Dr. Seuss Enterprises canceled six books—Mulberry Street, If I Ran the Zoo, and others—on March 2, 2021, over "hurtful" stereotypes, while President Biden’s administration removed him from "Read Across America." Meanwhile, Pastor James Coates faces imprisonment since February 16, 2021, for defying COVID lockdowns, with armed police enforcing orders not legislatively approved. A UK shift against primary school mask mandates contrasts sharply with Canada’s forced policies, which critics call unscientific and harmful to children. Lockdownism’s authoritarian grip risks eroding constitutional freedoms—worship, assembly, movement—undermining democracy under the guise of public health. [Automatically generated summary]
Hello my friends, today I talk about Dr. Seuss and I don't even engage in any rhymes.
I'm not going to rhyme about it.
I'm going to talk about the fact that his descendants have decided to ban six of his books from publication.
And I want to tell you about a Canadian MP who bravely stood in support of Dr. Seuss for two minutes.
I'll show you the clock.
Hey, before I get to that, let me invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.
That's the video version of the show.
And today it's great because we've got four excerpts from a Dr. Seuss old video about the sneeches.
Remember them?
I'd love to show that to you.
Yeah, you'll get a kick out of listening to it on the podcast, but please consider subscribing.
It's eight bucks a month, which is not a big deal.
I hope it's not a big deal to you, but you know, it's a big deal to us because if enough people chip in eight bucks a month, that pays a lot of salaries around here and that lets us stay independent.
So if I may invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus, go to rebelnews.com and click subscribe.
Do it for the content.
Do it for the videos you get for sure.
And Sheila Gunread's videos and David Menzies and Andrew Chapters.
I think it's worth the $8 a month.
But even if I don't convince you on that, please consider chipping in $8 a month just to help us keep the lights on, help us stay strong and independent.
Maybe that's even the better reason to do it.
All right, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, cancel culture comes for Dr. Seuss.
I wish I were kidding.
It's March 3rd and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say is government don't want to publish it just because it's my bloody right to do so.
If you've ever had kids, you know Dr. Seuss because he makes the best kids' books.
Before him, books about learning to read were pretty boring, but then he decided to make them funny and ridiculous and hilarious and rhyme.
The cat in the hat was the big breakthrough for him.
Others followed, green eggs and ham, fox in socks.
One of the things you'll know about Dr. Seuss is that most of the people in his stories aren't actually people.
They're critters or creatures of his bizarre and goofy imagination.
I think it was about imagination and silliness and learning to read without thinking about learning to read because you're thinking about all the silly rhymes and silly pictures.
That's what makes it work.
The kids learn how to read because they're not thinking about the boring parts.
They're having fun.
They don't realize they're learning.
Sometimes there was some subtle politics, I suppose.
In Horton Here's a Who, which was turned into a movie, a huge elephant hears tiny voices and it's a whole tiny world.
He saves no one else, believes it even exists.
The catchphrase, a person's a person no matter how small, has been interpreted as being pro-life.
All right, it is.
So what?
In 1974, Dr. Seuss gave permission to his friend Art Buchwald to rewrite one of his poems into an anti-Nixon poem.
This was the Watergate era.
I don't think that was a particularly radical point of view, but, you know, so the man wasn't a political blank slate.
So what?
And I'm sure that by today's exquisite standards, he did draw things sometimes or say things sometimes that wouldn't be up to our woke standards.
Pretty much anything written before five minutes ago fails that test.
But the shocking news, real news, is that Dr. Seuss's own estate has announced that they simply will stop printing six of his books.
I thought this was just like a satirical rumor, but it is true.
Take a look at this.
Statement from Dr. Seuss Enterprises, March 2nd, 2021.
Today, on Dr. Seuss's birthday, Dr. Seuss Enterprises celebrates reading and also our mission of supporting all children and families with messages of hope, inspiration, inclusion, and friendship.
We are committed to action.
To that end, Dr. Seuss Enterprises, working with a panel of experts, including educators, reviewed our catalog of titles and made the decision last year to cease publication and licensing of the following titles.
And you think that I saw it on Mulberry Street, if I ran the zoo, McElligut's Pool, on Beyond a Zebra, Scrambled Eggs, a Super, and The Cat's Quizzer.
These books portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong.
Ceasing sales of these books is only part of our commitment and our broader plan to ensure Dr. Seuss Enterprises catalog represents and supports all communities and families.
