London’s Waltham Forest Pride saw a burqa-clad woman scream "shame on you" and "God created Adam and Eve," calling it a hate crime while questioning if free speech laws apply equally—especially amid rising Islamification, with halal stores and modesty boutiques replacing secular norms. Meanwhile, Trump’s Baltimore critiques clash with mainstream media narratives, exposing how figures like Al Sharpton and Elijah Cummings exploit racial tensions to maintain power. Transgender athlete debates and Tulsi Gabbard’s Google lawsuit reveal deeper conflicts: identity politics vs. fairness, and establishment control over primaries, proving culture wars aren’t just ideological—they’re about who holds the levers of influence. [Automatically generated summary]
Hey folks, I got a viral video I want to show you from the UK today.
Obviously, you're on a podcast, so you'll just have to listen carefully to it.
I wish you could see the video though, because it's a woman dressed in a burqa from head to toe, and she's harassing people at a gay pride parade in the UK, and you've got to see it with your own eyes.
And I tell you that because I would like to invite you to become a premium subscriber to The Rebel.
That means you pay $8 a month or $80 a year if you buy in advance, and you get access to the video version of the podcast, and we show you stuff.
And I'd like you to see this stuff today.
Anyways, please consider go to the rebel.media slash shows.
And if you enter podcasts, you get a bit of a discount.
All right.
Without further ado, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, when a Muslim woman in a burqa screams at a gay pride parade, which side does the woke left support?
It's July 29th, and this is the Ezra Levant 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 them is because it's my bloody right to do so.
I saw this video on Twitter.
It was taken on a cell phone by someone on the street at a small gay pride parade in London, UK.
The neighborhood is called Waltham Forest, which sounds very pretty, doesn't it?
Here's what it looked like the other day.
Shame on you!
Shame on you to be scared!
People Shame on you!
Welcome to London, Estan.
I tell you, our new country is going to be great.
Now, let me say a few things about this.
Let me note some facts.
I'll give you my opinion in a moment, but let me just point out some observations.
She doesn't swear at anyone or use derogatory slurs.
She says, shame on you repeatedly.
She says the word despicable and shameless.
She says, God created Adam and Eve and not Adam and Steve, which sounds a bit out of place from someone who's surely not, doesn't have a Christian name like Adam or Steve or Eve.
What strikes me is the mania, though.
Her energetic manic chanting.
Like she was whipping herself up into a bit of a one-woman frenzy.
There was some usher or some security organizer who was physically being a barrier between her and that one gay pride marcher with the flag.
But I actually don't think that part was necessary.
I don't think she was going to hit anyone.
I don't think she was going to get physical, but she was just totally off the charts.
She was manic.
I thought the last line there, I don't know if you heard it, shouted back at her by, I presume, someone in the parade, that's what the racists and fascists say about you.
Did you hear that part?
And there's some truth in it, you know, although I don't recall ever seeing an Indigenous white woman in the UK screaming, you're despicable, at a group of peaceful Muslims walking down the street.
I just don't think I've seen that.
Not so brazen, not taking a public stand in the middle of the street.
I'm sure there are many private instances of racial or just personal insults.
But this was someone not just making a quiet comment.
This felt like she wanted to lead a counter-protest or something.
So I think the comment about this is how people treat you is a bit of an exaggeration.
That's actually not how most critics of Islam act.
But it does get straight to the heart of it, though, doesn't it?
I think it was a revelation for that gay pride activist who hollered back.
I wonder if he realizes that the kind of Islam that puts a woman in a one-person body bag with just slits for eyes, yeah, maybe they're not that progressive after all.
I mean, if they treat women like that, Muslim women, imagine how they would treat gays, especially gay infidels.
Well, no need to imagine.
In Iran, the preferred method for dealing with gays is to hang them in the public square.
In other countries like Saudi Arabia, they stone them.
I could almost imagine that woman shrieking at someone in Pakistan or Afghanistan for some sexual offense, screaming at someone, say, for being an adulteress.
