Rebel News’s 2021 plans clash with Canada’s mainstream media and Liberal-aligned figures after Aaron O’Toole condemned PLA training—18 joint projects in 2019—while his team denied an interview, sparking accusations of censorship. Calvin Robinson warns Big Tech (Apple, Google, Facebook) is suppressing dissent, from Nigel Farage’s refugee remarks to potential deplatforming of journalists, risking democratic extremism. With Rebel expanding coverage on China’s influence and lockdown policing normalizing restrictions, the episode urges collective resistance against shrinking free speech. [Automatically generated summary]
Today I talk about my exclusive email interview with Aaron O'Toole, the Conservative Party leader.
I thought it was a good interview.
He talked about questions I had about the China files.
That's interesting.
I think he did a good job.
I'll tell you some of his answers.
But it turned weird when his director of communications sort of denied that there was an interview, even though, like I say, it was all done by email.
So I have the receipts, as the kids would say.
It's a really weird story.
I'll tell you about it.
I wish you had the video version of this podcast because I show you my email exchange, which is what's sort of funny about this whole thing.
I'd like to invite you to become a video subscriber to this podcast.
Go to RebelNews.com, click subscribe.
It's $8 a month or $80 for the whole year.
You get the visual stuff.
We put a fair bit of effort into the video side of things, the images, the visuals.
And the $8 a month helps us keep the home fires burning because, of course, you know, we don't take a dime from Trudeau.
All right, here is today's podcast.
Tonight, an exclusive interview by email with Erin O'Toole.
It's January 11th, 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 is government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
Hey, I have a good story for you, and then a weird story for you, and then a bad story for you.
And the thing is, it's actually all the same story.
Hey, remember last month when I had what I called the scoop of my lifetime.
34 pages of top-secret government documents that the government simply forgot to censor before sending them to me.
It detailed how the Canadian Armed Forces didn't want to have joint winter warfare exercises with China's People's Liberation Army after China seized two Canadian hostages, Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig.
Well, when Justin Trudeau and his bureaucrats found out about this proposed cancellation, they hit the roof.
I wasn't supposed to get copies of the 34 pages of emails and memos, but I did, and it made huge news.
News in Canada, the Globe and Mail followed up with a major story on it.
News around the world.
And I was invited on the number one news show in America, Tucker Carlson Show, on Fox.
It was a brief interview.
Pretty exciting.
And I think I got the message out.
Here's how that went.
Ezra Levant is the founder of Rebel News in Canada.
He broke this story.
It's an amazing story.
And he joins us tonight.
Ezra, thanks so much for coming on.
I read this.
My first reaction was, this cannot be true.
Your prime minister offered to train Chinese troops in Canada.
Why would he do that?
It's a shock to Canadians, too.
That cold weather warfare that you're referring to was just one of 18 different joint projects the Canadian Armed Forces had with the People's Liberation Army in 2019 alone.
Canada is training one and two star Chinese generals in our war colleges.
We're training lieutenants and majors, commanders.
We're sending Canadians over to China.
We're bringing Chinese, I think they're not just soldiers, I think they're spies as well, to Canada.
And I don't know a single person in this country who knew about it, but it's been happening.
And we found out about it really by accident when the government sent me freedom of information documents and forgot to black them out.
Or maybe, frankly, someone inside the government wanted to blow the whistle on this incredibly upside-down relationship.
In those same memos you're talking about, Trudeau's office was supporting China and condemning the Trump administration.
It was upside down.
It was inverted morality.
It's seeping all the way into our bureaucracy, our diplomacy, and they're trying to get the military on side too.
I mean, with respect, we're Americans, so our concern is the United States.
Canada is our biggest trading partner.
We have the closest relationship with Canada of any country, obviously, in the world.
This seems like an obvious threat to American national security.
Does the Trump administration believe that, do you think?
Well, in fact, in these memos, you can see that the Trump administration warned Canada that this winter warfare training would transfer knowledge to China that could be used.
Now, they don't explain would it be used to take on Uyghurs in Xinjiang, Tibetans to fight India in the Himalayas, or even to fight us.
And when the military, the Canadian military said our American allies or our allies are concerned about this, Trudeau's staff pushed back and said, is it just the Trump administration or is anyone else worried about it?
