Jessica Swietoniowski and Keean Bexte expose UK police failures during Tommy Robinson’s European Parliament rallies, where 100 protesters violently attacked supporters without arrests, while media ignored the bias. Bexte reveals CBC’s Snapchat push—sexualized, radical content targeting youth—halted briefly after his report but warns of deeper systemic issues. Meanwhile, Ottawa’s Afghanistan War Memorial, unveiled May 13th but hidden until a Facebook post, mirrors government neglect of veterans amid political controversies like the $50K raise for General Vance. Their critiques underscore media double standards and institutional betrayals ahead of Canada’s election. [Automatically generated summary]
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, ladies and gentlemen, and the rest of you, in which we look back at some of the very best commentaries of the week by your favorite Rebels.
I'm your host, David Menzies.
Well, voting is already underway in the UK, and we'll find out if our favorite dark horse, Tommy Robinson, will actually capture a seat in the European Parliament in the days ahead.
Jessica Swetonyowski has been covering the Tommy campaign and she has all the latest news.
And if you're of a certain age, rather, you no doubt remember a day when the CBC used to produce youth-orientated programming that was clean and wholesome.
Well, those days would appear to be gone.
Kian Bexti will discuss how the CBC is now pursuing a youth-focused social media strategy that is vulgar, grotesque, and downright disturbing.
And finally, letters, we get your letters, we get them every minute of every day.
And I'll share some of your responses regarding my commentary about a war memorial in Ottawa that was recently dedicated to those Canadians who fell in the Afghanistan war.
Just one hitch, however, the True Hill Liberals apparently don't want any Canadians to see it.
Those are your rebels.
now let's round em up...
3 i am justin spentyofsky with the rebel 3 Here in the UK, Tommy Robinson's campaign heads to Olden, which is a heavily Muslim populated area.
The protesters are behind us.
The police did have to push them back.
They started with throwing eggs and all the rest of them going into the bins and going into the trash bin, picking up bottles and throwing it to the sides.
The protesters came, probably around a hundred of them.
They started on one side, police did block them, and they actually came around the street to another corner, all running towards the rally, throwing eggs, throwing bottles that they're finding in bins lying around in front of the houses.
I even saw them throw some bricks at Tommy Robinson's crowd.
We here at the Rebel are all about freedom of speech and what reasonable person would be against that anyway.
And it's healthy for a democracy to have vigorous debates on the issues of the day, but throwing rocks, throwing bottles, all with the intent to injure those who you disagree with.
Sorry, that's not crossing the line.
That's obliterating the line when it comes to discourse, civility, and yes, even abiding by the law of the land.
And joining me now with more on the Tommy Robinson election campaign is our very own Jessica Swetoniovsky.
Hey, Jessica, welcome to Rebel Roundup, and I'm sorry if I massacred the pronunciation of your surname yet again.
No worries.
It was as good as it'll be, I think.
Thank you so much for your tolerance.
Jessica, you've been producing absolutely superb videos as you cover the Tommy Robinson election campaign.
This particular video I was speaking about alone garnered more than half a million views.
But Jessica, when the camera doesn't lie, of course, and we saw a mob of thugs throwing rocks and bottles right in front of police officers.
And I didn't see a single arrest, which is kind of odd given that UK police will actually arrest people these days for hurting somebody's feelings online.
So please tell us, what gives here?
I wish I knew.
I also personally, nobody here understands it because this mob was actually led by police.
The police walked them over a mile to the rally because I believe there was a quick, there may have been a location change.
So I think that that is why the police actually had to lead them to the correct spot.
So they were actually led to the rally.
There was some good space in between.
There was like, you know, two lines of police officers, but it was kind of strange because the police officers were pushing back Tommy's crowd and letting the big, the group of thugs actually get closer and closer over time.
At one point, the group of thugs there, they realized they didn't have enough access to the crowd there.
So they actually went around the street.
They went and tried to find another entrance to get closer to the crowd as well.
And police just stood around.
There was a big brick that fell, that crashed on the floor just a few feet away from me and it completely shattered.
And I just, when I saw that, like, I just imagined if that was somebody's head, if that was my head, if that was a kid's head, there was children, there were families there.
And there were no arrests.
I don't understand it why there are no arrests.
I really, I wish I knew, but the police really didn't do anything.
