David Menzies on The Ezra Levant Show slams Justin Trudeau’s June 19 Toronto Eid event, where Rebel Media was barred despite advertised media access while CBC and CTV entered freely. Trudeau’s speech virtue-signaled anti-Islamophobia policies but subtly attacked Conservatives, echoing 2017 claims about ISIS fighter repatriation. Menzies ties this to climate rhetoric—UN’s "climate apartheid," activist-driven media shifts like The Guardian’s "emergency" framing—and Faisal Hussein’s Danforth shooting, dismissed as terrorism despite mental illness records. The episode argues political correctness and ideological agendas now dictate truth over facts, with mainstream media complicit in government narratives. [Automatically generated summary]
Conservatives Excluded From Trudeau Dinner00:13:25
Tonight, only one media outlet was kept out of an e-dinner with Justin Trudeau.
Can you possibly guess which one?
It's June 25th.
I'm David Menzies, and this is the Ezral Event Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're the biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
Well, that was quite the euphoric Eid Mubarak dinner Prime Minister Justin Trudeau attended last Friday in Toronto.
Justin and several high-profile Liberal caucus members were the guests of something called the Canadian Muslim Vote.
And Justin wasted no time after dinner to do that which he does so well, virtue signal.
He touched upon many issues that night, especially those with an Islamic bent to them, the anti-Islamophobia motion M103 and the upcoming so-called anti-racism policies soon to be announced, and of course, just about anything else that had anything to do with courting Muslim votes.
Hey, as Bob Hope used to say, when you're in New York, give them the big apple stuff.
When you're in Chicago, you give them the Windy City stuff.
And when you're a Liberal, just a tad north of the heavily Muslim Flemington Park area of Toronto, well, you give them the Mohammed peace be upon them stuff.
And boy, did Trudeau ever do that.
Indeed, by all the media accounts I came across, Justin trotted out his A-list game to a very friendly venue last Friday night.
He was back in rock star mode.
Oh, there'd be no talk about SNC Lavalin and Jody Wilson Ray Bolt and groping on this night.
Not in this venue, no, sir.
This would be a celebration of all things Islamic and of course a not-so-subtle denunciation of the Conservative Party of Canada.
And you know something folks?
I was really hoping to file a first-hand report regarding Justin's jolly jihad of joy, but alas and alack, even though this event was open to the media, someone behind the scenes deemed that rebel media wasn't fit to be there.
And so it was that my cameraman Efren and I were frog marched out of that building of peace and tolerance.
Oh sure, the official state stenographers with the media party, they were welcome to stay.
The Trudeau Liberals can always count on those propaganda producers not to rock the CASBA, especially these days when all those press payola paychecks will soon be in the mail.
Hey, as Telly Savalis used to say in the role of Detective Kojak, who loves you, baby, Ka-Ching.
Anyway, here's some video evidence of us at least trying to get in to report on that euphoric Eid event.
I'll set the scene.
We had been instructed to go into the media lockup area to await the RCMP sniffer dog to come by and check out our equipment.
We were certainly not crashing the event.
Check out this press release from the Muslim link.
Quote, notes for media.
The Prime Minister's remarks to the Eid Dinner are open to media coverage as per the official itinerary for the date.
Special accommodations have been made for media who are covering the event, end quote.
And apparently there was some extra special non-accommodation for certain media outlets.
That would be us, of course, given our chutzpah in trying to tell the other side of the story.
So as we patiently waited, along with all the other media types for screening as per standard protocol, we were confronted by a gentleman with the Canadian Muslim Vote Organization.
He wasn't there to wish us a happy Eid, though.
Sir, with all due respect.
Okay.
You're being asked to leave nicely.
It is time for you to go.
See, one of the people here is Maryam Monseff, who was at the World Press Freedom Day.
She's a big advocate for World Press Freedom.
Let's go find her and she can speak on your behalf.
I'll wait for her right here.
I'll wait for her right here.
So how can you support freedom of the press and yet kick out a media organization racist?
We support the rights of individuals here.
I wish you wouldn't manhandle the equipment.
I don't think that's manhandling, but I wish they wouldn't put my face.
Okay, well, are you married almost?
Oh, no, I'm not going to go there.
As one of the organizers of the event, you must leave now.