That is so gross.
They are erasing, unpersoning, destroying their own guy.
They're canceling themselves or their grandpa.
I know that book, Mulberry Street, by the way.
It's such a fun book.
You have to find strange things like an upside-down tree or a car without a wheel or whatever.
No real person would find that book offensive.
Imagine just declaring you're going to stop people from reading a book your grandpa wrote that has been loved by 100 million people because you, the ingratiate woke heir to his fortune, found something to grouse about so you could be important for a minute too.
No one believes that Dr. Seuss is bad.
No one, not even his royal wokeness, Barack Obama.
Listen to this.
Pretty much all of the stuff you need to know is in Dr. Seuss.
It's like, you know, the star-bellied snitches, you know?
We're all the same.
So why wouldn't we treat somebody differently just because they don't have a star on their pedal?
If I think about responsibility, I think about important sitting on the egg.
Well, lazy laissez.
Why not?
You know what I'm doing?
All I'm saying is that as you get older, what you will find is that the homespun basic virtues that your mom and dad, you know, folks care about or admire taught you about hard work, being responsible, being kind, doing something back, being useful, working as a team.
It's all true.
He's right, actually.
That was just a few years ago.
And yet Dr. Seuss is canceled.
Do you know that story about the sneeches that Obama was referring to?
I think it's probably the most successful anti-racism story for kids in history ever written.
It's an allegory.
It's not white people and black people.
It's not people at all.
It's sneeches.
They don't exist.
There's only one human in the whole story, a race huckster, a hustler.
Here, let me show you a few minutes of a cartoon movie made out of it probably 40 years ago.
Take a look at this.
Now the star-bellied sneeches had bellies with stars.
But the plain-bellied sneeches had none upon Mars.
No stars on their bellies, no stars upon Mars.
Now those stars weren't so big.
They were really quite small.
You would think such a thing wouldn't matter at all.
But because they had stars, all the star-bellied sneeches would brag.
We're the best kind of snitch on the beaches.
With their snoots in the air, they would sniff and they'd snort.
They'd have nothing to do with a plain-bellied sort.
Ronald, remember, when you are out walking, you walk past a sneeze of that type without talking.
So those are sneezes, and the ones who didn't have the star wanted a star because the star was assigned a status.
So enter the huckster.
My prices are low, and I work with great speed, and my work is 100% guaranteed.
By my new patent process of polar potoxis of the inner subnuclear noose bomb no goxis, you'll get a star like the star-bellied sneeze for the mere paltry payment of $3 each.
Naturally, the hustler saw another market, a star-off machine.
Belly stars, my dear friends, are no longer in style, and I'll have yours off in a very short while in my wondrous machine which eradicates stars.
Then you won't look like sneeches who have them on Mars.
Eradicates these?
Eradicates these with the greatest of ease, provided you pay your 10 bucks, if you please.
And on it went, star on, star off, until no one could remember who was who.
Once all their money was gone, the huckster left.
But McBean was quite wrong.
I am happy to say that the sneezes got really quite smart on that day.
That day they decided that sneeches are sneezes, and no kind of sneeze is the best on the beaches.
That day all the sneezes forgot about stars and whether they had one or not upon those.
It's a great story.
I bet that story did more to stop racism in America than any other book ever written except the Bible and Uncle Tom's Cabin.
But sure, go ahead and call Dr. Seuss a bigot and ban his books.
You can buy Hitler's Mein Kampf, by the way, on Amazon.
That's not banned.
So you might say, well, that's just some wacky woke Dr. Seuss heirs.
Charlie Angus's Flash of Common Sense00:03:18
Just like John D. Rockefeller's great-grandchildren are communists that the old man would probably despise and probably have had shot if he knew about them.
He'd probably have not left them a dime.
Same with Dr. Seuss and his ungrateful descendants.
But it's not just the wacky grandkids.
It's the president of the United States, Barack Obama's VP.
Look at this.
Biden erases Dr. Seuss from Read Across America proclamation as progressives seek to cancel beloved author.
Because, of course, there aren't enough, I don't know, trans people in his books or trans sneeches or whatever.
So it's not just the family.
This is spreading.
Now, there was a glimmer of hope out there for a moment on this ridiculous issue.
A new Democrat MP named Charlie Angus, who once in a while shows flashes of common sense.