Well, Jessica, thank goodness that brick didn't hurt you.
I'm going to be a bit of a mind reader because I've run into these situations personally myself.
And you say to the police officer, hey, that guy is breaking the law.
Are you going to arrest him?
And the stamped answer is, well, you know, tensions are very high right now.
You know, this mob is very potentially violent.
And if we arrest somebody breaking the law, that might incite them to actually do an all-out riot.
But I'm sorry.
I say, look, it's the criminal act that you should be cracking down on.
You shouldn't be turning a blind eye to it.
And I just think it's terrible policing.
And that makes me segue into another question.
One of your other videos, Jessica, and I thought this was egregious.
You went over to interview a more peaceful anti-Tommy protest.
And a policewoman said, no, no, no, you've got to stand something like 30 meters away and I guess yell your questions.
But treating you like you were part of an organization that was against them when indeed you're there as a member of the press trying to get both sides of the story.
What was her problem in giving you access?
Yeah, I really, I didn't understand it.
Actually, it's kind of funny because in the video, you even see my face.
It looks a little confused because I didn't understand what she meant.
She was telling me I can talk to the protesters, but just from several meters away where I would have to, like you said, I would have to yell my question.
So I kind of was kind of confused.
I was like, wait, are you joking?
Like, is this a joke?
We're just like some banter going on.
But no, she was serious.
She said, yeah, you can talk to them, but you have to talk to them from that far away, which of course I'm not going to because I'm not going to yell my question to a group of people and then have them yell back.
Like, of course, that's not a good idea.
I think that would probably escalate the situation more if I was yelling at the crowd of people instead of just, you know, civilly just speaking one-on-one to them, just having a normal conversation.
But yeah, you can even see I looked very confused in that video because I didn't understand what the issue was with me going over to talk to them.
No, I think it's appalling overreach.
I mean, I know our rebel media logo has a little stylized megahorn.
Who knew we were actually supposed to pack one of those to do interviews in the UK?
But the other thing, speaking of press coverage, Jessica, have you noticed, I mean, when the media do show up, and it doesn't look like they are in great numbers at least, have you detected any kind of a spin?
I say that because, you know, two weeks ago when Ezra was over across the pond covering the latest Tommy trial, there was a member of the media that ratted out Ezra, so to speak, although there was nothing to rat out.
He was complaining to the judge that Ezra was live tweeting, which Ezra was allowed to do.
And I thought, my goodness, first of all, why would you be a tattletale on a non-crime?
And secondly, why aren't you guys live tweeting?
This is news.
So can you give us an idea of what the mainstream media actions have been in terms of the Tommy campaign, Jessica?
Well, I mean, it's the most obvious situation was after that riot.
And the papers the next day, all the headlines were, you know, clashes at Tommy Robinson campaign.
And it was all very neutral and obviously trying to spin it as there was both sides to blame, which that wasn't the case because I didn't see any mainstream media cameras there.
I didn't see people from the media.
It was me.
There was a few other cameramen that I know are working with Tommy that were there getting in right to the front of the middle of the riot there.
But I didn't see anybody else.
And all I saw was the headlines the next day making it sound like there was just trouble at a sorry at a rally.
But that wasn't what it was.
It was an obvious planned attack.
It was an obvious planned attack.
And anyone can see that.
And we noticed there was Halifax Pakistanis, those kind of t-shirts that said Halifax.
So these are people that actually traveled.
There was definitely information there.
I'm sure there was pages online that you can find these events being planned.
This was a planned attack.
This was not just some clash that happened at a protest and a rally.
That's not what happened at all.
You know, I find that incredible, that line, both sides the blame, yeah, because you know that Tommy supporter, he was a bit of a dummy standing there that impeded the flight path of a brick that just happened to randomly be flying by.
Just amazing.
You know, Jessica, tell me, and speaking of the Tommy supporters, you've been there for several days now.
I'm sure you've gotten to know many of them and you've interacted with many of them, certainly.
Can you give our audience an idea of who these people are and what is the primary thing that is eliciting their support for Tommy in the first place?
Well, first of all, these are really, they're good people.
They're just honest, hardworking people that they, it's, you know, like the media portrays them as like a like a fringe racist group or something.
And it's not fringe.
There's hundreds of people at every single rally.
