Lisa Raitt, Canada’s Conservative deputy leader, reversed course on climate skepticism after left-wing backlash, apologizing for past tweets—including one debunking Trudeau’s extreme-weather claims—and now endorsing emissions cuts, sparking outrage among conservatives like Ezra Levant. Meanwhile, Hong Kong protesters defy China’s extradition bill, risking autonomy and economic stability, as Xi Jinping tightens control; Levant urges global support while critics warn of corporate censorship, like Comcast targeting conservative creators. The episode reveals how pressure reshapes policy, from climate to free speech, exposing deeper ideological fractures. [Automatically generated summary]
Today's podcast is about Lisa Raitt, the deputy leader and justice critic of the opposition conservatives, second only to Andrew Scheer.
And over the weekend, she did something just incredible.
She collapsed on Twitter saying essentially, oh, you know what?
I will never criticize the theory of man-made global warming again.
I'm so sorry I ever did.
And don't bug me anymore, okay?
Bug someone else.
That's barely a paraphrase there.
And the reaction to that and the demoralizing effect of that is incredible.
I'll take you through it in a moment.
Before I do, please consider becoming a premium subscriber of The Rebel.
That lets you see all these things in video form, gives you access to other shows like David Menzies and Sheila Gunread.
And of course, we get $8 a month.
And we use that money to build things here at The Rebel.
You can get your membership at the Rebel.media slash shows.
All right, without further ado, here's the podcast of Lisa Raitt collapsing.
Tonight, the Federal Conservative Party panics and bows to a left-wing mob, this time on global warming.
It's June 10th, 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.
But why not publish them?
It's because it's my bloody right to do so.
I saw the most curious tweet on Saturday morning.
It's by Lisa Raitt, the deputy leader of the Conservative Party and also the party's justice critic.
So number two in the party after Andrew Scheer.
I don't follow Lisa Raitt on Twitter, so I didn't come across it myself, but rather I came across it because it was retweeted and republished and replied to by countless liberals.
Here, let me read it to you to show you why.
Well, I've learned my lesson in tweeting anything about climate change.
I'm going to be transparent and let you know I'm deleting the earlier tweets.
I'm not the one to fight with on this, because like most, I believe that emissions cause climate change, and we should reduce emissions.
And I don't know if you can see those little numbers at the bottom there.
1.3,000 people replied to it.
A couple hundred people retweeted it.
That's republishing it.
And just under 2,000 people liked it.
So pretty busy tweet.
And looking at who liked it and who replied to it and what they said is most illuminating.
Here's one of the first replies, hundreds of likes on this reply.
It's by Peggy, whose biography includes the motto, I stand with Trudeau.
And Peggy says, Lisa, you and your leader are really misguided if you think relying on fossil fuels and creating a national energy corridor will win you votes.
It will in Alberta.
Yuck.
The rest of us want real progress on climate change, especially the young.
And Peggy would know because she looks like a spring chicken.
Now, here's someone who appears to be a conservative.
She's worried now.
She doesn't know what to make of Lisa Raitt's public self-abnegation, this self-denunciation.
Here's what she said.
But you'll repeal the carbon tax if the Conservative Party of Canada takes government in October.
Yes, as promised, yes.
To be clear, my vote will depend on that.
It's a deal-breaker.
John Groves, a conservative citizen pundit, had a few replies of his own.
He said, emissions went down under your government, he said to Lisa Raitt.
They've gone up under Trudeau's government.
The numbers back it up.
McKenna lies about this daily.
Your party doesn't even know how to call her on that lie or point out your performance.
Are really bad at playing this game, stop.
And he said, Seriously, why on earth do you guys think you can play this game?
The climate change game is a game invented by liberals.
They make the rules, they control the rules, they change the rules whenever they want, and they own the referees.
It's a rigged game.
Stop playing.
I'm sympathetic to that.
Here's Daryl King, another active citizen pundit who's conservative.
He says, Question isn't whether climate changes or even if humanity has some minor role in such changes.