He's the guy who, along with Pier Polyev, went after Trudeau on the We Charity stuff.
Charlie Angus, I got my beeps with him, but once in a while he shows some value.
He tweeted this.
Dr. Seuss created a wonderful, messy, and subversive world of images and possibilities.
My childhood imagination was enthralled by, and to think that I saw it on Mulberry Street.
Such a tragedy to watch them take a political eraser to his legacy.
Wow.
I agree with every word of that, and me too.
But as you can see, that is not a Twitter page we're showing you.
That's an automatic archive of Twitter called Politwoops.
I don't know how to pronounce it.
It's basically a robot that automatically takes a screenshot of any tweet that a politician deletes.
So you can see that Charlie Angus bravely stood against cancel culture and against taking an eraser to history for two full minutes.
You can see that at the bottom there.
That tweet was deleted in two minutes when he himself took an eraser to his own history.
Who made you do that, Charlie?
Was it your boss, Jagmeet Singh?
Who did that to you?
I note that Charlie Angus has deleted 1,294 other tweets.
I'm all for politicians deleting their tweets.
They should delete a lot of what they say and do.
They should just say and do less, I think.
But I wonder how much of that was Charlie Angus being censored again and again and again.
Or in this case, being censored about being censored.
Needless to say, that two minutes of courage that Charlie Angus did show, that was two minutes longer than the Conservative Party leader showed.
I know that Dr. Seuss isn't exactly top of the agenda for Canadian Conservatives, but that canceling of him is a symbol.
It's a symbol of cancel culture, of wokeness, of political correctness.
O'Toole claimed he was against that, but he wasn't really.
He isn't.
He's scared too, isn't he?
He's a canceler too.
Churches Under Lockdown00:15:35
Stay with us for more.
Welcome back.
Well, we have covered what we call the diner rebellion.
Small town diners in the prairies simply saying we're not going to shut down.
The big cities might be paranoid about this pandemic, but our town is virus-free.
We know everyone.
We trust everyone.
We're just not going to live like we're under house arrest.
Sheila Gunried told you the story about the Whistle Stop Cafe in Mirror, Alberta, and other cafes like the Noble Fox in Bashawm.
I think those are important because small businesses, those are a livelihood for so many Canadians.
And why should they be closed?
Whereas the big box stores like Costco and Walmart remain open.
I just don't get it.
Well, we've also focused on churches.
And churches have been particularly punished by these lockdowns.
I have my suspicions of why.
In my view, anyone who believes in something other than lockdownism, anyone who believes that there's a higher authority than just some politician or a bureaucrat, well, they're going to be a real pain in the neck to the lockdowns because they simply won't live in fear and won't follow ridiculous and capricious rules.
And some of those rules, such as in Montreal, for example, allow the reopening of movie theaters for well over 100 people, but massive cathedrals can only have 10 people.
Well, what's the difference?
We're taking some cases of some churches, but I am delighted to say that our friends at the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedom are doing the really heavy lifting on church freedom.
Obviously, it would apply to synagogues and temples and mosques too.
And what a pleasure it is now to connect with the boss of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms, my own friend, and a friend to our viewers, John Carpe, who joins us now by a Skype.
Well, John, I got to tell you, you are lifting a heavy load out there.
You're in a three-day hearing in Vancouver for church rights.
You've got the very next day a hearing in Edmonton for Pastor James Coates, who's been in prison for, I think, more than two weeks now.
I think you're doing more religious liberty litigation in Canada than any of the so-called civil liberties groups who've gone silent.
And I want to thank you for that on behalf of our rebel viewers.
It's important work and it's got to get done.
We've got currently nine full-time lawyers working on cases across Canada.
And we're looking to hire another three or four lawyers as soon as possible.
So if any of your viewers, if you're a lawyer or if you know a lawyer that loves liberty, that has some litigation experience, we want to hire another three or four full-time staff lawyers as soon as possible because the amount of work is astronomical.
The charter rights and freedoms are being heavily, severely, unjustifiably violated all across Canada.
Yeah.
Oh, I agree with you.
On the screen right now, you can see police with guns in their holsters walking right into a church in Calgary.
I think you guys are actually representing this church.
I was so infuriated by that act of intimidation, John.
These churches are the most peaceful places imaginable.
These aren't Hell's Angels biker clubs where cops need to go in SWAT team style.