So there's an antipathy towards America that seeps through all these secret documents.
And the overarching goal is to let China's president, Xi Jinping, save face.
I want to tell you, though, Tucker, that is not the view shared by grassroots Canadians.
Ever since China kidnapped those two civilians two years ago today, actually, Canadian public opinion has hardened against China.
And the last Pew Poll I saw actually says that Canadians are more hostile to China than Americans are.
You have every reason to be.
Ezra, thank you so much.
And congratulations on Rebel News.
I know you take a lot of abuse up in Canada, but you do a great job.
We appreciate it.
So like I say, biggest story of my life, real genuine secret documents.
Not Watergate or anything, but big for me.
Anyways, the next day, Aaron O'Toole, the Conservative leader, and other Conservatives asked about it in Parliament.
They agreed.
It was a big story.
Mr. Speaker, months after Canadian citizens were taken hostage by the communist regime in China, we learned that the Liberals fought hard to keep a close relationship with China.
In fact, the Deputy Prime Minister fought for Canada to train China's military on Canadian soil against the direct advice of the chief of defense staff.
With our citizens in jail, our exports banned, and with China committing human rights abuses around the world, why did the deputy prime minister push hard to partner with him?
And then I saw press releases, including one from the Conservative Party's defense critic.
Can you guess who I'm talking about?
Can you name the Conservative Party's defense critic?
Don't Google it.
Can you name him without checking?
To be honest, I couldn't either, but I did Google it.
And I sent him three invitations to come and talk on our show.
Three.
Two by Twitter direct message.
He follows me.
And one by email.
Now, I didn't get a reply.
I'm going to leave you guessing who he is because I don't think you know either.
Anyways, he can come on our show anytime he likes if he has something to say, but I guess he doesn't.
Maybe he's on a beach somewhere.
But then Aaron O'Toole had a press conference specifically about the documents that I had received.
I was pretty excited.
My scoop was growing.
So it was a press conference that you had to dial in a conference call and you would be chosen to ask questions.
I had some really good questions.
I dialed into the conference call, but I was never picked as a journalist.
Now that's okay.
Not everyone gets picked all the time.
I thought it was a bit odd because the CBC was given two questions and Canadian press was given two questions.
And out of all the questions that were asked, only a couple were about China.
And they weren't really questions.
They were scolding O'Toole for daring to be upset about China.
And none of the questions in the entire press conference were about the documents, the China files, that I had leaked and that O'Toole had called the press conference to talk about.
Take a look.
And just as a follow-up, I want to get your direct reaction to the news this morning that officials in Beijing have said that Michael Kobrig and Michael Spaver have already been indicted and tried.
And then just as a follow-up to your answer there, don't you think that sanctions at a time like this would put them at even greater risk given the situation that Cobrig and Spava are in?
Don't you think that some of the, you know, some of what you might be advocating, Magnitsky sanctions, perhaps well-intentioned, you know, could have negative repercussions for these two Michaels.
Because when you poke the jailer in the eye, it's not always a good idea.
Do you not think that's a consideration?
Or can you talk about that a little bit more in a little more detail, perhaps?
So if Aaron O'Toole wanted to get the message out about the China files, I think he failed.
Simply, no reporters in the media party wanted to talk about it.
I don't blame them.
It's a story they don't like to write about.
So I sent a note to Aaron O'Toole's press secretary, Chelsea Tucker, asking her if she actually wanted to talk about the news story of the season.
Great story for the conservative base.
Something about which the liberals are utterly vulnerable.
And she came up with a series of excuses for why Aaron O'Toole couldn't talk to me.
He was busy.
What about COVID-19?
He had already talked to Rebel News months ago.
These were some of her excuses.
She was stubborn.
But I can be more stubborn than just about anyone sometimes.
And finally, she agreed to do the interview with Aaron O'Toole via email.
The deal was I would send my questions to her.
She would pass them on to Aaron O'Toole, or more likely a policy advisor.
They would write a reply and send back the answers to me.
It's not ideal.
I reminded her we're in the video business.
But look, email messages do work, and I acknowledge that is how a lot of politics are done.
