort of deplatforming at any occasion for mere citizens or journalists.
But when someone like Tommy Robinson or Carl Benjamin or a political leader in the United Kingdom named Anne-Marie Waters, we had her on our show.
She's the leader of the For Britain Party.
When these politicians are deplatformed in the middle of an election campaign, how can that be seen as anything other than election meddling?
Yes, election meddling from companies in America in San Francisco, to be precise, are now intervening in the politics of a foreign country about which they may not even be super familiar with.
And the targets of this are, of course, at the moment, right-wing populists like Tommy Robinson and Anne-Marie Waters and Carl Benjamin.
But, you know, that could easily change in the future.
You know, the anti-the political establishment, the elites who insist they're the ones who are destined to rule Western societies, they're just as hostile towards the anti-establishment left as they are towards the anti-establishment right.
So this is really a threat to everyone who doesn't want the flow of information to be controlled by a small set of unaccountable elites, as it was in the pre-internet era when you just had a few cable shows who dominated the discussion.
And, you know, anyone outside the Overton window, the range of acceptable ideas was simply kept out of the public eye.
In the age of the internet, everyone suddenly had access to a new public square.
And that has radically changed politics.
And elites are desperate to stop it to put the genie back in the bottle.
That's so right.
You know, I don't even think it was a year ago that Alex Jones of Infowars was totally depersoned.
And it was so eerie.
It happened all on the same day.
Facebook, Twitter, Apple, Instagram, Pinterest, LinkedIn, of all.
Every single tech company within 24 hours suddenly decided to banish Infowars and not just banish them from doing anything going forward.
Apple, for example, had years worth of historic broadcasts from Alex Jones that were apparently fine at the time.
That entire history was deleted as if, truly, that's the first, that's one of the opening scenes in the book 1984.
Winston's job at the Ministry of Truth was to revise old newspapers to change the past to suit the current politics.
Alex Jones was marginalized.
I mean, he's out there on occasion, but once that precedent was set, they could just slice the salami, go a little bit more, a little bit more, a little bit more.
Tommy Robinson, then Carl Benjamin, now Anne-Marie Waters.
There's no reason at all why they couldn't go after Republicans in America or Wendy Trump himself.
Absolutely.
And Trump was on Alex Jones' show.
For Facebook to just simply, and other tech companies and just get rid of this guy who had millions and millions of followers has a vastly more significant impact on American politics than anything Russia is accused of.
You know, Russia was accused of buying like $100,000 worth of Facebook ads.
It did not really have a big impact on American politics.
Banning someone like Alex Jones does.
Banning someone like Tommy Robinson in the UK does have an impact on their politics as well.
And now we see Anne-Marie Waters and Carl Benjamin, both also UK politicians, one of whom's running in the European elections, placed on Facebook's list of potential hate agents, which Breitbart uncovered last week.
And they're now being monitored.
Anything they say that's even slightly suspect will go into this document and count against them.
So Facebook now has a list of people, some of them politicians, who they're looking into for further bans.
You know, it's incredible.
I have your story in front of me.
Let me read the headline.
Exclusive Facebook hate agents list includes British candidates for European election.
It's one thing to have an enemies list.
It's one thing to be a McCarthyite, you know, accusing everyone of Malafides.
But if Nixon had an enemies list, if Joe McCarthy had an enemies list, at least they were public figures who had some restraints on them, checks and balances.
The courts, voters could kick these people out.
But in the case of Facebook, it's secret.
You only got that information through a leak from inside.
There's no transparency.
There's no rules.
There's no accountability.
And suddenly people wake up and they're just deleted one day and they don't even know what happened.
And it's just like they're a rumor.
They never even existed.
I actually interviewed Carl Benjamin the day before we released that story.
And we both agreed that there's a fundamental mismatch here when you compare Facebook and social media platforms to other types of businesses.
So a landlord who rents out a property to you is not allowed to simply evict you for no reason.
They have to obtain a court order first.
And that's because you've invested time, money, into your property.
A landlord cannot just kick you out for any reason.
Yet Facebook, which in many cases, where in many cases rather, people have digital properties that are as valuable, if not more valuable than physical properties, they can come and take that away for any reason without warning, without a court order.
So it's not something we would accept in any other industry, yet somehow it's the case on social media.
That's a great point.
I mean, Tommy Robinson had built up through years of effort and energy and working on his page and working on his reputation and directing people towards Facebook to build up one million followers as he did.
Companies would pay tens of millions of dollars to have that kind of impact.
And simply to push a button and no appeal, no explanation, just because you're a hate agent and it's probably some 20-something liberal arts social justice warrior with problem glasses in San Francisco who's just made that determination and you've just destroyed not only the financial value, but a political outlet for obviously at least one million people who chose to follow him.
Absolutely.
It's interfering in politics and it's like a gross violation of business ethics and consumer rights.
Again, just go back to the landlord example.