It really feels like a little clip from that left-wing anti-Christian drama called The Handmaid's Tale, which is the most cowardly show on TV.
There is no Christian theocracy in the world.
There are dozens of countries, though, that are Muslim theocracies to more or less extent.
And the women in those Muslim theocracies, especially in Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, they'd only dream of having it as good as they do in the handmade's tale.
For one thing, in the handmaid's tale, they get to feel the sun and the wind on their faces.
I guess if they were to put those actresses in the full burqas on the show, not only would it look too Islamic and not Christian looking, but more to the point, we like to see actors and actresses and their faces.
We like to identify with them.
A lot of acting is facial expressions.
No one wants to watch a TV drama acted out by people in a burqa.
No actor wants to be unfamous like that.
Here's some censored footage of a woman being stoned to death in Afghanistan a few years back for adultery.
It wasn't really adultery, of course.
She was just trying to escape a forced marriage and she was caught and they put her in a pit and they stoned her to death.
Of course, there may have been women screaming at her, shameless, despicable, etc.
But the only people allowed to take rocks and stone her to death there were men, apparently.
So the basic facts about what we saw in Waltham Forest.
A woman shouted at the gay pride protesters, but she didn't physically touch them.
She didn't threaten them.
She didn't chase or follow them.
She didn't use derogatory slurs against them, didn't call for any harm to come to them, other than the social odium of shame, shame, shame.
She was pretty clear about that, wasn't she?
Sure, in another place, I bet she would have called for them to be stoned to death, but she didn't actually say that in London.
So not to take her side, but really, what crime did she commit there?
It is a legal right to say to someone, especially someone having a political protest or demonstration in a public place, it is a legal right to say shame on you.
I think it is.
Now, we don't like people dressed up like mailboxes, and that's what Boris Johnson, the new prime minister, once called women in Burkhus.
He called them letterboxes, if you understand the metaphor.
We don't like that.
We also don't like people who would kill gays and kill women who leave their forced marriages.
But I don't think this woman was an illegal immigrant to the UK.
Judging by her accent, I think she was either allowed into the UK, even invited him, welcomed in a long time ago as an immigrant.
But if you listen to her accent, it wouldn't surprise me if she was actually born in the UK.
And that's a bigger problem, don't you think?
A lifetime in the UK, and she's still more psychologically and morally at home in Pakistan or Iran than in London.
But look at this tweet from the Muslim mayor of London, Sadiq Khan.
And I should point out that Sadiq Khan, while he doesn't usually shriek at people, he does engage in some sexual censorship of despicable and shameless women himself.
Like when he banned these non-Sharia compliant bikini ads from London tube stations.
Yeah, he's more clever than that shrieking woman and more effective.
But here's his comment on the video of the shrieker.
He said, this was an appalling homophobic attack.
Here in London, you are free to be who you want to be and love who you want to love.
And hate crimes against the LGBTQ plus community will not be tolerated.
The Metro Police are investigating.
If you have any information, please call 101.
So calling 101 is calling the police over there.
Now, again, was what this woman did a hate crime?
I don't deny she was full of hate.
She said as much, but what was the crime?
And by the way, does anyone think what she said is not being preached and taught at a thousand British mosques and schools every day?
She just made the mistake of saying it on a high street in English.
Here's the cops, Waltham Forest Police.
We are aware of footage circulating on social media of abuse directed at those taking part in the Waltham Forest Pride event.
We are Waltham Forest STP Pride, and inquiries are underway.
Abusing someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity is a hate crime.
If you have been verbally or physically abused, harassed, or attacked in any way by someone because you are or they think you are LGBT plus, they drop the cue.
Please report these crimes to police or through a third-party agency.
Now, I obviously don't like the Sharia approach to women, sexuality, homosexuality, free expression, et cetera.
Obviously, I mean, just to guess if you're wearing a medieval body bag and it actually got up to 38 degrees Celsius last week in London.
Think about that.
If you're dressed like that and shrieking at gay pride marches, I'm guessing you've got strong views about everything from Jews to Western democracy to terrorism.
Yeah, our new country is going to be amazing.