And I know he has more supporters that just don't show up because they're scared to show their support publicly.
But talking to people, there's smiles everywhere.
The energy in every event of his has been so positive and inspiring.
It's been so inspiring.
And I know the number one reason that they support Tommy is because they legitimately fear where their country is going for the next generation.
They're worried about their children.
And this is an honest fear that they're having.
It's not something, it's not Islamophobia.
It's not something that they're building up in their head.
These are actual issues that are happening in small towns with the grooming gangs.
And Tommy has even met parents of these child victims.
And this is a real fear.
These aren't, they're not crazy people that are making up a problem in their head.
They just aren't, they're afraid of where it's going.
And so they're actually trying to make a stand and speaking up for these uncomfortable truths that most people don't want to talk about, especially in the Muslim community.
People, it's uncomfortable.
You don't want to mention that.
Nobody wants to mention that.
It's become so stigmatized.
But they have, but these are amazing people that actually have the courage to show up to support him, to talk.
I've talked to a lot of them and they're telling me how they're trying to encourage everybody to vote for Tommy and to listen to what he says.
Don't Google him.
Go and find a video of his and listen to what he says because when you Google him, you get the mainstream media spin.
But yeah, like these are positive people.
And it's just funny, the comparison, the contrast between Tommy's side.
And then when I go over and just take a look at the opposing, the protesters, these protesters look just so miserable.
So miserable and angry and just sad.
And I remember even one of the protesters the other day had a dog and I was even looking at this dog and even the dog looks sad.
It's just like such a negative energy on that side.
And it's like, I don't know, they're just so full of guilt.
And it's definitely like a deep-rooted thing that they have going on.
But I personally don't understand it because Tommy's side is, they are living through problems and they're like what's happening to these small towns is depressing.
It's depressing and it's scary, but they're still staying positive because they feel like they have hope, especially with Tommy.
They feel like they have hope.
Targeted Clickbait00:10:08
And Jessica, you know, great coverage.
Like I said, we have to wrap it here.
One very quick exit question, if you could answer very quickly.
In the days ahead, the ballots are going to be counted.
From what you're feeling, from what you're seeing over there, does Tommy actually have a chance of pulling off an incredible victory here?
I think he definitely has a chance.
I think he has a chance.
I don't want to say too much because, you know, who knows what's going to happen.
It all kind of depends on voter turnout.
It seems like Tommy's rallies and campaigns have been pretty big and pretty lively.
And so yeah, I think he has a chance.
Fantastic.
Well, who knows?
I mean, nobody a few years ago counted Donald Trump to even win the Republican nomination.
So things can happen.
Jessica, wonderful coverage.
Please stay safe, my friend.
And we look forward in the days ahead to see what the results of this campaign are.
Thank you so much for weighing in.
Yeah, no problem.
Thanks so much.
Fantastic.
And that was Jessica Swedenowski over in the UK.
Keep it here, folks.
More of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
Do you know what Snapchat is?
If you're between the ages of 13 and 24, I'm sure you do.
About 90% of the population uses the app about 25 times a day.
The usage drops off dramatically by the age of 34.
So for those of you who don't know what it is, it's an instant photo sharing tool that has been widely popular among millennials and Generation Z. Photo sharing is just one part of the platform, though.
A large component of the company's ad revenue comes from an interactive tabloid section.
Can you guess which state broadcaster leapt at the opportunity to weaponize this tool against our children?
You got it.
It's the CBC.
Now, the CBC is not using Snapchat like it uses Twitter or Facebook, where there are real critical adults scrutinizing their state-funded work.
The CBC is using Snapchat to speak directly to kids like a predator would if he was in a kid's home while the parents weren't there.
Uncensored, raw degeneracy.
They're not taking to Snapchat to tell 13 to 18 year olds the latest news about Mark Norman or SNC Lavalin.
No, they are boldly advertising the benefits of smoking narcotics before having sexual intercourse.
They are fetishizing kinky disabled people.
I'm not exaggerating.
I mean this literally.
The CBC urgently and repeatedly serves the 13-year-old boys of Canada clickbait to tell them how admirable it is to watch their future girlfriend run off and have sex with other men.
Feminism.
It'll get you every single time.
Gee, when I think back to the good old days regarding the CBC and programs that were targeted at kids, I think of the friendly giant and the Forest Rangers and Mr. Dress Up.