But by the time I heard back from her, it was almost the Christmas break.
Seriously, more than a week of delay had gone by since we broke the scoop, and I was trying to get conservatives to appear on our broadcast.
So by the time we were in late December, it was a dead zone for journalism.
So I held on to the written interview until the news picked up in the new year.
Of course, last week was just nuts with what happened in Washington.
And Mondays are always slow news days.
So today we published the email interview with Aaron O'Toole before the week began.
And I think it's a great story for Aaron O'Toole.
It makes him look strong and decisive.
He's talking about a winning issue for him.
You know what I mean by that, right?
I mean, he can be interviewed by the CBC about, I don't know, systemic racism or global warming or Greta Tunberg or whatever the CBC wants him to talk about.
And even if he does a very careful job and does the best he can, he's always losing because he's talking about subjects that favor the liberals.
But if he can talk about China and national security and the military and the two Michaels, he'll always win, even if he doesn't do a great job talking about it.
You know what I mean?
I'm just saying that's how politics works.
It's not even what you say in a conversation.
It's what the conversation is about.
What's the ballot question, election strategists might say?
Trudeau hates it when people are talking about China and spying in the military.
That's a bit of a hint about what O'Toole maybe should talk about, don't you think?
So that's what we did, and we published it this morning pretty positively.
You'll see that we were careful to mention that it was an email interview, which is sort of obvious, because if it were a video interview, we would have the video of it.
And we mentioned that the interview was actually done before Christmas, which it was.
Other than that, I think it was pretty much verbatim.
And it's good.
That's the good news part of the story.
Aaron O'Toole is strong on China.
Let me read a bit.
I'm just going to read one of my questions I put to him.
I said, the China files show that besides the winter warfare training, there were 17 other Canadian Armed Forces People's Liberation Army projects in 2019.
Would you suspend any of those?
And he answered, Canada should not be training Chinese soldiers.
As Prime Minister, I would cancel any training exercise coordinated with the People's Liberation Army.
Training Chinese military personnel, why the Chinese Communist Party holds Canadians hostage and actively spies on and intimidates Canadians at home is dangerous.
Canada needs to take a principled approach to foreign policy and stand up to China.
It's a pretty good answer.
Now, I'm going to stop there.
I asked him four questions, and he gave four answers, and I think they were pretty good.
And we published them without editing a single word that he said, without even changing a comma or an apostrophe.
Nothing added, nothing take away.
And you notice one more thing, right?
The use of the first person.
As prime minister, I would.
Now, I mentioned that to you, even though it's weird to mention it, because of course it's him talking in the first person.
I had asked to interview Aaron O'Toole via Skype, but they said no, only by email.
I grudgingly accepted.
And they came through.
So of course it's Aaron O'Toole.
But since I had dealt with the press secretary as the go-between, I mean, I wasn't bugging Aaron O'Toole directly, I sent Chelsea, the press secretary, one last email confirming that these words, in fact, were attributable to Aaron O'Toole.
I wasn't really interested in doing an interview with some staffer.
I wanted to know what the leader of the party had to say.
And you can see in this email, she said, of course it's attributable to O'Toole.
Who else would use words?
As Prime Minister, I would.
Yeah, so of course it was Aaron O'Toole's replies, and she wished me Merry Christmas.
So today we published the story, an exclusive interview done by email about my China file scoop.
I asked exclusive questions that I thought up in my brain, and O'Toole gave me answers that were sent only to me.
That's what exclusive means, I think.
I know you're thinking I'm weird for even mentioning these details, but I'm telling you that because the media party freaked out about this.
Andrew Coyne's Cancel Culture Complaint00:08:25
For example, Andrew Coyne, I don't even know where he is these days, National Post, Global Mail, Toronto Star.
It's all the same, isn't it?
He was apoplectic.
He didn't really say why.
I guess we're just all supposed to know why.
I'll tell you why, because Andrew Coyne believes in cancel culture, and he thinks we rebel news folks should be canceled, and we should not be allowed to ask questions of Aaron O'Toole, and he should not be allowed to talk to us.
And more than that, he believes he's in a position to tell politicians what they can or can't say and to whom they can or can't say it.
That's a lot chutzpah.