But of all the things to criminalize, not sure that shouting shame at someone is the thing I'd start with.
Pretty sure the problem actually predates that.
If you're worried about what you saw there, perhaps the problem is inviting in millions of people who hate gays and believe they ought to be stoned to death.
And you suddenly, you thought they'd suddenly changed their deep-seated hatred on a short plane ride over.
Maybe that's the problem.
Here's Pew Research with their international surveys on gay rights.
They pulled gay rights all around the world.
Should society accept homosexuality?
In Canada, 80% say yes.
In most Muslim countries, it's over 90% who say no.
Are you still surprised that they say no in the UK shortly after hitting the plane over from Pakistan?
Now, here's a question for you.
How are you going to find that suspect?
She's wearing a mask in public.
She's dressed in black.
How you got to pick her out of a lineup?
That's one reason we don't let people wear masks in public.
I think she's rude.
I think she does hate gays and probably uncovered women who she regards as dirty.
And she probably hates Jews and Christians too, frankly.
But I don't actually think we saw a crime there.
I mean, if the city won't arrest anti-fuss street thugs on the left who actually attack people, how can they arrest someone shouting shame for 60 seconds in the face of a parade?
But they say it's a crime, and apparently they found her.
Look at this tweet a little later in the day.
Officers investigating footage circulating on social media of abuse directed to those taking part in a pride event in Waltham Forest have arrested a 38-year-old woman under Section 4A of the Public Order Act.
She has been taken into custody at a North London police station.
Now, I have to think she turned herself in.
How else could they have found her?
Do you think the rest of her Sharia family was ashamed by her conduct or actually thrilled and proud of her?
We'll see.
I just don't know.
I can't believe someone like that would ever bend the knee to a secular justice system.
I just don't believe she will.
I think they dropped the charges against her.
But back to the parade itself for a moment.
It's pretty small.
It's not like the huge pride parades.
And I don't think there was, actually, I didn't even see any nudity.
I mean, there's some drag queens at Queens and whatnot, but I think they were just saying who they were.
their day.
Like it wasn't, so why the extreme reaction?
I mean, in Toronto, it's, I mean, these gents have some pants on.
But in Toronto, it is quite often, well, they're barefoot all over.
Let me just put it that way.
They'll practically have sex on the street in Toronto's Pride.
It wasn't that way in Waltham Forest.
It was tame.
I don't know what triggered her particularly.
Well, what's going on?
What's going on there in Waltham Forest?
Well, you've heard of gentrification.
That's when yuppies move into a cheap neighborhood, buy up the houses, renovate them, or knock them down and build nice new ones.
Pretty soon, Starbucks are moving in.
Soon it's a hip place to be up and coming.
That's gentrification.
What's happening to Waltham Forest?
What a pretty name, Waltham Forest.
Well, it's not gentrification, it's Islamification.
I found that exact location on Google Street Maps by typing in the name of the stores that we saw on the street.
So I found the exact location.
And if you zoom in up and down the street, it's not gentrified, it's Islamified.
There's halal grocery stores, there's Turkish restaurants, there's this shore, the Al-Ikhlas Boutique, which sells modesty clothing for women.
You can still see some non-Muslims on the street.
There's even a bar that still sells alcohol for now.
But it's pretty clear which direction that neighborhood is going politically, demographically, religiously.
I predict that in 10 years there won't even be a pride parade in Waltham Forest.
No bars selling alcohol either.
There won't be any customers.
And frankly, you won't even see that many uncovered women on the street.
When I was in Paris four years ago, after the terrorist attack on the Bataclan nightclub, I saw huge neighborhoods in Paris.
And I don't mean the far suburbs.
I'm talking in the heart of the city itself, where it was just men on the street.
Just men.
I mean, it would take you a while.
What's weird about the street?
There's no women.
Just guys, guys, guys, drinking coffee, sitting around, not working, probably collecting welfare.
I don't know.
They were trading conspiracy theories about Jews, which I thought was weird.
You saw the occasional woman covered in a hijab rushing from store to store buying groceries or things for her home, but these guys were just hanging out in the street.