The question is, are we going to stand meekly by while climate socialism is imposed on free people, knowing it will have zero effect on climate and cause great harm to liberty and property?
That's a great point right there.
But here's my favorite.
Actually, my least favorite.
And it's by the new leader of the Liberal Party of the province of New Brunswick.
I didn't know he was a leader until I saw this tweet.
You'll remember who I'm talking about, Kevin Vickers.
He was the brave sergeant-at-arms in the House of Commons that fateful day five years ago when an ISIS terrorist attacked Parliament Hill in a blaze of gunfire, murdered Constable, excuse me, Corporal Nathan Cirillo.
Vickers, as you may recall, went to get his own handgun to engage the terrorists.
He was later appointed as ambassador to Ireland.
And that gig is over, so he came back to Canada.
And in what I would call a step down, a disappointing career move, that great Kevin Vickers has decided to become a liberal politician, the leader of the New Brunswick liberals.
That is disappointing to me at least.
Why do nonpartisan civil servants always turn out to be political lefties?
Who knows?
Maybe one day he'll be Premier of New Brunswick, and maybe he'll be a great Premier.
I don't know.
But for now, I just look at him as a guy who should have retired at the top of his game, hero of the terrorist attack, tour duty as an ambassador to a great country.
So gross how all these non-partisan civil servants always earn liberals underneath it.
Anyways, what a weird note to end his career on.
But anyways, look at what he's doing now.
Here's what he said as the liberal leader.
He said, proud of you, Lisa.
Je sui fière pas vous lisa.
Great courage, leadership.
This is not about us.
It is about our children and grandchildren.
Proud of you?
When your partisan opponents are proud of you, here's a little tip.
They're not actually proud of you.
They want you to lose.
What they really are is delighted that you're undoing yourself.
You're embarrassing yourself so they don't have to do the heavy lifting.
They're happy to see you confess to things they'd probably never be able to credibly accuse you of on their own.
It's a version of when Gerald Butts tweeted about how upset he was during the Ontario Provincial Tory leadership race a year and a half ago, when Doug Ford and then all the other leadership candidates came out against the carbon tax, throwing out the red Tory Patrick Brown's policy.
Gerald Butts was actually really upset by that.
Why would that be?
Why wouldn't Gerald Butts want a clear delineation between his liberals and the Tories on carbon tax?
Especially if he was so sure that the carbon tax was a great idea.
Why wouldn't he want his opponents to make the disastrous mistake of opposing the carbon tax?
Well, of course, because in fact, nobody likes the carbon tax, and Gerald Butz knows that.
And it wasn't a disastrous mistake by Doug Ford.
It was actually one of the keys to Ford winning a huge majority and almost wiping out the liberals altogether.
Butts was upset because the false impression that had been created until then, that everybody supports a carbon tax, even conservatives like Preston Manning and Michael Chong and Patrick Brown.
So look, grassroots conservatives, there's no point objecting to this grassroots taxpayers.
There's no political party that will be your home if you don't like this tax.
So stop fighting against it.
In fact, be a loyal conservative like Patrick Brown and support this monstrous tax.
Well, that illusion of unanimity is gone.
Why do you think leftists keep saying the laughable line that 97% of scientists agree with them?
It's to make it socially unacceptable to disagree with them.
It's much harder than debating on the facts.
So Gerald Butts hated the fact that the opposition party actually came to oppose them back in Ontario.
And so Vickers' point here is, thanks, Lisa Raitt.
We're proud of you for agreeing with us and removing from Canadians any alternative political vehicle.
Thank you for removing an issue from contention in the election because obviously it would solidify their authority.
I mean, how many times will Lisa Rait's capitulations be used by the liberals in campaign ads?
Of course, Vickers is exciting.
Hey guys, you're unconservative if you're a global warming skeptic.
Andrew Scheer's hand-picked lieutenant says so.
Here's a left-wing pressure group that was set up to oppose Jason Kenney and the oil patch, just gleeful over Lisa Wright.
They were delighted.
Here's what they say.