No, not the current Mr. Dressup in Ottawa pretending to run the country, but rather the dearly departed Ernie Coombs.
Well, if Coombs and company could only see how the CBC is interacting with kids today, they would most certainly be shocked and appalled.
Indeed, to paraphrase a line from another giant in the kids' entertainment business, it's a brutal day in the neighborhood.
And joining me now with more on the CBC's weird and disturbing social media outreach that targets young people is our ever-roving reporter, Kian Bexti.
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, Kian.
Thanks for having me, David.
Always a pleasure.
Now, Kian, the examples you gave were appalling, especially given the intended audience.
But what is the unspoken strategy here when it comes to our state broadcaster reimagining itself as a taxpayer-funded Tinder?
Taxpayer-funded Tinder, that's good.
They're trying to indoctrinate kids, and I don't think it's a new strategy for them.
The new part of it is the degeneracy.
They always have tried to indoctrinate children.
I remember watching the CBC myself as a kid.
They had CBC kids, and it was fun, light-hearted children's programming.
But this is not children's programming.
This is content about sex, drugs, and sex while on drugs, pedophiles, prostitutes, and everything in between.
It's disgusting.
It's awful.
And it's targeted at our kids.
It's targeted only on a platform where children are present and watching.
This platform, Snapchat, is between 90% of the base, the user base, is ages 13 to 24.
And I think that skews a little bit to the middle.
So most of the users, I think, are around the age of 18, 19, maybe 17.
And the CBC knows this.
They're not stupid.
They look at the metrics.
They know who they're pushing this to.
They don't push this kind of content on Twitter where there's boomers watching, where there's taxpayers watching, where there's critical people watching.
They push it where there's kids watching, where they'll get away with it, like a predator in a house when the parents aren't watching.
Yeah, but you know, here's the thing, Kian, and I agree with what you're saying.
There is indoctrination going on there, and we know the CBC has a long history of trying to indoctrinate people.
But what I'm struggling with here is that I can imagine them indoctrinating kids when it comes to man-made climate change or the SNC Lavalin affair.
Things about the environment, about politics, about what's in the news.
But the examples you gave, it was very sexual in nature.
It was stuff that, I mean, I think most Canadians would feel uncomfortable in terms of discussing the topics with the audience as low as 13 years of age.
I mean, you're still a minor.
That's what I'm trying to get at, Kian.
Like, why go off the political reservation and into the sexual reservation with all this kind of indoctrination that they're doing right now?
I can't answer that, David.
I just, it boggles my mind why they think this is appropriate.
And I don't understand what the strategy is.
Maybe it's more clickable to them, and that's all they care about.
They don't care about corrupting Canadian youth.
All they want is to share content that they'll click on, that they know that they'll be, you know, ooh, you know, the CBC's talking about hot disabled people.
I got to click on that.
And then they, you know, delve into the world of kinky BDSM porn with paraplegics.
Like, it's mind-boggling.
I don't have the answer to why they want to do this.
I'm sure our viewers have some explanation for it.
But the CBC is not going to have one, that's for sure.
One thing I will note, though, is since this story came out, they have not published a single story on Snapchat.
Huh, interesting.
So they must be getting some blowback.
But I don't know, Kiana.
I doubt there's anything in the CBC mandate or mission statement, whatever their proviso is for their reason for existing in the first place that gives them the green light to do this sort of thing.
And certainly those examples you just gave, we ran in the clip.
What we didn't run in the clip, and I urge our viewers to go and watch your commentary in full.
You mentioned there was like weird nature porn and bald eagles embracing third wave feminism.
Kean, please tell us you're exaggerating here.
No, I'm not.
Oh, God, I'm not.
So the story was that there was a bald eagle, a female and a male, and they had offspring, as animals typically do in the wild.
Everything was fine.
But then the CBC noted that another male came along and the mother started engaging with the other male as well.
And the other male came in and started dealing with and raising the offspring of the other father while the father looked on.
He was basically being cocked.
And the CBC used this as an example of, you know, it's in nature.
So it's, you know, it's great.
Thumbs up, right?
Well, I think the CBC would be a little bit disturbed if I told them other things that are happening in nature.
It's not a very good example to lead into, but they took that example and then started talking about, you know, well, if they do it, why can't humans do it?