To me, it was shocking how a beautiful, romantic, feminine city like Paris was changing.
It looked more like something you'd see in Turkey or Pakistan.
That's Paris.
I think this woman in London was rude.
I don't think what she did was a crime in my view.
I'm a free speecher.
And I bet you a shilling that they will not prosecute her.
I mean, if she were some working-class white football hooligan, sure, yeah, they'd throw the book at her.
But she's a Muslim woman in a burqa.
I mean, you don't want an intifada in the streets, do you?
Yeah, no.
I know how this is going to end.
The thing I'm most interested in is finding that guy who hollered, that's what the racists and fascists say about you.
I sure would be interested to see if this incident did anything to enter his consciousness about where the threat to gay rights and feminism is actually coming from in London in 2019.
Criticism and Racism in Baltimore00:08:30
I wonder if he's putting it all together yet.
stay with us for more.
About a year ago, city leaders identified some of the city's most violent neighborhoods.
What the hell?
We should just take all this to Target under Baltimore's Violence Reduction Initiative.
Oh, Jesus.
Just last week, we went with Mayor Pugh as she toured an East Baltimore neighborhood.
This a new one.
I've been out here 54 years.
It's a new one.
Baltimore's Violence Reduction Initiative is about taking steps to rid communities of the cornerstones that contribute to crime.
Oh my God, you can smell the dead animals.
Blocks of dilapidated buildings help to hide the addiction that's crippled this community.
Well, that's a clip of Democratic lawmakers in Baltimore touring Baltimore talking about the rat problem in Baltimore.
You heard her.
You can smell the animals.
It's decrepit.
It really is like the worst of Detroit in both the decrepitude of the economy and the housing stock and also the crime.
That's what the Democrats said.
The New York Times said the same thing just days ago.
Same with Bernie Sanders and even the Baltimore Sun, when Donald Trump was elected, said they agreed with him the city needs a revamp.
But in his recent tweets criticizing the city and its lead congressman, oh my god, well, it's all being deemed racist.
What's the truth?
Is it possible to criticize the state of urban blight in America without being called a racist?
Joining us now via Skype from Phoenix, Arizona, where he's covering the Democrats is our friend Joel Pollock, senior editor-at-large of Breitbart.com.
Joel, thanks for joining us.
I know you're literally holding the camera in your hand.
Thanks for letting us squeeze in a few minutes of your time.
Tell us, is it fair to criticize Baltimore, which is a heavily black city run by black Democrats?
Can you make that criticism without being a racist?
Sure.
I mean, Bernie Sanders made a very similar criticism.
He said people in Baltimore were living in conditions like North Korea.
The Baltimore Sun, on the day Trump won the election last year, or in 2016 rather, printed an op-ed saying that Baltimore should be declared a disaster, destroyed, and then rebuilt.
Oh my God, that's their own newspaper.
Holy cow.
Yeah, this is basically a very common criticism of Baltimore.
The irony is that some of the people criticizing Trump are responsible for Baltimore's decay in a very direct way.
CNN encouraged rioting after the death of a black man from Baltimore, Freddie Gray, on his way to a police station in the back of a police van.
And they whipped up public sentiment.
And the result of that was the police pulled back from ordinary policing in Baltimore, leading to a spike in the murder rate.
And really, if you look at the murder rate in the United States, there are three cities responsible, Baltimore, Chicago, and Washington, D.C.
And this has been something people have remarked on for many years.
HBO, sorry, PBS came out with a documentary last year about the rat problem in Baltimore.
So the only thing that's different about this criticism of Baltimore is that Donald Trump made it.
Yeah.
Now, the reason he focused on Baltimore, if I'm not mistaken, is because one of Trump's political rivals is a Democrat named Elijah Cummings, who has presided over some of the most desperate neighborhoods in Baltimore for decades.
And I don't know.
I mean, I'm not going to say the man doesn't care.
I'm sure in his heart he does care.
But I guess he doesn't care enough to actually fix the problem.