Lisa Raitt, trending for all the wrong reasons today.
Another bad day for the Scheer team.
They were thrilled by Lisa Raid.
So what exactly did Lisa Rait say in the first place that she was bullied into deleting and then groveling about?
Here, her opponents kept screenshots of the original offenses because that way they can get the best of both worlds.
They can use these to mock Lisa Raitt to environmentalist voters and they can use her renunciation to mock her to conservative voters.
You never win anyone over, by the way, by doing this.
Do you think that any Green Party or any Liberal Party voters are suddenly going to vote conservative because Lisa Ray embarrassed herself like this?
Here's what she was groveling over.
This is a screenshot of what she deleted, just to be clear.
She was reading a little tweet, a note by an accomplished global warming scientist himself, Ross McKittrick, international reputation, well known for debunking Al Gore's hockey stick graph that purports to show that global warming and carbon dioxide have been steady, and then suddenly shot up on a graph that's shaped like a sideways hockey stick.
So McKittrick proved that was a laughable, unscientific fake.
You know, everything was fine, then boom.
So McKittrick is smart, he's well-regarded, and he's a critic of the theory of man-made global warming.
And as you can see in that tweet there, he says, which is very interesting, put it back up on the screen just for a moment.
He said that the government's latest statement on global warming, do you see it there?
It says, it's not what you might expect from the alarmist media coverage.
Instead, it's measured, rooted in data, and interesting.
So you can even say that's a bit of a backhanded compliment to Trudeau and his government.
And Lisa Rait simply retweeted Ross McKittrick saying, it's not as bad as the media says.
And she adds, lots to read in this thread.
In some data don't lie.
Now, I'm not going to take you through all of what Ross McKittrick said, but it's moderate and thoughtful and scholarly.
And just for saying, read what this guy is saying, she takes down her tweets and issues a self-denunciation.
And by the way, says, don't argue with me, argue with other people.
She basically throws anyone else who's a skeptic under the bus.
There was one more tweet by her, and this was the one that surely irritated the left.
She says, bottom line is there's no solid connection between climate change and the major indicators of extreme weather, despite Trudeau's claims to the contrary.
The continual claim of such a link is misinformation employed for political and rhetorical purposes.
And you can't quite see it there, but she was actually quoting from an article in the Financial Post.
Oh my God, well, you can't do that.
I mean, obviously, that quote is true.
How could it not be true?
Justin Trudeau and Catherine McKenna literally blame fires that were started by arson.
They blame arson on global warming.
By the way, you'll note that tweet by Rait doesn't even question that global warming is happening.
It just says there's no proven link between weather on any given day and global warming, which is pretty obvious.
I mean, we're pretending to believe in science here, right?
I mean, we don't actually believe that if you throw a virgin into a volcano, you'll change the weather or something, right?
I mean, please tell me that Catherine McKenna and Justin Trudeau aren't actually saying that if you pay me a carbon tax today, I'll guarantee to change the weather tomorrow.
I mean, please tell me you don't believe that.
Well, actually, as you know, Catherine McKenna sort of does believe that.
She calls herself the minister responsible for weather.
She really, really says that.
What's my point today?
My point is that the Conservatives have lost their nerve again.
We know that people in both Canada and the United States simply don't care about global warming.
It's way down the list there.
If you ask them unprompted what they care about, if you say, if you lead them and say, do you care about global warming, they'll all nod along so as not to seem unfashionable.
But no one brings up global warming unprompted.
That's not a normal thing people worry about.
Even liberal MPs in Ontario say no one cares, and they're begging Catherine McKenna to give it a rest.
They actually say that the economy and unlimited immigration are the two top issues.
So you would think that fighting back on global warming, especially the carbon tax, would be a good issue for the Conservatives.
I mean, no global warming fanatic would ever consider voting Tory to begin with.
So why not irritate them a little bit, but win over the countless Canadians who either don't care or are actually sick of these jet-sending hypocrites telling us how much they care about reducing your carbon footprint, but we have to pay more from their private jets.