The only possible reason for those armed police to walk into a church is for an intimidation factor.
And I'm not asking you to speak about that particular church in Calgary because I understand you have a legal process afoot there.
But I think that goes to the mindset of these public health tyrants.
I don't think it's appropriate that police run their errands for them.
I think that's probably constitutionally suspect, but it gives us an insight into the mind of all these public health bosses who are unaccountable, who have dictator-like power, and are taking on the trappings of a police state.
Like it's bizarre to me that in the name of public health, you send in someone with a gun and a holster to a church.
That gives away the whole game to me, John.
It's terribly sad because there are lots of Canadians that they are pro-police.
They want to be pro-police.
They don't want to see the police defunded.
They want to see the police enforcing the criminal code prohibitions against things like murder and rape and assault and all kinds of other fraud, all kinds of crime.
And unfortunately, our politicians have turned the police against the people by passing unjust laws in the name of health orders.
And you mentioned the lack of accountability.
One of the legal arguments that we are bringing forward in our court actions in Alberta and Manitoba and other provinces, where we are now challenging the lockdowns in court, is that this is a blatant violation of the Constitution, not just the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but also the non-charter parts of our Constitution that require that laws be passed by the elected members of a democratically elected legislative assembly.
And this is a core component of Canada's Constitution that you don't have unelected, unaccountable, politically appointed people that are passing general laws that apply to all citizens and just passing new laws every week, every month, on a whim, with no democratic accountability.
None of these health orders, which violate our rights and freedoms, have been considered, debated, voted on, or approved by the elected members of the Legislative Assembly or the elected or federally, you know, by the federal parliament.
So this is another issue that we're putting before the courts in addition to the charter violations.
You know, I'm so glad to hear that.
One of the things I find infuriating is when our reporters interact with police, which regrettably we do almost every day, is the police have no clue.
You know, in the past, in the before times, police would study the criminal code or they might know a couple of bylaws here and there.
And the laws would basically be the same every week, every month, every year.
If there was a big innovation, they would hear about it.
They would be briefed about it by their police departments.
But these lockdown rules or guidances or suggestions, some of them are just press conferences.
Nobody knows what the rules are.
The politicians don't know what the rules are.
And these cops clearly don't know either.
And so they're either guessing or going with their own personal opinion, or just they don't like the cut of someone's jib.
So, I mean, it couldn't be clear when it comes to protests, for example.
Black Lives Matter protests during the pandemic, you literally see cops taking an E.
But anti-lockdown protests, you see cops throwing people in the back of paddy wagons.
And there's no consistency in the application of the laws.
I don't think the police understand the laws.
And I have some sympathy for them because the laws change.
Like, do you think the cops really know the difference between a code red and a code gray and a code orange?
I don't think that even the bureaucrats who wrote those understand it.
And yet I don't see any judges saying, whoa, it's been a year.
No more excuses.
When this was all ramshackle, hustle-bustle, we can let you have some leeway.
But it's been a year now and it's just getting worse.
Where are the judges?
We're going to find out where they are.
But I really hope that they're going to fulfill their role of upholding rights and freedoms.
That's what the courts are there for.
Since 1982, since we've had the charter, the way it's supposed to work is that when politicians, perhaps with good intentions, but also perhaps acting out of fear and panic and without facts,
when politicians violate our rights and freedoms and perhaps have strong public support for doing so, the courts are supposed to be there to say, wait a minute, no, there's no justification or there isn't adequate justification for these health orders that violate our freedoms to move, travel, worship, assemble peacefully, associate, and so on.
The opening line of the charter, the preamble of the charter, says that Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.
And part of the rule of law, and as you know, Ezra, your lawyer as well, several dimensions to the rule of law.
One of them is clarity in the law.
And yet we get these health orders that say, you know, we should, you know, or it would be best if, as opposed to clear legal language that says must or shall.
And you've got laws promulgated by way of press conferences.
I mean, it's a complete disregard for Canada's constitution.
And so I'm hoping that judges will not shy away from what might prove to be an unpopular task of upholding rights and freedoms.
I mean, I know a few judges.
They are at the highest heights of society.
All their friends are in the elites, whether it's law professors, lawyers, bankers.
They live in fancy neighborhoods.
They are in the highest circles.
And I can only imagine the peer pressure at that high heights to conform to the lockdownism.