Trump's calling him King Elijah, making a lot of fun of it.
I think this is one of the first times the Democrats have been shown their mess.
And those three cities you just mentioned, D.C., Chicago, Baltimore, and other urban problem cities, they're all run by Democrats.
That's not a coincidence, is it, Joel?
No, it's not.
And they basically have no opposition in these cities.
I mean, they're one-party states.
They're like third world countries politically.
And so as a result, the citizens are forced to accept whatever leadership the unions or the political machine gives them.
And in this case, in Baltimore, the problem is just a lifetime tenure.
I mean, Elijah Cummings responded to Trump by saying he intends to represent his district until he's done living on this earth.
You know, and he meant it as a statement of political conviction.
But really, it's almost a self-owned because there's no one in Congress who should ever assume that they're serving for life.
So this is a common denominator.
We have these problems in many of these cities.
Baltimore's one of them.
And yeah, it didn't become racist until Trump said it, of course.
Yeah.
Now, I see today, I woke up this morning and I love starting my day with a few Trump tweets.
I think Trump loves it even more than I do because he knows, first of all, he knows exactly what button to push to get the media talking about whatever he wants all day.
And they can't help it.
For example, he criticized Al Sharpton.
Al Sharpton calls himself a pastor.
And look at this.
He said, Al Sharpton says, arrived in D.C. from Atlanta, headed to Baltimore.
Long day, but can't stop.
And Trump said, I've known Al for 25 years.
He went to fights with him and Don King.
Always got along well.
He loved Trump.
He would ask me for favors often.
Al is a con man, a troublemaker, always looking for a score, just doing his thing.
Must have intimidated Comcast NBC.
Hates whites and cops.
It's those last three words that I thought, oh boy.
But you know what?
I think it's true, Joel.
I think it's true.
He's like a slightly more presentable Louis Farrakhan.
He's like a Christian Louis Farrakhan.
Right.
And he's probably the most toxic figure in mainstream politics today.
He's been rehabilitated.
Back in 2008, given Sharpton's history of racism and anti-Semitism and general incitement, Barack Obama didn't want to be seen anywhere near him and made it known that he did not want Sharpton's endorsement.
But then after Obama became president, he needed an ally in the black community because he was getting a lot of criticism from Cornell West, Tavis Smiley, and others on the left.
So he rehabilitated Sharpton's image and they sent a bunch of White House advisors to Sharpton's conference, the National Action Network conference in 2011.
MSNBC picked up Sharpton as a news host, even though he had no journalistic experience and could barely read the teleprompter.
And basically he was restored or given this new platform, which he then used to divide the country on race in the Trayvon Martin fiasco.
In fact, there's no individual who's more responsible for our racial division.
There's no single person than Al Sharpton.
So Trump, he could have added Jews in there.
Sharpton has a long history of just virulent anti-Semitism.
But Trump is exactly right to call him out on his hatred, his racism, his anti-police rhetoric and incitement.
And again, this one goes to Trump because the Democrats can't really defend Sharpton.
And now, for the first time, many people will be looking at his actual record.
You know, it reminds me of when Trump went after the squad, those four congresswomen, including Alexandria Kuzi-Gortez and Ilhan Omar.
It was David Axelrod, Obama's 2008 campaign chairman, who said, oh, I see what's going on here.
He's tackling the squad.
And because so many people have a reflexive opposition to Trump, they're casting their lot in with these four extremist Democrats in a way they wouldn't normally do, except they're anti-Trump.
So they're legitimizing Trump's claim that they're the face of the Democrats.
I think Axelrod would say, ah, look what Trump's doing.
He's by going after Sharpton, he's eliciting that Pavlovian response by the leftist media to defend anyone Trump criticizes.
So not only will he highlight Al Sharpton's racism, Al Sharpton's anti-Semitism, but he'll force the Democrats to embrace him in a way they hadn't before.
I think there's a depth of strategy to Trump and his tweet that I think many people might not notice.
I think he's forcing the Democrats to own or disown Sharpton, and most will own him.