They tell us how much they care.
How about speaking out with some courage about the hypocrites?
It worked for Doug Ford, didn't it?
It just worked in Australia, where the Conservative leaning party, ironically called the Liberals, the anti-carbon tax party, came from behind and won.
That's why the liberal leader in New Brunswick, Kevin Vickers, is excited by Lisa Raid's collapse here.
But my point is, whenever you blink like this, whenever you score a goal in your own net, whenever you give up an unforced error, whenever you give something away to your political opponents for free and renounce yourself, denounce yourself, denounce everyone who is on your team and who hasn't yet caved in in the same humiliating way, what you do is you demoralize your base and you thrill your opponents.
Read her tweet again.
Renouncing Public Beliefs00:02:15
Look at this.
Well, I've learned my lesson in tweeting anything about climate change.
I'm going to be transparent and let you know I'm deleting the earlier tweets.
I'm not the one to fight with on this.
As in fight with my colleagues or any losers out there still holding the line.
I'm not the one to fight with on this because like most, I believe the emissions cause climate change and we should reduce emissions.
Oh, okay.
So anyone who hasn't caved in is now the enemy.
So Lisa Rait says she's learned her lesson and this will be put in the face of any conservative MP across the country, including from Alberta, of course.
And what are they going to do?
Contradict publicly their deputy leader?
Oh, don't talk to me about it.
Why don't you talk to those Alberta MPs?
Yeah, don't fight with me.
And you're an Alberta MP.
You're going to contradict your deputy leader?
Have you learned your lesson yet?
Why are you still saying what Lisa Raitt has disavowed?
Do you believe, I mean believe, like a belief system, like a faith, like a religion?
Do you believe in your heart that emissions cause climate change?
You need to believe people.
This isn't science anymore.
How deep is your belief?
Will you renounce the evidence of your lying eyes that arson is caused by people and that it's always been warm in the winter, warm in the summer?
Will you renounce what your lying eyes tell you and will go with your belief?
Like Lisa Raid has gone with her belief here.
Yeah, not a way to win an election.
But really, no different than the Conservative Party losing their nerve on half a dozen other issues recently, including free speech, which they no longer seem to be concerned about based on their conduct in recent weeks.
And all of this losing, all this surrendering before the election campaign even begins.
Stay with us for more.
The intensity of this four months is quite unprecedented.
For a bill proposed by the government to have this intensity of discussion.
Hong Kong Standoff00:13:16
So I would say that while we will continue to do the communication and explanation, there is very little merit to be gained to delay the bill.
It will just cause more anxiety and divisiveness in society.
In what some are calling the largest protests ever in Hong Kong, by some reports, more than one million citizens taking to the streets out of a total population of just seven and a half million to have one million adults out.
I've never heard of a protest so large.
But as you can see, Carrie Lamb, the chief executive of Hong Kong, seems dead set on plowing forward with a bill, a bill, a law if it's enacted, that would allow the extradition of people from Hong Kong to mainland Communist China, which would, of course, put the liberties of Hong Kong at even greater risk than they are now.
Well, there's one man who knows more about this subject than anyone else I know.
In fact, he wrote the book called The Coming Collapse of China.
His name is Gordon Chang.
You can follow him on Twitter at Gordon G Chang, and he joins us now via Skype.
Gordon, great to see you again.
What do you make of these protests?
They looked enormous.
I can't believe literally one-seventh of the population, that's got to be like a quarter of the adults in that city, came out to protest.
That's amazing.
It is amazing.
And it was whole families and people who have never protested before.
People did this because there's a thought that this is really Hong Kong's last stand.
Beijing had promised autonomy for Hong Kong for 50 years, starting in 1997, when the city was handed back, as they say, from Britain to China.
And really right now, what we're seeing are people just understanding that if they don't take a stand, then clearly Beijing will just control the city completely.
Carrie Lamb, the chief executive, says she's doing this on her own, not on instructions from Beijing, but that's not to be believed.
So right now, we're in a little bit of a standoff.