It's the working classes who have lost their jobs.
You know, we see the news that there's a judge in Ontario who's hearing cases from Barbados.
You know what?
No one in the judiciary has lost a day's pay.
In fact, they're having a great staycation.
So you've got the lockdown class that's loving it, time of their lives.
And they don't want this gravy train to end.
And it's just the little people.
And I don't know.
I hope that there's a judge who understands that no matter what the peer pressure is, no wonder, no matter what his friends at the country clubs say down in Barbados, that the little people have the rule of law too, including those in church.
I want to talk just for a minute about Pastor James Coates.
And we've had a petition called Free Pastor James.
And I know you've done a lot of interviews.
I think you were doing some interviews in the U.S.
And we did, I mean, ironically and predictably, the imprisonment of Pastor James Coates has had more news coverage in America than it has in Canada.
Would you agree with me on that?
That's definitely the way it appears.
Yes.
And that's a shame right there that shows you this lockdownism is the state religion in Canada.
He's in what?
He's been in prison for two weeks now.
Is that right?
He went into jail on February the 20, sorry, February the 16th.
So it's already been, I think, more than two weeks now that he's behind bars for basically refusing to comply with unscientific and unconstitutional health orders that have been promulgated by way of chief medical officer news conferences rather than the Legislative Assembly of Alberta.
So if my math is right, he's now in his 16th day.
He's now starting his 16th day in, is he still in the Maximum Security Edmonton Reman Center?
He's in the Edmonton Reman Center, and he was supposed to have one cellmate for the first 14 days.
I don't know if he's been transferred into a different cell in the past day or two with the 14 days being up.
And there's another example of how inconsistently these rules are applied.
He's supposed to be quarantined for 14 days because of COVID, and yet he's put in with a cellmate.
I don't think he minded being put in with a cellmate, but it's just doesn't make sense.
And that very same prison, I'm somewhat familiar with that prison.
They let out 400 convicts or people being held on bail for violent offenses in the name of the virus.
So they let out 400 real or suspected criminals, but they put the pastor in for 15 days.
And yeah, I didn't understand that, how it could be quarantined, but he's in there with a criminal in the same cell.
None of it makes sense other than same thing as those cops going into that church in Calgary.
It's about, you know, as they say, pour encourage les otres, to threaten the others, to make an example out of them.
If you want cops with guns in your church, if you don't want your pastor thrown in prison with an accused violent criminal or whatever, then you better comply.
It's a unique guy who doesn't bend the knee 16 days running in prison.
That's a rare person to have that kind of strength.
Like that's a diamond of strength.
And something tells me, now his hearings tomorrow, right?
He ain't going to, if he's in prison 16 days, he's suddenly not going to lose his faith.
He's not suddenly going to bend the knee to Caesar.
What's going to happen?
Well, we're hopeful that on Thursday, March the 4th, we're hopeful to get a ruling same day to release him from prison.
If that fails, then he could be behind bars for another eight weeks.
And this is in a context where, you know, the norm in Canada is that unless you've been charged with murder or rape or serious assault, the normal course of action is that you are released pending until your time of trial.
And Pastor Coates certainly has no intention of avoiding the trial dates now scheduled for May 3rd, 4th, and 5th.
He has no intention of leaving the country or not showing up for trial.
So there's no valid reason for him to be in prison.
And, you know, hopefully we get him released on Thursday, March the 4th.
You know, I know you got to run, but I'm just doing the math here.
When I was a law student in Edmonton, and the very first time I went to docket court as a student, I sat and watched and I saw a man convicted of sexual assault.
And he was sentenced to 30 days in jail.
Sexual assault, 30 days, which means he would have been out in 10 days, possibly five.
This pastor, if you say, if what you say happens, if he's been in there for 16 days and has another eight weeks, that's like 10 weeks.
And in that hard time, in that maximum security, it's like 20 weeks.
Pastor's Unjust Sentence00:03:50
That is an actual sentence that someone who commits second degree murder would serve, or at least a violent assault.
He is being the amount of hard time he's serving, I'm saying, John, maybe my numbers are off by a little bit, but when you have parole in this country, full parole, Day Parole statutory release, no one ever serves their full time.
For a pastor to actually sit in prison 10 weeks in a hard facility like that, that is tantamount to what a violent gun shooting robber would get.
Am I wrong on that?