And soon, other liberal hacks like Andrew Coyne got in on it, including liberal MPs and Liberal Party staff, to which my reaction would be great.
It upset them.
The interview was a good one for Aaron O'Toole.
It had good answers on China.
It was on O'Toole's agenda, not Trudeau's agenda.
So the Liberals were really mad, and that's great.
And he's reconnecting with the conservative base.
That's great.
Here's a pro tip, and I used to be a staffer on Parliament Hill more than 20 years ago.
If your political opponents are really mad at you, that's a sign you're doing something right in our political system.
Even Gerald Butz, the disgraced former aide to Justin Trudeau, who was forced to resign over his role in the dirty SNC Lavland corruption scandal.
Remember him?
He's now working from New York.
He weighed in.
That's a sign you're over the target if even Gerald Butts is mad at you.
I guess he wants to bring canceled culture up to Canada too, I guess, for enemies of the Liberal Party, I guess.
So far, so great.
O'Toole reconciling with Rebel News, the biggest conservative news agency in Canada.
O'Toole sounding pretty good on good issues, ignoring the media party.
That's what I'd call a win.
But then, but then O'Toole's communications staff snapped.
Not him yet, at least when I'm recording this, but his staff.
Look at this weirdness from Melanie Parity, his communications director.
Just again and again and again.
It was not an interview.
It was not an interview.
It was from a spokesman.
It didn't happen.
It's a lie.
Well, no, sister, it wasn't an email from a staffer.
I wouldn't publish an interview from a staffer.
I mean, who cares what a staffer says?
By the way, a staffer wouldn't say, as prime minister, I would do this or that.
It was handed to me by a staffer, but it was attributed to the leader.
And I presume he wrote it or approved it if he's putting it out.
It was an interview by email, which is acknowledged in our story, because they wouldn't do a Skype call.
Okay, that's fine.
I mean, I don't really care.
I've had the great pleasure of interviewing Aaron O'Toole in person before.
It's a wonderful experience.
I'd like to do it by Skype, but I'll take email from now and then.
But why the fib?
Why the attempt to deceive or, I don't know, distract?
Why try to deny the obvious?
They gave me an email interview.
That's a thing.
Why be shy about it?
Why try to throw me under the bus?
Was it me?
Really, how is that throwing me under the bus?
I posted to Twitter my email conversation with the press secretary confirming that it was indeed from O'Toole.
Really weak, really sad.
But more than that, why are they doing that?
Why don't you say the Conservative Party position is the same no matter who asks us a question?
Okay, you're done.
That didn't even take five seconds.
Why not say we take questions from a range of journalists?
It's part of our job in the communications department.
Why say that?
How about saying nothing?
Why spend half a day dancing to the tune played by liberals?
Would a liberal communications director take one second of his day to indulge some conservative online troll?
Would they let the conservatives hijack the liberals for half a day to talk about things they didn't want to talk about?
How embarrassing, how unprofessional.
Not from me.
I mean, I thought it was a good interview.
And I don't even think it's that embarrassing for Aaron O'Toole.
What he said was pretty good.
And we emailed it to a lot of people in Canada, probably the first time they ever heard of him talk about it because the media party didn't let him get any messages out on that.
But for a spin doctor, he's just spinning in circles, digging a hole.
Embarrassing for her.
Why, though?
Why?
Would a single person in the world care that Aaron O'Toole told me he wants to be tough on Communist China?
I mean, maybe Andrew Coyne cares, but so what?
He voted NDP and he voted liberal in the last few elections.
He's a quirky columnist who, I promise you, will never support the Conservatives and does not want good things for Conservatives.
So why is Melanie Parody jumping up and down for him?
Why try to appease him and give his cancel culture call any credence?
Why are you doing that?
You know, Arrow Toole is actually being pretty good on cancel culture.
At least whoever runs his Twitter account has been good on cancel culture, at least back when he was running for party leader.
I haven't heard much from him about that since.
It's just weird that his own staff are wobbly.
I mean, if you don't want to talk to me or Rebel, then don't talk to me or the rebel.
Don't talk to me and then try to lie about it, especially when I got the receipts.
Oh, well, who cares?