Kerry Lamb has the votes in LEGCO, the legislature, to be able to push this through.
We'll just find out what the people of Hong Kong are made of and what they're going to do next.
Yeah, I mean, I remember back in 1997 when the handover from the United Kingdom to China happened, and it was a very Canadian story, Gordon, because a lot of Hong Kong citizens were granted Canadian passports as sort of a safety valve.
The promise was, if I recall the motto, one country, two systems.
And that meant a different economic system.
And everyone thinks of Hong Kong as perhaps the most capitalistic place in the world.
Well, the rest of China's caught up a bit on the capitalism side, but the more important system was the rule of law, the independent judiciary, the freedoms.
I think that China is becoming more capitalist, but they're trying to make Hong Kong less civilly free.
What do you think happened to one country, two systems?
Well, one country, two systems is in real danger because in China itself, you have Xi Jinping, the ruler, really believing in a state-dominated economy.
So he's pushing China back to something that Mao Zedong would be more familiar with.
Also, you know, we speak of China being authoritarian, but it's really becoming semi-totalitarian and probably on its road to full totalitarianism with the social credit system, with much more censorship, with all the rest of it.
So China is moving in directions that no one except Xi Jinping really wants to see.
At this particular time, you know, as businesses look at Hong Kong and the business community, it's not just dissidents who are against the extradition bill.
It's also businesses because they realize that they're at risk as well.
I think that we could see some of them actually go return to the United States, for instance, in the financial sector, but also, you know, regional headquarters going to Singapore, maybe Taipei, Tokyo, because businesses understand that they just cannot live in an environment where you've got Beijing being able to pick people off the streets of Hong Kong.
Yeah, it's incredible.
I mean, Hong Kong is such an amazing city.
I know you surely know it intimately.
Last time I was there, I remember landing at the airport, and there were all these signs against corruption.
And I thought, this is one of the ways Hong Kong, this is my amateur analysis.
I thought, this is one of the ways Hong Kong is trying to distinguish itself from mainland corrupt communist China.
They're trying to say we're not like them.
We are clean, rule of law, independent courts.
At least, like, there was some interesting pro-freedom, pro-rule of law posters at the airport.
I just have never seen that sort of thing before.
And you're right.
Yes, of course, freedom.
But all that money, all those wheeler dealers, all that regional trading stuff, that can't happen without freedom, too.
So it's not just personal freedoms, it's economic freedom.
The whole miracle of Hong Kong is at risk here.
Am I being too melodramatic?
I mean, it's just such an amazing city.
Would Xi Jinping kill the goose that lays the golden egg?
Like, it's the most amazing city in the world, really on par with a London or a New York, but in its own way, would they kill it?
I think Xi Jinping actually would.
I mean, he doesn't want to, of course, but for him, control is more important than anything else.
So he will kill off Hong Kong if he needs to do that in order to control it.
You know, I was there just a couple of weeks ago with my wife, Lydia, and, you know, everything that you just said about Hong Kong is certainly true.
And there really is, you know, there, the fear that things are going to go very bad, badly, if the extradition bill goes through.
You know, we talk about what happened on Sunday, but if we go back to April, there was, you know, the organizers of these events were thinking, well, they couldn't really get anybody out on the streets for this, but they actually held a demonstration and they got 130,000 people onto the streets in April.
And that's why they decided to go ahead with yesterday's event.
And, you know, even though people were expecting a big crowd, nobody expected, you know, more than a million people.
The organizers say 1,030,000 people showed up.
That is just astounding.
Yeah.
Well, I have a question for you.
I remember a few years back, first of all, it's quite something to watch a protest of a million people in Hong Kong.
I'm not going to say politeness, but the orderliness and there were no riots.
There was no, I mean, I understand there's a handful of arrests, but you have a million people, you're going to have anything happen anyway.
Just I've never seen such a law-abiding, unified, like talk about a sense of harmony and communal identity.
It's quite amazing to me to see that.
I don't think you could have a million people in Washington, D.C. or Paris, France in such an orderly way.