Well, we had another organizer say to come in here to be screened by the RCMP, and that's what we're doing.
Can you bring him back and see if he got it wrong?
No, you need to leave right now.
So what's the difference between us and the CBC and City TV and CTV and all the other media that is here, Grayson?
That's what I want to know.
That you have to leave right now.
That's not an answer to my question.
That is the difference.
You have to leave right now.
Well, yeah, I'm asking the reason for the difference, sir.
because you have to leave right now.
This is a private event, and I'm sorry you...
It's a private event open to media, obviously.
I see all the cameras here.
It's not open to everyone.
It's not open to you, sir.
Hmm.
To paraphrase that Sesame Street Diddy, one of these media outlets is not like the others.
Indeed, in what is becoming an increasingly frequent occurrence, the Rebel showing up to cover an event where liberals are in attendance is welcomed about as much as the proverbial skunk to the Garden Party.
As you saw, I referenced Maryam Monsef, the Liberal MP, who was the keynote speaker at a media event celebrating World Press Freedom Day last month in Toronto.
She's a true crusader for freedom of the press, let me tell you.
Check out our brief interview.
Minister Monsef, David Menzies with Rebel Media.
Just a quick question.
The United Nations told our reporters they were banned from covering their conferences due to a directive from the Canadian government.
Do you support that?
I hope you support what we're doing here today, which is ensuring freedom of expression and an independent free press for your colleagues around the world.
But that's precisely the point.
We traveled to Morocco, we traveled to Poland, and we were shut out of UN conferences because of an edict from your government.
Does that sound like World Press Freedom to you, Minister?
What we're doing today is supporting an independent and free press in some of the most troubled regions of the world.
And I have no doubt that you rejoice in this investment and this initiative.
Well, you know, but how do you square the fact that you won't even let Canadian journalists that might have a dissenting opinion about things like immigration and climate change to attend UN conferences?
And here you are advocating for World Press Freedom Day.
Thank you.
Thanks very much.
This doesn't look like a lot of freedom, ladies.
Well, she's in her private area now.
Thank you very much.
Okay, then.
And then, in what is becoming par for the course, we were given the bums rush from the headquarters of Chorus Entertainment, the Rebel being deemed media non-grata yet again.
Yes, even on World Press Freedom Day, we were booted from a media event taking place inside the head office of a media company at an event celebrating press freedom.
No, I'm not making this up.
But enough with my whining, because after Justin finished wolfing down his lamb chops, here are some of the talking points he served up according to an article in the Huffington Post.
For starters, Trudeau urged Canadian Muslims to make themselves important to the Conservative Party.
Now, why would he advocate for that?
The Conservatives being the opposition and whatnot.
Well, Justin said this is the only way to ensure mainstream parties don't sow fear and division because presumably the Tories dine out in sowing fear and division.
Here's Justin's quotation verbatim: quote, I want you to make Muslim volunteers important to the Conservatives, end quote.
With the Huffington Post noting how many in attendance started cheering and clapping, Justin continued, quote, so that never again would any mainstream party in Canada think it's a good idea to stoke fears and divisions against Muslims or any other group of Canadians, end quote.
And by this point, the HuffPost adroitly pointed out that the adoring attendees were now standing on their feet in thunderous applause.
Yes, Justin scored a standing O. Take that, JWR.
Yet, you see what Trudeau did there, don't you?
It was actually quite clever, albeit quite slimy, too, because his rhetoric may have looked non-partisan and it may have seemed at first blush to appear like a feel-good sentiment.
But what Trudeau really did was conduct a drive-by smear on the Conservative Party.
Indeed, by saying that Muslims need to make themselves important to the Conservatives implies that, as it stands right now, Canadian Muslims are not important to the Conservative Party.
Ergo, Justin's lament about fear and division.
Fear and division, eh?
I think that's actually Justin's bailiwick, you know.
Remember back in 2017 when Trudeau actually made the outrageous insinuation that Conservative leader Andrew Scheer was an Islamophobe for having the temerity to ask a perfectly valid question in the House of Commons pertaining to public safety, namely, what was the government's plan regarding all those Canadian ISIS fighters returning to Canada?
Well, here's a smear job for the ages.
Mr. Speaker, it's this Prime Minister that's de-emphasizing Canadian security and Canadians are tired of it.