And then it moves into living with your partner's lover and letting your partner screw around with other people and how healthy it is and how moral it is.
They actually called it moral.
They said, this is totally moral.
There's nothing wrong with this at all.
How could anything be wrong with this?
It's moral.
And that's the line, I think, they're blatantly lying.
Or their morals are just so backwards that they really are not, they don't qualify as being competent enough to be our state broadcaster at this point anymore.
Because if that's their moral compass, how can we trust them on anything?
Yeah, it's amazing.
I mean, and they jump to conclusions, obviously.
I mean, three eagles nesting together.
Obviously, it's driven by some desire for an orgy.
I mean, hey, Kian, I know the old adage goes, birds of a feather flock together.
I think the CBC is using another rough word here.
And I dare not say that on the air.
But, you know, at the end of the day, Kian, what is egregious is that, listen, if you're a private company, assuming that you're operating within the proviso of pornography laws as it pertains to minors,
CBC Funding Controversy00:05:33
which nobody supports except pedophiles, and we like to have those guys put away, the idea of this being a state broadcaster being funded by our money doing this, like I said, I just find that even more egregious than the usual things they get upset about when it comes to the CBC.
Yeah, I mean, they could be sharing with Canadian youth the stories that are important in the day.
They could be talking about SNC Lavelle and from whatever their corrupted angle is.
They could be talking about Mark Norman.
They're not doing that.
They're choosing to bring kids into the news world with clickbaity porn.
That's what they've decided is fit for Canada in the future.
And I'm disappointed.
I've always been disappointed in the CBC, so I don't know what's new, though.
Yeah, no, indeed, if I was the father of a 13-year-old girl and I look at the content here, which, as you said, sex, drugs, and polygamy, I would be absolutely out of my mind that A, I'm funding it, and B, you know, my daughter would be exposed to this.
But Kian, I want to tell you, I want to ask you about something.
Last week, a poll came out, and from Nanos Research, it said that 33% of respondents want CBC funding maintained, 46% want funding increased, and only 17% want to see funding cuts at the CBC.
Do you buy those numbers, Kian?
That doesn't reflect what I've seen, the people that I've talked to.
Perhaps I'm a little bit biased in the selection of people that I'm talking to.
I'm talking to political conservatives a lot of the time.
But even in Alberta, the general populace, a lot of them, they don't really think about the CBC as being state-funded in the first place.
If you said, do you know how much government money goes to the CBC, they might think for the first time maybe since elementary school, oh, yeah, the CBC, it is funded by taxpayers' dollars, isn't it?
It's not something that they think about because the CBC, they don't lead into everything saying, we're obviously biased because our paychecks come from Justin Trudeau.
They don't tell anyone that.
They don't advertise that fact.
So a lot of Canadians, I don't think, really know how the CBC exists, why it existed 60 years ago, and how that has changed up until today to make them not really relevant anymore.
But if every Canadian knew how the CBC is funded, how much they are funded, maybe they'll start to question it.
But I have doubts that that poll really spoke to a bunch of informed people.
Oh, indeed, Kian, and it should be noted that the group that funded that Nanos research was Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, which of course is a partisan group that supports the CBC.
So I'd really love to see the methodology they use to get those kind of numbers.
Because, you know, we recently went out to do streeters at Young and Dundas, and out of over 30 people we spoke to, only one said, yeah, maintaining or increasing funding was a good thing.
So certainly from our Men on the Street survey, these numbers don't drive.
But I guess to wrap it up, Kian, given that you've exposed this, do you, and you alluded to some blowback they are getting, do you see them changing this or this mandate, this philosophy?
Or are parents going to have to follow your instructions of how to delete Snapchat, which seems to be quite an arduous process, let me tell you.
They don't want you to go once you're in there.
So what are your thoughts on that, my friend?
Well, first off, I'm indifferent to whether or not they changed their tune.
I think that everyone should make their household a CBC-free household.
Snapchat, Twitter, Facebook, television.
Call your service provider and have them black out channel four or whatever it is.
But like I said, they haven't published these stories anymore since I published this my story on Wednesday, I think it was Wednesday.
So it's been a while and they normally pump out content every 24 hours, sometimes twice in a 24-hour cycle.
So maybe we made some progress here.
I don't know.
I highly doubt they changed their tune.