In fact, we know you can't.
What happened the last time with the umbrella protests?
And could they win?
Like, could they make Kerry Lam blink?
Well, that's a great question.
You know, if you go back to 2003, which is sort of the analogue where the government, Chung Chi Wa, who was chief executive at the time, wanted to push through what's called Article 23 legislation or national security law.
And he couldn't do it because in Ledgeco, the Legislative Council, you had a group of sort of legislators in the middle who decided to defect from the government and side with the Democrats.
This time, that's probably not going to happen.
But, you know, when you have a million people on the streets, anything can happen.
And so I tend to have a little bit of optimism, but when you count votes in Ledgeco, it doesn't look good.
And so most people suspect that the extradition bill will go through before the current legislative session is over next month.
Wow.
It sure is happening quickly if you, I mean, that's measured in weeks, sounds like it.
I've seen news lately about how Hong Kong's, and you mentioned Singapore, Hong Kong's woes could become an economic benefit to other regional capitals.
You mentioned some of them.
Of course, there's the people themselves, like the ordinary rank and file Hong Kongers.
I mean, I don't think Singapore could take 100,000 people from Hong Kong.
I don't know.
Maybe they would.
Is any of this related in some way to Donald Trump and his trade battle with China?
I'm not trying to make a stretch here.
I'm just saying, is that adding pressure to Xi Jinping?
Is that part of this?
I'm just so curious because things are happening between China and America that we haven't seen in decades.
Yeah, that's a great question.
You know, I tend to think that, you know, certainly President Trump is pressing the Chinese on trade and intellectual property theft.
And those are different issues, of course.
But for Xi Jinping right now, you've got to remember the guy's in battle.
He's not only got Trump pressing him, and in senior circles in Beijing, the question's being asked, like, who lost America?
And the answer, of course, is Xi Jinping.
And because Xi Jinping is so powerful, he has taken responsibility from senior leaders.
It's no longer a consensual system.
So that means he is really nobody else to blame for the problems with the United States.
Well, you add on to this, it's his policies that are causing the reaction in Hong Kong.
So this is something else for people to blame Xi Jinping for.
And, you know, you have restiveness around the periphery of China.
So, you know, I think that Xi Jinping at this particular moment does not need another crisis on his agenda, and he's getting one.
You know, I got to tell you, Gordon, I have an emotional reaction when I see a million people standing up for liberty because I wish that we in North America were not as complacent.
Maybe we're not in the same jeopardy, but to see a million people united in purpose and we see the police pushing some young men and women around here.
I'm showing this on the screen as we talk, Gordon.
I really feel affectionate towards them because, of course, they've learned from the lack of it, and they've learned from observing their neighbors in the rest of mainland China the heavy price of not having freedom.
Of course, Tiananmen Square would be still deep in their memory, even though it's been decades now.
I don't know, is anyone coming to their aid?
I see Chris Patton, the last British governor, has weighed in a little bit.
I don't know how much moral authority has.
Have foreign leaders spoken out?
I don't see anything yet from Justin Trudeau or Christy Freeland of our country.
Has anyone from the State Department speak out?
Has the Queen, I think there's still affection in Hong Kong for the British years.
Has there been any moral support from around the world for these one million brave protesters?
There is moral support on the extradition bill.
And clearly, there's one country that does have a direct interest, and that is Britain.
Because of the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, it does give Britain some rights to comment on this.
Now, Beijing says that the Sino-British Declaration is of no force, but this is another example of Beijing signing an agreement and then repudiating its own obligations.
But clearly, Britain needs to speak out more forthrightly.
The United States, of course, needs to do that.
And yes, Trudeau would be good to do that because I know that Canada is involved in the Mengongzhou Luawe extradition matter.
But, you know, right now, I think Canadians have to understand that they're in a long-term struggle with China.
There's no appeasing Xi Jinping, and this is a match for the rest of the world where we just don't have the choice of losing because this is where he's attacks our societies.
So we're all very much got an interest with the people in Hong Kong.
Yeah.