It was Conservatives who amended the Criminal Code to make it an offense to leave Canada to fight for ISIS.
It was Conservatives who are focused on giving our law enforcement new tools to prosecute ISIS fighters.
This Prime Minister is using a broad spectrum that includes poetry and podcasts and all kinds of counseling and group hug sessions, Mr. Speaker.
When will the Prime Minister take the security of Canadians seriously and look for ways to put these ISIS fighters in jail?
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Party learnt nothing from the last election and the lessons Canadians taught them.
They ran an election on snitch lines against Muslims.
They ran an election on Islamophobia and division.
And still they play the same games trying to scare Canadians.
The fact is we always focus on the security of Canadians and we always will and they play politics of fear and Canadians reject that.
Yeah, so if you all have a problem with ISIS fighters, be they traitors or terrorists or both, who are coming back to Canada in order to take part in poetry classes as a way of becoming de-radicalized, then you're obviously a bigot and a racist and of course an Islamophobe.
Hmm, you know, folks, I think I need an ISIS-themed rhyming couplet for the phrase, hickory dickery duck.
Please leave your suggestions in the comment section.
Still, Sheer being Sheer, I think that exchange made him so gun-shy in terms of being labeled Islamophobic that he has, like a scolded little puppy, course corrected his behavior to such an extent that true blue conservatives can only shake their heads with a mixture of wonder and pity.
Case in point, earlier this month, the conservatives actually dismissed Salim Mansour as a candidate in a London writing.
Mr. Mansour is a professor and a writer and someone who has bravely and fairly called out radical Islam in his columns over the years.
By all accounts, Mansour is a star candidate.
But Scheer was evidently terrified that the opposition parties and the mean girls in the media party would crucify the conservatives as being Islamophobic if they had Mansour run under the blue banner.
So even though Salim Mansoor is a Muslim himself, because Salim Mansoor is critical of radical Islam, then Salim Mansour is simply, you know, not the right kind of Muslim in the eyes of Mr. Charisma.
Again, you can't make this up, folks.
As well, since Shir was in Nunavut last Friday, because of course Nenavit is where anyone would want to be campaigning, you know, in order to drum up all those dozens of votes, he was unable to attend the Eid festivities.
Instead, he sent deputy leader Lisa Rait, who is kind of like the reverse she-hulk, because the matter Rait gets, the weaker she gets.
And true to form, after Justin took the Conservatives to the woodshed for that fear and division tongue-lashing and received thunderous applause for doing so, Rait, sporting her ultra-bright smile, had this to say, quote, we welcome you, meaning Muslims, with open arms, end quote.
Hmm.
Diversity and Division00:09:01
So basically, she conceded the point regarding the fear and division claptrap, virtually waving the white flag of surrender when she should have challenged Trudeau's borderline libelous remarks.
You know, they say never bring a knife to a gunfight, but the knife Rait had in her purse that night looked like a rusty screwdriver, whereas Trudeau's gun, thanks to conservative ineptitude and wimpiness, looked like a bazooka by way of comparison.
Moving on, the HuffPost reported that Omar Algarbra, the MP for Mississauga Center, said that the Canadian Muslim vote started before the last election because Muslims traditionally had a lower rate of voter participation than the general population.
But in 2015, participation increased by more than 20%, he said, noting, quote, they went door-to-door, they had pamphlets, they went to religious institutions, they spoke to Imams and religious leaders, and they spread the message in a non-partisan way, end quote.
Yeah, non-partisan.
So non-partisan, in fact, that I must remind you that Grayson Bass decided to give the rebel media, i.e. the only right-of-center media on the premises that night, the boot.
But then again, according to Grayson, the rebel isn't a real media outlet.
Why is that?
Oh, it's because we're not unionized.
Check out this exchange.
You would like to take that up with someone?
Maybe there's a media union you can speak to.
Maybe you can go and speak to...
There is a media union uniform, and we wouldn't be part of that, so I'm afraid we...
So then you're not part of the media.
You're going to have to leave now.
Well, no, we're not part of a union.
I'm indicate that you're in the media if you're not part of a media report.
I see.
So you have to be part of the Unifor union to be a member of the media in your eyes?
To leave, sir.