Are my numbers off by a lot there, or is that more or less right?
You know, it's obviously the sentence imposed on violent criminals will vary on, you know, based on the circumstances and the criminals, you know, got a long, long track record of committing crimes and a bunch of other factors.
But the central point that Pastor, I agree entirely with the central point that Pastor Coates is serving more hard time than a lot of criminals are.
And I think as well that the fact that these health orders have been challenged in court by the Justice Center in another court action should also be taken into account by the judge.
This is not some law that people accept as constitutional or as being properly enacted by the legislature.
This is a law that is before the courts under challenge as well.
And I think that should be taken into account.
So it's pretty bad.
I mean, we've really regressed in the past 11, 12 months.
We're very rapidly moving in the direction of being something like a country like China or Russia or Cuba or North Korea.
We're not quite there, but that's a direction that we're moving in very, very quickly when you've got pastors in jail simply for exercising their constitutional freedoms in the face of very evidence-free, science-free public health orders.
Yeah, it meets the definition of a political prisoner.
Absolutely, it does.
John, I'd like to encourage our viewers, and we do this all the time, I'd like to encourage our viewers to visit your website at jccf.ca.
Is that right?
That's correct.
They're a registered charity.
So if folks want to chip in to help your good work, not only will they have the moral satisfaction, but they'll also get a receipt for the CRA purposes.
So that's at jccf.ca.
Keep it up.
We'll keep reporting on it.
Someone's got to because the CBC ain't.
So we'll keep at it.
You keep at it, okay?
Thanks, Ezra.
Have a great day.
You too.
There you have it.
John Carpe.
He's the boss of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms.
I'm going to say their website one more time, jccf.ca.
Boy, is he busy.
Three days in court in Vancouver, fighting for religious freedom there, then up to Edmonton, fighting for religious freedom for Pastor James Coates.
I predict that James Coates, the pastor, will remain in prison for the eight shocking weeks that John has predicted.
And in doing so, he will serve more time than many violent criminals.
Stay with us more.
Hey, welcome back to my show last night.
MJ writes.
99.5% survival rate.
Children Being Tortured00:02:41
And for this, children are being tortured.
Yeah, you know, I saw a clip out of the United Kingdom today.
Their schools department made an official announcement that no kids should wear masks.
It's just too damaging to their psychology.
Here, let me play a quick clip from you.
This is from the UK.
How come their science says take the masks off kids and ours says force it on them?
Take a look.
School children have the lower amount of infection, especially primary school children.
And in looking at it, we've talked to educationalists, public health, and clinical specialists.
And the consensus view is very strongly to not advise school children at primary school age to wear face coverings.
This for two reasons.
One is that they can have difficulties wearing them and keeping them on all day.
And the second part of that is that it's really important that they can see facial expressions in order to develop their communications and language skills.
Schools have done a lot of and delivered a lot of measures to reduce the risk in schools.
And additional plans to test families of primary school children will also be in place as schools go back.
And therefore, the strong recommendation is for primary school children not to wear masks.
Yeah, look, it's all politics, people.
Laurel writes, leaving a young child alone in a closed room to fend for themselves, stating the obvious is beyond negligent.
$5,000 fine.
Wouldn't family services normally be involved for child abuse and neglect?
If this were reported to the police, oh, you're exactly right.
Every bloody one of these health officers is a child abuser in the way that we're describing here, forcing children to go under psychological and physical treatment that is unacceptable, unscientific, and unhealthy.
Jer writes, the picture of the breakfast served at the COVID jail spoke a thousand words about this government.
Yeah, Keen kept showing me that picture of his breakfast, one eggo and a little crepe or something.
And it did look meager.
And looking at me, you know that I wouldn't have lasted an hour in that jail from a food point of view.
But the bigger problem is, I mean, let's say they had a lovely breakfast.
Let's say they had a wonderful breakfast with steak and eggs and fresh fruit and orange juice and coffee and just, or even the full English, as they say.
It still wouldn't be acceptable because it's the violation of our basic liberties.
It's incarcerating us, even though we committed no crime.
It's treating us as if we're sick, even though we're healthy, treating us like criminals, even though we're innocent, and stopping us from coming home to our own country.
That's why it's wrong.
The food is insult to injury, but the injury is the incarceration.
Well, we'll fight for these things.
I promise you that.
That's our show for today until tomorrow.
On behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night.