You know, I know it'll never happen, but I have this secret wish that Queen Elizabeth, who has spent so much of her life as the monarch of Hong Kong, I just have a wish that she would in a quiet, dignified way indicate her support, which I'm sure she feels for the citizens of Hong Kong.
And of course, Donald the Strong, which is one of the nicknames they have in Beijing for Donald Trump.
Those two people, just through some moral suasion, I think that their help is needed now.
Corporate Meddling and Censorship00:03:04
Who knows?
Maybe if we tweet this interview to the president, he might retweet it.
There's always a hope for that, Gordon.
Well, thanks, Ezra.
That's a great suggestion.
I mean, we do need to talk to our leaders to draw the connections between the common interests that we have as victims of China and, of course, the people in Hong Kong who are directly affected this very day.
Yeah.
Well, our hearts are with them.
I thank you for bringing some of the background, the history, and the politics behind it.
Gordon, we always rely on you because I know of no one who is as better briefed, as well briefed on you, and who cares about freedom in China as you do.
I'm in your debt.
It's great to see you again.
Let me just give one more shout out to your book, very prescient, called The Coming Collapse of China.
And we'll have a link to Amazon in the description if folks want to get that.
And of course, people can follow you at Gordon G. Chang on Twitter.
Great to see you, my friend.
Thanks for taking the time.
Thanks so much, Ezra.
All right, there you have it.
Well, we'll keep an eye on that situation in the weeks ahead.
Sounds like it'll move quite quickly.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Hey, welcome back on my monologue Friday about YouTube demonetizing and silencing thousands of independent content creators, including Stephen Crowder.
David writes, Carlos Maza planned this and YouTube just needed an excuse.
Oh, absolutely.
And by the way, Carlos Mazza, a writer for Vox, formerly a Democrat activist at Media Matters, he didn't do this on his own.
Don't tell me a company owned by Comcast does this kind of corporate meddling.
Let's a junior staffer do this kind of corporate meddling on his own.
He's a savvy, experienced writer, absolutely operating with the approval of his managers.
You don't go after a rival company.
You don't go after YouTube with the approval of Comcast high-ups.
Don't kid yourself.
John writes, haven't thought a lot about corporate censorship.
Sounds like Comcast is a big player in the censorship of conservative thought.
Yeah, well, I was just pointing out that Comcast is huge.
I think it's like the second largest media company in America.
But it's no different up here.
Rogers and all the other telcos, they're happy to have a cozy oligopoly.
A handful of tycoons, lots of corporate cronyism, corporate links.
There's no true independent telecommunications companies in Canada.
They're so heavily regulated, their cell phone business, their cable business, that if they also happen to own content journalism, don't think for one second they wouldn't throw that journalism under the bus to get a better deal for a cable rate or a cell phone rate.
Through the cell phone and cable regulation of Canadian media companies, every word they say is regulated too.
David's Al-Quds Day Video00:01:21
And that's before he even introduced the $600 million bailout.
Bruce writes, Ezra's monologue and David's videos show that we really are heading towards the UK's condition.
I know you're talking about a variety of things regarding censorship, the politicization of police, and frankly, even Islam.
I've been thinking about that viral video David did at the Al-Quds Day March.
That's the artificial Ayatollah Khomeini Iran holiday that is in Toronto and cities around the world.
You saw that guy.
I think he was from Pakistan, judging from the accent.
And he was saying, yeah, absolutely, Sharia law would kill gays.
And David said, do you want Sharia law?
He says, it's not even do I want it.
It's coming.
We're going to be a majority in 2060.
It's coming.
And absolutely, that's the punishment for being gay.
That was fine.
Police were right there.
No problem with it.
Compare that light touch to police investigating any politically incorrect comment on the right that doesn't even come close to that kind of threat of violence.
So yeah, the kind of political selective policing you see in the UK, I believe it's coming here.
I believe it's already got a toehold here.
And I think it's only going to get worse.
Well, folks, that's the show for today until tomorrow.
On behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters to you at home, good night.