Yeah, and let's reiterate, the Canadian Muslim vote is not a liberal front.
It's non-partisan.
Don't bet your burqa on that one, folks.
And I'm wondering, does Mr. Bass have such warmth in his heart for Unifor because this union is all about helping the hardworking rank and file better themselves, be they journalists or janitors?
Or is his love of Unifor due to the fact that, well, Unifor just happened to be one of the sponsors of Friday's E dinner?
You know, I really want to quote that classic Jed Clampett line whenever he has an epiphany, you know, well doggy.
But given that dogs are haram, I'd best not fall back on any canine quotes lest I be labeled as Islamophobic.
Moving on, it was also noted that according to a 2015 paper prepared by something called the Canadian Dawn Foundation, the Muslim community accounts for 2.1% of the electorate.
Translation, it is estimated that the Muslim vote could influence the outcome of races in no fewer than 23 constituencies.
And one of those constituencies is most certainly the Toronto riding of Don Valley West, currently upheld by Liberal MP Rob Oliphant.
Here's what Mr. Oliphant had to say, quote, it, meaning the Muslim vote, is clumped in certain areas of the city.
I have a significant population of Muslims in my riding, parts of Mississauga, parts of Ajax, Pickering, Scarborough, Markham.
And that actually increases their ability to be effective in elections because they are concentrated and they are able to be significant, end quote.
The thing is, Mr. Oliphant, he is an openly gay man, which should be entirely irrelevant in any discussion in 2019.
But me thinks one's sexual orientation is very much relevant when it comes to courting the Muslim vote in any year.
You might recall that interview we did earlier this month with an attendee of the Al-Quds rally in downtown Toronto.
You see, this individual, most certainly a beacon of light and inspiration for the Palestinian plight, is very keen on seeing Sharia law replace Canadian law in our great dominion.
Paging the Right Honorable Rob Oliphant, you might want to pay close attention to some of the ramifications of Sharia law, given that you, sir, definitely have some skin in the game.
What would happen to a gay couple in Gaza?
Islam doesn't endorse gayism.
Islam doesn't endorse homosexuality.
Just like Canada doesn't endorse a lot of things.
And do you think that's good?
If I were to think that's good, sir.
Do you think it's good for gays?
I would get prosecuted.
In the same way, Islam doesn't approve of being gay.
I see.
Okay, so would you like to see Sharia law in Canada replace Canadian law?
At some point it will.
You know, because we have families, we are making babies.
You are not.
Your population is going down the slump.
Right?
And by 2060, by 2060, according to Pew Research Institute, your research, by 2016, Muslims will be the biggest religious group the world over.
That's right, Oliphant.
Take a long, hard look at the elephant in the room.
But back to Trudeau, who noted how, quote, far too often, and you know this, Muslim communities bear the brunt of that backlash.
Hate can only creep in the mainstream if we don't speak up.
This is the moment to call out discrimination and racism in every form.
This is the time to stand against, to stand strong against Islamophobia.
End quote.
Translation, any day now, the results of the committee study on the anti-free speech pro-censorship motion M103 will be released.
By the way, that shouldn't be confused with the Liberals' quest to return the anti-free speech pro-censorship section 13 to the Canadian Human Rights Act.
I know, I know, folks, there's so much quashing of freedoms and freedom of expression by these libs that it's hard to keep up, isn't it?
Naturally, the Liberals market such clampdowns on our freedoms as anti-racism measures, but of course they do, given that Canada is such a bastion of racism these days.
And as for the media party, this is no biggie.
You'd think they'd fight clampdowns on freedom of expression, that being their bailiwick, after all.
But it's a struggling industry, and besides, Uncle Justin is cutting $600 million worth of checks, not including the $1.5 billion that annually props up the state broadcaster, the CBC.
So let's not get our knickers in a knot, shall we?
As that cliché goes, we can do this the easy way or we can do this the hard way.
And an increasingly prostituted press is, well, they're opting for the easy way.
It should also be noted that even Toronto Mayor John Torrey took some time off from searching for his missing spine in order to take part in the Eid festivities.
He told the crowd that he hoped and prayed that the next election would, quote, steer well clear of the rhetoric and policies that even tilt slightly in the direction division being invoked elsewhere, end quote.