There's this idea going around now, which I think is a very good idea that social media users should be able to take companies to court to get their account reinstated.
But even that, a landlord has to go and get a court order before they evict you.
So really, if we were applying the same standards to social media companies, they wouldn't be able to just ban your account without going through a legal process first.
I'm not sure this situation can go on for much longer.
I don't think consumers or businesses will tolerate it.
That's a good point because, of course, the courts over the sweep of history have realized there's a power imbalance between a landlord who probably has money, probably has a lawyer, and a tenant who might be very poor.
And so the idea that the tenant would have to hire the lawyer, the tenant would have to take steps, figure it out when the tenant, if he or she is evicted, is likely in a crisis now.
I've got to find a place to live.
I don't know what to do.
So they invert it.
And there's some good rationale for that because you don't want to kick someone off out of their home and make them have to take the steps to get back in.
Switch the onus.
I mean, that can swing too far.
But I think we're at that same point.
If you take a political figure, a community figure like Tommy, I'm using Tommy because our viewers understand him.
But Carl Benjamin or some of these other, quote, hate agents, it's the same thing.
It's their entire public reputation.
It's their business, their livelihood.
It's all their friendships.
People wouldn't even know how to find you in many cases.
People wouldn't know how to communicate with you.
There's a lot of young people, young people, I'm 47.
There's a lot of people who only communicate via social media apps.
They don't pick up the phone and dial a phone number anymore.
And if they do, they're relying on the phone number being stored in an app.
You're literally throwing someone in an isolation tank.
It's like they're being exiled, banned from the kingdom.
Absolutely.
In many cases, it's worse than losing a physical property because you're not just losing one thing, as you point out.
You're losing your livelihood.
You're losing your political influence.
You're losing your friend network all at the same time, all at once.
So that's what we're dealing with here.
And these companies have no standards whatsoever in terms of consumer rights or fair business practices.
There are some privacy restraints in them now, but absolutely no restraints in terms of who they can ban for whatever reason.
And just today, actually, we're starting to see businesses, non-partisan businesses, refusing to tolerate this.
CrossFit, the fitness company, has pulled all its business from Facebook over what they describe as arbitrary bans policies that are what they said were totally opaque, and they're absolutely right.
So we now have not even politicians and political figures refusing to tolerate it, but businesses as well.
And I think that's perfectly correct.
Yeah, I saw that.
I mean, Facebook, of course, has 2 billion customers.
I'm glad that one has left, but you need 100 million to leave before they wake up.
I'm reading your article here.
These hate, this hate agents list, this enemies list.
What's so strange is they go back through your history years.
You could have written something on Facebook years ago.
Some social justice warrior discovers it and unpersons you today for something that happened years ago.
It's so, like you say, it's opaque.
There's no rules of justice.
You know, I want to point out that the Star Chamber, which these days has become a synonym for an unfair political court, the Star Chamber at least let you make your case.
And in fact, you had to have a lawyer to go there.
It was some form of a court, even though at the end it became quite a partisan and political court.
But at least there was a process at all.
There's no process.
There's no rules.
These folks are just making it up.
Or if there is a rule book, it changes all the time.
It's not applied uniformly.
And who the hell are these people to apply their private courts anyways to your life?
Absolutely.
And as you say, they have, as we wrote in the article, they have level one, what they call signals that they use to determine if someone is a hate agent or not.
And they're level one, level two, and level three.
And that's based on years.
So if you say something within the last year, that's a level one signal.
Within the last two years, level two signal, three years, level three signal.
I'm actually surprised they don't extend it further.
They stop at three years.
That's at least something.
But it's no surprise that many people I know, many political figures I know, have taken to deleting their tweet history past a few months.
Because as you say, people will go back.
They will try and dredge up old comments.
And they'll use that to deplatform you.
But here's the thing.
Even if you delete your post history, now the social media companies are saying, well, we're going to ban you for off-platform activity as well.
It's not just activity you do on Twitter or activity on Facebook.
If you insult someone on a TV network or use hate speech to rally so-called hate speech, we might ban you for that as well.
So they're not just regulating your behavior on Facebook.
They're going to regulate your behavior everywhere, everywhere.
Anything you do in public or even in private that becomes public, they're going to regulate in Canada against you.
Yeah.
You know, and again, I referred to Orwell's 1984, which was quite prophetic in that the telescreens, as I think they call TVs in that book, you watched it, but it watched you.
It was listening to you.
was spying on you in your home and it was on all the time.
How is that any different from Amazon Echo or any smartphone or smart TV that's on all the time listening, listening?
I tell you, it's all coming true.
Last question for you, Alam.
You and I have been talking about these problems actually for years now.
And I think you and I are agreed and maybe some of our viewers too and others are waking up to it.
But I think the only man who could do something about it, the president of the United States, who's a huge social media user, so far has not done a thing.
And it's just a couple years till his re-election and I think he's going to be killed by these folks.