I mean, it was only the biggest story in the season.
Why wouldn't they want to get in on it?
I mean, but sure, go answer some more gotcha questions from the CBC there, still suing the Conservative Party, by the way, literally suing the Conservative Party.
The CBC is suing.
But you go give them some exclusive interviews on TV, not even by email.
You know what?
We're going to keep doing our job here at Rebel News, which is telling the story with or without MPs.
I mean, it was the largest story of the day, with or without MPs.
I mean, I haven't been on Tucker ever in my life.
That was 5 million viewers.
The fact that the Conservative Party's obscure defense critic wouldn't even return my three messages, well, really, so what?
I mean, I got the story out, didn't I?
He probably could have used some of the coverage.
I don't think most people even know the Conservatives have a conservative defense critic.
Look, we've had the best journalistic year of our lives by telling the story that others won't tell.
And you know, in the past year, since the pandemic started, we've done thousands of stories.
I mean, we're doing like 10 a day.
I doubt we've talked to politicians 10 times in the last thousand stories since the pandemic began.
I mean, why?
They just aren't relevant.
Certainly not opposition MPs who won't oppose, critics who won't criticize in a parliament that almost never sits.
I mean, any journalist who thinks that's where you're going to get the news probably is paid by politicians, which is most of them.
Not us.
We're too busy.
And by the way, this week we're announcing we're getting even busier.
Thanks to our generous viewers, we've paid down our bank loan.
And now we've got some freedom of movement.
We are putting up three help-wanted ads for new journalists.
One for a reporter in Montreal, one for a reporter in Ottawa, and one for a reporter to cover the China beat.
So hopefully someone who speaks Chinese fluently is able to report on China's influence in this country and everything from politics to universities to media, talk about what's going on in Hong Kong, stuff like that.
So that's what we're doing.
And you know what?
We're doing it with or without the permission of the media party or the media party's financiers in the Liberal Party.
Aaron O'Toole is welcome to come talk to us anytime if he wants to be part of that conversation.
But if not, it really doesn't hurt my feelings because I know who I am and I know who we are, no matter what Justin Trudeau and Andrew Coyne say.
Stay with us for more on Cancel Culture.
Well, the world has been riveted by Donald Trump and the transition of power from him to Joe Biden.
But there are other precedents to look at, especially for us Canadians, other lessons to learn.
Stake in Democracy00:02:52
And the United Kingdom has plenty to offer, not only in how they handled the Brexit or mishandled it, but also how they're handling the civil liberties lockdown that we see.
The United Kingdom is in some of its strictest lockdowns yet.
What a pleasure it is to read our friend Calvin Robinson in a publication called The Mallard.
That's a great name for a magazine.
His latest article is called The Censorship of Big Tech.
We've spoken with Calvin before.
You'll remember him as the boss of Defund BBC and a senior fellow of the policy exchange.
And he joins us now via Scott Calvin.
Great to see you again.
I just chuckle at the name The Mallard, but it looks like a great read.
I'd encourage our viewers to go there and read your article.
Tell me about the case you make about big tech censorship.
What lessons can we Canadians learn from the UK, for example?
Absolutely.
So I think there is so much at stake here.
And I really, really do believe that democracy itself is at stake.
Because as we saw with Brexit, we've had four nearly five years now of battles after we had one of the biggest votes we've ever had in this country.
More people came out to vote to leave the European referendum than normally come out to vote for anything else.
And the metropolitan liberal elite, the establishment, the, you know, the upperty people who run things were not happy with the results.
They didn't get the result they wanted.
Our prime minister quit immediately.
We've had two prime ministers since then who struggled to get this done.
But the whole of parliament, the whole of our political system was against us leaving the European Union.
And when more people have voted for it than for anything else and the establishment are against it, we've got a loggerhead.
We've got a battle here.
And this is the undermining of democracy.
And we're seeing the same thing in America.
We saw, you know, when Donald Trump got elected, it was not in my name or not my president.
And now that Biden's been elected, we're seeing the reverse.
Trump is saying, you know, this wasn't a legit election result.
So no one seems to want to concede ground anymore.
And you can't have democracy unless the losers concede.
It doesn't work.