Yeah, because the ever-progressive Toronto City Hall would never want to divide people, even though it was revealed last year that the city now offers a segregated internship program, meaning the program is for Muslims only.
That's right, if you're Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, or atheist, sorry, you need not apply.
Just adherence to the religion of peace only, please.
Wow, just wait till the Wiccans hear about this one.
At any event, I pass on my gratitude to those in the media who did get into this shindig and got to report on the affair.
And special thanks to the Huffington Post, without whom I would not have been able to source the various quotes in this commentary, given my game misconduct.
Still, I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict that the over-underline on the number of times diversity is our strength was uttered was 49.
But the thing is, as we discussed yet again, as much as the Liberals love diversity, that only seems to apply to identity politics, you know, skin color, religion, nationality, and whatnot.
But as we discovered, they are most certainly not into a diversity of opinions or even entertaining a diversity of media outlets.
That sort of diversity isn't good.
It's quite bad, actually.
And it must be shut down because contrary opinions are apparently dangerous.
So while I regret that I could not attend Justin's Eid Mubarak in person, I'll keep my fingers crossed that I'll be able to attend Trudeau's Ramadan Palooza event.
Apartheid Claims Matter00:04:43
But in truth, I'm not very hopeful about getting into that one either.
Well, this just in, in addition to supposedly melting the polar ice caps and creating more severe and frequent hurricanes and increasing the size of deserts.
it would appear that climate change is also making people nuts.
How else to explain some of the recent utterances of the various climate cassandras?
The UN's Philip Alston is fretting that severe weather may result in a form of climate apartheid.
Yes, apartheid.
Meanwhile, British climate activist Blythe Pepino, she says she's going to help save the planet by not having kids.
You know, I think there's a punchline just dangling there, folks, but I dare not utter it.
Joining me now to hopefully make sense of it all is that barometer of common sense, Mark Moreno of climatepot.com.
Welcome to the Ezra Levant Show, Mark.
Thank you.
Happy to be here today.
Always a pleasure, my friend.
Okay, so from apartheid to vows of celibacy, this climate change crisis, it's really getting serious now, isn't it, Mark?
Yeah, I mean, they are just, it's amazing thing to just ramping it up, ramping it up, ramping it up.
They also know there's a big 2020 election in the U.S.
And one of the biggest storms in the side of this entire movement is one name, Trump.
And they're going to do everything they can to get their base excited and get him out of office.
Now, the UN, first of all, claiming this is going to be a climate apartheid, claiming this is going to be a violation of human rights, democracies, and all this weird weather.
What the UN is doing is the same thing they've always done.
They are lobbying for their own self-interest.
In other words, only the United Nations in charge with the bureaucracy, with central planning, which with global governance, which is their phrase, which a complete centralized transformation, which wealth redistribution, with their solutions beginning with the UN, and I say beginning with the UN-Paris Agreement, because they said that saved the earth, and now they're saying it's woefully inadequate and we're all going to die again.
They are trying to get people scared enough to get on, so they're coming up with all kinds of wacky things about we're going to prevent this, we've got to prevent that.
It's just the same old UN, except slightly more intense these days.
I tend to believe that words matter.
And when you say something like apartheid, listen, my wife is from South Africa.
I've been to South Africa.
Unless you're talking about a system that is discriminatory to people of other skin colors, other races, it's not apartheid.
When you say somebody is a Nazi because you have a disagreement with them, that's wrong too.
Unless that person is involved in genocide, don't call anyone you disagree with a Nazi.
And the same with Holocaust.
That's being brought into the climate change debate too.
And what I'm saying, Mark, is that I take offense to this appropriation of words that stand for very powerful things in the course of history.
And so that these climate hucksters use these terms in a completely inappropriate fashion, which I think ultimately, if it catches on, it diminishes what these words actually mean and what they stand for.
It does.
I mean, the latest example of that devaluing words is the UK Guardian, Telemundo, and several other media outlets changing over to the phrase climate emergency.
This debases their own cause, because anyone watching the news or reading it is going to know, oh, these are just activists.
I can't take this report seriously.
But interestingly, about this climate apartheid, what they're claiming, they're claiming that future global warming is going to disproportionately hurt the poor nation.
And therefore, perversely, we need to prevent them from developing so we don't make global warming worse.