Highlight Reel of Trump Strategy00:03:03
Well, it's too late.
I mean, they already do own him.
Every single Democratic candidate, every one of them, has gone to Sharpton's conference this year and is seeking his support.
Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden, they basically have all signed on with this guy.
It's kind of incredible.
They talk about wanting to fight racism and anti-Semitism, and they've signed up with the most racist, anti-Semitic person in the country, basically.
So they already own him, and Trump is going to highlight that.
And I think it's about time.
Well, Joel, I know you're rushed.
Thanks for jamming us in.
I know you're holding your cell phone up with your arm.
Your arm's probably getting tired.
Thanks for fitting us in.
I appreciate your commentary.
You keep doing your great work out there, okay?
Exactly, YouTube.
All right, there you have it, Joel Pollock, senior editor-at-large, Breitbart.com.
We caught him on the go, and it was nice of him to, it was a close-up shot, but he was holding the camera in his arm, and that's how it goes sometimes.
Hey, you know, there's one thing Joel mentioned.
I just want to show it to you because I don't know if you saw it.
Joel mentioned in passing that Al Sharpton was a terrible, had no journalistic background and couldn't even read a teleprompter.
That's not an insult.
It's an observation.
I want to show you a little bit of this clip of a highlight reel put together.
I think it's by the folks at the Washington Free Beacon.
Take a look at, it's called Al Sharpton versus the Teleprompter.
Just to end on a light note here, take a look at this.
But resist, we must.
We must.
They're all jitty about a shutdown.
The tortesse in the race.
Then co-author of Hoobries.
You two lead singer, Bono, Fran Dreischer, Sigenoy Weaver, suspect Jaha Sanaev, Rush Limbaugh, Rush Limbaugh, Rush Limbaugh, the show Rush Lombard hosts Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sartomaya.
Is Mike Muckery?
Yesterday, Antony Nin Scalia, Kim Kadarshin, and the Republican candidates.
Both Cairo and Benghazi.
We rank behind La Vita.
First stop, Kazakh, Kazakhstan.
To college students in Beijing.
He's getting lunch at Chripoli in Iowa.
Vain is appropriate.
The GOP's tax day giveaway to millionaires.
Why was traffic problems email sent?
The Environmental Protection Agency.
And what sequestation has done.
Yeah, well, what he makes up, what he lacks in eloquence, he makes up for with virulence.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
On the monologue Friday about transgendered women competing in the 2020 Olympics, Bruce writes, The Olympic organizers should have a class action suit slapped on them, but I doubt that will happen.
Bruce's Solution00:01:38
What's more likely is that people will just switch off their TVs or change channels and watch real competition.
Well, Bruce, my point was NBC has a pretty big stake in this, don't they?
I forget the exact billions they're paying for the footage.
It's billions.
I think NBC will, they've got the skin in the game.
They want people to watch.
And no one thinks it's sport to watch a second-rate guy beat a gal.
Or soon it'll just be a bunch of second-rate guys saying, I'm a gal.
No, you're not, buddy.
Rob writes, I have a simple solution to the trans athlete issue.
Eliminate men's and women's categories altogether and replace them with XX and XY for chromosomal makeup.
Let them call themselves whatever they want.
Sure, yeah, that's one way of doing it.
Another is to have another category called trans.
I mean, the whole point about sport is you have different categories.
You have seniors.
I mean, kids.
When kids play hockey, you don't have an 18-year-old boy playing against a 12-year-old boy.
We stratify based on age, weight class, ability.
Otherwise, it's not sport, is it?
On my interview with Alan Bokari on Tulsi Gabbard's suing Google, Paul writes, as we saw in 2016, the Democrat presidential primary won't be decided by Democrats.
It'll be decided by party insiders.
The last thing they want is sanity taking over the party, and they see Gabbard as a threat to that.
Yeah, sanity, outsider, dissident, someone who's not quite in sync with their invade the world, invite the world approach.
I don't know.
I like the cut of her jib.
I just don't think she has a chance.
Well, that's the show for today, folks.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rubble World Headquarters to you at home, good night.