Now, one of the things that I love about freedom of speech, and I've been in my own free speech battles over here, is that free speech is a safety valve.
If you're frustrated, if you feel a grievance, if you feel hard done by, you can shout it to the wind.
And if you are allowed to do that, you feel like at least you had your day in court, so to speak.
And I think that's part of accepting a loss in a game.
If you agree to the rules of the game and you play and you lose, accepting it, that's a healing thing.
But if you are now banned from expressing your grievance, banned from expressing your point of view, that doesn't stop you from feeling, and I mentioned that, Calvin.
Collusion Concerns00:04:40
Absolutely.
Sorry, go ahead.
I'm just saying, it's empowering, isn't it, to have a moan, to have a rant.
It's quite British, actually, to be unhappy about something and put it out there.
And people can argue against it or join in with you.
But if you're shut down because you have the wrong opinion and you're not subscribing to the approved narrative, that's very dangerous because that sends your opinion underground.
And we all know what happens, according to history, if opinions get shoved into the underground.
They uprise and we get extremists.
And we've seen that across the world and across time.
And we're seeing this at the moment.
And it's not just a US issue.
This is a global issue in that big tech has become too powerful.
When big tech can collude and work together, and I'm talking about Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon, they're all working together now.
There's surely an antitrust lawsuit coming up, but they're working together to shut down debate.
And they silenced the most powerful man in the world.
They silenced the leader of the free world and said, actually, you're not allowed a platform anymore.
And people are saying, you know what, these are free to do whatever they like.
They're private companies.
Yes, they are private companies, but they're also a monopoly and they control our communications infrastructure.
So they're bigger than a private company.
They are the platform that we've come to expect to get news and information from.
And Trump made that happen.
He made Twitter what it is.
You know, it wasn't the platform it was when he joined.
And he's made it the in thing for politicians to kind of put their news and their information out there.
And so to remove him, to remove a sitting president of the United States from being able to express himself and put news out there is, in effect, it's a coup d'etat.
It really is.
Big tech have flexed their muscles and said, We are more powerful than the president of the United States, and it's our way or the highway.
And it's not just him.
They silenced a load of high-profile conservative voices.
I've had hundreds of followers disappearing from my following list.
I'm sure you've had the same over the last few days.
People who think like us or don't think like Jack Dorsey of Twitter or Zuckerberg from Facebook, people who think differently are being erased and silenced.
What is this?
It's totalitarian.
It's scary.
It's a tyranny.
And these big companies are orchestrating it together.
You know, people say, well, it's a private company.
Go start your own.
First of all, when it was the case of the little baker being ordered to bake a cake for a gay wedding, people said, no, no, bake the cake.
You bigot.
That's illegal.
Well, these tech companies don't want to bake the cake for Trump.
But when a bunch of conservatives and Trump supporters went to a startup called Parlor, P-A-R-L-E-R, well, they shut that down too.
Amazon stopped hosting their servers.
Apple and Google refused to sell the app.
12 different companies.
You know, it was, they shut down the startup.
So it's not just that you can't use the monopoly sites that have 99.9% of the traffic.
If you think, okay, I'll make a go of it on this tiny little island, they'll flatten that without a blink.
That's what's scary to me: it's a juggernaut that crushes anything in its path.
I'm a little worried here myself because we rely on Google, YouTube, and servers.
We rely on everything to be in the public square in 2021.
Ezra, it's like you're suggesting that the left have double standards.
That's outrageous.
But you're completely right.
You know, people say, well, make your own app.
And Parla or Parlay, however it's pronounced, made their own app.
But then they got shut off the app store.
They got shut off the Play Store.
And not only that, their entire servers have been closed down.
This is what I mean by collusion of Amazon, Google, Facebook.
They're all working together.
And that is illegal in and of itself.
But who's going to challenge them?
Trump was the only political figure I can think of that would stand up to big tech.
And now that he's on his way out, I'm very worried about what's going to happen next.
Because if I want to make an app that promotes free speech, I've got to make my own operating system now with my own app store.
Probably I have to make my own mobile phone.
Like, how far does it go?
Will the airwaves, the networks, will they be shutting people down next?
Do I have to make my own network too?
It's not possible, is it?