The UN needs to centrally plan their lives in wealth redistribute.
In other words, keep them at a low level of developmental misery.
What these countries need, whether we have global warming or not, and we don't of any discernible nature and certainly not impacted on extreme weather in any way, shape, or form, according to the latest science, data, and evidence.
What we need is for poor countries to become wealthier.
Climate Apartheid Debate00:12:33
That's the way you deal with extreme weather, whatever the cause.
The more infrastructure you have, the more steel, concrete, the more access and roads and transportation and technology and early warning systems.
That is how you save people, not by locking them in poverty, not by the United Nations planning everyone's lives like a mastermind organization, which is literally trying to be.
You know, I think you nailed it.
I want to give you a personal anecdote, Mark.
About 15 years ago, I was on an assignment called the Polar Safari.
It was a two-week snowmobile trek in Nanavit.
And it was very interesting.
There was somebody from France.
I knew I was going to hate this guy from the get-go.
He had a photograph of George Bush with the universal no slash through it.
And we had an Inuit guide, and he started this white liberal virtue signaling by saying, you know, wasn't it great before the white men came here?
I mean, you did everything so organic.
You know, you didn't have snowmobiles spouting carbon emissions.
You didn't have guns.
And the guy looked at him.
This is the Inuit.
And like he was mad.
He said, well, listen, in my great-grandfather's day, it took a dog team two weeks to travel what I can do in one hour with a snowmobile.
And hunting polar bears with spears, it actually meant a life and death situation if you didn't hit the target properly, whereas with a gun, you have a much greater chance of actually bagging the prey.
You know, it was just astonishing to see this virtue signaler from France put in his place by somebody whose quality of life has been immeasurably increased in a matter of, even in terms of life and death, Mark, thanks to our technology.
Yes.
In fact, I did a documentary years ago on the Amazon, and I interviewed the author of the book called The Myth of the Noble Eco-Savage, because typically the American liberals and the Western liberals have this vision of native indigenous peoples at one in harmony with nature would never harm.
In the book, they detail that back if you go over, for instance, tropical forests in the middle, in the 1500s, earlier, you could see massive areas of the forest burning.
Indigenous peoples could be just as destructive, just as environmentally unfriendly or unsustainable.
They would hunt animals to extinction.
They would run them off a cliff.
They just didn't have the technology that later people had.
But to deify them in some way and put them up on a pedestal is not accurate, as your anecdote tells.
And even the indigenous people themselves don't want that label because that's not a real label.
It's the myth of history.
But that's the way the white liberals particularly, and I'm using the word white hair because the other story we were going to talk about is this story about people not having kids because of, quote, white privilege and fear of the climate catastrophe.
It's all the same thing.
Somehow our generation, our modern era, we've destroyed the earth, so therefore we can't allow ourselves to have kids.
We need to save it.
And they have a whole whopping 400-plus people signed on to not have kids right now, which is a small number, but I would expect that to grow.
There's enough nuts out there that might believe this climate rhetoric.
Oh, and it is so nutty, Mark.
I mean, yes, you're referring to the story, activists go on birth strike over climate change.
And it quotes somebody, a founder of a British climate change activism group, Blythe Peppino.
What gets me is like the audacity that she would come out and say, I'm going to save the planet by not having a child.
And the idea that a media outlet thinks this is worthy to actually do a story.
This is just a woman doing what millions of other women by their own choice are not doing, i.e., bringing children to the world.
But what gets me is that when this Blythe Mark, she says, here's one of her quotes: I'm lucky enough to have a certain amount of power in this world.
I'm white and privileged and don't have any children.
Why do they always have to bring race into this, Mark?
I mean, I think there's another narrative, another agenda at play here, don't you?
Yeah, in fact, recently at Climate Depot in the past month, I've literally been collecting stories on race, on class, on the social system.
We have a whole series of studies now being funded on how Hispanics have bigger carbon footprints than blacks, and whites have the highest carbon footprint, and this diet affects that.
And, you know, and I even go back to the 19th century that showed the Aborigines said the change in climate was due to the introduction of the white man to the country in Australia.
I mean, the race has always been part of our culture.
It's no surprise that they're going to now label it and paste it and start dealing with it in climate.