They're probably just going to regather themselves and maybe lay off the polygamy porn for a while.
But, you know, regardless, people should be flicking off the CBC.
Well, Kian, we're going to have to wrap it there.
If indeed this was your commentary that made them at least lay low for a while or rethink this entirely, congratulations on another victory on your behalf.
And thank you so much for weighing in on this really disturbing story.
Thanks for having me, David.
You got it.
And that was our roving reporter, Kian Bexty, somewhere in Saskatchewan, I believe, right now.
Trudeau Liberals' War Memorial Mystery00:05:25
Keep it here.
more of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
Hey folks did you hear the news?
A brand new war memorial was unveiled in Ottawa last week.
Oh, you didn't know?
Hey, don't feel bad.
I didn't hear about this thing either, and I'm a bit of a news junkie.
In fact, almost nobody heard about this new war memorial because, incredibly, there wasn't even a press release issued by Justin Trudeau's liberals.
That's weird.
Luckily, David Puglies of Post Media was tipped off about the almost secret unveiling and was able to pen a story in the National Post.
Otherwise, the Afghanistan War Memorial might merely exist as some sort of Canadian urban legend.
Still, this story remains wrapped in mystery.
Nevertheless, as the Post notes, the Canadian forces confirmed last Thursday evening on Facebook that it had held a dedication service at the new Afghanistan Memorial Hall at the National Defense Headquarters in Ottawa.
Yet the event had actually occurred three days earlier on May the 13th.
The Facebook posting notes that it had been attended by senior Canadian military leadership and DND management.
But why no formal announcement?
And why was there a 72-hour delay in making this announcement?
Those questions remain unanswered as there still has been no official government explanation to date.
Again, how weird is that?
Wow, that's one hell of a war memorial, eh?
Unveiled in near secrecy, hardly publicized, closed to the public.
Oh, and if you are a family member of one of the fallen well, you will be accommodated, which is to say, as long as you put your request in writing in advance of your visit, they'll let you in to see it for a few minutes.
Don't overstay your welcome, though, right?
What a disgrace yet again when it comes to how the Trudeau liberals deal with the Veterans Affairs file.
In any event, here's what some of you had to say about the latest military PR debacle, courtesy of the Justin Trudeau Liberals.
BC writes, PM didn't want a memorial for those who killed his friends.
Well, you know, there is indeed some truth to that statement because I think the unspoken strategy at play here is this.
The war in Afghanistan was a war by Western nations against a Muslim-majority country, even though Muslims in Afghanistan were the ones being brutalized by the likes of al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
But Justin Trudeau just can't be seen as, oh, I don't know, glorifying such a war to his rapidly growing contingency of Islamists.
Too bad we don't have someone in Ottawa that would embrace the Arnold Schwarzenegger method of dealing with terrorists.
True lie style.
you're fired.
Cody Chloroform writes, Trudeau can't wait to cut the ribbon on the new ISIS Omar Khadar library next month.
Indeed, that kind of edifice would be unveiled with much pomp and circumstance and lots of cash all around for a murderous little Omar, of course.
Todd Smith writes, General Vance should be ashamed with this.
Ah, yes, General Vance, the coward who threw Vice Admiral Mark Norman under the sub because Norman acted ethically and because Trudeau is Trudeau and Canada under his watch is resembling the bizarro Superman world.
Vance received a $50,000 raise for being a backstabber.
Gee, General Vance, what reward will you be getting for dissing Afghanistan war vets?
Snomatic writes, petition.
Canadians need to know about Trudeau's embarrassment for our fallen and all thy sons command.
Oh, Snomatic, all thy sons command?
That's like so 2014.
Didn't you get the man splaying in memo from the main man himself?
We like to say people kind, not necessarily mankind, because it's more inclusive.
And WhoTube writes, disgusting, kick the bum out.
Well, WhoTube, there are exactly 150 days to go until election night.
That's only like 3,600 hours.
And I think I speak for millions of Canadians when I say, I just can't wait.
I can't believe it.
I couldn't be more excited.
I wish you were here now, you know.
This waiting is like making me mental.
What time is it now?
Oh, 204.
This is a joke.
Well, that wraps up another edition of Rebel Roundup.
Thanks so much for joining us.
See you next week.
And hey, folks, never forget, without risk, there can be no glory.