If you can take out Alex Jones today, Tommy Robinson the next day, and Marie Waters today after that, why couldn't you take out Donald Trump?
And what's he going to do if he loses?
And what's he going to do about it?
Is Donald Trump actually ever going to wake up to this while he can?
Well, I noticed that yesterday, Ivanka Trump, the president's liberal daughter who works in the White House now, won an award from the Internet Association, which is ironically an Internet Freedom Award from the Internet Association.
Now, the Internet Association is a DC lobbying group set up by Google, Facebook, and Microsoft and all the big tech companies.
So it's very, very troubling that members of the president's family are getting so-called internet freedom awards from the very people who are destroying internet freedom on a daily basis.
Sunday Night in Manchester00:04:44
As you say, Donald Trump will not win in 2020 if he doesn't solve the problem of social media bias.
He has mentioned it many, many times.
He's focusing on it a lot more.
The White House launched a reporting system to gather data on bans.
So they are aware of the problem.
What they're going to do about it is another question.
It's possible that us waiting for the right moment or working out what to do.
It is a legitimately complicated issue.
But one thing the executive could do tomorrow is simply withdraw federal contracts from any tech giant that doesn't respect the First Amendment.
They could do that tomorrow.
Or any tech giant that doesn't allow users an ability to appeal banning decisions via a clear, transparent process.
They could use federal contracts in that manner, but they haven't yet.
And I think time is running out for Donald Trump.
And also time is running out for everyone else.
We are sleepwalking into totalitarianism here.
As I said, we're now in a situation that if you don't follow the rules of these companies to the letter, not just on their platform, but in all of your public life and maybe even your private life as well, if you don't follow their rules of behavior, your livelihood will be destroyed.
You won't be able to use credit cards.
You won't be able to have a voice in the public square.
If we don't address that, we will arrive in a sort of this technological dystopia where all of our behavior is governed by a few God-kings in Silicon Valley.
Yeah, that's terrifying.
Well, Alan, great to talk with you, even though it's an upsetting story.
Well, I'll see if it made a difference in Tommy Robinson's campaign.
I'll be in Manchester on Sunday night when his results are released.
And if he loses just by a few percent, I wonder if that could be ascribed to Facebook taking away a 1 million person page from him.
I don't know how it possibly could not.
We'll see if that was enough to stop him.
Alan, great to see you again.
Thanks for your time.
Thank you, Ezra.
All right.
Stay with us.
I'll tell you a little bit more about my trip to Manchester in a moment.
Hey, welcome back on my monologue yesterday about Trudeau's digital charter and the media bailout.
Henry writes, Funny how they keep repeating they have to fight disinformation, yet they never quantify what disinformation they're fighting.
Canada has never been in more danger.
They don't quantify it and they don't qualify and they don't explain it.
It's just a catch-all for things they don't like.
Al writes, all this begs the question, who will police the thought police?
Yeah, and who will police the police of the thought police?
How about we just don't have thought police?
On my interview with James O'Keefe, John writes, It's shocking how much the Rebel and Project Veritas have to pay for legal fees.
I'm glad we are winning all the lawsuits, but it's such a burden.
Here's hoping to the end of the perpetually offended crybabies.
Yeah, I mean, you can see our financial disclosure.
I don't know if you've ever gone there.
If you go to the rebel.media/slash trust, once a year we publish our expenses that we crowdfund.
And I'm going from memory here, but last year we spent $350,000 on lawyers.
And it sounds like James O'Keefe spends more than a million.
So, I mean, obviously, we win most of them, but it's the process that's the punishment.
So, if you're out $350,000, but you won too many more of those victories and were doomed, wouldn't you agree?
All right, folks, that's my show for today, and that brings us to the close of the week.
I should tell you what I'm doing on Sunday.
On Saturday night, I'm flying to Manchester in the United Kingdom, and I'll be there on Sunday.
So, I'm flying overnight.
On Sunday, I'll be in Manchester when the results of Tommy Robinson's election are announced.
And we will be having a three-hour live-streamed show, an election night special from the UK.
The election was yesterday, but the results won't be coming out until Sunday night.
I don't know.
That's just how they do it over there.
So, if you're curious, I mean, not all our viewers care about Tommy Robinson.
Fair enough.
You don't have to.
But for those who do, join me and Jessica S., our student journalist, and we'll be doing a three-hour election night special from the UK on Sunday night.
So, I hope you join us there.
And I will be doing my Monday monologue from the UK as well.
I'll be back on Tuesday.
All right, folks, that's it.
Until next time, we'll see you on Sunday night.
That live stream show, by the way, starts at 9 p.m. Manchester Time, which is 4 p.m. in Toronto, 2 p.m. in Calgary, 1 p.m. in BC.
So, it'll be sort of afternoon-ish here in Canada, even though it's at night there in the UK.
All right, folks, till then, keep fighting for freedom.