But interestingly enough, you know, 30 years ago, in order to virtue signal, you could buy a Volvo, slap a save the whale bumper sticker on your car and say you want to save the earth.
Now you have to pledge not to have kids, condemn your white privilege, and a whole hunch of other nonsense.
It just keeps getting more and more absurd.
Yeah, and as we've said, it seems that the ringleaders of such movements, Al Gore in your neck of the woods, David Suzuki and ours, they always tend to have a carbon footprint several factors higher than the average North American.
But, you know, getting back to the Guardian story, Mark, on climate apartheid, you know, it goes on to, of course, a dumps on Donald Trump, part of Trump derangement syndrome.
What else is new with The Guardian?
And of course, Brazilian President Bolsonaro.
But then it gives praise to groups such as Extinction Rebellion.
Now, let me tell you something, Mark.
Two weeks ago, Extinction Rebellion shut down the busiest intersection in downtown Toronto for about half an hour at the height of rush hour during a Raptors final game, inconveniencing thousands of people.
And what did they achieve by this?
Literally, thousands of cars stuck in gridlock idling.
Idling is the worst kind of emissions.
How in blue hell does the Guardian say stunts like that is going towards helping the planet, Mark?
Because it goes right up there, raising awareness.
And that's ultimately they're raising awareness.
And beyond that, they're raising funds and they're satisfying their ideological fervor and they're getting ink in all the papers.
So they really don't care about the emissions or the idling.
You're making a very good point because cars not moving.
All that wasted gas is sitting there not moving at all while they do their silly little protests.
They're also spread to New York and they're going after the New York Times and they're going after.
And the funny thing is all these liberal papers, they're susceptible to this kind of pressure.
And that's where we're seeing some of these news agencies now change the phraseology to the climate emergency.
So these protests can be very effective with their fellow liberal establishment members.
But this is something we have to stay strong, meaning that those who are actually for sound science and for pushing back against this, we are going to be under, between now and the next two years, unprecedented assault because of the coming U.S. election, because of what happened in Brazil, because of what happened in Australia.
The other side is feeling, but because of what's happening in parts of Canada with the rebellion and the carbon tax, they feel there's a backlash.
So they're going to ramp this up.
And the best way to ramp it up is to send out a bunch of protesters, do a bunch of wacky things.
The UN can continue to make pronouncements.
And of course, in America, the Democratic candidates are all falling all over each other, trying to outdo each other on climate and Green New Deal versions.
It's just a giant spectrum of insanity.
But it's something we can sit back and enjoy, but it's also a very grave threat because once they're back in power in the United States, this is going to fast track UN process globally and fast track the U.S. back on board with all of this utter and complete nonsense.
It is insanity, and I think there's a measure of hypocrisy too.
You referred to, Mark, those left-wing newspapers, the likes of the New York Times, the Washington Post.
If they're so committed to climate change, why don't they go completely online?
That way they're not chopping down trees for newsprint, and they can take all those delivery vans off the road that are filling all those boxes with old school newspapers.
But I guess when it doesn't quite fit their business plan yet, they'll continue same old, same old.
But, you know, and speaking of this kind of media, The Guardian, Mark, last year, they reported that it was climate change was the reason for those illegal caravans coming up from Central America through southern Mexico, ultimately to the U.S. border.
And it was funny, my cameraman Efren and I went down for a week in November last year.
And of all the migrants we met, not a single one mentioned climate change.
So where does the Guardian get this?
It's absolute garbage media.
But again, a huge percentage of populations in every country accept this absolute crap.
But here's how they get it.
60 Minutes, to give you an example in the U.S., did a profile of these teenager kids and elementary school kids protesting our government's inaction on climate.
So there's all these lawsuits.
They actually profiled an elementary school or middle high school kid who woke up and stuck her ankle in climate change.
Do you know why?
Because her basement flooded.
So she got out of bed and her foot went into climate.
Now, she woke up and put her ankle in climate change.
If you can make that statement and you can do it under the banner of CBS News 60 Minutes and do it with a straight face, you've lost all journalistic standards and you're promoting nonsense.
We have Greta Thunberg, the teen climate striking school activist.
She's asking people openly on Twitter, she's made herself a point never to fly again.
So she wants to go to Santiago, Chile, which I'll be going to to the next UN climate conference.