When they control the infrastructure, the information highway, they control the messaging.
And they need to decide whether they are a platform or a publisher.
Because if they're going to curate content and they're going to censor people, they're a publisher.
Therefore, they need to abide by the regulations that publications do, which are much more stringent.
And there's much more accountability there.
But right now, they're saying they're platforms.
So they have very limited accountability.
And it's not democratic.
Like, if I don't agree with Twitter or Facebook or their policies, I don't agree with their politics.
Who do I challenge that with?
How do I vote them out?
How do I get someone else in that I do agree with?
It's impossible.
It's very, very worrying.
Well, I got a question for you.
One of the characters I follow online is Nigel Farage.
Worrying Platform Dynamics00:04:01
Obviously, he's a consequential British politician.
He was the driving force behind Brexit.
He was a very visible supporter of Donald Trump campaigning with Trump in both 2016 and 2020 in America.
You don't often see that.
You don't obviously see a Brit coming over to America to campaign, quite closely associated with him because of that.
And in the UK, Farage is talking about the kind of populist nationalist things that Trump did, including right now, I mean, America would say build the wall, but there's these dinghies coming across the English channel with refugees.
I think that Nigel Farage is next on the list of national populist conservative troublemakers.
I think that there's a real chance Nigel Farage will be deplatformed.
What do you think?
Am I projecting onto the UK?
You would know better than me.
No, I think you're absolutely right.
I think people like Nigel Farage will be de-platformed next.
He's saying things that the establishment don't want said or that the metropolitan liberal elite don't want said.
And they'll say he's racist.
They'll say he's xenophobic.
What he's actually saying is, why do we have illegal immigrants coming over to the UK from safe countries?
You can't get to the UK without passing through a safe country.
So they've landed in Germany.
They've gone to France.
Why did they not settle there?
Why are they swimming across the channel to the UK?
There's something dodgy going on there.
Why are we letting that happen?
And just by raising that, he's sticking his head above the parapet and he's ostracizing himself.
So yes, they'll come for him next.
And the left will celebrate.
They'll be like, yes, he's gone, just as they did when Trump was silenced.
But they forget that one day they'll say or do something that people don't appreciate and they'll get cancelled too.
So we have to all stand up and say, no, it's not okay.
Censorship is not okay.
And we want to fight for free speech because otherwise it'll be too late when it's already gone.
Who's going to champion it then?
Yeah.
You know, the one glimmer of hope I see in the Western world fighting for free speech, it's actually in the UK.
I see more and more people like Toby Young of Free Speech Union.
I see some people pushing back in the UK.
I don't see that as much in America, and I don't see it at all in Canada.
So although you were sort of an early example of what America could expect, your Brexit experience, maybe you're an early example of people fighting back.
I know you're a free speecher too, so I wish you great luck.
Thanks for taking the time with us today, Calvin.
Absolute pleasure.
And God bless.
And let's hope that people do start to stand up for freedom of expression.
That's excellent.
Well, I hope so too.
There you have it.
Calvin Robinson.
You can see his new article in the Mallard.
The website is linked underneath this video.
It's mallarduk.com.
Stay with us.
Hey, welcome back.
Your feedback, Randy Weitz.
People trying to live a normal life is now the biggest crime that police are trying to stop.
Well, you're talking about the lockdown, so they got the curfew in Quebec.
I'm really worried they're going to bring the curfew to Ontario.
But the thing is, you've been trained.
You've been conditioned for that by forcing you to wear a mask.
So they've already got you thinking like a prisoner.
So you have to dress how they say, and now you can only go out when they say what's left, really?
Tanya writes, can't do journalism if you're kicked off a platform.
Do you have what you need ready when they come for you?
I hope so.
Well, we have some backup plans, and I think we probably need other backup plans.
And the thing is, Parlor, which was the conservative Twitter replacement, they thought they were fine until all of a sudden they weren't.
So I think we have to take extra steps.
Even if we think we're okay now, we have to ask the what if, what if, what if questions and be ready for that.
But for now, I think we're okay, but that could change in a heartbeat.
I'll do my best to make us ready.
That's our show for today.
Until next time, on behalf of all of us here at Rubble World Headquarters, see you at home.