She's trying to figure out how to get there without flying.
Now, someone had the brilliant idea.
Why don't you Skype in?
Why doesn't the UN make this so that it's friendly?
But they don't want to do that because they build, and this is according to all the past UN summits, they build carbon footprints that are equivalent to entire African nations' emissions of a year for that two-week summit that they have.
They usually build mini little cities in these countries, have this UN conference where all the world leaders come in, celebrities, the chefs come in, caviar, and they celebrate world poverty and how they're going to cure poverty and sustainable development while they live eating caviar and lobster and all these receptions.
Oh, I've seen it firsthand as you have, Mark, at these UN conferences.
Keep those luxury SUVs running because you don't want the air conditioning to go flat.
You know, we've got to wrap it here.
I guess the one last takeaway point, Mark, I would make is that, you know, this narrative of entitlement and ignorance, I think, is a really deadly combination.
I think of AOC and their proclamation that we only have 12 years left.
You know, Mark, as you well know, a century, forget a century, a millennia is not even a blink of an eyelash in terms of geological time.
And you can have somebody like that get up there with a straight face and say, we have 12 years left on the meter.
To me, that should destroy that person's credibility right from the get-go.
It should.
And I know in my book, The Political Incarride to Climate Change, I go back to the history of tipping points.
The 19th century, people were warning about climatic excess.
In 1989, the UN gave a 10-year tipping point.
In 1982, they had a tipping point.
Paul Ehrlich gave tipping points.
Back in the 60s, it all expired.
Tipping points are comic relief.
And I actually want to say this: any Canadian American, any educated person who actually believes in a tipping point, as this moron in the article did about the birth strikers, I feel for them.
Tipping Points Debunked00:03:28
I mean, I think it's actually a question of basic intelligence that they're struggling with.
I'm sorry if I sound insulting there, but I actually believe that.
If you actually believe this nonsense, when you look at who's saying it, how many times they've said it, and what they're basing it on, and what they're lobbying for, and you fall for it, something's wrong with your intellect.
And sorry if I've insulted some of your audience.
I don't care.
Well, there you go, Mark.
You know, I got a venture outside now.
I want to see what the weather's like.
This has been in Toronto the coldest, wettest June in 25 years.
So, so much for global warming.
A lot of people here are saying, please bring it on.
Mark, always a pleasure, my friend.
Thanks for weighing in.
Thank you.
Appreciate it.
You got it.
And that was Mark Moreno of climate.com in Washington.
Keep it here, folks.
More of the Ezra Levant show to come after this.
On my monologue yesterday about the investigation into the Toronto Danforth shooting being finally released to the public, Bruce writes, even Inspector Clouseau could detect the pattern of Islamist ideology behind the supposed fits of mental illness by the attacker.
Indeed, as I mentioned in my monologue, I'm willing to accept at face value that the gunman, Faisal Hussein, struggled with mental illness during his lifetime, and there are certainly documented examples of this.
However, why is it that we can't accept the fact that someone might be mentally ill and a terrorist?
Why must those two factors be mutually exclusive?
There was a wealth of evidence pointing to Hussein being drawn to Islamic extremism, but with Islam seemingly existing as a protected class these days, applying the T-word to a Muslim who is actively engaged in terrorism is supposedly offside.
Whether Faisal Hussein was acting as a lone wolf or he was part of a wolf pack, the horror that he was responsible for on the Danforth last July most certainly was an act of despicable terrorism, period.
Sheldon writes, funny how our government and police institutions can't utter the word terrorist or terrorism.
Yeah, I agree, Sheldon, although it's not so funny in my book, rather, it is downright egregious that the powers that be are too cowardly due to political correctness to state the bloody obvious.
This entire investigation was a sham.
So much delicate care went into virtually sanitizing the vile actions of Faisal Hussein.
It makes one wonder where the compassion is for his many victims.
And Betty writes, This whole show tells me that the liberals have allowed extreme political agendas to override the laws of the land, and that is not a good thing.
Well, Betty, they say the first casualty of war is the truth, and the first casualty of political correctness is also the truth.
Our progressive gatekeepers seem to believe that we just can't handle the truth, so they'll sanitize it for us.
Ignorance is bliss, as the saying goes.
Well, that wraps up another edition of the Ezra Event Show.